#81
in the 6 december 2015 elections, the opposition democratic unity roundtable claimed 112 of the 167 seats in the national assembly, which would give it a super-majority of 67% of the legislature. on 30 december 2015 the supreme court accepted requests to challenge the results of four seats (3 opposition, 1 socialist) due to allegations of electoral irregularities such as fraud, large number of blank votes, and vote buying, and temporarily suspended the swearing-in of the pertinent deputies. early in january 2016, the new opposition president of the national assembly ignored the supreme court ruling and swore in the three opposition deputies. in response, the supreme court declared subsequent actions of the national assembly void

https://www.telesurenglish.net/analysis/Fraud-Allegations-in-Venezuelan-Elections-Explained-20160104-0015.html
https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/11814

in may 2017 due to civil unrest and the continued absence of a legitimate legislative body, maduro invoked article 347 of the venezuelan constitution to call for the establishment of a constituent assembly, which has supreme power over all other governmental bodies and can draft a new constitution. elections for the constituent assembly were held in july, though the opposition did not participate. in august the constituent assembly set up a meeting to coordinate with the national assembly, which the national assembly boycotted. the constituent assembly then assumed most state legislative powers. the national assembly has not been dissolved, but remains constitutionally powerless

https://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/13260
https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/13322

Edited by ialdabaoth ()

#82

ialdabaoth posted:

in the 6 december 2015 elections, the opposition democratic unity roundtable claimed 112 of the 167 seats in the national assembly, which would give it a super-majority of 67% of the legislature. on 30 december 2015 the supreme court accepted requests to challenge the results of four seats (3 opposition, 1 socialist) due to allegations of electoral irregularities such as fraud, large number of blank votes, and vote buying, and temporarily suspended the swearing-in of the pertinent deputies. early in january 2016, the new opposition president of the national assembly ignored the supreme court ruling and swore in the three opposition deputies. in response, the supreme court declared subsequent actions of the national assembly void

https://www.telesurenglish.net/analysis/Fraud-Allegations-in-Venezuelan-Elections-Explained-20160104-0015.html
https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/11814

in may 2017 due to civil unrest and the continued absence of a legitimate legislative body, maduro invoked article 347 of the venezuelan constitution to call for the establishment of a constituent assembly, which has supreme power over all other governmental bodies and can draft a new constitution. elections for the constituent assembly were held in july, though the opposition did not participate. in august the constituent assembly set up a meeting to coordinate with the national assembly, which the national assembly boycotted. the constituent assembly then assumed most state legislative powers. the national assembly has not been dissolved, but remains constitutionally powerless

https://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/13260
https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/13322

Owned

#83
National Assembly... You know what Nazi is short for? National Socialism. I'm just saying, they both have national ideologies.
#84

ialdabaoth posted:

in the 6 december 2015 elections, the opposition democratic unity roundtable claimed 112 of the 167 seats in the national assembly, which would give it a super-majority of 67% of the legislature. on 30 december 2015 the supreme court accepted requests to challenge the results of four seats (3 opposition, 1 socialist) due to allegations of electoral irregularities such as fraud, large number of blank votes, and vote buying, and temporarily suspended the swearing-in of the pertinent deputies.



so the 108 seats the opposition won were legit?

#85
the other 109 opposition seats weren't being contested as illegitimate anyway
#86
doesnt this then mean that the opposition was voted by the majority of the people or am i missing something here
#87
they were. if they had actually continued engaging in the political process instead of trying to pull unconstitutional stunts right off the bat they would have probably been able to accomplish some of their agenda. but they needed the supermajority to fuck maduro as fast as possible and when it appeared they would only get a simple majority they couldn't abide. they are far less popular and significantly internally divided now having spent the last few years fomenting coups, inviting foreign invasions, organizing lynch mobs, firebombing government buildings, boycotting elections, etc
#88
i don't remember where i heard it or who did the poll and whatever but i heard numbers recently about 80% of venezuelans disapprove of maduro's performance as president but 75% say the opposition should eat shit
#89
marco rubio? more leik, wait for it, hang on, wait, ok, here we go, more like, yeah, thats right, more like marco coup-bio
#90
demons from the very deep



https://www.thenation.com/article/elliott-abrams-its-back/ posted:

