|
https://twitter.com/KawsachunNews/s...ingawful.com%2F
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 04:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 13:54 |
|
|
ZearothK posted:I know it is kind of fighting against a very entrenched linguistic institution, but I really dislike using America to refer to the US and American to refer exclusively to the people of the United States. It may sound petty, but it is one of the ways the Monroe Doctrine is legitimized, as language molds thought. It's like using Asian and Asia to refer exclusively to China, or European/Europe to refer to the United Kingdom and not to any of the other countries in that continent. Same with the British re-introducing the term British Isles to justify their occupation of Ireland. And it works so insidiously that people with absolutely no skin in the game with rabidly defend the use of the term because geography is a pure science untainted by politics.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2020 13:23
|
|
|
I'm really not sure how Bolsonaro has avoided getting the virus so far.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2020 22:14
|
|
|
WOWEE ZOWEE posted:I'm really not sure how Bolsonaro has avoided getting the virus so far. narrator : he didn't He was on the corona flight from Florida, where a bunch of people got infected. His "official" test was released by court order but apparently it was done under a fake name and document so as to preserve state secrecy, or more likely, it's fake. God hates us all so of course him and trump are asymptomatic.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2020 13:55
|
|
|
drat who could have predicted this? https://twitter.com/KawsachunNews/status/1268701592687202310?s=20
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2020 01:46
|
|
|
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/07/world/americas/bolivia-election-evo-morales.htmlquote:A Bitter Election. Accusations of Fraud. And Now Second Thoughts. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 03:41
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 04:19
|
|
|
Who Possibly Could Have Seen This Coming
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 04:21
|
|
|
Can't wait for the "Lol the NYT is far left wing news source that always supports anti-American governments. Try again tankie.  " responses.
punk rebel ecks fucked around with this message at 04:29 on Jun 8, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 04:24
|
|
|
Did anyone actually believe this poo poo wasn't a coup from the very start.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 14:07
|
|
|
no but some pretend to cuz they're just fascists who are scared of public condemnation
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 14:20
|
|
|
NYT workflow reached the tepid both-sidesy correction stage
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2020 16:17
|
|
|
Ague Proof posted:Did anyone actually believe this poo poo wasn't a coup from the very start. Take a look through the threads on this very forum, and be surprised.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 12:20
|
|
|
Lmao i came here to post this but my last read post was from january 5th and first thing i see is some dude talking about maduro rigging elections. You hate to see it
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 21:00
|
|
|
ArfJason posted:Lmao i came here to post this but my last read post was from january 5th and first thing i see is some dude talking about maduro rigging elections. You hate to see it Just because Morales didn't rig any elections, it doesn't follow that Maduro didn't rig elections either, if that's what you're implying. But if you mean that it's interesting and appalling to see centrists who profess to be shocked by authoritarianism when it's a "left-wing" and/or anti-American government doing it tying themselves in knots to justify people like Áñez, then I agree.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 23:32
|
|
|
Silver2195 posted:Just because Morales didn't rig any elections, it doesn't follow that Maduro didn't rig elections either, if that's what you're implying. But if you mean that it's interesting and appalling to see centrists who profess to be shocked by authoritarianism when it's a "left-wing" and/or anti-American government doing it tying themselves in knots to justify people like Áñez, then I agree. if its the same people screaming about both maduro and morales rigging their elections, then it does actually mean that you shouldn't take their claims about maduro at face value either
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2020 23:41
|
|
|
I've constantly said that Maduro is authoritarian while Morales was not.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 00:00
|
|
|
Kurnugia posted:if its the same people screaming about both maduro and morales rigging their elections, then it does actually mean that you shouldn't take their claims about maduro at face value either Yes, it is literally the exact same people. Every single Venezuelan who has complained about the blatant illegality of the Constituent Assembly (over 60% of them, according to one poll) is also pro-Anez, and the same Venezuelan voting machine manufacturers who accused the PSUV of faking turnout figures secretly wrote the Ecuador OAS report. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 00:04
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:I've constantly said that Maduro is authoritarian while Morales was not. and which one of them was overthrown in a US sponsored coup again? hmm, perhaps there might be a connection there... Silver2195 posted:Yes, it is literally the exact same people. Every single Venezuelan who has complained about the blatant illegality of the Constituent Assembly (over 60% of them, according to one poll) is also pro-Anez, and the same Venezuelan voting machine manufacturers who accused the PSUV of faking turnout figures secretly wrote the Ecuador OAS report. oh lmao i forgot about the voting machines guys
