independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Wed 23rd Oct 2019 8:10am
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Politics & Religion > Venezuela - Sanctions and blockade continue as U.S now attempts a coup
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 3 of 9 <123456789>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Reply #60 posted 01/31/19 1:01am

IanRG

nd33 said:

IanRG said:

.

In an election where he imprisoned some potential candidates, banned some opposition parties from participating in the presidential election, had other opposition parties seek to boycott the election, a far smaller proportion of the population than usually vote in Venzuela voted in 2018 because they had no trust in the electoral system after he changed the constitution and electoral process. Voter turnout was down by about 50%. With great chunks of the opposition out of the election by force or boycott, to only get less than 1/5th of vote needs to be compared to other effectively one party states.

.

Australia has compulsory voting with more than 90% of eligible voters successfully voting (i.e. voted and the vote was able to be properly counted). With a preferential system the winning party normally get at least 40% of the primary vote. After allocations of preferences they normally get around 50% of the total votes two part preferred.

[Edited 1/30/19 21:55pm]

In the 2016 Australian election 21.3% of the citizenry voted for Turnbull. I agree voting should be compulsory.

.

I don't know where you are getting your figures from. I suspect you are including children not eligible to vote. Turnbull's national vote was 42% of the primary vote. In his seat he got 62.3% of the primary vote and 67.7% after first preferences with over 90% of voters properly voting.

.

Madura, on the other hand with the inside running due to inprisonments, party bans and opposition boycotts also got 67.8% of those who voted but with a turnout of between 32.3% to 46.07, this is 2/3rds of a much smaller proportion of voters.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #61 posted 01/31/19 1:02am

IanRG

BombSquad said:

IanRG said:

In an election where he imprisoned some potential candidates, banned some opposition parties from participating in the presidential election, had other opposition parties seek to boycott the election, a far smaller proportion of the population than usually vote in Venzuela voted in 2018 because they had no trust in the electoral system after he changed the constitution and electoral process. Voter turnout was down by about 50%. With great chunks of the opposition out of the election by force or boycott, to only get less than 1/5th of vote needs to be compared to other effectively one party states.

same shit happens in many nations, most prominently Russia

yet I do not hear the loud screaming right wing pussies yell "we need to intervene there! they need help!"


spineless hypocritic sissies.
but it fits that they support that fat orange weakest sissie of them all

.

Agreed and would include that if the US elections were monitored the way they monitor other's they would fail their own test.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #62 posted 01/31/19 4:44am

nd33

IanRG said:



nd33 said:


IanRG said:


.


In an election where he imprisoned some potential candidates, banned some opposition parties from participating in the presidential election, had other opposition parties seek to boycott the election, a far smaller proportion of the population than usually vote in Venzuela voted in 2018 because they had no trust in the electoral system after he changed the constitution and electoral process. Voter turnout was down by about 50%. With great chunks of the opposition out of the election by force or boycott, to only get less than 1/5th of vote needs to be compared to other effectively one party states.


.


Australia has compulsory voting with more than 90% of eligible voters successfully voting (i.e. voted and the vote was able to be properly counted). With a preferential system the winning party normally get at least 40% of the primary vote. After allocations of preferences they normally get around 50% of the total votes two part preferred.


[Edited 1/30/19 21:55pm]



In the 2016 Australian election 21.3% of the citizenry voted for Turnbull. I agree voting should be compulsory.

.


I don't know where you are getting your figures from. I suspect you are including children not eligible to vote. Turnbull's national vote was 42% of the primary vote. In his seat he got 62.3% of the primary vote and 67.7% after first preferences with over 90% of voters properly voting.


.


Madura, on the other hand with the inside running due to inprisonments, party bans and opposition boycotts also got 67.8% of those who voted but with a turnout of between 32.3% to 46.07, this is 2/3rds of a much smaller proportion of voters.



Yes, my numbers include all population. If you exclude people ineligible to vote, they will all still hover around the same percentage of people that voted for the person who leads the country, ie Trump and Maduro will be around 30% and Turnbull 32%...you know what I mean. All very similar. The point being that Maduro has just as much domestic support as other major leaders do, regardless of whether the turnout was low or not.

I got the numbers off the internet of course! Wikipedia pages for each countries election has the exact voting numbers each candidate received in their last election, and then it’s easy to find each countries population from the relevant election year.
[Edited 1/31/19 4:46am]
Music, sweet music, I wish I could caress and...kiss, kiss...
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #63 posted 01/31/19 11:21am

IanRG

nd33 said:

IanRG said:

.

I don't know where you are getting your figures from. I suspect you are including children not eligible to vote. Turnbull's national vote was 42% of the primary vote. In his seat he got 62.3% of the primary vote and 67.7% after first preferences with over 90% of voters properly voting.

.

Madura, on the other hand with the inside running due to inprisonments, party bans and opposition boycotts also got 67.8% of those who voted but with a turnout of between 32.3% to 46.07, this is 2/3rds of a much smaller proportion of voters.

Yes, my numbers include all population. If you exclude people ineligible to vote, they will all still hover around the same percentage of people that voted for the person who leads the country, ie Trump and Maduro will be around 30% and Turnbull 32%...you know what I mean. All very similar. The point being that Maduro has just as much domestic support as other major leaders do, regardless of whether the turnout was low or not. I got the numbers off the internet of course! Wikipedia pages for each countries election has the exact voting numbers each candidate received in their last election, and then it’s easy to find each countries population from the relevant election year. [Edited 1/31/19 4:46am]

.

Except there is something seriously wrong with your maths and understanding of voting systems.

.

The key failure in your method is you are comparing votes for multiple members of parliament to votes for a president as if they are comparable. If you look at the last Venzuelan parliamentary election in 2015, Maduro's party got 40.9% of the votes compared to 56.2% for the highest placed group. With a voter turnout of 74.17% this means he got 30.34% coming a poor second to the winners at 41.68% of eligible voters.