Elliott Abrams: It’s Back!
By David Corn
June 14, 2001

“How would you feel if your wife and children were brutally raped before being hacked to death by soldiers during a military massacre of 800 civilians, and then two governments tried to cover up the killings?” It’s a question that won’t be asked of Elliott Abrams at a Senate confirmation hearing–because George W. Bush, according to press reports, may appoint Abrams to a National Security Council staff position that (conveniently!) does not require Senate approval. Moreover, this query is one of a host of rude, but warranted, questions that could be lobbed at Abrams, the Iran/contra player who was an assistant secretary of state during the Reagan years and a shaper of that Administration’s controversial–and deadly–policies on Latin America and human rights. His designated spot in the new regime: NSC’s senior director for democracy, human rights and international operations. (At press time, the White House and Abrams were neither confirming nor denying his return to government.)

Bush the Second has tapped a number of Reagan/Bush alums who were involved in Iran/contra business for plum jobs: Colin Powell, Richard Armitage, Otto Reich and John Negroponte. But Abrams’s appointment–should it come to pass–would mark the most generous of rehabilitations. Not only did Abrams plead guilty to two misdemeanor counts of lying to Congress about the Reagan Administration’s contra program, he was also one of the fiercest ideological pugilists of the 1980s, a bad-boy diplomat wildly out of sync with Bush’s gonna-change-the-tone rhetoric. Abrams, a Democrat turned Republican who married into the cranky Podhoretz neocon clan, billed himself as a “gladiator” for the Reagan Doctrine in Central America–which entailed assisting thuggish regimes and militaries in order to thwart leftist movements and dismissing the human rights violations of Washington’s cold war partners.

One Abrams specialty was massacre denial. During a Nightline appearance in 1985, he was asked about reports that the US-funded Salvadoran military had slaughtered civilians at two sites the previous summer. Abrams maintained that no such events had occurred. And had the US Embassy and the State Department conducted an investigation? “My memory,” he said, “is that we did, but I don’t want to swear to it, because I’d have to go back and look at the cables.” But there had been no State Department inquiry; Abrams, in his lawyerly fashion, was being disingenuous. Three years earlier, when two American journalists reported that an elite, US-trained military unit had massacred hundreds of villagers in El Mozote, Abrams told Congress that the story was commie propaganda, as he fought for more US aid to El Salvador’s military. The massacre, as has since been confirmed, was real. And in 1993 after a UN truth commission, which examined 22,000 atrocities that occurred during the twelve-year civil war in El Salvador, attributed 85 percent of the abuses to the Reagan-assisted right-wing military and its death-squad allies, Abrams declared, “The Administration’s record on El Salvador is one of fabulous achievement.” Tell that to the survivors of El Mozote.

But it wasn’t his lies about mass murder that got Abrams into trouble. After a contra resupply plane was shot down in 1986, Abrams, one of the coordinators of Reagan’s pro-contra policy (along with the NSC’s Oliver North and the CIA’s Alan Fiers), appeared several times before Congressional committees and withheld information on the Administration’s connection to the secret and private contra-support network. He also hid from Congress the fact that he had flown to London (using the name “Mr. Kenilworth”) to solicit a $10 million contribution for the contras from the Sultan of Brunei. At a subsequent closed-door hearing, Democratic Senator Thomas Eagleton blasted Abrams for having misled legislators, noting that Abrams’s misrepresentations could lead to “slammer time.” Abrams disagreed, saying, “You’ve heard my testimony.” Eagleton cut in: “I’ve heard it, and I want to puke.” On another occasion, Republican Senator Dave Durenberger complained, “I wouldn’t trust Elliott any further than I could throw Ollie North.” Even after Abrams copped a plea with Independent Counsel Lawrence Walsh, he refused to concede that he’d done anything untoward. Abrams’s Foggy Bottom services were not retained by the First Bush, but he did include Abrams in his lame-duck pardons of several Iran/contra wrongdoers.

