this is the vice president of venezuela, who would be next in succession, should maduro resign.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delcy_Rodr%C3%ADguez
Saturday, February 23, 2019
now, if maduro were to resign, then whomever is next in the line of succession would take over until the next scheduled election - it wouldn't trigger an election.
they just had one.
the opposition boycotted it...
they just had one.
the opposition boycotted it...
at
23:54
socialist dictator.
it's a bizarre abuse of language - a contradiction in terms, in fact. for, if you are a socialist, you cannot be a dictator, and if you are a dictator you cannot be a socialist. so, which is it? is he a socialist or is he a dictator?
in fact, maduro is neither a socialist, nor is he a dictator. maduro is an elected representative of the people, in a system with a broken opposition that doesn't appear to be interested in democracy. and, venezuela is a capitalist economy - albeit with a few social programs.
there's more socialism in denmark or mexico, or even in quebec, than there is in venezuela.
but trump needs a straw man to tear down, and the corporatists in the democratic party seem keen to let him have it.
but, let us not forget the truth that, elected as he may be in the context of a system as broken as the venezuelan's is, maduro is also completely incompetent. the man is a high school drop out. socialism does not mean idiocracy; a re-evaluation of the division of labour doesn't imply the elevation of ignorance. chavez was stupid to elevate him to power, but perhaps the point was that he was seen as too impotent to threaten him.
and, i, for one, am not any more on side with any kind of fawning support of maduro than i am with an invasion to overthrow him. my position here is non-intervention out of principle, not out of solidarity. my solidarity is with the peasants, who will be fucked over by whatever happens.
and, i actually agree that he should probably step down - due to the clarity of his own incompetence. but, that's not my choice.
it's a bizarre abuse of language - a contradiction in terms, in fact. for, if you are a socialist, you cannot be a dictator, and if you are a dictator you cannot be a socialist. so, which is it? is he a socialist or is he a dictator?
in fact, maduro is neither a socialist, nor is he a dictator. maduro is an elected representative of the people, in a system with a broken opposition that doesn't appear to be interested in democracy. and, venezuela is a capitalist economy - albeit with a few social programs.
there's more socialism in denmark or mexico, or even in quebec, than there is in venezuela.
but trump needs a straw man to tear down, and the corporatists in the democratic party seem keen to let him have it.
but, let us not forget the truth that, elected as he may be in the context of a system as broken as the venezuelan's is, maduro is also completely incompetent. the man is a high school drop out. socialism does not mean idiocracy; a re-evaluation of the division of labour doesn't imply the elevation of ignorance. chavez was stupid to elevate him to power, but perhaps the point was that he was seen as too impotent to threaten him.
and, i, for one, am not any more on side with any kind of fawning support of maduro than i am with an invasion to overthrow him. my position here is non-intervention out of principle, not out of solidarity. my solidarity is with the peasants, who will be fucked over by whatever happens.
and, i actually agree that he should probably step down - due to the clarity of his own incompetence. but, that's not my choice.
at
23:49
and, to be as clear as possible - venezuela is not currently and never was a socialist country. it was at most a mixed economy, with a state-run oil sector. but, you couldn't even really call it "state capitalism". it's just as capitalist as anywhere else.
if the country had actually embraced socialism, it wouldn't have destroyed it's own agriculture sector, or become reliant on imports of food by crowding out the rest of the economy.
socialism is a worker-run economy, and there is no sign of that in venezuela. at all.
so, it's an absurd red herring for ignorant buffoons to squabble over and not a serious debate to engage with. these right-wing idiots pushing this kind of stupidity should just be laughed out of the room.
if the country had actually embraced socialism, it wouldn't have destroyed it's own agriculture sector, or become reliant on imports of food by crowding out the rest of the economy.
socialism is a worker-run economy, and there is no sign of that in venezuela. at all.
so, it's an absurd red herring for ignorant buffoons to squabble over and not a serious debate to engage with. these right-wing idiots pushing this kind of stupidity should just be laughed out of the room.
at
22:13
in the trump era, it's easy to forget that bernie almost certainly doesn't post his own tweets. he has a staff to do that for him...
whether the problem is duss or not, i agree that there's an issue here that needs to be attended to.
that said, he just stated a few days ago that he doesn't think maduro is a dictator and is apprehensive about the motives in american involvement. so, i'm going to wait to let him clarify himself before i join the chorus: this may be more about a rogue staffer than a swing towards american imperialism.
if you dissect the statement, there are some truths and half-truths to it. it is true that there is a humanitarian crisis in venezuela, and that the government has mismanaged the situation. it is also true that the sanctions have exacerbated a situation of poor management. and, while i haven't looked into it very deeply, i've seen this situation before: the security forces are probably reacting to provocateurs, who are inciting them into violence to generate headlines. then, cnn will run a story about some protestors being shot, but will forget to mention that they were lighting cop cars on fire.