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 00:14
|
|
|
Silver2195 posted:Just because Morales didn't rig any elections, it doesn't follow that Maduro didn't rig elections either, if that's what you're implying. But if you mean that it's interesting and appalling to see centrists who profess to be shocked by authoritarianism when it's a "left-wing" and/or anti-American government doing it tying themselves in knots to justify people like Áñez, then I agree. Lol if you still believe state department talking points on other countries elections you are either willfully obtuse or childishly uninformed. If the US back a side, it’s the bad guys. Not a single counterexample in 60 years.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 01:35
|
|
|
talking about bad guys and good guys in politics is very wronheaded imo, but what is factually inarguable is that whoever the us backs in latinamerican countries is always to serve their interests to the detriment of the latinamerican country's people
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 03:07
|
|
|
So how's the region handling the pandemic? I don't really know where to get news from Latin America and I don't really trust my relatives to be particularly objective when it comes to Colombia, they say that Duque is handling it very well, but the dude's such a blockhead I have trouble believing it. The inequality in the region is what worries me most since I'm sure that'll be the real divide that'll cause harm, much like it has with minority populations in the US.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 07:39
|
|
|
100YrsofAttitude posted:So how's the region handling the pandemic? I don't really know where to get news from Latin America and I don't really trust my relatives to be particularly objective when it comes to Colombia, they say that Duque is handling it very well, but the dude's such a blockhead I have trouble believing it. Brazil took the lead in daily deaths so Bolsonaro had his government stop reporting numbers
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 07:56
|
|
|
Kurnugia posted:and which one of them was overthrown in a US sponsored coup again? hmm, perhaps there might be a connection there... What? Plenty of authoritarian regimes have been overthrown by initiatives sponsored by the US. Hint, the likelihood of successful overthrow of a government isn't how nice or bad a government is, but rather how vulnerable the ruling system is to internal and external pressures, and if those weaknesses are exploited. A coup won't work in Venezuela not because the PSUV are actually really nice or because its authoritarian (authoritarians often give their militaries a lot more power) but because Chavez and Maduro have successfully brought the military establishment over to their side. Given how close the Venezuelan military was to the United States this is probably Chavez's most impressive achievement.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 08:03
|
|
|
joepinetree posted:Brazil took the lead in daily deaths so Bolsonaro had his government stop reporting numbers Well, that's just great. How much autonomy do the individual states have to protect their people/be transparent, if they so felt to be so though, I can only imagine that Bolsonaro's party controls a fair amount of governors anyway...
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 08:11
|
|
|
Baka-nin posted:What? Plenty of authoritarian regimes have been overthrown by initiatives sponsored by the US. Hint, the likelihood of successful overthrow of a government isn't how nice or bad a government is, but rather how vulnerable the ruling system is to internal and external pressures, and if those weaknesses are exploited. A coup won't work in Venezuela not because the PSUV are actually really nice or because its authoritarian (authoritarians often give their militaries a lot more power) but because Chavez and Maduro have successfully brought the military establishment over to their side. Given how close the Venezuelan military was to the United States this is probably Chavez's most impressive achievement. I swear half that half the history of South and Latin America over the last two centuries is popular revolutions/conflicts leading to people voluntarily giving control to the military to establish order, thinking the military is a neutral party in politics and discovering that no, no they are not neutral at all.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 16:31
|
|
|
Dreylad posted:I swear half that half the history of South and Latin America over the last two centuries is popular revolutions/conflicts leading to people voluntarily giving control to the military to establish order, thinking the military is a neutral party in politics and discovering that no, no they are not neutral at all. If by "people" you mean "ruling elites", thats very true
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 16:39
|
|
|
Baka-nin posted:What? Plenty of authoritarian regimes have been overthrown by initiatives sponsored by the US. Hint, the likelihood of successful overthrow of a government isn't how nice or bad a government is, but rather how vulnerable the ruling system is to internal and external pressures, and if those weaknesses are exploited. A coup won't work in Venezuela not because the PSUV are actually really nice or because its authoritarian (authoritarians often give their militaries a lot more power) but because Chavez and Maduro have successfully brought the military establishment over to their side. Given how close the Venezuelan military was to the United States this is probably Chavez's most impressive achievement. It’s actually because the Venezuelan people support their government and are armed to the point where they can act to prevent foreign invasion, like those fishermen did with the failed US invasion a month or so back.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 16:41
|
|
|