Abrams was as nasty a policy warrior as Washington had seen in decades. He called foes “vipers.” He said that lawmakers who blocked contra aid would have “blood on their hands”–while he defended US support for a human-rights-abusing government in Guatemala. When Oliver North was campaigning for the Senate in 1994 and was accused of having ignored contra ties to drug dealers, Abrams backed North and claimed “all of us who ran that program…were absolutely dedicated to keeping it completely clean and free of any involvement by drug traffickers.” Yet in 1998 the CIA’s own inspector general issued a thick report noting that the Reagan Administration had collaborated with suspected drug traffickers while managing the secret contra war.

So Bush the Compassionate may hand the White House portfolio on human rights to the guy who lied and wheedled to aid and protect human-rights abusers. As Adm. William Crowe Jr. said of Abrams in 1989, “This snake’s hard to kill.”





Is there anything of which one can say,
“Look! This is something new”?
It was here already, long ago;
it was here before our time.

#91
lmao. jeremy hunt, our foreign minister, has declared his support for guiado. nobody cares about jeremy hunt, not even his wife. jeremy hunt is a man who disappears from your mind as soon as you are not looking at him. i can only type this by alt+shifting back to a guardian article to remind myself what i am posting about. jeremy hunt is a forgettable yet terrible human being, and he has issued a demand that maduro call fresh elections within 8 days or we will do...something. we still haven't given them their gold back, i imagine he will do something with that. i hate jeremy hunt. what a useless tosser.
#92
last time they acceded to demands for early elections maduro was reelected and now the fact that elections were held early is being tossed around as reason why the election was supposedly not legitimate. cant win with these snakes. if they was going to shoot you they'd throw a tantrum if you didn't agree to pull the trigger yourself w your toes
#93

sovnarkoman posted:

doesnt this then mean that the opposition was voted by the majority of the people or am i missing something here



this leads to a point that i think a lot of socialists/communists don't acknowledge or have conflicting views on. when it comes to imperialism mucking things up, we say they're violating international law or when reactionaries protest the recently elected government we say they need to respect the will of the people. however, when a minority of revolutionary minded marxist people try to uproot the system through guerrilla tactics this is considered good and necessary. they may win and gain support of the majority of people through increasing living standards but it's still technically illegal and breaking international law if supported by foreign socialist governments. why point to laws or majority consent when these topics are just ignored during historic moments that benefit working class people?

if a revolutionary uprising happens in the U.S. 30 years from now with millions of people taking the streets are we really going to say "no, the majority of people voted for chelsea clinton, please respect the will of the people"? i don't think so and yet we get furious at conservatives and fascists when they support breaking rules and funding small movements. we would do the same thing but for the betterment of all life.

#94
isn't enough to be furious at them simply because they're conservatives and fascists

it's not duplicitous to ask reactionaries to respect the rule of law in socialist countries while celebrating the triumphs of revolutionaries against capital and empire, considering the moral imperatives involved. rule of law isn't the point per se, but rather liberation and as you say the betterment of all life. we're not liberals going to act like there's a moral equivalence there and we all got to be polite
#95
i get that some folks get upset at that and think it's a double standard, but they're off the mark on what standards need to be upheld
#96
https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2019/01/26/declaration-by-the-high-representative-on-behalf-of-the-eu-on-the-situation-in-venezuela/

In the absence of an announcement on the organisation of fresh elections with the necessary guarantees over the next days, the EU will take further actions, including on the issue of recognition of the country’s leadership in line with article 233 of the Venezuelan constitution.



this comes a few days after an EU FBPE person at work hit me with a firehose of hysterical bullshit when i said that guy verhofstadt commenting on venezuela's internal affairs was a big reason why a lot of UK leftists distrust the EU and worry how it would react if a corbyn government ever happened. their argument was " doesn't speak for the whole of the EU". well what about this, partner?

