Since there is a lot going on with Venezuela lately, I thought I'd create a general thread. Even if many of us here don't support the current government, it should be important to keep track of where the truth lies, as this is bound to be used as imperialist propaganda in the coming months.
Guardian claims Venezuela election was manipulated by 1 million votes
The president (Maduro) called for the creation of a Constituent Assembly to re-draft the constitution with an election to choose who would staff it.
The opposition cried foul saying the president can't do this and that it requires a public referendum to decide whether to create such an assembly in the first place, not just an election on who would staff it.
This went to the Supreme Court and the SC ruled against the opposition, saying the President does have this power under the constitution and the election could go forward.
The opposition then decided to declare the SC illegitimate, disregard its ruling, boycott the election and start rioting in the streets instead of voting.
Now the assembly is filled with government loyalists because they didn't vote, and so the opposition is likely to get BTFO by whatever changes are made.
Now we're all supposed to cry about "dicatatorship" and muh human rights and "democracy".
Kayden Green
I am pretty sure that they are counting on a CIA intervention sooner or later. That's the only thing that explains their behavior.
Angel Reyes
Not saying it's Maduro's fault, but come on, lad. You can't expect the plebs to remain docile when a banana costs as much as a house used to.
Owen Thomas
Don't ever be surprised, they already do. It is notable that the discourse has heavily turned towards "bringing back democracy", so it's likely shit is brewing.
Logan Cooper
Threadly reminder
Austin Campbell
dude, it ain't the poor rioting. it's mostly the rich.
And the riots were not about food, they were about stopping an election and overthrowing a president through chaos.
This is what the opposition has always done about absolutely everything since 1998. Everything that goes against them is "illegitimate" and invalid.
When Chavez won the presidency, that was illegitimate and fraud. When Chavez won to re-draft the Constitution in 1999, that was illegitimate and fraud. When Chavez won re-election that was illegitimate and fraud. Every time Chavez won referendums that was illegitimate and fraud. When Maduro won the presidency that was illegitimate and fraud.
Etc. etc. etc.
The only time the opposition has every accepted any election or referendum or anything as being legitimate is the couple cases where they've won them, or the 2002 coup d'etat.
Everything other than them winning everything all the time is "illegitimate", and it has been that way from the moment Chavez first came into office.
John Robinson
usually, when there is an election the ruling majority continues to hold power and make laws until the newly elected lawmakers actually take office. In the US these are called "lame duck" sessions, but they continue to hold all the powers they did before the election, up until the newly elected members actually take office.
Carter Murphy
Can people in those sessions name judges in the US? Not in Venezuela.
Justin Fisher
Makes sense. Calling something a "fraud" is a great way to get the US involved. That's why there is literally no point in arguing over "legitimacy" when fighting capitalists. The goal should be the elimination of the bourgeoisie as a class. You cannot do that with words. The more you deliberate with them the longer they have to orchestrate coups and counterrevolutions.
Aaron Thomas
Yeah, people in the bourgeoisie that say "I'm totally socialist guys" and give people free shit should definitely be defended by everyone.
Robert Powell
This isn't going to end well for the poor of Venezuela. Between petite booj shit flinging, sanction, cia involvement, and some poor management by the government itself regime change will happen sooner or later.
Thomas Richardson
In the US, the congress appoints federal judges. They can continue doing so in lame duck sessions between an election and a new congress taking their seats.
If you want me to read some detailed argument, you'll have to provide it in English. I don't read spanish well and google translate is shit, especially for complicated legal arguments.
But better than some editorial is something in court. Anyone can write an editorial saying something is illegal. Good lawyers can argue both sides of any case and make either side sound good. This has to be tested through the courts or it's just an accusation.
I wanna hear your thoughts. Did Jason win? Is anything either of them said untrue, and if so, which things in particular?
Carter Wood
1. They have to show the new nominations and (removals?) in a nationally circulating newspaper 15 days before they happen, and the newspaper has to show the nomination's origin. It didn't show it. 2. The nomination committee has to formally approve the removal of the previous judges after that 15 day period, which started on December 8th and ended on December 23rd, but there was no formal statement about it and its president said that it was rejected because it "didn't have arguments".
I'm lazy and I can't find how to translate some weird terms used in the next 3 so I'll stop there.
Chase Brown
5. They can't have 2 extraordinary sessions in one day. They had 2 on the 22nd and 2 on the 23rd. (and a lot more things)
Tyler Hughes
@6:17 - this was kind of weak by the IFP guy. He says to take the turnout results with salt. The government says 8m, the opposition said 2-3 million. He says the gov has reason to inflate and the opposition has reason to understate, so let's just cut that in half and say 5m.
That's pretty generous to the opposition. The 8m are the official election results from the CNE who are tasked with overseeing the vote and have access to all the voting records from all the areas of the country. They also have a track record of being fair in a long string of monitored elections over the years.
Meanwhile, the opposition deliberately did not take part in the vote at all and has no data on anything. So let's just put equal weight on both of their claims. Why should we?
Even the article in the OP post is about a voting machine firm in the UK claiming the results were "manipulated" by 1m votes. Ok, even if you believe that, it would still be 7m votes instead of 8m, pretty close to what the CNE said and not remotely close to what the opposition said.