Baka-nin posted:What? Plenty of authoritarian regimes have been overthrown by initiatives sponsored by the US. Hint, the likelihood of successful overthrow of a government isn't how nice or bad a government is, but rather how vulnerable the ruling system is to internal and external pressures, and if those weaknesses are exploited. A coup won't work in Venezuela not because the PSUV are actually really nice or because its authoritarian (authoritarians often give their militaries a lot more power) but because Chavez and Maduro have successfully brought the military establishment over to their side. Given how close the Venezuelan military was to the United States this is probably Chavez's most impressive achievement. Pretty much. Who has the support of the military has the security. Thailand is also a great example of this. The government was popular but the military despised the red shirts. So they did a coup as soon as feasible.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 16:43
|
|
|
Baka-nin posted:What? Plenty of authoritarian regimes have been overthrown by initiatives sponsored by the US. Hint, the likelihood of successful overthrow of a government isn't how nice or bad a government is, but rather how vulnerable the ruling system is to internal and external pressures, and if those weaknesses are exploited. A coup won't work in Venezuela not because the PSUV are actually really nice or because its authoritarian (authoritarians often give their militaries a lot more power) but because Chavez and Maduro have successfully brought the military establishment over to their side. bringing the military establishment over to your side necessitates what posters like fnox have decried as "authoritarianism". personally i have no loving clue what the word is even supposed to mean except that it involves removing power from established elites and elite dominated institutions Baka-nin posted:Given how close the Venezuelan military was to the United States this is probably Chavez's most impressive achievement. wholeheartedly agreed, and securing the socialist state against a military coup is indeed the most critical phase following the takeover of power, and his failure on that front is the reason why Morales is now in exile
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 16:48
|
|
|
Kurnugia posted:bringing the military establishment over to your side necessitates what posters like fnox have decried as "authoritarianism". personally i have no loving clue what the word is even supposed to mean except that it involves removing power from established elites and elite dominated institutions
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 18:49
|
|
|
come on now, don't keep me waiting for that punchline
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 19:03
|
|
|
Munin posted:Is this genuine ignorance or are you making a cheap shot? Not a cheap shot, the label “authoritarian” is applied with little regard consistency and is more an indicator of “countries the west doesn’t like” than actual policies of a country. As the BLM protests have shown, all countries are authoritarian.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 19:05
|
|
|
uninterrupted posted:Not a cheap shot, the label “authoritarian” is applied with little regard consistency and is more an indicator of “countries the west doesn’t like” than actual policies of a country. It is seen as a perjorative political label. Of course it is applied in a partisan manner, especially by political hacks (which means most of the political establishment full stop). The basic concept is pretty straightforward though and covers political regimes across the political spectrum from the Porfiriato, Pinochet's Chile, Saudi Arabia, Zimbabwe, to Cuba and Maduro's Venezuela. The basic thing holds true that partisans will vehemently defend regimes they see as aligned with their interests even in light of patently obvious abuses. The term itself is pretty well defined though even if, as with everything, there are issues categorising edge cases. Not to mention that even in the category of authoritarian regimes there are degrees and kinds. This is taken from wikipedia since it puts the essentials better than I could. The main features are:
2. Political legitimacy based upon appeals to emotion, and identification of the regime as a necessary evil to combat "easily recognizable societal problems, such as underdevelopment, and insurgency" 3. Minimal political mobilization and suppression of anti-regime activities 4. Ill-defined executive powers, often vague and shifting, which extends the power of the executive And of those number 2, is in my opinion, the weakest since emotions runs people and emotion is part and parcel of the political discourse. It seems mostly included in the list to differentiate "authoritarian" and "totalitarian" regimes as defined by the scholar quoted in the Wikipedia article. The underlying point is to prevent any questioning of the dominant ideology and people power and suppress any means for the people in charge to be replaced in a democratic way. If you were to look at the US through that lens the state apparatus is used for some of these more than in other "free" democracies, but not to the extent as happens in places like Russia. The increasingly flagrant attempts at voter suppression by the Republicans would be an example of limiting political mobilisation. Trump's, often successful, attempts at showing that a lot of the limits on the power of the President, which are more down to convention than statute are a clear example of pushing boundaries around point four. Nevertheless, in general a broad variety of political parties and organisations can gather privately and publicly and air a wide variety of political view. There has been strong pushback against Trump's grab for more executive power and some of the limits on the power of the president have become clearer. It doesn't look as if Trump could totally subvert limits on the President's power, like for example term limits. I should also add that authoritarian regimes aren't necessarily bad for their citizens. I mean, you can have enlightened dictators or