.

Wikipedia states that Turnbull received 42.04% of the popular vote and 50.36% after allocation of preferences with a 90.98% turnout. This gives Turnbull 38.25% on first preference and 45.82% after allocated preferences - This latter figure is important because in a preferential system people get more than 1 choice resulting in many minor parties and independents. Unlike a first past the post system you can vote for an independent first knowing they are unlikely to get in and state your preference for others in order. None of this US/UK problem that if you vote independent you lose your vote and you just take your vote from whichever of the major parties you prefer. You ahve no need for primaries and runoff elections. In the run off election in France wikipedia states Macron received 43.6% of total eligible voters. The UK Parliamentary figures are deceptively low because you are using figures from a system with many parties, no preferential voting, no primaries and no run-off elections - it is all first past the post - so the parliamentary vote here is 29.17% of total eligible voters, but it is like comparing apples with oranges.

.

Now to Maduro's wikipedia figures: getting 67.8% with a turnout of between 32.3 and 46.05% means between 21.9% and 31.22% (Note the turnout was way down from their last parliamentary voter turnout because of high voter distrust caused by Maduro's tactics to disable parliament). That is markedly different from 45.82% or 43.6%. And this is after Maduro imprisoned some potential candidates, banned some opposition parties from participating and the majority of the rest boycotting the election. These tactics are more Putin style - Putin after similar but less aggressive tactics in his last election got 76.69% of the vote with a 67.5% turnout giving him 51.77% of the vote, way more than Madura' upper end figure of 31.22%. It is safe to say that Maduro would have been likely voted out if those who voted in the 2015 parliamentary election but boycotted the last presidential vote campaigned and voted instead.

.

So, no I don't agree that Maduro has just as much support as others based on your source. I agree he did better than Trump who got 46.09% with a turnout rate of 60.2 giving only 27.75% of the eligible voting population but got in due to the college system.

[Edited 1/31/19 14:11pm]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #64 posted 01/31/19 12:35pm

13cjk13

IanRG said:

BombSquad said:

same shit happens in many nations, most prominently Russia

yet I do not hear the loud screaming right wing pussies yell "we need to intervene there! they need help!"


spineless hypocritic sissies.
but it fits that they support that fat orange weakest sissie of them all

.

Agreed and would include that if the US elections were monitored the way they monitor other's they would fail their own test.

Exactly right.

"If we had had confidence the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #65 posted 01/31/19 5:59pm

hausofmoi7

avatar

Make Venezuela Great Again

Opposition have burnt over 25 people.
People are picked out by skin colour. Dark skinned, Afro and indegenious people are the targets.


Most of them died or were seriously injured due to prejudices against the victim because of their social status or political belief, an act typified by the United Nations as a “hate crime.

In the United States, Tuskegee University has reported that 3,446 Afro-Americans and 1,297 whites were lynched – and most burnt alive – between 1882 and 1968, by extremist groups such as the Ku Klux Klan.

According to local Venezuelan press reports, of the 105 deaths in Venezuela during the street protests, 29 were victims – directly or indirectly – of the actions of the demonstrators themselves. Another 14 victims died during looting and in one prominent case, the assailants set fire to a shop and ended up engulfed in flames. Another 14 deaths are attributable to actions by state authorities (in almost all of these cases those responsible have been prosecuted) and 44 are still under investigation or in dispute.



http://theprisma.co.uk/20...Df43z4VLxI





The other day, anti-government protesters in Venezuela set a man on fire, severely burning nearly 80 percent of his body. The man had brown skin, and government supporters say he was a Chavista, to highlight the racist savagery of their adversaries. The opposition says he was a thief.

The video of the incident—which shows an anti-government protester throwing accelerant on the man, who then bursts into flames and runs down the street as other protesters, rather than help douse the fire, let him burn—is horrific. It obviously doesn’t fit the narrative of brave, virtuous, democratic activists facing down a tyrannical government.


https://www.thenation.com...venezuela/



.
[Edited 1/31/19 18:06pm]
“It means finding the very human narrative of a man navigating between idealism and pragmatism, faith and politics, non- violence, the pitfalls of acclaim as the perils of rejection” - Lesley Hazleton on the first Muslim, the prophet.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #66 posted 01/31/19 6:08pm

hausofmoi7

avatar

The World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU), representing 95 million workers of the five continents as well as the world class-oriented labor movement, strongly rejects the attempted coup d’état against the legitimate government of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.

http://www.wftucentral.or...J-yMIrvbdI

This interference, orchestrated by the US government, NATO and the EU and executed by the representatives of the transnationals and monopolies in the country, constitutes a flagrant violation of the most elementary rules of international law and of the Venezuela’s sovereignty. For the WFTU, it is an inalienable right of each people to decide for themselves, without outside interventions, on their present and future.

At the same time, the WFTU reaffirms, as it has already done on several occasions, its solidarity with the Venezuelan people, with the working class and our affiliated organizations in the country in front of this imperialist threat. In addition, we call on the Venezuelan people to reject the maneuvers of the imperialists and their lackeys in the region, to condemn the plans of the murderers of the peoples. We will continue to support the Venezuelan working class, for the deepening of the Bolivarian process, until the abolition of man by man exploitation, towards a new world, without wars and imperialist barbarism. This is the only way forward to repel the plans of the imperialists.

Long live internationalist solidarity!



.
[Edited 1/31/19 18:09pm]
“It means finding the very human narrative of a man navigating between idealism and pragmatism, faith and politics, non- violence, the pitfalls of acclaim as the perils of rejection” - Lesley Hazleton on the first Muslim, the prophet.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #67 posted 01/31/19 6:49pm

hausofmoi7

avatar

Western governments are supporting a coup to install a racist, fascist and elitist government.


https://www.google.com.au...uro-elites

Venezuela shows that protest can be a defence of privilege
Street action is now regularly used with western backing to target elected governments in the interests of elites


What are portrayed as peaceful protests have all the hallmarks of an anti-democratic rebellion, shot through with class privilege and racism. Overwhelmingly middle class and confined to wealthy white areas, the protests have now shrunk to firebombings and ritual fights with the police, while parts of the opposition have agreed to peace talks.