The IFP guy then also says we should compare this to a figure of 7m that supposedly voted against the election in a vote held by the opposition. But again this figure is just an assertion by the opposition. Why should we believe that figure? He acknowledged they have reason to understate the turnout of the election itself, but then takes their claimed figure for their own vote as if that's just a fact.
Also, his claim earlier that Venezuela was the beacon of democracy and prosperity before Chavez came along and ruined everything is a joke.
@7:50 he claims that the average Venezuelan has lost 14 pounds over the last year. This claim is almost certainly propaganda with no basis in reality. This claim was from a sample survey by some University profs and NGO's (guess who they support. I wonder…). Something like this is the easiest thing in the world to fake and it provides a nice talking point that will grab headlines and circulate around the world, like on this show.
Landon Young
This election wasn't monitored by anyone. The closest thing to that is an exit poll with an estimate of 3-4 million votes from Torino Capital and a Reuters article alleging that there were 3,7 million votes 1 hour and a half before the voting ended according to an official report that they got. The Carter Center, which is what everyone quotes when they say "the elections in Venezuela have been monitored before", even said that "the process was carried out in the complete absence of electoral integrity, posing serious problems of legitimacy, legality, and procedure.". cartercenter.org/news/pr/venezuela-080117.html
It was from the company that supplied the machines, so they obviously have election data. They also said "at least 1 million" which means that there could be anywhere between 1,000,000 and 8,089,319 fake votes.
It's not obvious that they would have any relevant data just because they supplied machines:
If they do have relevant data, and actual evidence of fraud, they could supply the data and demonstrate how it shows fraud. To my knowledge, they haven't done so. They merely assert fraud. You wanna bet that such data is never forthcoming? I doubt it. The assertion will just hang out in the air to help the opposition discredit the results.
Come on bro. Even if you buy the claim of "Torino Capital" about 3-4 million a couple hours before poll closings, there's no way to reach "8,089,319 fake votes". The opposition always claims every vote they lose is a fraud. Every single time since Chavez took office. Stop being such a shill.
"at least" is weasel words. If they had evidence for anything greater than a million they would have said so. If they even have evidence for a million they would supply the data and show how it indicates fraud.
Yeah, and how much you want to bet the data supposedly showing this "estimated" difference is never forthcoming?
Matthew Nelson
Well, the opposition parties were busy orchestrating riots instead of voting or monitoring the vote, so…
Ryan Perez
WEW lads…….
Grayson Gonzalez
FTFY. I look forward to the day when people like you will be starved to death in the gulags.
Gabriel Morgan
You forgot this part of the story.
Elijah Gray
Shortages in Venezuela began before the oil prices started dropping.
Also, Norway is heavily reliant on oil too, but strangely their hospitals still have toilet paper.
Kayden Robinson
lol OK
Isaac Bennett
Venezuela's issues are related to oil. But a major reason for it's woes are terribad monetary policy and an economy that has always had dutch disease and relied on US imports.
Throughout the 2000s Venezuela saw consumption skyrocket and millions were lifted out of extreme poverty and simply, the economy was not able to keep up. There is a famous Chavez slogan from like 2006 where he said "There is not enough milk because for once it's in the bellies of the poor" and that was quite literally the case.
From about 2003-4 onwards, Chavez did try diversify the economy and increase national production, but the GFC hit and the economy stagnated, and those growing industries collapsed, then with 2012 oil price plummet, the economy went into disarray.
They could fix like maybe 50% of the problems by fixing monetary policy, but Maduro simply doesn't have the political capital to do it since it's that monetary policy that keeps the poor on side.
Weird to see a libertarian fuck defending a failed attempt at social democracy.
Benjamin Long
wtf CBS lied to me?
I'm guessing this is the CBS report you're referring to. I wonder why he didn't ask these two how much weight they'd lost like he did the earlier guy.
John Evans
If Venezuela manages to defeat the reactionaries and get back on its feet, the absolute cherry on top would be them experiencing an economic rebound. Even if they're pink at best, rubbing that in the face of every stupid dipshit that called Venezuela socialist would absolutely be worth it.
Luke Robinson
The collapse started when the dollar was at $100 (late 2012), do you think that oil would fix the economy?
Lucas Phillips
Asked a Venezuelan on halfchan what he thought of the whole thing: if there were any socialists left in the regime, if the election was rigged, if the US will pull a Pinochet, and got a pretty honest and long answer. Thought I'd share it with y'all:
Ayden Ramirez
shocked
Jordan Bennett
It sounds like he's calling out the opposition as being just as corrupt though
John Bennett
Tell me about Chavez, did CIA put him in charge like all those other foreign opposition parties at the time?
Sebastian Long
No, just the "honest" ones he likes most are in jail and he's worried the others are too fucked up to secure glorious victory, so he's longing for Daddy Trump to come install Pinochet.
To gulag with him.
Ayden Peterson
How do you know that he isn't posting from a dying Pentium 4 desktop from 2007?
Caleb Kelly
The capitalists are responsible of this! please Chavez we need a cup d'etat Damn, USA is attacking Venezuela again! we must endure this crisis.