monarchs. Cuba has overall managed itself pretty well over the years despite the US embargo. It is still an authoritarian regime though given how tightly executive power is held within a ruling clique, how tightly elections are controlled, and how breaching the (very confined) limits of political discourse and organisation are also criminalised. It would be an interesting hypothetical to imagine how stable Cuba would have been if it didn't have the safety valve of the US right next door, where the broad mass of its most radical dissenters could easily be shipped to. That said, they tend to come a cropper either when the person, or people, in charge become to old or die bringing the question of political succession to the fore or a attitudes changes or a set of crises . Since there is no system for political succession things tend to descend into infighting. The other common occurrence is that the liberation hero starts to lose their grip on reality/turns out to be incompetent but doesn't want to lose the power they've come to like, see Zimbabwe for an example of that. They can also fail to move with the times with an aging elite ruling with just the same policies and approaches as they did 30 years prior when they first gained power despite the economic and social circumstances having changed wildly since then and having a younger generation wanting a say in how things and having their thoughts and attitudes reflected but having no way of achieving that within the system. See the Porfiriato (which, interestingly, has what I would call a very flattering write-up on Wikipedia...). uninterrupted posted:As the BLM protests have shown, all countries are authoritarian. I would disagree there. There has been plenty of space for political discourse and dissent across the world and the kind of public show of political dissent against the establishment would have been totally shut down in many countries. The behaviour of the police demonstrated once again how close the US is to being an authoritarian country but the protests as a whole and everything that surrounds them shows that it isn't quite yet. In addition the reaction to the behaviour of the police has also shown how strong of a breach of the norm that reaction by the police was seen to be.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 20:52
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:Can't wait for the "Lol the NYT is far left wing news source that always supports anti-American governments. Try again tankie. i know literally nobody itt actually read the article but it doesn't actually say what you think it does. it also only disagrees with the OAS on a single point, which isn't even that important to the OAS case for election irregularities.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 21:10
|
|
|
quote:“We took a hard look at the O.A.S.’s statistical evidence and found problems with their methods,” said Francisco Rodríguez, an economist who teaches Latin American studies at Tulane University. “Once we correct those problems, the O.A.S.’s results go away, leaving no statistical evidence of fraud.” quote:The authors of the new study said they were unable to replicate the O.A.S.’s findings using its likely techniques. They said a sudden change in the trend appeared only when they excluded results from the manually processed, late-reporting polling booths. That's what the bulk of the article is about; the OAS loving up their blackbox analysis. They pepper in some other unsubstantiated claims of fraud, but that's about it. At the end of the day, this was a fascist coup to overthrow a legitimately elected leftist leader. That's it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 21:28
|
|
|
uninterrupted posted:As the BLM protests have shown, all countries are authoritarian. I should have asked, what criteria are you using to make that call?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 22:02
|
|
|
Squalid posted:i know literally nobody itt actually read the article but it doesn't actually say what you think it does. it also only disagrees with the OAS on a single point, which isn't even that important to the OAS case for election irregularities. Don't you realize it's easy for anyone to read the article and know you're full of shite?
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 22:02
|
|
|
brugroffil posted:That's what the bulk of the article is about; the OAS loving up their blackbox analysis. They pepper in some other unsubstantiated claims of fraud, but that's about it. i dont really know why so much emphasis is put on the statistics. The OAS report basically many, many allegations. The principle argument for fraud however rests on irregularities in the electronic voting system and with paper ballots. Additionally there was a statistical analysis of voting patterns. But even if there was a problem with that analysis, the OAS's argument doesn't rest on that. Now you say the OAS's claims are unsubstantiated. What kind of substantiation would you like to see? I can show you their sources if you'd like.
|
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 22:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 13:54 |
|
|
Why is it so important to you to validate the pretext for a fascist coup? e: and just to be clear, we can see you bullshitting again with the "only disagrees on a single point" claim. They reject the entirety of OAS's statistical analysis. They did not investigate and don't say they support any of OAS's claims. The article focuses on OAS's statistical bullshit because that's what this independent study was looking at. e2: on the article itself: "As the preliminary vote count began, on Oct. 20, 2019, tensions ran high. When the tallying stopped — suddenly and without explanation — then resumed again a full day later, it showed Mr. Morales had just enough votes to eke out a victory." Isn't it common for quick counts to stop when they? brugroffil fucked around with this message at 23:13 on Jun 10, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jun 10, 2020 22:43
|
|