As a US citizen, whatever happens, I really hope America doesn't get involved in arming the protesters. Voice support for them but do not get involved in any material way.
We don't need another Syria on our hands, where two sides of a civil was were aided and armed by great powers who didn't care enough to significantly involve themselves in the conflict but cared just enough in principle to prolong it, destroying the nation in the process.
I recognize that Venezuela is far from being Syria, but at the end of the day, prolonged civil war is worse than either side winning outright. Order over chaos.
I'm not sure how I feel about your statement. I see a lot of Venezuelans with no recourse other than to start fighting. I don't see how order is more important than having a chance at a future at all? It is frustrating to watch a socialist country fail yet again. Downvote that statement all you want, it's the truth--the idea of ceding more and more power to a central state always ends up with dictatorship and now it's the world's problem. It's stupid human behavior over and over again and we never learn our lesson.
What I simply can't get my head around is why aren't there enough Venezuelans resisting this nightmare? Is everyone just a sheep, go along to get along, afraid to pop their head up lest it get lopped off by government thugs?
America barely armed any Syrian rebels or protestors. Much of the DC establishment and military community wanted to arm them, but Obama was against it and therefore any real military aid was severely limited: http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-33997408
The conflict in Syria was started and escalated by Assad. It was prolonged by a number of actors, including Russia and Iran supporting Assad, and the gulf states / Turkey etc., supporting the other side.
America is a common boogeyman for whenever something goes wrong in the world (Venezuela's Maduro never misses an opportunity to blame the US for his own regime's multitude of failures and crimes).
>prolonged civil war is worse than either side winning outright. Order over chaos.
That really depends on what timescale you care about and who's side you're on.
Would Korea be better off if the US never got involved? What about if the Chinese never stepped in?
What if the US had tried harder to prop up the Shah in Iran? What if the US hadn't backed Saddam in the 80s?
What if the US had never backed the Mujaheddin against the soviets? Backing them caused a lot of bad stuff but bleeding the USSR to death may have averted continuing the cold war and another Vietnam somewhere else in the world decades later.
Time only goes one way. You never get do-overs. You just get to make the best decision you can for the current situation.
Sorry to tell you, now you just need to found a political party in USA that won't support dictatorships around the world.
BTW, the USA is has a great dose of responsibility for mess in Venezuela is in. Maybe if it were not for your interventionist politics, Venezuela wouldn't be living all this radicalization.
Search in YouTube for the impressive documentary "The Revolution won't be televised".
Venezuela has one of the biggest petroleum reserves on the planet, and is responsible for 10% of America's oil imports. That is a lot lot lot lot lot lot lot of oil.
Only a geopolitical fool would allow a crisis/opportunity like this slip by without at least claiming a little side action. Even Goldman Sachs has skin in the game.
I hate Maduro as much as any sane person should but these particular people were rallying the people and the army to do a coup. I'm not sure how well that would sit in a country like the US. You can do that under the flag of free speech?
Even more cynical there are still people in the Mercosur that back Maduro even now. I can imagine left leaning people would align with a socialist government initially but still after all this happened? Let me put your names on the list of people to never trust with a democracy again.
> Even more cynical there are still people in the Mercosur that back Maduro even now. I can imagine left leaning people would align with a socialist government initially but still after all this happened?
Not just Mercosur, the leader of the UK Labour party is a long term Chavez supporter, and still hasn't come out against all of this.
> Even more cynical there are still people in the Mercosur that back Maduro even now
Definitely. Brazilian Workers' Party (ruled the country for the last 13-14 years and drove it into the worst recession in a century) just signed a letter last week offering their full support for Maduro.
These days you can't even carry large amounts of cash in the US. Free speech as an ideal would allow for calling for violence as a last stand against oppression.
As for what you can legally get away with in the US, assuming you aren't wealth enough to afford a good legal defense, you do not have any rights any more. If those in power decide to ruin your day, you have a chance of ending up in prison despite being completely innocent. Maybe the ACLU/EFF/etc. will defend you depending upon what they actually try to charge you with, but even that isn't a guarantee with how the legal system current works.