#97

ilmdge posted:

Proposing to take power


Kinda wondering why they let this dude out

#98
I’m admittedly dumb as dog shit, but to me it seems like Maduro et al gave the opposition an inch in the name of democracy and good faith (and potentially optics too, but honestly mostly the former two) and the opposition took a mile
#99

sovnarkoman posted:

doesnt this then mean that the opposition was voted by the majority of the people or am i missing something here



the use of undifferentiated "opposition" terminology in this way ends up very misleading though, as a statement of this kind can only be referring to the MUD - a coalition or bloc of 8 different parties that campaign separately - not to a single party backing Guaido or some other Maduro-opponent (which is an obvious false implication of the term "the opposition"). it is a fact that PSUV won more seats than any other party (31 seats) in the 2015 parliamentary election. for the sake of comparison VP (Popular Will) - to which not-president Guaido belongs - apparently took just 15 seats in that election, they weren't even the 4th party in terms of popular electoral support in 2015. but they were a (minority) member of the MUD electoral bloc, comprised of them and 7 other parties who agree to act in concert against other electoral blocs. PSUV are themselves part of a similar bloc (GPP), along with the Communist Party and a bunch of other minority parties. between them, parties belonging to the MUD bloc took more total seats in 2015 than parties belonging to the GPP bloc, but the PSUV, the party of Maduro, in point of fact won more seats than any other individual party, so saying shit like "the opposition won the election" is not really an accurate statement, if it's taken to imply that any other party performed better than PSUV (none did)

the election was therefore significant in that the GPP coalition bloc - of which the PSUV is a member - lost its majority. but the breakdown of seats also still showed definitively that no party enjoyed more popular support in the 2015 parliamentary election than the PSUV did. attempts to conflate the size of electoral coalition blocs (such as MUD and GPP) with the actual number of seats held by each party (e.g., PSUV, VP, etc.) are as far as I can tell being used in current Anglophone discourse about Venezuela to deliberately conceal this fact and make it seem like there is a single opposition party with greater popular support than the PSUV, and that Juan Guaido is their representative. however, the top few parties in terms of raw seat numbers in 2015 appear to be as follows, in descending order:

PSUV - 31 Seats
PJ (Justice First) - 30 Seats
AD (Democratic Action) - 25 Seats
UNT (New Era) - 16 Seats
VP (Popular Will) - 15 Seats
PCV (Communist Party) - 6 Seats
...etc.

see the full chart here, can't be bothered to type these all out:




i'd like to be able to find more reliable versions of this breakdown (the one above is from Spanish-language Wikipedia as far as I can tell) but frustratingly it's virtually impossible to find English-language treatments of the 2015 Parliamentary Election that actually recognise the seat-shares of individual parties and don't just represent the MUD-coalition group (of which PJ, VP and a bunch of others are members) as a single "opposition party" - completely ignoring the actual party-level breakdown of results, which of course show that the PSUV still enjoyed wider popular support than any other party in 2015, despite their voting bloc losing its overall majority

e: for clarification, we're talking about the 2015 parliamentary election results here. just fyi, even if VP (then headed by Lopez) had trounced PSUV and taken way more seats in the 2015 parliamentary election (which it didn't), this would have absolutely zero bearing on the legitimacy of the current attempted coup d'etat, since the Venezuelan presidency is in any case determined by completely separate presidential elections - and you'll never guess who won the last one of those by a fucking landslide (hint: it wasn't Juan Guaido)

Edited by Ufuk_Surekli ()

#100
It may also be worth remembering the source of the economic difficulties which set all this off as well. Shining light on the root causes may help weaken the putschists propaganda efforts.

In 2014 the obama regime under international pressure was negotiating to relax sanctions on Iran allowing them to sell oil and buy things like medicine. At the same time Russia had just held the Olympics and Crimea was trying to revolt away from NATO candidate Ukraine, and Maduro has just won election despite US interference in the election after Chavez' death.