.
“It means finding the very human narrative of a man navigating between idealism and pragmatism, faith and politics, non- violence, the pitfalls of acclaim as the perils of rejection” - Lesley Hazleton on the first Muslim, the prophet.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #68 posted 01/31/19 6:57pm

IanRG

There are two side to every story - Your posts are from 2017. Amnesty International in the same year also reported on this violence but from the perspective of the violence coming from the government against the people:

https://www.amnesty.org/e...isidencia/

"What seemed to be isolated reactions by the Venezuelan authorities in the face of protests, in fact indicate a planned strategy by the government of President Maduro to use violence and illegitimate force against the Venezuelan population to neutralize any criticism," said Erika Guevara-Rosas, Americas Director at Amnesty International.

.

State violence

Over the past 3 months, Amnesty International has documented that state security forces hav...government. An analysis of the facts indicates that these acts of violent repression are not only an uncontrolled reaction on the part of some security agents, but are part of a premeditated practice of using violence to stifle critical voices.

Amnesty International has been able to corroborate that the Bolivarian National Police and the Bolivarian National Guard have unduly used non-lethal force, including firing teargas directly at dissident demonstrators. An example of this is the case of Juan Pernalete, who died after being shot directly in the chest with a tear gas canister while he was demonstrating in Caracas in April 2017. Security forces have also used lethal weapons to suppress demonstrations, resulting in deaths and injuries, including Fabián Urbina, who died on 20 June 2017 while he was protesting in Caracas from a gunshot fired by an officer from the National Guard.

.

You need to be honest and condemn all the violence, not just violence by the side you are ideologically opposed to.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #69 posted 01/31/19 7:01pm

IanRG

hausofmoi7 said:

Western governments are supporting a coup to install a racist, fascist and elitist government. https://www.google.com.au...uro-elites Venezuela shows that protest can be a defence of privilege Street action is now regularly used with western backing to target elected governments in the interests of elites What are portrayed as peaceful protests have all the hallmarks of an anti-democratic rebellion, shot through with class privilege and racism. Overwhelmingly middle class and confined to wealthy white areas, the protests have now shrunk to firebombings and ritual fights with the police, while parts of the opposition have agreed to peace talks. .

.

This is from 2014!

.

It is hardly a reference to what is occurring in the struggle between the National Assembly and the president in 2019.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #70 posted 01/31/19 7:07pm

nd33

IanRG said:



nd33 said:


IanRG said:


.


I don't know where you are getting your figures from. I suspect you are including children not eligible to vote. Turnbull's national vote was 42% of the primary vote. In his seat he got 62.3% of the primary vote and 67.7% after first preferences with over 90% of voters properly voting.


.


Madura, on the other hand with the inside running due to inprisonments, party bans and opposition boycotts also got 67.8% of those who voted but with a turnout of between 32.3% to 46.07, this is 2/3rds of a much smaller proportion of voters.



Yes, my numbers include all population. If you exclude people ineligible to vote, they will all still hover around the same percentage of people that voted for the person who leads the country, ie Trump and Maduro will be around 30% and Turnbull 32%...you know what I mean. All very similar. The point being that Maduro has just as much domestic support as other major leaders do, regardless of whether the turnout was low or not. I got the numbers off the internet of course! Wikipedia pages for each countries election has the exact voting numbers each candidate received in their last election, and then it’s easy to find each countries population from the relevant election year. [Edited 1/31/19 4:46am]

.


Except there is something seriously wrong with your maths and understanding of voting systems.


.


The key failure in your method is you are comparing votes for multiple members of parliament to votes for a president as if they are comparable. If you look at the last Venzuelan parliamentary election in 2015, Maduro's party got 40.9% of the votes compared to 56.2% for the highest placed group. With a voter turnout of 74.17% this means he got 30.34% coming a poor second to the winners at 41.68% of eligible voters.


.


Wikipedia states that Turnbull received 42.04% of the popular vote and 50.36% after allocation of preferences with a 90.98% turnout. This gives Turnbull 38.25% on first preference and 45.82% after allocated preferences - This latter figure is important because in a preferential system people get more than 1 choice resulting in many minor parties and independents. Unlike a first past the post system you can vote for an independent first knowing they are unlikely to get in and state your preference for others in order. None of this US/UK problem that if you vote independent you lose your vote and you just take your vote from whichever of the major parties you prefer. You ahve no need for primaries and runoff elections. In the run off election in France wikipedia states Macron received 43.6% of total eligible voters. The UK Parliamentary figures are deceptively low because you are using figures from a system with many parties, no preferential voting, no primaries and no run-off elections - it is all first past the post - so the parliamentary vote here is 29.17% of total eligible voters, but it is like comparing apples with oranges.


.


Now to Maduro's wikipedia figures: getting 67.8% with a turnout of between 32.3 and 46.05% means between 21.9% and 31.22% (Note the turnout was way down from their last parliamentary voter turnout because of high voter distrust caused by Maduro's tactics to disable parliament). That is markedly different from 45.82% or 43.6%. And this is after Maduro imprisoned some potential candidates, banned some opposition parties from participating and the majority of the rest boycotting the election. These tactics are more Putin style - Putin after similar but less aggressive tactics in his last election got 76.69% of the vote with a 67.5% turnout giving him 51.77% of the vote, way more than Madura' upper end figure of 31.22%. It is safe to say that Maduro would have been likely voted out if those who voted in the 2015 parliamentary election but boycotted the last presidential vote campaigned and voted instead.


