Venezuelan-American citizens in the United States have a privilege, to commemorate side by side the independence of our adoptive nation, with that of our always loved Venezuela. By chance, we commemorate the 4th and 5th of July together.
On the occasion of these dates, we will make a quick historical tour and we will see some interesting details that are no longer “coincidences” but rather “causalities”. But we will also find fundamental differences that explain the why of things, as we see them today.
The cries for freedom that started with the Boston Massacre in March 1770 continued with the Boston Tea Party in December 1773 and the idea of no longer paying taxes to the King of England without governmental representation (“No taxation without representation”); triggering the process of the War of Independence of the United States (also known as the American Revolutionary War). It was a conflict that pitted the original thirteen British colonies in North America against the Kingdom of England. During the United States’ War of Independence, the Continental Congress met on July 4, 1776 in Philadelphia and ratified what is perhaps one of the most powerful and influential political documents of all time: The United States Declaration of Independence. The original document is available to the public in the American National Archives in Washington, DC and was approved by 56 congressmen, and drafted by Thomas Jefferson with the help of four other congressmen: Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, Roger Sherman and Robert Livingston (known in history as “The Committee of Five”). Adams and Jefferson were, in that order, the second and third Presidents of the United States. Livingston, the first Chancellor or Secretary of State; Sherman, Connecticut Deputy and Senator. The wise and inventor Franklin was the intellectual and unifying force of the founding fathers and in the first steps of the Republic was the first Postmaster of the United States (the first federal public service created by the Constitution, which included the handling of the first intelligence services) and the first Ambassador in France, the most important diplomatic position of the time due to the military and financial link of the independence process with such. The declaration was printed on paper money and diplomatic relations with foreign powers began. The declaration was approved with the abstention of the New York delegation (including Livingston, co-editor of the statement). Of the 56 congressmen, 14 died during the war. The war of independence of the United States developed between 1775 and 1783, ending with the British defeat at the Battle of Yorktown and the signing of the Treaty of Paris in 1873. And here, some important coincidences for Venezuelans begin.
Our extraordinary Venezuelan Francisco de Miranda found himself in Philadelphia in 1783, deciding on his future and understanding the process that began when England recognized the independence of the United States in the Treaty of Versailles. In addition to corresponding with Washington as emissary of the Captain General of Cuba Juan Manuel Cagigal, he cultivates friendship with other independence leaders, particularly Alexander Hamilton, and began an affair with Susan Livingston, daughter of Robert Livingston, first Secretary of State and the co-author of the Declaration of Independence that interestingly did not sign it because his state, New York, instructed the delegation to abstain. To have perspective of Miranda’s presence in the United States, on July 24, 1783, Simón Bolívar was born, and Francisco de Miranda (at that date 33 years old) was already a friend of Washington and Hamilton and was thinking about the independence of Venezuela.
The independence of the United States is inspired by and has the same encyclopedic and anti-monarchical roots followed by all these Masonic leaders in America, and the scholars of Miranda’s life (also a Mason like Simón Bolívar), affirm that he decides to fight for the independence of Venezuela during his stay in the United States, in the heat of the process carried out by Washington. In 1787, the United States adopted the first and only Constitution it has known, and Washington was chosen by the Electoral College in the presidential elections of 1789 as the first president of a Federal Republic. Although the independence of Venezuela is inspired and has the same roots as that of the United States, as confirmed by the detail of Miranda’s wanderings between Philadelphia and New York, there are immense differences in the coincidence.
The Venezuelan war of independence was a much longer and bloodier process than the North American conflict. The American War of Independence ended in less than a decade. It is studied in the military disciplines that Washington triumphed with the use of military intelligence, and that the confrontations he avoided were more decisive for his success than those he fought, almost always prevailing in his victories due to the surprise factor, which he achieved based on an efficient spy network. In addition, Washington was the military leader of an army that unified several colonies since the proclamation of independence itself, anticipating a federative model of government among what could have been 13 different republics.
On the contrary, the independence of Venezuela had several precursory movements: The insurrection of José Leonardo Chirino (1795), a free zambo who promoted a republican idea advocating for the abolition of slavery; but under the suspicious and even accusatory gaze of the Venezuelan born white elite (“Criollos”), who despite caressing the idea of independence, did not unite around something considered hasty for some, which placed a mestizo at the head and additionally outlawed slavery, an essential part of colonial economic structures. Then came the Gual and Spain Conspiracy (1797) which, despite its important progressive proclamations, did not become more than a seditious movement or attempted coup, without popular roots, and therefore betrayed. Francisco de Miranda’s attempt to enter through the Vela de Coro (1806) was not welcomed because it was seen as an external imposition (financed by the English in hopes of weakening the Spanish dominions in America, after the American independence). Therefore, Miranda presented himself on that occasion as a foreigner in his own country, covered in military glory in Europe during the French Revolution (Miranda is even portrayed as one of the heroes at the Arc de Triomphe) but unable to be the bearer of a unitary proposition among the leaders of Venezuelan society. On the other hand, during the independence of Venezuela two republics rose and fell without consolidation, and it was not until later that Simón Bolívar managed, with a bit of audacity, vision and ambition, to advance beyond the liberation of a colony and include New Granada (today Colombia and Panama), Quito (today Ecuador) and Bolivia (then part of Peru, where Mariscal Sucre, Venezuelan and Bolivar’s pupil was a key factor); giving rise to Gran Colombia.
