Venezuela: The Empanada Summit

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Venezuela: The Empanada Summit

Peel: Dec 3, 2007

We also have calls for assassination and armed revolution ITT, it's just how anglophone venezuelachat goes.

# ¿ Sep 12, 2015 21:25

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 4, 2024 02:25

Peel: Dec 3, 2007

computer parts posted:

25% is about the "will vote for a Ham Sandwich with -R next to its name" level here.

Actually remarkably close.

# ¿ Oct 5, 2015 12:06

Peel: Dec 3, 2007

The only actual communist (I know of) in this thread's only post was to criticise the PSUV for shite economic policy.

# ¿ Oct 22, 2015 12:19

Peel: Dec 3, 2007

Ardennes posted:

Basically, price controls really aren't the route you should be ever really going in, nationalization may or may not work but meaningful price controls will gently caress with your economy every time.

Not necessarily. The minimum wage is a price control, for example.

But it's evident that what Venezuela is doing with them isn't working.

# ¿ Oct 24, 2015 14:37

Peel: Dec 3, 2007

The secret PSUV plan was just to leave the polling places open indefinitely and never actually count the votes.

# ¿ Dec 7, 2015 01:30

Peel: Dec 3, 2007

Chuck Boone posted:

On the Mision Vivienda law reform:

The issue of the proposed reform to the Mision Vivienda subsidized housing program is an interesting one. However, if your starting position is �whoever disagrees with me is a Racist Bad Man� and everything they say is wrong, and I will parrot whatever PSUV says without question�, then we can't have a discussion.

If you do possess and value critical thought, there is a really interesting intersection of issues at play in this proposed reform.

The status quo regarding Mision Vivienda tenants is problematic because they do not own the units they live in. This causes problems because the government can and has threatened to remove/removed people from their homes for political purposes. People living in these units today do so at the whim of a government that is run on whims.

The fact that tenants do not own their units makes them easy targets for criminal elements (see: Nuevo Circo raid and the �Rodeo�, �Yare� and �Tocoron� housing complex in Caracas, re-named by residents after notorious prisons for the way the buildings act as criminals "bases"). There have also been instances of government forces intimidating residents into leaving for political purposes. Beyond these examples, you can imagine that the mere precense of the threat of losing your home for upsetting the government in some way is enough to pose troubling questions about the true purpose of the program.

The proposal for the reform law is being debated right now. No one knows what will be proposed before the National Assembly as the final draft of the law. However, there are reasons to be concerned about how far the law would grant ownership rights to tenants.

We do know that during the election campaign, the law's main purpose was stated to be the granting of property deeds to tenants so that the government could not evict people at will. What is not so clear is whether or not granting tenants deeds will mean �granting them the right to sell/rent/lease� the units. On the face of it, full ownership of property implies the ability to sell that property. However, there are good reasons to believe that the bill would (and should) try to limit this right. Perhaps the most obvious one is the fact that tenants paid Bs. 0 for these units. I think the temptation to sell an apartment/house you paid nothing for if given the opportunity overnight would be too great for many to resist, and this could cause problems. It takes approximately 164 years for a person making minimum salary to save enough money to buy an apartment: or, you could make that overnight by selling your Mision Vivienda unit. The opposition is aware of this, and that's why there is a debate happening around the proposal for the law.

I'm not sure what the solution is. I think I'd like to see a compromise where the tenants own their units insofar as they can't be evicted without cause, but are prohibited from transferring ownership of the units. Another compromise might be to allow the units to be sold, but only to the government. That way, the units would always belong either to beneficiaries of the program or the government, which could then re-assign the units as needed.

It is clear that the Mision Vivienda law as it exists today poses serious problems that should be rectified. It is also clear that there are pitfalls in the proposed reform that can only be addressed by rigorous debate. The reform seeks to correct some of the issues with the current law, but if we know anything about law it�s that when you fix one issue you run the risk of creating others. Following one side blindly and refusing to listen to the other is what ruined the country in the first place. Critical thought and self-reflection are key.

Are you familiar with the 'Right to buy' policy in the UK? People were allowed to buy and resell government subsidised houses, which produced windfalls for some tenants but depleted the subsidised housing stock over time, among other effects. It may have come up in the debates. It was the first thing I thought of when you mentioned the proposal, but I'm British.

# ¿ Jan 29, 2016 06:34

Peel: Dec 3, 2007

If there's a nega-Jimmy it's M. Discordia. MIGF is his own unique miracle of the universe.

# ¿ May 20, 2016 21:08

Peel: Dec 3, 2007

Yeah a census should collect data on racial distribution, otherwise you can't investigate and address racism effectively. That's normal in censuses.

It's rather rude to laser in on these individual cracks in posts to avoid an honest discussion, though.

# ¿ Dec 6, 2016 05:47

Peel: Dec 3, 2007

Nah dude that's actually pretty gross.

# ¿ Dec 25, 2016 03:06

Peel: Dec 3, 2007

I was confused and alarmed by Chuck Boone's post until I scrolled back up and read 'Gilber Caro.'

# ¿ Jan 12, 2017 22:01

Peel: Dec 3, 2007

This thread has been solidly anti-PSUV, the last thread had broad representation and some surprisingly good discussion.