.


So, no I don't agree that Maduro has just as much support as others based on your source. I agree he did better than Trump who got 46.09% with a turnout rate of 60.2 giving only 27.75% of the eligible voting population but got in due to the college system.

[Edited 1/31/19 14:11pm]



Yes, I get the benefits of alternate election systems. We have MMP, which is far more representative than FPP.

There are many ways to analyse this, but I wanted a quick simple way to gauge the election result of Venezuela compared to the US, with the UK thrown in there as an additional gauge. Let’s throw in Oz too. We are lead to believe by all the media coming out that Maduro is a dictator who no one in his own country likes. So, here is my quick calculation:

USA 2016 population: 323,400,000
Trump votes received in 2016 election: 62,984,828
Percentage of population voted for leader: 19.5%

Venezuela 2018 population: 32,381,000
Maduro votes received in 2018 election: 6,245,862
Percentage of population voted for leader: 19.3%

UK 2017 population: 66,020,000
May votes received in 2017 election: 13,636,684
Percentage of population voted for leader: 20.7%

Australia 2016 population: 24,210,000
Turnbull votes received in 2016 election: 5,131,505
Percentage of population voted for leader: 21.2%

So what this tells us is that the domestic support for Maduro is right in line with the support that western leaders received, with all near bang on the 20% mark.

What I find interesting is that even though Australia has compulsory voting, and a far higher turnout than these other countries, the person elected to lead, Malcolm Turnbull only received similar support to other countries with far lower turnout. Obviously much more divided in Australia, which means the system works. People in Australia are not just voting for one of two parties. A good thing!

I will also note that from a quick glance at graphs, the age demographics in Venezuela appear to have a larger representation of children ineligible to vote than these other countries. That means if I recalculated to exclude those ineligible to vote because of age, Maduro’s percentage of support would rise in relation to the others.
Music, sweet music, I wish I could caress and...kiss, kiss...
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #71 posted 01/31/19 7:51pm

hausofmoi7

avatar

IanRG said:



hausofmoi7 said:


Western governments are supporting a coup to install a racist, fascist and elitist government. https://www.google.com.au...uro-elites Venezuela shows that protest can be a defence of privilege Street action is now regularly used with western backing to target elected governments in the interests of elites What are portrayed as peaceful protests have all the hallmarks of an anti-democratic rebellion, shot through with class privilege and racism. Overwhelmingly middle class and confined to wealthy white areas, the protests have now shrunk to firebombings and ritual fights with the police, while parts of the opposition have agreed to peace talks. .

.


This is from 2014!


.


It is hardly a reference to what is occurring in the struggle between the National Assembly and the president in 2019.



The articles above this one were written post the constitutional amendments.
Its Still the same situation. It’s still the same dynamics going on.
Nazis are still going to Nazi.

I get that the Australian Labour and liberal Party have to support Australias elites as they have financial interests invested with Trump and the opposition of Venezuela in stealing its resources for themselves.

Muddying the waters so thier voters don’t stand in solidarity with the Bolivarian government.

I saw the press release from the Labour Party supporting this racist neo-Nazi coup.

I didn’t realise the labour leader was head of indegenious relations.
Given that Venezuela’s indegenious groups and the Australian indegenious groups are in solidarity.
It’s messed up that he claimed on the press release that he represents indegenious affairs.
Given his stance on this issue and refusal to stand with Australia’s indegenious communities that are in support of the bolivarian revolution , perhaps his title should be “gatekeeper of indegenious affairs”





.
[Edited 1/31/19 21:15pm]
“It means finding the very human narrative of a man navigating between idealism and pragmatism, faith and politics, non- violence, the pitfalls of acclaim as the perils of rejection” - Lesley Hazleton on the first Muslim, the prophet.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #72 posted 01/31/19 8:18pm

hausofmoi7

avatar

IanRG said:

There are two side to every story - Your posts are from 2017. Amnesty International in the same year also reported on this violence but from the perspective of the violence coming from the government against the people:



https://www.amnesty.org/e...isidencia/



"What seemed to be isolated reactions by the Venezuelan authorities in the face of protests, in fact indicate a planned strategy by the government of President Maduro to use violence and illegitimate force against the Venezuelan population to neutralize any criticism," said Erika Guevara-Rosas, Americas Director at Amnesty International.


.


State violence



Over the past 3 months, Amnesty International has documented that state security forces hav...government. An analysis of the facts indicates that these acts of violent repression are not only an uncontrolled reaction on the part of some security agents, but are part of a premeditated practice of using violence to stifle critical voices.



Amnesty International has been able to corroborate that the Bolivarian National Police and the Bolivarian National Guard have unduly used non-lethal force, including firing teargas directly at dissident demonstrators. An example of this is the case of Juan Pernalete, who died after being shot directly in the chest with a tear gas canister while he was demonstrating in Caracas in April 2017. Security forces have also used lethal weapons to suppress demonstrations, resulting in deaths and injuries, including Fabián Urbina, who died on 20 June 2017 while he was protesting in Caracas from a gunshot fired by an officer from the National Guard.


.


You need to be honest and condemn all the violence, not just violence by the side you are ideologically opposed to.



Sections of the Bolivaran government and politicians opposed some instances of state violence in these clashes and Prosecutions were even made in some cases. You ignored that part.
Most of the violence and deaths are hate crimes by the protesters. You ignored that also.
Bolivarian revolution is progressive, even though these protesters are vile racist thugs and neo-nazis. The government still hold themselves to a progressive standard when dealing with this like making sure state violence is investigated.
These are far right racist protesters, who are killing brown and black people in support of European elites, now you be honest of what our governments are backing here in Venezuela.


Australia and U.S government want to resolve this by overthrowing the democratically elected progressive socialist government and appointing the leader which the right wing neo Nazi protesters want in power.


