|
Elections are no guarantee of democracy, but if you believe in democracy the logical position is to demand elections that are democratic, not to reject democracy. Of course coup supporters don't believe in democracy which is why they hope starving millions with a naval blockade will coerce the country into accepting a US-backed dictatorship
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2019 20:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 10:43 |
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Elections are no guarantee of democracy, but if you believe in democracy the logical position is to demand elections that are democratic, not to reject democracy. Which is why the government should not be banning electoral groups for running for office arbitrarily, correct. Good to see you are finally learning VitalSigns posted:Of course coup supporters don't believe in democracy which is why they hope starving millions I agree, Maduro’s actions have been loving ghoulish and he needs to get guillotined as soon as possible
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2019 20:39
|
|
|
Noshtane posted:Well, you, for one. Then there was also Foro de São Paulo hosted in not too long ago. Despite being more bloodthirsty than Pinochet, Maduri still garner support from various "leftists", around the world. I have my doubts that a paper called "Proletaren" is anything close to "prominent". Also your link is broken. E: The circulation of Proletaren appears to be around 3,200: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prolet%C3%A4ren making it an utterly irrelevant mouthpiece for a dead ideology and not particularly 'prominent'... The Jehova's Witness magazine probably has higher circulation in Sweden, although granted they give it out for free. I haven't seen any remotely mainstream news source support the PSUV or Venezuela's government in a couple years.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2019 20:52
|
|
|
Noshtane posted:You are equally responsible for Maduro as some random Pinochet supporting reactionary was for the state of Chile during the 80s. I'm sure this must have felt more damning in your head
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2019 20:52
|
|
|
Saladman posted:I have my doubts that a paper called "Proletaren" is anything close to "prominent". Also your link is broken. As far as communist papers go in Sweden, Proletären is one of the bigger and I wouldn't call it a dead ideology either. http://proletaren.se/artikel/usa-stott-kuppforsok-i-venezuela Let's see if plain old URL works better. Homeless Friend posted:I'm sure this must have felt more damning in your head We should be equally critical against the supporters of Maduro since he is every bit as bad as Pinochet.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2019 21:04
|
|
|
uninterrupted posted:Before the worst of the sanctions most Venezuelan expats were well-off professionals Is that cause and effect? If you had means you probably already got out of Venezuela a while ago, right?
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2019 21:15
|
|
|
Noshtane posted:It was not supposed to be a sick burn, it was supposed to be an equivalence. We rightly criticize those who supported Pinochet back in the day, no matter how insignificant they where. Sure, people might do this on an interpersonal level, but no serious analysis is going to factor in individual agents unless they possess actual power or are relevant to those agents.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2019 21:16
|
|
|
BigFactory posted:Is that cause and effect? If you had means you probably already got out of Venezuela a while ago, right? "But back then they were leaving for the wrong reasons!" 
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2019 21:22
|
|
|
Furia posted:Which is why the government should not be banning electoral groups for running for office arbitrarily, correct. Yeah I agree, and have never said otherwise, I'm not sure what this has to do with the fact that the opposition has flatly rejected democracy. Notice there's no argument that Venezuela should have democracy, just a deflection that Maduro is an authoritarian who does not allow democracy himself. It's not surprising why the Venezuelan people want nothing to do with Guaido and the rest of your ilk, when it's so plain yall and Maduro are two sides of the same autocratic coin. Furia posted:I agree, Maduro’s actions have been loving ghoulish and he needs to get guillotined as soon as possible Notice again, no argument that Venezuelans shouldn't be starved (because the opposition enthusiastically supports starving the country into submission), just a deflection onto Maduro and the implicit statement that starvation as a weapon should be used in favor of US corporations' political interests rather than Maduro's. VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 21:26 on Aug 9, 2019 |
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2019 21:23
|
|
|
Noshtane posted:As far as communist papers go in Sweden don't tire yourself out moving those goalposts
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2019 21:28
|
|
|
Homeless Friend posted:Sure, people might do this on an interpersonal level, but no serious analysis is going to factor in individual agents unless they possess actual power or are relevant to those agents. I agree that individual posters on a dead comedy forum probably have a vanishingly small impact on the current situation in Venezuela. I'm still going to call out dictator apologists when they post though. VitalSigns posted:Yeah I agree, and have never said otherwise, I'm not sure what this has to do with the fact that the opposition has flatly rejected democracy. Maduro has time and time again subverted the democratic process in Venezuela. Why should this time be any different? What reason do we have to believe that he won't use the same dirty tricks as last time?
