Venezuelan demonstrations are full of myths and memories of the past, recourse to the general strike or the recall referendum, but there is a gap, a deficit and a contradiction that overrides them. It is the old structure which reacts on the fascist demonstration and from this angle of clash history shows us that the old systems are not reimbursable. The case of the so-called marches in Venezuela is pathetic. The crowd goes out what amounts to a disempowerment instead of a chance defeat frustration. The reason is that we might call conventional vehicles, read matches, and without that a student movement immature and without fixed, not to be the same protest targets, is able to achieve the connection. The dough out on the street and then look to the face without having reached any target simply because wasn’t raised none, not to be draining emotions waiting for the electoral act.
In this way the March not leaves legacy. Rather than pass to become example of impotence. And in recognition of the abducted institutions of the dictatorship, to conclude them in delivery of documents drawn up in a language that could be called as something out of pure legalism. Thus, the old problem that Touraine and Baudrillard had already interviewed, from the crisis of representativeness, busting in Venezuela with all his strength. Parties, destroyed by its aberrant practices and their inability, give power to other equally ruined institutions and all marching alongside the confrontation against the regime without any chance of overcoming it. With their defeat the crisis reaches the fullness: they no longer represent anyone, they are teased, but they continue to exercise a limited power of that emerging fascist state allows them to legitimize its exercise. In parallel the problem initially theorist of representativeness sprouts in reality when the old actors want to continue to exercise power over the citizens due to its tacit monopoly for the presentation of candidates for the old parliamentary system.