Our governments are supporting a coup of a democratically elected government to support neo Nazis that are lynching brown and black people in 2019.




.
[Edited 1/31/19 21:31pm]
“It means finding the very human narrative of a man navigating between idealism and pragmatism, faith and politics, non- violence, the pitfalls of acclaim as the perils of rejection” - Lesley Hazleton on the first Muslim, the prophet.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #73 posted 01/31/19 9:09pm

IanRG

nd33 said:

IanRG said:

.

Except there is something seriously wrong with your maths and understanding of voting systems.

.

The key failure in your method is you are comparing votes for multiple members of parliament to votes for a president as if they are comparable. If you look at the last Venzuelan parliamentary election in 2015, Maduro's party got 40.9% of the votes compared to 56.2% for the highest placed group. With a voter turnout of 74.17% this means he got 30.34% coming a poor second to the winners at 41.68% of eligible voters.

.

Wikipedia states that Turnbull received 42.04% of the popular vote and 50.36% after allocation of preferences with a 90.98% turnout. This gives Turnbull 38.25% on first preference and 45.82% after allocated preferences - This latter figure is important because in a preferential system people get more than 1 choice resulting in many minor parties and independents. Unlike a first past the post system you can vote for an independent first knowing they are unlikely to get in and state your preference for others in order. None of this US/UK problem that if you vote independent you lose your vote and you just take your vote from whichever of the major parties you prefer. You ahve no need for primaries and runoff elections. In the run off election in France wikipedia states Macron received 43.6% of total eligible voters. The UK Parliamentary figures are deceptively low because you are using figures from a system with many parties, no preferential voting, no primaries and no run-off elections - it is all first past the post - so the parliamentary vote here is 29.17% of total eligible voters, but it is like comparing apples with oranges.

.

Now to Maduro's wikipedia figures: getting 67.8% with a turnout of between 32.3 and 46.05% means between 21.9% and 31.22% (Note the turnout was way down from their last parliamentary voter turnout because of high voter distrust caused by Maduro's tactics to disable parliament). That is markedly different from 45.82% or 43.6%. And this is after Maduro imprisoned some potential candidates, banned some opposition parties from participating and the majority of the rest boycotting the election. These tactics are more Putin style - Putin after similar but less aggressive tactics in his last election got 76.69% of the vote with a 67.5% turnout giving him 51.77% of the vote, way more than Madura' upper end figure of 31.22%. It is safe to say that Maduro would have been likely voted out if those who voted in the 2015 parliamentary election but boycotted the last presidential vote campaigned and voted instead.

.

So, no I don't agree that Maduro has just as much support as others based on your source. I agree he did better than Trump who got 46.09% with a turnout rate of 60.2 giving only 27.75% of the eligible voting population but got in due to the college system.

[Edited 1/31/19 14:11pm]

Yes, I get the benefits of alternate election systems. We have MMP, which is far more representative than FPP. There are many ways to analyse this, but I wanted a quick simple way to gauge the election result of Venezuela compared to the US, with the UK thrown in there as an additional gauge. Let’s throw in Oz too. We are lead to believe by all the media coming out that Maduro is a dictator who no one in his own country likes. So, here is my quick calculation: USA 2016 population: 323,400,000 Trump votes received in 2016 election: 62,984,828 Percentage of population voted for leader: 19.5% Venezuela 2018 population: 32,381,000 Maduro votes received in 2018 election: 6,245,862 Percentage of population voted for leader: 19.3% UK 2017 population: 66,020,000 May votes received in 2017 election: 13,636,684 Percentage of population voted for leader: 20.7% Australia 2016 population: 24,210,000 Turnbull votes received in 2016 election: 5,131,505 Percentage of population voted for leader: 21.2% So what this tells us is that the domestic support for Maduro is right in line with the support that western leaders received, with all near bang on the 20% mark. What I find interesting is that even though Australia has compulsory voting, and a far higher turnout than these other countries, the person elected to lead, Malcolm Turnbull only received similar support to other countries with far lower turnout. Obviously much more divided in Australia, which means the system works. People in Australia are not just voting for one of two parties. A good thing! I will also note that from a quick glance at graphs, the age demographics in Venezuela appear to have a larger representation of children ineligible to vote than these other countries. That means if I recalculated to exclude those ineligible to vote because of age, Maduro’s percentage of support would rise in relation to the others.

.

But what does than mean?

.

You have two (UK & Oz) with lots of parties. This will reduce the percentage received

.

You have two that are parliamentary votes for many seats, each with their own local member and own issues and different socio-economic make ups rather than a vote for one person for the whole country. This will spread the votes and reduce the percentages received.

.

You have one that has preferential voting and you are comparing these to first past the post. This will reduce the percentage of first votes for that country because we know they are not lost if your person does not make the final two - On two party preferred the maths using your formula becomes:

.

Australia 2016 population: 24,210,000
Turnbull votes ultimately received in 2016 election: 6,818,824
Percentage of population voted for leader gov't won seats: 28.17% - People do not vote for a prime minister, they vote for their parliamentary representatives - or did people really vote for your deputy prime minister?

.

You have one country that imprisoned potential candidates, banned some parties and had some others boycott the election. This reduces choice and causes fear so can inflate percentages received by leader.

.

You are chosing a measure that shrinks the percentage differences making them look closer by including all these people who are underage or are resident or temporay resident non-citizens. The impact of thie distortion can be seen by the following:

.

Australia 2016 population: 24,210,000

Government votes received in 2016 election: 5,131,505

Percentage of populations who ultimately voted for Gov't won seats: 28.17%

Percentage of voting populations who ultimately voted for Gov't won seats: 45.81%

.

Venezuela 2015 population: 31,108,083

Opposition votes received in 2015 election: 7,728.025

Percentage of populations who voted for opposition won seats: 24.84%

Percentage of voting populations who voted for opposition won seats: 41.69%

.

