[POLITICS] Brutal dictatorship protects Guaido from angry mob

[Seanchaidh]

Meanwhile in Honduras: [tweet t="https://twitter.com/GrayzoneProject/status/1113467656131293186"]

What about the humanitarian crisis in Honduras? Why is the media so obsessed with Venezuela when the migrant caravans are primarily coming from Honduras? Why does the US mainstream media apparently consider it impolitic to criticize regimes that were installed by U.S.-backed coups, then turn around and assume the worst of any left-leaning government, advocating overthrow and punitive sanctions? The United States NatSec blob could not ask for a media more biased in its favor.

 

[Kwak]

Meanwhile in Honduras: [tweet t="https://twitter.com/GrayzoneProject/status/1113467656131293186"]

What about the humanitarian crisis in Honduras? Why is the media so obsessed with Venezuela when the migrant caravans are primarily coming from Honduras?

Russia.

 

[Seanchaidh]

Meanwhile in Honduras: [tweet t="https://twitter.com/GrayzoneProject/status/1113467656131293186"]

What about the humanitarian crisis in Honduras? Why is the media so obsessed with Venezuela when the migrant caravans are primarily coming from Honduras?

Russia.

What about Russia?

 

[Sonmi]

Meanwhile in Honduras: [tweet t="https://twitter.com/GrayzoneProject/status/1113467656131293186"]

What about the humanitarian crisis in Honduras? Why is the media so obsessed with Venezuela when the migrant caravans are primarily coming from Honduras?

Russia.

What about Russia?

If I had to guess, Russia and Venezuela are "close", and so Venezuela is higher on the list of targets to take down despite other crises being just as bad if not worse. Basically the same old fake tears and hypocrisy used to attempt to unseat Assad.

 

[Kwak]

Meanwhile in Honduras: [tweet t="https://twitter.com/GrayzoneProject/status/1113467656131293186"]

What about the humanitarian crisis in Honduras? Why is the media so obsessed with Venezuela when the migrant caravans are primarily coming from Honduras?

Russia.

What about Russia?

The power plays between US and Russia using Venezuela as their virtue-signalling opportunity.
Some headlines...
Russia in Venezuela: Why Putin has sent troops to back up Nicolas Maduro

Venezuela Says More Russian Troops May Arrive to Face U.S. as Syria Offers Support

Venezuela crisis: Why Russia sent army to Venezuela REVEALED - Trump FURIOUS at decision

The Folly of Conflict With Russia Over Venezuela
There is at least one point on which Washington and Moscow find themselves at odds: Venezuela.

Trump, Putin and a Possible ?Red-Line Moment? in Venezuela

US threatens to counter Russia over military deployment Venezuela

 

[Seanchaidh]

Meanwhile in Honduras: [tweet t="https://twitter.com/GrayzoneProject/status/1113467656131293186"]

What about the humanitarian crisis in Honduras? Why is the media so obsessed with Venezuela when the migrant caravans are primarily coming from Honduras?

Russia.

What about Russia?

The power plays between US and Russia using Venezuela as their virtue-signalling opportunity.
Some headlines...
Russia in Venezuela: Why Putin has sent troops to back up Nicolas Maduro

Venezuela Says More Russian Troops May Arrive to Face U.S. as Syria Offers Support

Venezuela crisis: Why Russia sent army to Venezuela REVEALED - Trump FURIOUS at decision

The Folly of Conflict With Russia Over Venezuela
There is at least one point on which Washington and Moscow find themselves at odds: Venezuela.

Trump, Putin and a Possible ?Red-Line Moment? in Venezuela

US threatens to counter Russia over military deployment Venezuela

Seems a bit post hoc; media has been weird about Venezuela since before Russia was really doing much of anything.

 

[generals3]

That Maduro has retained considerable popularity with poorer Venezualans is not controversial; it is thus consistent that a man who tried to depose him would get a rough ride in a barrio and might have to be extracted by his security team.

You certainly might also expect Western media to ignore this event if they've got a narrative to push. I think we are sold Guaido as the golden boy who's going to save Venezuala, and I think it reasonable to claim that our media are going to be shy of stories that suggest his popularity and position are much murkier than presented. Although maybe I should partially roll back "narrative to push": it might just partly just the cognitive simplicity of Maduro = bad guy, Guaido = good guy for ease of conveying events.