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2019 21:31
|
|
|
Noshtane posted:Maduro has time and time again subverted the democratic process in Venezuela. Why should this time be any different? What reason do we have to believe that he won't use the same dirty tricks as last time? None, obviously. Which is why the logical demand, if one believes in Democracy and the Venezuelan people's right to self-determination, would be a free and fair election with international observers to certify the results. Of course, the opposition's agenda is massively unpopular, so it's not surprising that a free and fair democratic election is the one thing they won't countenance.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2019 21:36
|
|
|
Noshtane posted:Maduro has time and time again subverted the democratic process in Venezuela. Why should this time be any different? What reason do we have to believe that he won't use the same dirty tricks as last time? Maduro is incompetent and could accidentally gently caress it all up, while the US is much more practiced and likely wont make any errors in that regard. Therefore letting Maduro run in the election has the highest odds for real democracy to happen. Its simple math.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2019 21:41
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:None, obviously. this is their demand though I guess there's also a demand from some quarters that Maduro resign first, but I don't think anyone is too afraid of him winning a fair election. If they could gaurantee that th election will be fair I think the opposition would be eager to go up against Maduro
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2019 21:46
|
|
|
Squalid posted:this is their demand though You think the group of people who organized the western blockade of Venezuela and want to cut food/housing aid AND privatize the oil industry are gonna poll well? Like, you know actual Venezuelans are gonna be voting, not just expat gusanos in Miami/London/Sweden, right?
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2019 21:51
|
|
|
uninterrupted posted:You think the group of people who organized the western blockade of Venezuela and want to cut food/housing aid AND privatize the oil industry are gonna poll well? these policies have not prevented parties from winning elections in the past so it's certainly not impossible
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2019 21:52
|
|
|
Squalid posted:this is their demand though By "some quarters" you mean the people actually calling the shots in the negotiations. So there's a demand to not allow elections, but you "don't think" it's because those people are afraid of losing an election. Mhm. Next are you going to tell me that Trump won't release his tax returns because they're so impeccable he doesn't want to embarrass Rachel Maddow.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2019 21:54
|
|
|
Squalid posted:these policies have not prevented parties from winning elections in the past so it's certainly not impossible Did you read the wapo article? The pro-coup opposition is directly responsible for the worst conditions in Venezuela in decades. What do you think their voter base looks like, outside of wealthy Venezuelans hoarding food in those plush supermarkets we keep seeing?
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2019 21:56
|
|
|
uninterrupted posted:Did you read the wapo article? The pro-coup opposition is directly responsible for the worst conditions in Venezuela in decades. What do you think their voter base looks like, outside of wealthy Venezuelans hoarding food in those plush supermarkets we keep seeing? I think his argument is that the coup plotters believe that they will successfully pin the blame for all the people they starve with their embargo on the Venezuelan government for not acquiescing to a US-backed coup, and therefore despite their explicit rejection of democracy secretly they're fine with democracy and therefore they are good. So much to unpack in there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2019 22:05
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:By "some quarters" you mean the people actually calling the shots in the negotiations. I'm not sure I understand what you are saying. The opposition has been very clear that it wants to hold new parliamentary elections. They also want Maduro to resign, and they refuse to acknowledge the legitimacy of the Constituent Assembly. It sounds like you are saying they do not really want elections, and that this is a false claim against which they have placed impossible restrictions. I'm not sure who is really calling the shots in these negotiations. I'm not convinced it is Bolton, who is one of the people I recall was calling for elections only after Maduro's resignation. If the opposition could get elections with outside observers against Maduro, I think they would likely take it. However it's hard to tell what people really want and what is just a negotiating position. uninterrupted posted:Did you read the wapo article? The pro-coup opposition is directly responsible for the worst conditions in Venezuela in decades. What do you think their voter base looks like, outside of wealthy Venezuelans hoarding food in those plush supermarkets we keep seeing? The opposition represents a varied coalition of many different demographic and identity groups. In 2015 they earned about 56% of the parliamentary vote, and there's not much evidence that their popularity has declined since. From their actions they at least appear to believe they command even more support. You might argue they have lost popularity, but it's hard to gauge it with any accuracy without an election or reliable polling.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2019 22:08
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:I think his argument is that the coup plotters believe that they will successfully pin the blame for all the people they starve with their embargo on the Venezuelan government for not acquiescing to a US-backed coup, and therefore despite their explicit rejection of democracy secretly they're fine with democracy and therefore they are good. I mean I guess, but the opposition overthrew the government and tried to tear up the constitution wholesale in what, 2001? It’s not yesterday, but that’s pretty fresh in people’s minds. Maduros definitely losing support due to the campesino murders and cracking down on their protests, but I don’t see the pro-coup opposition capitalizing on that. Their position is p much “we want big landlords to murder you, too!”