This type of situation is actually the one that makes me believe in the long-term viability of cryptocurrencies. If i were living in venezuela right now, i would buy as many bitcoins as i could with my money, as soon as the president prevents regular currency trading through regular banks (which shouldn't take too long to happen, unless it's already the case).
I love the bitcoin concept, but it's clear most of their fans don't understand much about how the real world works
How do you propose they trade Bolivars for BTC? Do you think VNZL mines enough to have a local market? See the restrictions on foreign currency purchases in VNZL (and what is effectively two exchange rates)
How do you propose the bitcoins are subsequently used? For buying basic items (like toilet paper, which gets smuggled from Brazil)
Airlines can't repatriate their earnings from VNZL. Oh I know, they should buy bitcoin! /s
But I assure you most of the well offs already have their earnings safely in a Miami bank account.
I would be surprised if existing capital controls wouldn't prevent you from doing just that. Not every country is as liberal as the West when it comes to moving money around.
You can't buy anything useful with Bitcoins. Most Venezuelans trade their bolivars for US dollars or other stable foreign fiat currency on the black market to escape inflation.
> i would buy as many bitcoins as i could with my money
Which would mean that there would be someone selling as many of their bitcoins as possible for your money. If the situation is so dire that buying bitcoins is the obvious solution, who is going to sell them to you?
Buying Bitcoin would only be useful in this case if you intended to flee the country, to get around the currency export limits.
Buying them as a store of wealth would only be useful back when the Bolivar was worth something - as it stands, the black market exchange rate is several times the most generous official exchange rate (there are 3 official exchange rates for some reason). So buying BTC now would only make sense if the government currency had any further to fall.
Can someone explain me how the country with the biggest oil reserves in the world can be in economic problems, that lead to shortages? Even with an incompetent government this seems highly unlikely to happen to me.
Chronic underinvestment in the people and equipment needed to get that oil out. It's not a simple "just dig until you find oil".
There's also the government taking over private companies and running them poorly(surprise). Which leads to less investment and production which leads to less tax revenue, and the downward spiral keeps picking up speed.
I'm not against socialism but this particular form of it was basically handing out money for nothing. In short term the poor gain a bit but it does not do much for the economy in the long term.
Luckily there's a neoliberal right wing government ready to take over and run the country into the ground with a bunch of new dogmas, like Argentina went from Kirchner to Macri.
Years of harassing the foreigners who had been maintaining the oil machinery out of the country and not reinvesting any of the oil profits in maintaining the machinery. Then oil prices crash.
Oil prices dropped from $100 a barrel to $40, their economy relies almost solely on oil exports. There's some amount that is explained by corruption and poor investments over the past decade, but primarily it's the oil price.
In the end it will be the rest of the world (with most of the support coming from US tax payers) that bails out this country. Maduro will continue his reign and the debt will continue to pile-on. The money from the IMF will go directly to Goldman Sachs to first pay off debts, and then will go directly to Maduro.
How so? How would having a gun in a cupboard or somewhere help you in a situation like this? Once you are at gunpoint it's game over, regardless of gun control. It's easy to imagine this is hollywood where the hero easily escapes from gunpoint with kung fu ninja skills while the evil mastermind explains the master plan but that isn't a realistic scenario.
EDIT: is it just me or did this say something about airports before?
Not to say anything about gun control, but being Latin America, they could as easily, have been communists arming themselves to overthrow a right-wing government.
Pretty good argument against socialism as well; since it seems that they piled on the expenses until they either had to compromise services or compromise fundamental property rights. The obvious choice for one's own term in office is to compromise property rights.
Now, say, what country do we know of which prospered under a non-socialist government which recognized the right to keep and bear arms, and strong recognition of property rights...
P.S. Consider replying before you vote, it'll be a heck of a lot more convincing than a decreasing counter of non-argument.
A capitalist Venezuela faced similar economic problems in the 80's-90's, even had the same response to the unrest when they jailed Chavez. Socialism isn't the cause, it just wasn't the solution they hoped.
Check the statistics about Venezuela's economic structure.
Chavez claimed he was a socialist because that has positive connotations over there and the US wanted to portray him as a socialist for the opposite reason.