Another important difference is in the baptism of the process. In the United States, the Declaration of Independence expressed a frontal break with the King of England. In Venezuela, everything began on April 19, 1810 as a manifestation of loyalty to King Ferdinand VII of Spain, overthrown by the French under Napoleon Bonaparte, who imposed his brother, José Bonaparte, on the government of Spain. This complicated maneuver, which began with a step so distant from the French revolution itself (and inspired the independence process), and declared loyalty to the Spanish Monarchy, which, unconfessed, the Venezuelan elites wanted to become independent from, was decisive in uniting the “Criollos” White elite and many Peninsular Whites, together with the people, in an adventure that crystallized with the proclamation of the Declaration of Independence of Venezuela on July 5, 1811, almost a year later. The Act of the Declaration of Independence of Venezuela is a document in which seven Spanish Provinces belonging to the Captaincy General of Venezuela in South America declared their independence from the Kingdom of Spain and explained their reasons for this action. The new nation that this declaration proclaimed would be the American Confederation of Venezuela. It was written mainly by Juan Germán Roscio, who was later the first Vice President of Gran Colombia and the first Chancellor of Venezuela. It is important to note that the provinces of Coro, Maracaibo and Guayana were excluded from the Congress because they were dominated by the Spanish, and therefore did not subscribe to the declaration of independence.
One last and interesting fact. Neither Washington nor Bolívar are signatories to the Act of the Declaration of Independence of their respective nations, but they are without question the military leaders who make them possible. In the case of Washington, who was Delegate to the Continental Congress, he did not sign it because he was absent as he was immediately appointed as Military Chief of the Army or militia of the new State, and was already fighting when the document was approved. Bolívar did not represent any province of Venezuela in the Congress that proclaimed independence, but he was behind many of the movements that wove its results, and was decisive in the return and incorporation of Miranda to that body, who, with his military prestige, was a symbol and necessary actor for the fight that would be unleashed. Miranda’s signature is stamped on the document as a delegate or deputy for Barcelona. However, it was not Miranda (who died convicted of treason in the prison of La Carraca, Cadiz, after the fall of the First Republic), but Bolívar who became the stellar military and political figure of independence. While it took less than 10 years for northern Americans to conclude the war against the English and see Washington as their first president-elect under what remains the Constitution of the American people; Venezuelans continued in conflict until 1826 in search of a great independence and federation project called Gran Colombia, which failed not so much because it was ambitious, but because of the lack of unity among the leaders of independence, who departed from Bolívar’s leadership to cling to the idea of various nations where each would rule at will. Unlike Washington, Bolívar was unable to lead a republican consolidation process under a Federal Constitution. On the contrary, he had to be a Dictator and rule by decree between 1826 and 1830 to fight against the separatist movements that finally triumphed.
The Republic of Venezuela that we know today really begins in 1830 under the leadership of General José Antonio Páez, who, after being a magnificent military leader in the independence movement, was the most emblematic figure of “La Cosiata”, the separatist movement of Venezuelans. From that moment, coup after coup and through the Federal War, the country lived in conflict under the ambition of caudillos and militias, totally in disunity, until General Juan Vicente Gómez took power at the beginning of the 20th century. Venezuela has lived its entire history among the military boot and conflict, with the parenthesis of the 40 years of representative and alternative democracy between the AD and COPEI parties between 1959 and 1999 and under the 1961 Constitution, which has been the most durable. Through this whole process and to date Venezuela has known 26 Constitutions. The United States has had a single Constitution since its declaration of independence, with 27 amendments to introduce specific changes that have given greater force to the Constitution itself and its democratic system of government, as well as to human and individual freedoms and rights in the face of governmental power. Quite possibly at the end of the darkness in which Venezuela lives, a new Constitution will be necessary to turn on the light and illuminate the future of Venezuelans. It would be number 28.
Despite the contrasts discussed, there exists systemic and common thinking as expressed by the American and Venezuelan people in their declarations of independence. These two statements should be read and felt by all Venezuelan-Americans as they celebrate the 4th and 5th of July.
A final theme worth highlighting: on this occasion, the vast majority of the Venezuelan population celebrates its independence as a broken family, separated beyond political differences and conflict, by the exodus that has 5 million Venezuelans outside of their homeland. In the United States live 420 thousand Venezuelans, 120 thousand are citizens of both countries. 150 thousand live in a totally vulnerable migratory situation, more than 2 thousand facing deportation processes and hundreds of them detained. Fortunately, the Biden Administration has granted the humanitarian measure of Temporary Protected Status to Venezuelans (known as TPS), and the Democratic Party promotes legislation that could grant them a path to residency and citizenship along with all TPS holders. According to the prestigious PEW center for demographic studies, Venezuelan immigrants have the highest level of education of the entire large family that makes up the immense Latino immigration. Close to a hundred thousand Venezuelans can vote in the United States, and the humanitarian tragedy that Venezuela is experiencing, as well as the sustained fight to regain democracy and defend human rights, is a bipartisan issue. The path to citizenship for thousands of compatriots in the United States this will an issue to embrace to gain the Venezuelan-American support.
While in Venezuela the authorities of the regime celebrate the date of July 5 with a typical militaristic procession, Venezuelan-Americans remember the link of Miranda with Washington that sowed the idea of forming in Venezuela, and in the Spanish domains at South America, an independent nation like the one born on July 4, 1776 with the United States of America.
In celebrating US independence, Venezuelan-Americans pay tribute in the festive, community-oriented and decentralized activities that characterize the celebration of American independence, to that sovereign and democratic ideal now frustrated by the regime and the political conflict that suffocates Venezuelans, making our demand that our fellow citizens in this adopted country support us decisively in sustaining and expanding migratory protection to Venezuelans living in the United States displaced by oppression and a humanitarian crisis, while pressing together with the international community to recover democracy through a peaceful process that makes way for free, fair and credible general elections in Venezuela. We should also advocate to extend the option of permanence in the United States to thousands of families whom already have made this their adopted country.