Venezuela 2018 population: 32,381,000

Maduro votes received in 2018 election: 6,245,862

Percentage of population voted for leader: 19.3%

Percentage of voting populations who voted for leader: 30.43%

.

Maduro looks bad compared to the nearest equivalent - his own country's last vote.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #74 posted 01/31/19 9:28pm

IanRG

hausofmoi7 said:

IanRG said:

There are two side to every story - Your posts are from 2017. Amnesty International in the same year also reported on this violence but from the perspective of the violence coming from the government against the people:

https://www.amnesty.org/e...isidencia/

"What seemed to be isolated reactions by the Venezuelan authorities in the face of protests, in fact indicate a planned strategy by the government of President Maduro to use violence and illegitimate force against the Venezuelan population to neutralize any criticism," said Erika Guevara-Rosas, Americas Director at Amnesty International.

.

State violence

Over the past 3 months, Amnesty International has documented that state security forces hav...government. An analysis of the facts indicates that these acts of violent repression are not only an uncontrolled reaction on the part of some security agents, but are part of a premeditated practice of using violence to stifle critical voices.

Amnesty International has been able to corroborate that the Bolivarian National Police and the Bolivarian National Guard have unduly used non-lethal force, including firing teargas directly at dissident demonstrators. An example of this is the case of Juan Pernalete, who died after being shot directly in the chest with a tear gas canister while he was demonstrating in Caracas in April 2017. Security forces have also used lethal weapons to suppress demonstrations, resulting in deaths and injuries, including Fabián Urbina, who died on 20 June 2017 while he was protesting in Caracas from a gunshot fired by an officer from the National Guard.

.

You need to be honest and condemn all the violence, not just violence by the side you are ideologically opposed to.

(1) Sections of the Bolivaran government and politicians opposed some instances of state violence in these clashes and Prosecutions were even made in some cases. You ignored that part. Most of the violence and deaths are hate crimes by the protesters. You ignored that also. Bolivarian revolution is progressive, even though these protesters are vile racist thugs and neo-nazis. The government still hold themselves to a progressive standard when dealing with this like making sure state violence is investigated. These are far right racist protesters, who are killing brown and black people in support of European elites, (2)now you be honest of what our governments are backing here in Venezuela. Australia and U.S government want to resolve this by overthrowing the progressive socialist government and appointing the leader which the right wing neo Nazis want. . [Edited 1/31/19 21:08pm]

.

(1) No, you dishonestly ignored violence from your ideological side until I raised it so you could present a false impression that the violence is all by the others. This is the poorest defence possible - some on my side have opposed some of our violence and anyway we are good and they are <insert pejorative term>

.

(2) I already said I opposed all the violence and all outside interference in my first post here: "Having said that, I fully encourage a peaceful internal resolution to this problem that does not strip a country of its natural resources and, most importantly, sees people not murdered at the rates they now are, properly fed and provided with adequate healthcare and stops a country that should be stable and well off from creating so many refugees." Nothing in this shows I am dishonestly hiding anything or surreptitiously supporting hate crimes, outside interference and exploitation of Venezuela. This is just another of your normal vile accusations.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #75 posted 01/31/19 9:40pm

hausofmoi7

avatar

My side?
If you mean the people who don’t support the opposition and want thier national sovereignty respected.
They are not lynching and killing thier ideological opponents or committing hate crimes.

These killings and lynchings are not even happening in protest clashes.
Random people walking down the street are targeted based on skin colour by these protesters.





.
[Edited 1/31/19 23:25pm]
“It means finding the very human narrative of a man navigating between idealism and pragmatism, faith and politics, non- violence, the pitfalls of acclaim as the perils of rejection” - Lesley Hazleton on the first Muslim, the prophet.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #76 posted 01/31/19 11:38pm

hausofmoi7

avatar

And if the u.s military attacks Venezuela.
Those upper middle class and rich people are getting on the first plane to Miami.
“It means finding the very human narrative of a man navigating between idealism and pragmatism, faith and politics, non- violence, the pitfalls of acclaim as the perils of rejection” - Lesley Hazleton on the first Muslim, the prophet.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #77 posted 02/01/19 1:22am

IanRG

hausofmoi7 said:

My side? If you mean the people who don’t support the opposition and want thier national sovereignty respected. They are not lynching and killing thier ideological opponents or committing hate crimes. These killings and lynchings are not even happening in protest clashes. Random people walking down the street are targeted based on skin colour by these protesters. . [Edited 1/31/19 23:25pm]

.

No, I mean people who excuse violence if it comes from their side and only complain about the violence from the other side. Don't pretend that I have not already said I don't support the violence from either side and absolutely want the Venezuela's sovereignty respected.

.

Amnesty International found the violence is in no way just from the other side and its a pathetic excuse that some from your ideological side are against the violence by their own side when it should be all are against it. And that some on your side want the violent on your side prosecuted means that some don't - this is deplorable - All those commiting the murders and violence so markedly prevalent in Venevuela under Maduro should face justice not matter which side or what motive.

[Edited 2/1/19 1:41am]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #78 posted 02/01/19 2:36am

hausofmoi7

avatar

IanRG said:



hausofmoi7 said:


My side? If you mean the people who don’t support the opposition and want thier national sovereignty respected. They are not lynching and killing thier ideological opponents or committing hate crimes. These killings and lynchings are not even happening in protest clashes. Random people walking down the street are targeted based on skin colour by these protesters. . [Edited 1/31/19 23:25pm]

.


No, I mean people who excuse violence if it comes from their side and only complain about the violence from the other side. Don't pretend that I have not already said I don't support the violence from either side and absolutely want the Venezuela's sovereignty respected.


.


Amnesty International found the violence is in no way just from the other side and its a pathetic excuse that some from your ideological side are against the violence by their own side when it should be all are against it. And that some on your side want the violent on your side prosecuted means that some don't - this is deplorable - All those commiting the murders and violence so markedly prevalent in Venevuela under Maduro should face justice not matter which side or what motive.