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2019 22:09
|
|
|
Squalid posted:The opposition represents a varied coalition of many different demographic and identity groups. In 2015 they earned about 56% of the parliamentary vote, and there's not much evidence that their popularity has declined since. From their actions they at least appear to believe they command even more support. You might argue they have lost popularity, but it's hard to gauge it with any accuracy without an election or reliable polling. Well that’s just the issue, they’re extremely varied, so you can’t lump them together as 56% of the vote. That’s why I specified pro-coup opposition; their far-right supporters and the rest of the opposition, some attacking Maduro from the left, have completely different bases of support.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2019 22:13
|
|
|
uninterrupted posted:I mean I guess, but the opposition overthrew the government and tried to tear up the constitution wholesale in what, 2001? It’s not yesterday, but that’s pretty fresh in people’s minds. impacts on campesinos probably has a minimal effect on Maduro's popularity, agriculture made up only 10% of Venezuela's labor force in 2004, a lot of those are probably landowners in their own right, and that proportion probably declined a lot up to 2014 as the agricultural sector collapsed. PSUV support was always based in the urban workers and variables effecting PSUV support are therefore going to necessarily effect their interests.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2019 22:14
|
|
|
Squalid posted:I'm not sure I understand what you are saying. The opposition has been very clear that it wants to hold new parliamentary elections. They also want Maduro to resign, and they refuse to acknowledge the legitimacy of the Constituent Assembly. It sounds like you are saying they do not really want elections, and that this is a false claim against which they have placed impossible restrictions. Ah so I should ignore what they say, in favor of what I wish they believe in their hearts, and just assume their stated position is a lie, but I should trust those liars to deal in good faith later based on an imaginary good secret position that I fancy they hold. Hmm that doesn't sound too reasonable my friend. Demanding the government resign and be replaced by an unelected US-backed administration that they assure us will hold elections doesn't make sense. How do we know those elections will be free and fair, if apparently international observers are inadequate (as they must be, or else the logical demand would be for observers to monitor elections under the current government, not for that government to resign). I presume I'm not going to get a hilarious response like "Maduro is untrustworthy, but we can have faith in the US's history of good faith and fair dealings in Latin America" VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 22:20 on Aug 9, 2019 |
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2019 22:16
|
|
|
Squalid posted:impacts on campesinos probably has a minimal effect on Maduro's popularity, agriculture made up only 10% of Venezuela's labor force in 2004, a lot of those are probably landowners in their own right, and that proportion probably declined a lot up to 2014 as the agricultural sector collapsed. PSUV support was always based in the urban workers and variables effecting PSUV support are therefore going to necessarily effect their interests. I think looking at it simply through economic terms is too limited. Lots of these campesinos are “landlords” because they took some unused land through Chavez’s land law. gently caress, who’s that guy who posts here like every other month and runs a farm; not ever landlord is running some luxury plantation. Also there are full on Chavista militias getting killed with no government answer (and supposedly some national guard involvement); that’s a full on attack on his core supporters Maduro is ignoring.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2019 22:33
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Ah so I should ignore what they say, in favor of what I wish they believe in their hearts, and just assume their actual position is a lie, but I should trust those liars to deal in good faith later. Hmm that doesn't sound too reasonable my friend. I find your description of the opposition demands and the political issues confusing. Guaido and the National Assembly haven't so much as asked the government to resign as they have declared it unconstitutional and asserted that Guaido is the legitimate President. On this basis they assert authority to command the military. On this basis they justify a military coup d'etat against the Maduro government, and have promised elections in the immediate aftermath. This would in effect leave an undemocratic military junta in power, although if it actually holds elections that would result in a transition. As to how to test if elections are fair there are various ways. The ultimate result of such events are hard to predict and I would not deign to try. However the opposition is very clear about their desire for elections in the near future, so I'm not sure why you think they don't want them. If must make me point out why international observers and the opposition are distrustful of Maduro it's not hard to find sources. election problems go back many years. Your argument doesn't seem to be that Maduro is actually trustworthy, but that he is just no less trustworthy than the opposition. Unfortunately in any situation where the government is not democratic, there is no way to guarantee a democratic transition, because when there aren't good institutions there's no reason to trust the process. The only solution is building good institutions, and its not easy to predict how likely political actors are to do that in advance. In this situation predicting who would end up in the policy driver seat is necessarily very difficult. uninterrupted posted:I think looking at it simply through economic terms is too limited. Lots