But check
* percentage of workforce work in public sector
* government expenditure as % of GDP
* percentage of workforce that is part of a union
* taxes
* state enterprises
* the welfare and state provided benefits
Compare all of these to a country like Norway (richest or 2nd richest country in the world, also an oil state of sorts). You'll find that if Venezuela is socialist, than Norway must be a straight up reincarnation of the USSR.
You can say socialism if you want. But if you then use Venezuela as a reason on why the USA can't have universal healthcare, someone points out countries in Europe that have universal healthcare and are doing fine, then it's your turn to say "that's not real socialism". Not that you would do this of course, but these arguments tend to get really twisted.
This is so disingenuous. We don't blame capitalism when an industry struggles in Europe or the US. And when the financial crisis hit in 2007-2008, capitalism didn't get the blame it deserved.
It is real socialism but it's been done in an extremely resource-poor country with numerous other issues, not the least of which is massive amounts of systemic corruption and crime.
Socialism clearly isn't working here, but I wouldn't say it's at fault for the current struggles.
[+] [-] meri_dian|8 years ago|reply
We don't need another Syria on our hands, where two sides of a civil was were aided and armed by great powers who didn't care enough to significantly involve themselves in the conflict but cared just enough in principle to prolong it, destroying the nation in the process.
I recognize that Venezuela is far from being Syria, but at the end of the day, prolonged civil war is worse than either side winning outright. Order over chaos.
[+] [-] gtirloni|8 years ago|reply
My point being that many countries in LatAm live in a disguised civil war state and it's just "normal" (far from it, actually).
[+] [-] justadeveloper2|8 years ago|reply
What I simply can't get my head around is why aren't there enough Venezuelans resisting this nightmare? Is everyone just a sheep, go along to get along, afraid to pop their head up lest it get lopped off by government thugs?
[+] [-] omurphy27|8 years ago|reply
The conflict in Syria was started and escalated by Assad. It was prolonged by a number of actors, including Russia and Iran supporting Assad, and the gulf states / Turkey etc., supporting the other side.
America is a common boogeyman for whenever something goes wrong in the world (Venezuela's Maduro never misses an opportunity to blame the US for his own regime's multitude of failures and crimes).
[+] [-] dsfyu404ed|8 years ago|reply
That really depends on what timescale you care about and who's side you're on.
Would Korea be better off if the US never got involved? What about if the Chinese never stepped in?
What if the US had tried harder to prop up the Shah in Iran? What if the US hadn't backed Saddam in the 80s?
What if the US had never backed the Mujaheddin against the soviets? Backing them caused a lot of bad stuff but bleeding the USSR to death may have averted continuing the cold war and another Vietnam somewhere else in the world decades later.
Time only goes one way. You never get do-overs. You just get to make the best decision you can for the current situation.
I'm also in the camp of "we're not world police"
[+] [-] empath75|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tomjen3|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] neves|8 years ago|reply
BTW, the USA is has a great dose of responsibility for mess in Venezuela is in. Maybe if it were not for your interventionist politics, Venezuela wouldn't be living all this radicalization.
Search in YouTube for the impressive documentary "The Revolution won't be televised".
[+] [-] unknown|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] Entangled|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] rm_-rf_slash|8 years ago|reply
Only a geopolitical fool would allow a crisis/opportunity like this slip by without at least claiming a little side action. Even Goldman Sachs has skin in the game.
[+] [-] dep_b|8 years ago|reply
Even more cynical there are still people in the Mercosur that back Maduro even now. I can imagine left leaning people would align with a socialist government initially but still after all this happened? Let me put your names on the list of people to never trust with a democracy again.
[+] [-] Brakenshire|8 years ago|reply
Not just Mercosur, the leader of the UK Labour party is a long term Chavez supporter, and still hasn't come out against all of this.
[+] [-] gtirloni|8 years ago|reply
Definitely. Brazilian Workers' Party (ruled the country for the last 13-14 years and drove it into the worst recession in a century) just signed a letter last week offering their full support for Maduro.
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-07-31/latin-ame...
[+] [-] humanrebar|8 years ago|reply
Not legally, but the Declaration of Independence states that it's the right thing to do sometimes.
Disclaimer: I'm not informed or invested enough to have an opinion in this case, at least not yet.