[Edited 2/1/19 1:41am]




Clashes are between right wing opposition forces and the state.
Supporters of the government are not counter protesting. So these riots are not clashes between two groups.
Protesters are targeting people to be killed or set on fire based on thier skin colour.
25 have been lynched and killed by protesters.
In some cases the people they targeted weren’t even necessarily government supporters.
They were randomly picked out based on skin colour as being “communists” or “socialists”

The government has a strong base.
Also there are people supporting the government because the protesters and opposition are facists and right wing. not because they even necessarily fully agree with government on all issues.
That’s very important to highlight that supporters of the government and those within the government are not a monolithic group.


End of the day Ian, you and I agree on some fundamentally important major points here. And that’s a good place to be and the most important thing here.
Let’s leave it there.

No Sanctions, No War, No regime change.




.
[Edited 2/1/19 2:54am]
“It means finding the very human narrative of a man navigating between idealism and pragmatism, faith and politics, non- violence, the pitfalls of acclaim as the perils of rejection” - Lesley Hazleton on the first Muslim, the prophet.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #79 posted 02/01/19 2:49am

IanRG

hausofmoi7 said:

IanRG said:

.

No, I mean people who excuse violence if it comes from their side and only complain about the violence from the other side. Don't pretend that I have not already said I don't support the violence from either side and absolutely want the Venezuela's sovereignty respected.

.

Amnesty International found the violence is in no way just from the other side and its a pathetic excuse that some from your ideological side are against the violence by their own side when it should be all are against it. And that some on your side want the violent on your side prosecuted means that some don't - this is deplorable - All those commiting the murders and violence so markedly prevalent in Venevuela under Maduro should face justice not matter which side or what motive.

[Edited 2/1/19 1:41am]

Clashes are between right wing opposition forces and the state. Supporters of the government are not even counter protesting. People are being targeted by thier skin colour by protesters. 25 have been lynched. In some cases the people they targeted weren’t even necessarily government supporters. They were randomly picked out based on skin colour as being “communists” or “socialists”. Also there are people supporting the government because the protesters and opposition are facists and right wing. not because they even necessarily fully agree with government on all issues. That’s very important to highlight. End of the day we agree on some fundamentally important major points. And that’s a good place to be and the most important thing here. Let’s leave it there. No Sanctions and No War. . [Edited 2/1/19 2:43am]

.

Except for the violence you choose to ignore - or is Amnestry International part of the neo Nazi conspiracy seeking to undermine the far left?

.

You already admitted to the far left violence, so why backtrack?

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #80 posted 02/01/19 2:56am

hausofmoi7

avatar

IanRG said:



hausofmoi7 said:


IanRG said:


.


No, I mean people who excuse violence if it comes from their side and only complain about the violence from the other side. Don't pretend that I have not already said I don't support the violence from either side and absolutely want the Venezuela's sovereignty respected.


.


Amnesty International found the violence is in no way just from the other side and its a pathetic excuse that some from your ideological side are against the violence by their own side when it should be all are against it. And that some on your side want the violent on your side prosecuted means that some don't - this is deplorable - All those commiting the murders and violence so markedly prevalent in Venevuela under Maduro should face justice not matter which side or what motive.


[Edited 2/1/19 1:41am]



Clashes are between right wing opposition forces and the state. Supporters of the government are not even counter protesting. People are being targeted by thier skin colour by protesters. 25 have been lynched. In some cases the people they targeted weren’t even necessarily government supporters. They were randomly picked out based on skin colour as being “communists” or “socialists”. Also there are people supporting the government because the protesters and opposition are facists and right wing. not because they even necessarily fully agree with government on all issues. That’s very important to highlight. End of the day we agree on some fundamentally important major points. And that’s a good place to be and the most important thing here. Let’s leave it there. No Sanctions and No War. . [Edited 2/1/19 2:43am]

.


Except for the violence you choose to ignore - or is Amnestry International part of the neo Nazi conspiracy seeking to undermine the far left?


.


You already admitted to the far left violence, so why backtrack?




You can deny that Nazis exist all you want.


Which far left violence are you even referring to Ian?
Do you mean the state of Venezuela are the far left because they are clashing with far right neo-Nazis that are killing people based on thier race, skin tone, class and/or political beliefs?

Interesting


Supporters of the government are not the ones committing the crimes or clashing with the state.
There are also Supporters of the government and also those within the actual government itself who are some of the most vocal about the concerns over state violence.

These riots are not even clashes between two civil groups.
One group is attacking random civilians in an effort to achieve thier political goals.
They are clashing directly with the state as they try to terrorise and kill civilians.


The media ignores the peaceful pro-government protests that oppose u.s intervention.
Government supporters and thier protests are not committing acts of violence against the opposition supporters or the state.
It’s an uncomfortable reality.
Yes, our governments are backing a coup in support of violent right wing neo Nazis because it aligns with thier wallets and financial interests.

They want to send poor and middle class Americans to go kill poor and middle class Venezuelans.

Only way they can do that is muddy waters because the reality is the bolivarian revolution and its supporters have a lot more in common with them than the people that want to send them to war and are supporting the sanctions against Venezuelans.



.
[Edited 2/1/19 6:47am]
“It means finding the very human narrative of a man navigating between idealism and pragmatism, faith and politics, non- violence, the pitfalls of acclaim as the perils of rejection” - Lesley Hazleton on the first Muslim, the prophet.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #81 posted 02/01/19 10:20am

NorthC

Neo-nazis? Yeah, those millions of refugees were all carrying flags with swastikas into Colombia and Brazil... rolleyes It must be comfortable to have such a simplisitic world view: this side is always right, that side is always wrong.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #82 posted 02/01/19 1:03pm

2freaky4church
1

avatar

Note how they avoid the Afro-Venezualians. They are Chavistas.