of these campesinos are “landlords” because they took some unused land through Chavez’s land law. gently caress, who’s that guy who posts here like every other month and runs a farm; not ever landlord is running some luxury plantation. Also there are full on Chavista militias getting killed with no government answer (and supposedly some national guard involvement); that’s a full on attack on his core supporters Maduro is ignoring. she runs a dairy with one regularly employed campensino. I'm not sure how typical that is, but the kinds of agriculture that tended to employ the rural workforce have decayed the fastest. The sugarcane industry is practically dead as far as I've been able to tell, that and coffee farms were probably the big rural employers. Rural areas just aren't that important politically because Venezuela is a very urbanized society. Urban violence is definitely politically important though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2019 22:50
|
|
|
Current US foreign policy being bad for Venezuelans isn't mutually exclusive from Maduro's continued rule and policies being bad for Venezuelans.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2019 23:36
|
|
|
Another apparently needed regular reminder: Guaido's party won the last legitimate election in Venezuela and Maduro is illegally refusing to cede power. "The coup" has happened and the people responsible for it are the same ones running the death squads that the Jacobin readership is cheering. "Allowing the winner of the election to run the government would be undemocratic" only makes sense through the light of leftist world where there's just a list of interchangeable words that have no meaning beyond "bad thing" - they could just as easily describe allowing Guaido, the winner of the election, running the government as "Zionist" or "austerity" or "GMO."
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 02:05
|
|
|
M. Discordia posted:Another apparently needed regular reminder: Guaido's party won the last legitimate election in Venezuela and Maduro is illegally refusing to cede power. "The coup" has happened and the people responsible for it are the same ones running the death squads that the Jacobin readership is cheering. "Allowing the winner of the election to run the government would be undemocratic" only makes sense through the light of leftist world where there's just a list of interchangeable words that have no meaning beyond "bad thing" - they could just as easily describe allowing Guaido, the winner of the election, running the government as "Zionist" or "austerity" or "GMO." so when you were drooling over the thought of a new regime instituting a program of mass murder in Venezuela, was that a bit, orrr
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 02:39
|
|
|
M. Discordia posted:Another apparently needed regular reminder: Guaido's party won the last legitimate election in Venezuela and Maduro is illegally refusing to cede power. "The coup" has happened and the people responsible for it are the same ones running the death squads that the Jacobin readership is cheering. "Allowing the winner of the election to run the government would be undemocratic" only makes sense through the light of leftist world where there's just a list of interchangeable words that have no meaning beyond "bad thing" - they could just as easily describe allowing Guaido, the winner of the election, running the government as "Zionist" or "austerity" or "GMO." guaido didn't even stand in the last election; his temporary appointment as president expired months ago. he clearly has no support outside of the us state department, given the utter failure of his coup attempt, and even in the us his fortunes are waning. the federal government refuses to give him access to the billions in oil assets and gold stolen from venezuela, and us congress is balking at giving him money to run embassies after he squandered all of the money he was given to form a militia in columbia. he not only didn't win the election, he has an incredible track record of failure that makes jeb bush look like a political genius. calling guaido the legitimate president is a sick joke, made even worse by the way that the trump administration is willing to starve venezuela to install him. contrary to what you think, leftists actually care what words mean, and calling this whole process "democratic" stretches that word far past the breaking point. save your rants about leftists and propaganda for a better cause than juan guaido.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 04:50
|
|
|
Democracy is when communists get rounded up and murdered, ruthless authoritarianism is when the government helps the filthy poors. Discordia is your typical red faced republican boomer grandpa
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 07:43
|
|
|
regime members are a protected class and revolts are hate crimes. what if you replace "dictators" with "trans people"? really a bad look for those who advocate oppressed populations killing dictators imo.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 11:17
|
|
|
GoluboiOgon posted:guaido didn't even stand in the last election; his temporary appointment as president expired months ago. he clearly has no support outside of the us state department, given the utter failure of his coup attempt, and even in the us his fortunes are waning. the federal government refuses to give him access to the billions in oil assets and gold stolen from venezuela, and us congress is balking at giving him money to run embassies after he squandered all of the money he was given to form a militia in columbia. he not only didn't win the election, he has an incredible track record of failure that makes jeb bush look like a political genius. Guaido inspired millions of Venezuelans to openly protest, despite running the risk of being fired upon by Maduros death squads, police or military. What Guaido never managed to do was to garner support from the military or police, them being perfectly happy enriching themselves by bribes and corruption. A dictator like Maduro doesn’t need to give a gently caress about what the majority of his subjects think or want, as long as he has enough guns supporting him.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 11:49