It shouldn't but in the "black & white" world we live in it probably is. It's much easier to depict conflicts (of all sorts) as being black and white rather than explain all the nuances of grey.

Someone being popular shouldn't be a gauge of how good or bad a leader is, misinformation can easily make an extremely bad leader loved by a big chunk of the people. (and the opposite is also true)
But than you need to explain in details why one's popularity shouldn't be used as a measure of benevolance. Which requires more effort than just trying to depict someone as being generally despised (or the opposite).

 

[Kwak]

Meanwhile in Honduras: [tweet t="https://twitter.com/GrayzoneProject/status/1113467656131293186"]

What about the humanitarian crisis in Honduras? Why is the media so obsessed with Venezuela when the migrant caravans are primarily coming from Honduras?

Russia.

What about Russia?

The power plays between US and Russia using Venezuela as their virtue-signalling opportunity.
Some headlines...
Russia in Venezuela: Why Putin has sent troops to back up Nicolas Maduro

Venezuela Says More Russian Troops May Arrive to Face U.S. as Syria Offers Support

Venezuela crisis: Why Russia sent army to Venezuela REVEALED - Trump FURIOUS at decision

The Folly of Conflict With Russia Over Venezuela
There is at least one point on which Washington and Moscow find themselves at odds: Venezuela.

Trump, Putin and a Possible ?Red-Line Moment? in Venezuela

US threatens to counter Russia over military deployment Venezuela

Seems a bit post hoc; media has been weird about Venezuela since before Russia was really doing much of anything.

Well, true. It's the go-to example of how 'socialism' is doomed to result in chaos and devastation and authoritarian dictatorships, and thus its disasters must be continually highlighted lest the US populace get any uppity ideas about any legislative pushes for equality within the glorious capitalist system.

My cynicim is exaggerating the reality of course - it's obviously a news-worthy situation with probably only 60% being bias-induced capitalist dogma.
Libertarians are particularly gleefully obsessed with every new story of failure from out of there, because they can use it to say "See what happens when you regulate the free-market!"

 

[TheIronRuler]

.

.
Give me a few successful current nations with a socialist designed economy. Not with social policies, like a retirement age or a maternity leave. A socialist designed economy.

 

[PsychedelicDiamond]

.

.
Give me a few successful current nations with a socialist designed economy. Not with social policies, like a retirement age or a maternity leave. A socialist designed economy.

Cuba's doing better than most of its neighbours in the Carribbean despite crippling sanctions.

 

[Silvanus]

Give me a few successful current nations with a socialist designed economy. Not with social policies, like a retirement age or a maternity leave. A socialist designed economy.

That'll depend on what you're referring to as a "socialist designed economy". I can think of quite a few successful countries with nationalised utilities or socialised healthcare, for instance.

 

[Pyrian]

Not with social policies, like a retirement age or a maternity leave.

Y'all attack "social policies" because VENEZUELA and "socialism never works" and then run away as fast as your rhetoric can carry you when called on it.

 

[TheIronRuler]

.

.
Give me a few successful current nations with a socialist designed economy. Not with social policies, like a retirement age or a maternity leave. A socialist designed economy.

Cuba's doing better than most of its neighbours in the Carribbean despite crippling sanctions.

.
Good example. I admit I don't know much about how Cuba's doing numbers-wise. I do however can guess it does better than some of the other Caribbean islands purely based on having a big-enough population and land-mass. Excluding Tobago, I think most independent Caribbean nations have it rough. If you can link me to some stuff about how Cuba's doing, I'll give it a read. However do try to find some neutral or non-communist sources, if you can.
.

Give me a few successful current nations with a socialist designed economy. Not with social policies, like a retirement age or a maternity leave. A socialist designed economy.

That'll depend on what you're referring to as a "socialist designed economy". I can think of quite a few successful countries with nationalised utilities or socialised healthcare, for instance.

.
I mean exactly what I said. If the meaning slipped your mind for a moment you can read-up on it. In a blunt and short fashion, Socialism is central planning.
.

Not with social policies, like a retirement age or a maternity leave.

Y'all attack "social policies" because VENEZUELA and "socialism never works" and then run away as fast as your rhetoric can carry you when called on it.

.
The blokes above you gave me a proper and respectful response. You haven't. You just put up a straw-man and won against it. If you want to dismiss me and keep yelling through the keyboard that's fine. It's not what I'm looking for.