Conveniently enough, all three official enemy nations economies were being supported by oil prices over $100 a barrel which was also making americans cry like big fat wet diaper babies every time they refilled the SUV.

So, in order to collectively punish the citizens of all three just for being there, and increase the domestic ruling party's performance in the polls by making gas cheaper, Obama cut a deal with the Saudis to pump oil like their lives depended on it and generally ignored the environmental consequences of unregulated hydrofracking in the US. The USA is now the #1 oil exporter in the world.

Price of oil over 10 years

Gee I wonder why Venezuela's economic crisis started exactly in 2014? Clearly the fault of Chavismo, specifically.

Recklessly surging production immediately before allowing Iran back into the international markets (october '15) tanked the price of oil in the middle of the global economic expansion that was causing rising prices for everything else. The US central bank was still printing money with 0% interest rates, allowing US corporations and investment banks to spend on whatever they wanted, while sanctions, tech export restrictions, and other deals were used to further constrict Venezuela's ability to produce and sell oil to keep up with the global economic conditions and rising prices for food, medicine, and machinery.

This devastated the economies of the protagonists while allowing the imperialist core to reap the benefits of cheap energy to continue hiding the structural problems at home, continuing the "recovery" from 06-09 crisis and getting rich af while maintaining wage stagnation to "protect the recovery".

Venezuela was in the middle of trying to diversify and build the economy in spite of US meddling and expand housing and services and were hit suddenly by the massive loss of income at a critical time, which the US took advantage of by buying the capitalist opposition to power in the 2015 national assembly elections and sponsoring protests and violence by the white contras every day since, combined with steadily increasing sanctions, specifically to ensure that no economic recovery can take place because of the instability of having US-backed actual lynch mobs running around trying to overthrow the national elections, destroy the offices of the social programs, hoard food to cause artificial shortages, and set black people on fire.

Edited by MarxUltor ()

#101
Maduro won the popular vote when he was re-elected president last year by 3,322,294 votes

Donald Trump lost the popular vote when he was elected to president by 2,868,486 votes

Guaido's party coalition in the state of Vargas, VE, got a combined total of 99,734 votes in 2015

so the USA and a bunch of monarchies in Europe want to forcibly remove from office a guy who was elected by the voting system former US president Jimmy Carter called the best in the world, with enough of a victory margin that he could donate enough votes to make trump's election look legitimate and STILL have more than 5 times the votes guaido has ever kinda gotten in his entire life, most of which were not actually for him. For democracy.
#102
i don't know if it's a bot push or what and i know using twitter as a barometer of anything is ridiculous but there's suddenly loads of shit going around about maduro ordering snipers to open up on protest marches and torturing thousands of detainees in detention facilities. like within the last 24 hours. this stuff gets picked up and parroted by pundits, it then transfers to straight coverage, and before you know it everyone is reciting the same talking point as if it's immutable truth. see also: "maduro won elections widely dismissed as a sham". by who? when? why? dunno, but it's basically verbatim what all the main media outlets say now, like an incantation to ward off critical thinking.

elsewhere, how significant is this defense attache guy defecting? i'm assuming the ven government will have seen this coming given his proximity to the US.

Edited by ghostpinballer ()

#103
this is quite useful to send to people as counter-prop, the guy knows his stuff

https://www.reddit.com/r/BreadTube/comments/ak1wtu/hello_im_dr_alan_macleod_i_have_studied_venezuela/
#104
#105

ialdabaoth posted:

i get that some folks get upset at that and think it's a double standard, but they're off the mark on what standards need to be upheld


Yeah. To paraphrase Norm on Bill Cosby, I don't think the worst thing about imperialists is the hypocrisy

#106
i mean even if he does call another election, the international community will just say, "we aren't releasing fuck all gold or lifting any sanctions unless the boy king is elected". they'll just do the same thing as they did in nicaragua. the US will just bully venezuela into giving it what it wants. it's enough to make anybody sick, really. i hate this shit so much.
#107
1 2 3 punch