|
|
|
Squalid posted:I find your description of the opposition demands and the political issues confusing. Guaido and the National Assembly haven't so much as asked the government to resign as they have declared it unconstitutional and asserted that Guaido is the legitimate President. On this basis they assert authority to command the military. On this basis they justify a military coup d'etat against the Maduro government, and have promised elections in the immediate aftermath. Right, they don't want to risk an election that they will probably lose, they want to seize power in a military coup. Glad we agree. Ah but you say after the US installs a military government then they will hold the free and fair election that they've said is unacceptable, and we can trust that it will be free because uhhh...? Squalid posted:This would in effect leave an undemocratic military junta in power, although if it actually holds elections that would result in a transition. As to how to test if elections are fair there are various ways. The ultimate result of such events are hard to predict and I would not deign to try. However the opposition is very clear about their desire for elections in the near future, so I'm not sure why you think they don't want them. Oh because you suppose they want them, based on...what I guess the sterling record of US-installed military dictatorships in Latin American for good faith and honest dealings? Okay. Look you're right that I'm not a mind reader or a time traveller. So I can't definitively prove that this US-installed military dictatorship will do the same thing every US-installed military dictatorship in Latin America has always done every time the US overthrew a Latin American government to install a military dictatorship in the name of 'freedom' and 'democracy'. And I can't go to the future and show you whether or not the opposition leaders who are declaring war on the country to starve them with a naval embargo and calling for an invasion will suddenly have a magical change of heart and suddenly start caring about the welfare of the millions of people whose murder they're happily agitating for in order to grab power. All I can talk about is the horrendous record of US-backed invasions in Latin America, and the horrific actions the opposition is taking now to punish the people of Venezuela for rejecting them. All I can do is apply basic pattern recognition. But I can't prove hypotheticals, so of course if you wish you can spin whatever web of sophistry you want to believe that It's Different This Time. But it doesn't matter what you believe does it, if you want to see your political goals accomplished here, the people of Venezuela have to agree with you, and when your only arguments are "well a military dictatorship will be nice...this time!" and "hey those people asking foreigners to starve and murder you, their hearts will grow three sizes if you give them absolute power!" well gee it's not hard to figure out why Guaido has no support. Noshtane posted:Guaido inspired millions of Venezuelans to openly protest, despite running the risk of being fired upon by Maduros death squads, police or military. That must be why the opposition has rejected internationally monitored elections and acknowledged they need a military coup in order to win. VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 20:01 on Aug 10, 2019 |
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 19:55
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:But I can't prove hypotheticals, so of course if you wish you can spin whatever web of sophistry you want to believe that It's Different This Time. But it doesn't matter what you believe does it, if you want to see your political goals accomplished here, the people of Venezuela have to agree with you, and when your only arguments are "well a military dictatorship will be nice...this time!" and "hey those people asking foreigners to starve and murder you, their hearts will grow three sizes if you give them absolute power!" well gee it's not hard to figure out why Guaido has no support. You have not understood my intentions. I have no interest in discussion political goals or values. It is almost always a tedious and pointless exercise. If you really want you can find some of my opinions on current events itt, but they are not in that post you quoted. In this exchange with you and uninterupted I have tried to avoid any discussion of desirable outcomes or morality, since for the most part this is little of interest to say. What is much more interesting is to discuss history, things that we can know about the actual actors, what happened, and theory. On these subjects we can present evidence and actually draw solid conclusions, and if we have different desires or values shouldn't stand in the way of agreeing on basic history. I know this is a kind of weird and irrelevant take. When uninterupted says "there's no way the venezuelan people will vote for the opposition because of x!" I understand he doesn't mean this literally, what he really means is "they SHOULDN'T" vote for them because of x!" So when I respond with "historically, people have voted for people despite x" It's a non sequitor. Still, I persevere, because discussing what is known from history is more interesting to me than moral posturing. I am not politically active in anyway that is at all relevant to Venezuelan politics, I just want to understand what is going on. What is good or moral in this situation has little interest to me, I just want to know what is. On that note: VitalSigns posted:That must be why the opposition has rejected internationally monitored elections and acknowledged they need a military coup in order to win. I'm a little unsure as to what specifically you are referring to here? Could you expand on this in more detail, and maybe provide a source?
