Chavez was elected on a platform of fighting poverty. When elected he started tearing down the democracy.
His successor Maduro has mismanaged the economy and now foreign nations refuse to sell items there because they fucked up their economy. There is a massive shortage of food and other necessary consumer goods.
Maduro is also supposedly tied into narco trafficking, and his admin is afraid if they step down, they’ll be prosecuted.
The public want change. They voted for a congress of the opposition party but Maduro and his packed Supreme Court neutered the legislature. Guaido was the head of the legislature and by the constitution has a rightful claim to leadership.
Well…I’d say it was socialist AND a dictatorship. It checks most of the boxes for socialist economic and political systems, and it checks most of the boxes for a dictatorship. They aren’t mutually exclusive, after all…we have plenty of examples of socialist or communist dictatorships to pick from.
The problem is folks seem to want to define socialism to equal all the stuff they want and exclude the stuff they don’t, but it doesn’t work that way. But abrogating the constitution isn’t mutually exclusive to socialism either. It’s mutually exclusive to democracy (well, that’s probably overstating…after all, we could, in theory, abrogate our own constitution if it was the will of the people. You just couldn’t do it by fiat or some socialist counsel for ‘the good of the people’, as has been done in the past). In the case of Venezuela, I’d say it’s a perfect storm of the worst aspects of socialism (economic and political) coupled to a dictatorship that has grown over time and over the course of two regimes now into a monster that’s destroying the country.
Which is neither here nor there wrt what the OP is asking, though the ‘dictatorship’ part does have an impact of course. Part of the legitimacy thingy along with the will of the people. But those are things that have to do with democracy…not socialism, per se.
Well…frankly it’s kind of stupid and less than informative. There are plenty of more informative videos on YouTube. Plus it’s kind of long for what it is.
That I don’t know…nor why you’d say ‘Reported’, whether you were going to report it or not. I didn’t see anything in there that warranted reporting to the Mods nor SAY you were going to report it to the Mods.
Maybe he thought you were a spammer I guess? Or maybe this came from another dimension and part of another thread…
Dude. Don’t post this juvenile garbage. If you want get in your digs and say that socialism sucks, okay whatever. Just as we’re not going to have a meme war here, dueling youtube links calling things retarded is about as useless as it gets. You’re perfectly capable of participating at a level above 1st grade taunts. Please try harder and do better.
Please do not publicly indicate post reports. See discussion at this thread here:
right now, the UNSC is holding a meeting on the Venezuela crisis. I have only caught snippets of it (and it’s hard to hear the translation AND the spanish speakers), but it seems like most participants are opposed to any sort of military intervention.
That’s nice to know, but seems pretty irrelevant. If the US wanted to depose Maduro through military force, I doubt they’d put “boots on the ground” to do it. It’d probably be an assault from air and naval forces, something like what we did in Libya.
Quite a few are successful, and with a high quality of life:
Denmark
Ecuador
Finland,
France
Germany,
Greenland
Iceland,
Ireland,
Italy
Luxembourg
Netherlands,
Northern Ireland,
Norway
Peru,
Portugal
Sweden
The few that are not, are no ver “democratic” and in fact Venezuela no longer qualifies as democratic, imho. It is just another dictatorship.
Mind you, I am not saying that Democratic Socialism is the way for the uSA to go, but clearly, it’s not the “socialism” in those nations that is the problem. It’s when they turn into a dictatorship.
Marxist–Leninist-inspired socialism, run always by dictators, has always been a failure.
As I understand it, Guaido is legally the leader of the nation.
Whether he would have won the election even if everything had been (or was) kosher is irrelevant. Richard Nixon would probably have won his second term fairly as well, that doesn’t mean that he didn’t try to cheat.
And it’s fair to say that if you’re creating a secondary Congress and Federal Election Committee under your control, completely outside of the Constitutionally created ones, that you’re cheating.
This isn’t to say that the opposition might not have also done some corrupt or unconstitutional things. But there is a fair basis to say that Maduro’s election was invalid.