#108
#109

ilmdge posted:




this is fucking comical. may the carribean be a grave to five thousand US Marines

#110
of course hes probably just that inept, but cant rule out that hes either showing it off to demoralize and intimidate, or that it's gonna be even worse and that's just a "Limited Hangout," that favorite conspiracy term of the socalled "crackpot tankie"
#111
Lately they've just been in the desert, does anyone know how the USMC has traditionally done when fighting against popular movements in humid tropical environments just slightly north of the equator? They seem like a bunch of badasses, it must have gone pretty well?

Seems like something we should know before assessing how scared Maduro should be of 2/3rds the number of troops the USA invaded Grenada with
#112
.
#113

ilmdge posted:



it is a great era in which to be a guy with an IQ of 81

#114
good on boots for using his newfound hollywood clout so relentlessly/unapologetically tho
#115
Hes basically always posted like this
#116
I don't doubt that for a second, but he's become slightly harder to ignore and that's neat
#117

This version of 'Despacito' promotes the Constituent Assembly as a mechanism for peaceful dialogue


lyrics posted:

Por la unión y la paz de nuestro país (oh no / yeah yeah)
La Constituyente va.

Hey, querido hermana aquí estoy cantándote
tengo un gran mensaje para ti

Es el llamado a la Constituyente
que sólo quiere unir al país

Despacito
Abre bien los ojos y mira a tu gente
Tiéndeles la mano hoy mañana y siempre
que son tus hermanos los que están al frente

Despacito
ejerce tu voto en vez de las balas,
ve con tus ideas siempre en paz y en calma,
y que la esperanza brille en tu alma.

(oh no / yeah yeah)

(La Constituyente va. Ejerce tu voto!)


English (approx) posted:

For the union and peace of our country (oh no / yeah yeah)
The Constituent Assembly is going on.

Hey, dear sister, here I am singing to you
I have a great message for you

It is the call to the Constituent Assembly
that just wants to unite the country

Despacito
Open your eyes and look at your people
Give them your hand today, tomorrow and always
Whenever your brothers are on the frontline

Despacito
exercise your vote instead of bullets,
go with your ideas always in peace and calm,
and may hope shine in your soul.

(oh no / yeah yeah)

(The Constituent Assembly is going on. Exercise your vote!)


❤️

e:
Despacito singers slam Venezuela's Maduro for 'illegal' use of song

SAN JUAN (AFP) - The Puerto Rican duo behind the worldwide sexy smash Latin pop hit Despacito on Monday (July 24) slammed Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro for "illegally" using their song to promote a controversial vote he is organising.


💔

Edited by Ufuk_Surekli ()

#118
differential diagnosis: the venezuelan coup d'état is bankrolled by the RIAA as part of a clandestine music copyright enforcement exercise
#119

ghostpinballer posted:

i mean even if he does call another election, the international community will just say, "we aren't releasing fuck all gold or lifting any sanctions unless the boy king is elected". they'll just do the same thing as they did in nicaragua. the US will just bully venezuela into giving it what it wants. it's enough to make anybody sick, really. i hate this shit so much.


this time UK is caerfully deliberating whether it wants to carry out US orders. But last time an oil rich nation ditched the "Petro-Dollar , all the NATO countries immediately and enthusiastically robbed its foreign holdings. Tyhats Libya im talkin abot. They havent paid out Guabo yet tho. Apparently the financial sector makes up like 12% of the UK tax base, and Apparently, people dont want to bank with you if there's a chance that the bank will occasionally give your money away to a stranger who wants to kill you. This is also a theft of 1.2 billion dollars whereas "€10bn vanished from ‘frozen’ Gaddafi accounts in Belgium". Bask in my false equivalinces and toke up amigo

#120
kinda gotta give the brits a bit of a break on this one, it's probably the last chance they'll ever have to plunder the third world before their whole trash ass island starves to death in a few weeks