D&D used to be libertarian, since 2008 it's been soldily left-liberal. Actual socialism or other strongly left ideologies have never been hegemonic except in LF.

# ¿ Jan 22, 2017 01:00

Peel: Dec 3, 2007

ISeeCuckedPeople posted:

I think a civil war is inevitable. And ultimately, what will have to happen is the strong supporters of Maduro and Bolivarianism will have to be exiled or killed. There is no way a society can function with people who are so strongly brainwashed participating in it.

Bolivarianism will need to go the way of Nazism in Germany post World War 2 - banned as a party and even mention for any hope of progress.

Nah.

# ¿ May 4, 2017 13:39

Peel: Dec 3, 2007

I did a search on the NY times website. The top ten relevant results in the last week are all critical of the government or at best neutral-ish 'just the facts' style reporting. The top result is an opinion piece by an opposition supporter that says the Chavez programme has 'left the country in ruins', the remaining news articles tend to casually refer to things like 'repression', 'increasingly authoritarian rule' and the 'deep desperation of [Maduro's] unpopular government'. The closest thing to a pro-PSUV view is a report of the Pope being unhappy with divisions in the opposition derailing Vatican attempts to mediate, and this thread itself is full of criticism of the opposition leadership.

The NY times is a centre-left liberal organ with no interest (quite the opposite) in propping up the PSUV. If the only reporting you find acceptable is a fascist propaganda rag you're probably looking in the wrong place by going to mainstream American newspapers.

e: I'm reminded of the occasional claims that the D&D Venezuela thread used to be a haven of doctrinaire Chavism where dissent was banned by the moderators, when I used to like it (the one before this one) precisely because it was the only Venezuela discussion I had ever found that had meaningful dialogue rather than a shouting match or a hegemony.

Peel fucked around with this message at 20:02 on May 4, 2017

# ¿ May 4, 2017 19:54

Peel: Dec 3, 2007

he does explicitly say they are 'working hard' to make sure it is 'stable and democratic', which is not a combination of concepts I particularly like in the mouth of the CIA

but it could mean anything, from 'we've masterminded the whole thing' to 'we're trying to get leverage on one guy in a minor party that we have confused with a more important party of a similar name because our information is a week out of date and the source is scamming us'

# ¿ Jul 26, 2017 22:04

Peel: Dec 3, 2007

Squalid posted:

There's a well rehearsed script for this kind of work, I suspect most American effort is focused into efforts similar to those which led to the electoral defeat and overthrow of Slobodan Milosevic in 2000 by an opposition coalition. There's a rough summary of US efforts then here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otpor!#Revelation_of_U.S._involvement

In Serbia America pressured the diverse opposition parties to form a grand coalition against Milosevic. American money helped them organize party activists and fund campaigns, while they also benefited from technical and strategic expertise from professional American marketing firms and campaign managers.

This sort of activity is primarily handled through State and private contracting firms and nonprofits. CIA would be more likely to focus on developing contacts within the army and government. I haven't seen any indication of more aggressive activity but if that yahoo who stole a helicopter can find a CIA handler he's likely to at least get some pocket change for recruiting supporters if not actually arms just yet.

Isn't US State currently pretty rudderless right now? Trump has done a number on it.

# ¿ Jul 27, 2017 11:51

Peel: Dec 3, 2007

The anti-anti-PSUV posters should probably sit down and establish a clear argument that a new government must be both* rightist and authoritarian, since that's the fundamental disagreement underlying the shouting match. Vague appeals to the CIA or the existence of violent groups among the opposition aren't sufficient.

_{*you need both, because otherwise an obvious anti-PSUV proposal is to soak a short-lived right-wing government as a step to a different left government that isn't trying to abrogate democracy}

# ¿ Jul 31, 2017 11:27

Peel: Dec 3, 2007

The VICE claim was a joke.

# ¿ Jul 31, 2017 11:35

Peel: Dec 3, 2007

Bob le Moche posted:

Don't call for US intervention. You are being tricked and manipulated. I don't claim to know better than you what's good for Venezuela but I do claim to know what the US is after and why they support he opposition, and I can tell you they don't want to save you or to give you democracy. Trust me, this is a trap. Do not make threads on English-language internet platforms with the intent of convincing North Americans that intervention is necessary and that they should support Trump in his actions against Venezuela the rogue state ruled by an evil dictator. Do not accept to write about that and to lend support to the official imperialist narrative as an academic expert in exchange for a PhD from a North American university.

Who is doing this?

# ¿ Jul 31, 2017 15:31

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 4, 2024 02:25

Peel: Dec 3, 2007

ryde posted:

I'm pretty floored by the earnest arguments regarding poorly-educated government leaders earlier in the thread. How can you believe that demanding your leaders to be educated and have experience in governing is some sort of bougie plot rather than just common loving sense?

Maduro has decades of political experience, he wasn't plucked off the street. There's no reason someone with his CV couldn't be an excellent leader. That he's actually a grasping bungler is something that comes out at the interview.

Dismissing actual relevant experience by glancing at what school someone went to (or didn't go to) is one very direct way class bigotry works, so it's not surprising it rankles.

# ¿ Jul 31, 2017 18:58

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Venezuela: The Empanada Summit