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 20:26
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:That must be why the opposition has rejected internationally monitored elections and acknowledged they need a military coup in order to win. Are we talking about when Maduro offered to redo the election for the National Assembly and nothing else here? Despite their mandate stretching to 2020?
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 21:40
|
|
|
M. Discordia posted:regime members are a protected class and revolts are hate crimes. what if you replace "dictators" with "trans people"? really a bad look for those who advocate oppressed populations killing dictators imo. El Mozote Was About Bringing People Freedom, I shout, as I rip a couple tons of food away from the starving
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2019 21:45
|
|
|
Squalid posted:What is good or moral in this situation has little interest to me  Yeah I mean sure that's very obvious. Squalid posted:
Well, no. What's actually happening is people are asserting that they "know" the Venezuelan people would absolutely positively most definitely vote for Guaido and company, and therefore a military coup to install a dictatorship directly is good because it's what the people "really" want. Several posters are skeptical about this, and are bringing up reasons why we can't just assume they would win. So when you chime in with "  bad governments have been elected before" you're 100% correct, that is completely true. And you're also 100% correct that it's totally irrelevant to the conversation. Just because bad governments have been elected in various places at various times is no reason to assume any given would-be government will definitely win a specific election and it certainly isn't a reason to justify a military dictatorship to install that would-be government.I know this is D&D, but if you don't want people to misunderstand your intentions, maybe don't jump into conversations and phrase irrelevant observations as rebuttals to the points being made? Or maybe understand what the point actually is before trying to rebut something else? Not quite sure of the precise cause of the problem here. Noshtane posted:Are we talking about when Maduro offered to redo the election for the National Assembly and nothing else here? Squalid posted:I'm a little unsure as to what specifically you are referring to here? Could you expand on this in more detail, and maybe provide a source? Sure no problem  Jose posted:drat who could have predicted this VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 00:33 on Aug 11, 2019 |
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2019 00:30
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Well, no. What's actually happening is people are asserting that they "know" the Venezuelan people would absolutely positively most definitely vote for Guaido and company They already did. The insistence that they must not only do so a second time, but prove to your satisfaction that it is metaphysically certain they will before another election can be allowed, is a premise that you are asserting without any good-faith support. quote:, and therefore a military coup to install a dictatorship directly is good because it's what the people "really" want The military coup to install a dictatorship already happened. Maduro's party lost an election and he forcibly dispersed the opposition legislature with the military, which is also continuing to kill members of that opposition. It is you and the rest of the DSA Mass Grave Caucus that supports military coups and opposes democracy when using the real definition of those terms and not the Jacobin definition of "democracy is whatever keeps socialists in power up to and including nullifying elections and going door-to-door shooting members of opposing parties."
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2019 03:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 10:43 |
|
|
M. Discordia posted:They already did. The insistence that they must not only do so a second time, but prove to your satisfaction that it is metaphysically certain they will before another election can be allowed, is a premise that you are asserting without any good-faith support. There's been polling posted itt about this exact thing and iirc the results were that Maduro isn't popular, but Guaido assuming power unconstitutionally is even less popular so I'm skeptical that Venezuelans are secretly buying what you're saying but then just lying to pollsters or whatever M. Discordia posted:The insistence that they must not only do so a second time, but prove to your satisfaction that it is metaphysically certain they will before another election can be allowed, is a premise that you are asserting without any good-faith support. The opposition and its US government allies are the ones taking it off the table and insisting on installing a government by force.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2019 05:51
|
|