[+] [-] BearGoesChirp|8 years ago|reply
These days you can't even carry large amounts of cash in the US. Free speech as an ideal would allow for calling for violence as a last stand against oppression.
As for what you can legally get away with in the US, assuming you aren't wealth enough to afford a good legal defense, you do not have any rights any more. If those in power decide to ruin your day, you have a chance of ending up in prison despite being completely innocent. Maybe the ACLU/EFF/etc. will defend you depending upon what they actually try to charge you with, but even that isn't a guarantee with how the legal system current works.
[+] [-] bsaul|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] raverbashing|8 years ago|reply
How do you propose they trade Bolivars for BTC? Do you think VNZL mines enough to have a local market? See the restrictions on foreign currency purchases in VNZL (and what is effectively two exchange rates)
How do you propose the bitcoins are subsequently used? For buying basic items (like toilet paper, which gets smuggled from Brazil)
Airlines can't repatriate their earnings from VNZL. Oh I know, they should buy bitcoin! /s
But I assure you most of the well offs already have their earnings safely in a Miami bank account.
[+] [-] thepumpkin1979|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] qubex|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] uiri|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kitcar|8 years ago|reply
I don't see how Bitcoin is a great solution here when it depends on utilities managed by the government for its liquidity...
[+] [-] nradov|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] BearGoesChirp|8 years ago|reply
Which would mean that there would be someone selling as many of their bitcoins as possible for your money. If the situation is so dire that buying bitcoins is the obvious solution, who is going to sell them to you?
[+] [-] chiph|8 years ago|reply
Buying them as a store of wealth would only be useful back when the Bolivar was worth something - as it stands, the black market exchange rate is several times the most generous official exchange rate (there are 3 official exchange rates for some reason). So buying BTC now would only make sense if the government currency had any further to fall.
[+] [-] gregshap|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] wodencafe|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] legulere|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] whb07|8 years ago|reply
There's also the government taking over private companies and running them poorly(surprise). Which leads to less investment and production which leads to less tax revenue, and the downward spiral keeps picking up speed.
[+] [-] dep_b|8 years ago|reply
Luckily there's a neoliberal right wing government ready to take over and run the country into the ground with a bunch of new dogmas, like Argentina went from Kirchner to Macri.
[+] [-] Symmetry|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] boomboomsubban|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] des429|8 years ago|reply
http://money.cnn.com/2017/05/30/news/economy/goldman-sachs-v...
In the end it will be the rest of the world (with most of the support coming from US tax payers) that bails out this country. Maduro will continue his reign and the debt will continue to pile-on. The money from the IMF will go directly to Goldman Sachs to first pay off debts, and then will go directly to Maduro.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-imf-g20-worldbank-venezuel...
[+] [-] Tycho|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ATsch|8 years ago|reply
EDIT: is it just me or did this say something about airports before?
[+] [-] ttmmp|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lumberjack|8 years ago|reply
Would you also be supportive of them?
[+] [-] microcolonel|8 years ago|reply
Now, say, what country do we know of which prospered under a non-socialist government which recognized the right to keep and bear arms, and strong recognition of property rights...
P.S. Consider replying before you vote, it'll be a heck of a lot more convincing than a decreasing counter of non-argument.
[+] [-] unknown|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] unknown|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] nmbr213|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] sctb|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] boomboomsubban|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lumberjack|8 years ago|reply
Chavez claimed he was a socialist because that has positive connotations over there and the US wanted to portray him as a socialist for the opposite reason.
But check
* percentage of workforce work in public sector
* government expenditure as % of GDP
* percentage of workforce that is part of a union
* taxes
* state enterprises
* the welfare and state provided benefits
Compare all of these to a country like Norway (richest or 2nd richest country in the world, also an oil state of sorts). You'll find that if Venezuela is socialist, than Norway must be a straight up reincarnation of the USSR.
[+] [-] seanmcdirmid|8 years ago|reply
Arguing on the internet is so much fun :p
[+] [-] codydh|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] FussyZeus|8 years ago|reply
Socialism clearly isn't working here, but I wouldn't say it's at fault for the current struggles.
[+] [-] duncan_bayne|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] Entangled|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pjc50|8 years ago|reply