the worrying thing about the statement from sanders' account is in it's urging to accept a humanitarian convoy that is clearly a propaganda ploy. it is that specific point that he needs to clarify.
the position that harris is taking is contemptible. the right thing to do is get out of the way and let the venezuelan people govern themselves, not interfere in the borders of sovereign nations. kamala harris seems to have a very warped concept of morality.
but, i wouldn't expect sanders to take a pro-maduro position, either - nor has blumenthal. and, while i'm a fan of roger waters, he's been known to rely on questionable information in the way he forms his opinions. i think abby martin's primary concern is likely to be international law.
the reality is that there is no contradiction between rejecting american intervention in the region and criticizing maduro's handling of the economy in venezuela. you don't have to embrace maduro to criticize trump. bernie is good at this and knows how to navigate it. but, see, the fact that i know that indicates that he doesn't have a lot of space to start spouting bullshit, either.
i don't have a twitter account, fwiw. i've pointed that out here, repeatedly.
https://www.rt.com/usa/452276-bernie-sanders-venezuela-regime-change/
whether the problem is duss or not, i agree that there's an issue here that needs to be attended to.
that said, he just stated a few days ago that he doesn't think maduro is a dictator and is apprehensive about the motives in american involvement. so, i'm going to wait to let him clarify himself before i join the chorus: this may be more about a rogue staffer than a swing towards american imperialism.
if you dissect the statement, there are some truths and half-truths to it. it is true that there is a humanitarian crisis in venezuela, and that the government has mismanaged the situation. it is also true that the sanctions have exacerbated a situation of poor management. and, while i haven't looked into it very deeply, i've seen this situation before: the security forces are probably reacting to provocateurs, who are inciting them into violence to generate headlines. then, cnn will run a story about some protestors being shot, but will forget to mention that they were lighting cop cars on fire.
the worrying thing about the statement from sanders' account is in it's urging to accept a humanitarian convoy that is clearly a propaganda ploy. it is that specific point that he needs to clarify.
the position that harris is taking is contemptible. the right thing to do is get out of the way and let the venezuelan people govern themselves, not interfere in the borders of sovereign nations. kamala harris seems to have a very warped concept of morality.
but, i wouldn't expect sanders to take a pro-maduro position, either - nor has blumenthal. and, while i'm a fan of roger waters, he's been known to rely on questionable information in the way he forms his opinions. i think abby martin's primary concern is likely to be international law.
the reality is that there is no contradiction between rejecting american intervention in the region and criticizing maduro's handling of the economy in venezuela. you don't have to embrace maduro to criticize trump. bernie is good at this and knows how to navigate it. but, see, the fact that i know that indicates that he doesn't have a lot of space to start spouting bullshit, either.
i don't have a twitter account, fwiw. i've pointed that out here, repeatedly.
https://www.rt.com/usa/452276-bernie-sanders-venezuela-regime-change/
at
21:54
i actually think that democrats need to stop pretending that it's important to win primaries in deep red states like south carolina.
bernie shouldn't completely abandon the state - he should make a nominal effort to show up and compete. but, his strategy should be to get out of the way and let the other candidates split the vote.
the reality is that losing south carolina, as he no doubt will, will not matter a whole lot, in the end. what matters is making sure that no other candidate runs up the score, there.
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/02/bernie-sanders-already-repeating-some-crucial-2016-mistakes
bernie shouldn't completely abandon the state - he should make a nominal effort to show up and compete. but, his strategy should be to get out of the way and let the other candidates split the vote.
the reality is that losing south carolina, as he no doubt will, will not matter a whole lot, in the end. what matters is making sure that no other candidate runs up the score, there.
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/02/bernie-sanders-already-repeating-some-crucial-2016-mistakes
at
17:53
if there was an acceptable younger candidate available today, we would just support that younger candidate.
it's not clear to me why we should put faith in the universe to produce a better candidate in the next 6 years.
and, if we are in the same position four years from now, the same logic will hold: sanders will still remain the candidate, by default.
i lean in the opposite direction: i think they should abolish term limits.
https://theintercept.com/2019/02/22/bernie-sanders-2020-one-term-pledge/
it's not clear to me why we should put faith in the universe to produce a better candidate in the next 6 years.
and, if we are in the same position four years from now, the same logic will hold: sanders will still remain the candidate, by default.
i lean in the opposite direction: i think they should abolish term limits.
https://theintercept.com/2019/02/22/bernie-sanders-2020-one-term-pledge/
at
17:33
what i actually called for, and it was years ago now, was a manhattan project for the environment - and if it is a successful transition, that is more what it will actually look like.
but, it's maybe not as effective marketing as a "green new deal".
even if the green new deal ends up written in manhattan....
but, it's maybe not as effective marketing as a "green new deal".
even if the green new deal ends up written in manhattan....
at
17:15
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)