I don't attack social policies. Retirement age and benefits, first came into effect to this world due to my namesake, Chancellor Otto von Bismark. It was the German Empire that constituted this in the 1880s. Just for the sake of fairness, I'd like to mention that one of the reasons for this was trying to disperse the boiling unrest caused by Marxists (said like a true Victoria 2 player).

Social policies can be beneficial to many societies, and they do not require a socialist economy to exist. They often requires a capitalist and free business environment to gather the wealth for instituting them. That's why you can get some nice social policies in rich capitalist countries like Sweden and Switzerland. Greece for example lead a line of generous social policies, but did not have the strong free economy required for their level of benefits. Greece has a bloated public sector, high taxes (that 25% VAT, damn) and a flourishing black market. If you can't tax the money moving around your country you can't use it to pay for benefits.

 

[MrCalavera_v1legacy]

Not with social policies, like a retirement age or a maternity leave.

Y'all attack "social policies" because VENEZUELA and "socialism never works" and then run away as fast as your rhetoric can carry you when called on it.

That's the best part. A country can be "socialist" when it fucks up, and "not REALLY socialist" when it does something right.

 

[Trunkage]

Not with social policies, like a retirement age or a maternity leave.

Y'all attack "social policies" because VENEZUELA and "socialism never works" and then run away as fast as your rhetoric can carry you when called on it.

I like the comments when a Capitalist country goes bankrupt. Usually "well, that's not real Capitalism."

 

[Pyrian]

I mean, it's patently obvious why there's no "real" capitalism, no "real" libertarianism, no "real" communism, and so on. None of those philosophies remotely work at scale in their pure form, not even enough to try and fail. Maybe this country needs a better social safety net, maybe that country needs more room for free enterprise.

 

[Seanchaidh]

Greece for example lead a line of generous social policies, but did not have the strong free economy required for their level of benefits

They didn't have the sovereign control over their own currency required; instead they shared a currency with (among others, but especially) Germany, which is kind of an awful idea.

 

[Trunkage]

I mean, it's patently obvious why there's no "real" capitalism, no "real" libertarianism, no "real" communism, and so on. None of those philosophies remotely work at scale in their pure form, not even enough to try and fail. Maybe this country needs a better social safety net, maybe that country needs more room for free enterprise.

This. Also add that this need can change from year to year. Too much free enterprise can lead to bad outcomes, but so can too much safety net.

 

[Silvanus]

I mean exactly what I said. If the meaning slipped your mind for a moment you can read-up on it. In a blunt and short fashion, Socialism is central planning.

The problem is that what you said doesn't mean very much on its own.

"Socialism" is... very conveniently understood and defined when someone has a point to prove (or an axe to grind). This is a case in point.

No, socialism is not just central planning.

 

[TheIronRuler]

The problem is this echo-chamber. At least I can respect the users, even with extreme views (to my own), that engage in actual debate with each other besides tossing shit around and debating definitions just to justify their opinions or weasel their way out of a conversation. Here, a person who I believe supports socialism, gave me a good example for my question - Cuba. It can be argued whether or not Cuba is doing well for itself, but it is a socialist-run country.

There are more examples of socialist countries but they are all examples of failed socialist countries (I may have overlooked more examples, I'm not familiar with the nearly two hundred countries in the world). Zimbabwe is a good example for a failed socialist country. Africa is riddled with socialist failed states thanks to soviet aggressive diplomatic policies and the limp diplomatic actions of European de-colonizers like Portugal and Britain.

You don't want to engage this argument because you lost it before it even started. You can argue socialism on a philosophical, social level. I can indulge you, even if I think the theory is mostly morally repugnant.

I can share this with you here, mostly because you've known me for years and this is wholly anonymous. The reason I'm so adamant against this method of thinking, which permeates itself into philosophy and governance stems from a short little story by Kurt Vonnegurt, 'Harrison Bergeron'. I want every single person to have the opportunity to be the best, strongest, smartest, kindest, most beautiful creature it can be, and populate the world around me. I don't want everybody to be equal in misery, for the sake of this value men created that is equality. This value philosophers created and fell in love with... We are all equal in the eyes of god, and in my view, we should all be equal in the eyes of a mortal judge - but not anywhere else.