According to internal polls the public there favor Maduro over the coup leaders. The right wing, racist opposition are very unpopular.

All you others say Hell Yea!! woot!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #83 posted 02/01/19 2:27pm

IanRG

hausofmoi7 said:

IanRG said:

.

Except for the violence you choose to ignore - or is Amnestry International part of the neo Nazi conspiracy seeking to undermine the far left?

.

You already admitted to the far left violence, so why backtrack?

You can deny that Nazis exist all you want. Which far left violence are you even referring to Ian? Do you mean the state of Venezuela are the far left because they are clashing with far right neo-Nazis that are killing people based on thier race, skin tone, class and/or political beliefs? Interesting Supporters of the government are not the ones committing the crimes or clashing with the state. There are also Supporters of the government and also those within the actual government itself who are some of the most vocal about the concerns over state violence. These riots are not even clashes between two civil groups. One group is attacking random civilians in an effort to achieve thier political goals. They are clashing directly with the state as they try to terrorise and kill civilians. The media ignores the peaceful pro-government protests that oppose u.s intervention. Government supporters and thier protests are not committing acts of violence against the opposition supporters or the state. It’s an uncomfortable reality. Yes, our governments are backing a coup in support of violent right wing neo Nazis because it aligns with thier wallets and financial interests. They want to send poor and middle class Americans to go kill poor and middle class Venezuelans. Only way they can do that is muddy waters because the reality is the bolivarian revolution and its supporters have a lot more in common with them than the people that want to send them to war and are supporting the sanctions against Venezuelans. . [Edited 2/1/19 6:47am]

.

Where did I say nazis don't exist? You are just trying to avoid recognising that Amnesty International documented that the violence is also by government forces and rioters supporting the president.

.

As to calling the far left Venezuela government far left, it is because they are. It has nothing to do with the nature of their opposition. The reason you like them so much and accept their violence is you know they are far left and you are excited by their struggle with the far right and racists on the other side. It excites you that you can use this against the US and Australia - It is far left porn to you.

.

Amnestry International (a well known nazi organisation in your mind) disagrees with you as whether is only the opposition doing the attacks and the government supporters and forces are innocent - You even disagree with you because you already admitted that some (only some!) on your side disagreed with the violence for and by Maduro's government. You even knew some had been charged for this violence you are now saying did not occur!

.

You are muddying the waters just as much as anyone else. You are supporting violence so long as it favours your side, just as much as anyone else.

[Edited 2/1/19 15:03pm]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #84 posted 02/01/19 4:37pm

hausofmoi7

avatar

IanRG said:



hausofmoi7 said:


IanRG said:


.


Except for the violence you choose to ignore - or is Amnestry International part of the neo Nazi conspiracy seeking to undermine the far left?


.


You already admitted to the far left violence, so why backtrack?



You can deny that Nazis exist all you want. Which far left violence are you even referring to Ian? Do you mean the state of Venezuela are the far left because they are clashing with far right neo-Nazis that are killing people based on thier race, skin tone, class and/or political beliefs? Interesting Supporters of the government are not the ones committing the crimes or clashing with the state. There are also Supporters of the government and also those within the actual government itself who are some of the most vocal about the concerns over state violence. These riots are not even clashes between two civil groups. One group is attacking random civilians in an effort to achieve thier political goals. They are clashing directly with the state as they try to terrorise and kill civilians. The media ignores the peaceful pro-government protests that oppose u.s intervention. Government supporters and thier protests are not committing acts of violence against the opposition supporters or the state. It’s an uncomfortable reality. Yes, our governments are backing a coup in support of violent right wing neo Nazis because it aligns with thier wallets and financial interests. They want to send poor and middle class Americans to go kill poor and middle class Venezuelans. Only way they can do that is muddy waters because the reality is the bolivarian revolution and its supporters have a lot more in common with them than the people that want to send them to war and are supporting the sanctions against Venezuelans. . [Edited 2/1/19 6:47am]

.


Where did I say nazis don't exist? You are just trying to avoid recognising that Amnesty International documented that the violence is also by government forces and rioters supporting the president.


.


As to calling the far left Venezuela government far left, it is because they are. It has nothing to do with the nature of their opposition. The reason you like them so much and accept their violence is you know they are far left and you are excited by their struggle with the far right and racists on the other side. It excites you that you can use this against the US and Australia - It is far left porn to you.


.


Amnestry International (a well known nazi organisation in your mind) disagrees with you as whether is only the opposition doing the attacks and the government supporters and forces are innocent - You even disagree with you because you already admitted that some (only some!) on your side disagreed with the violence for and by Maduro's government. You even knew some had been charged for this violence you are now saying did not occur!


.


You are muddying the waters just as much as anyone else. You are supporting violence so long as it favours your side, just as much as anyone else.

[Edited 2/1/19 15:03pm]



You sound worse than Trump at Charlottesville.

Rehinge yourself.
Stop referring to marjilanised and groups of people who the world over are targets of hate violence as the “far left”
“far left” is code for black, brown, queer, women, Muslim, Jewish people.

The humanity and existence of people can not be reduced to just being “a political opinion”
Which is what you do when you try and create a fake centrist position for our existence and humanity.
Creating a space where our humanity is reduced to being an extremist position on a spectrum.
Reduced to a “political perspective”

Well played.





.



.
[Edited 2/1/19 17:11pm]
“It means finding the very human narrative of a man navigating between idealism and pragmatism, faith and politics, non- violence, the pitfalls of acclaim as the perils of rejection” - Lesley Hazleton on the first Muslim, the prophet.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #85 posted 02/01/19 4:56pm

hausofmoi7

avatar

2freaky4church1 said:

Note how they avoid the Afro-Venezualians. They are Chavistas.



According to internal polls the public there favor Maduro over the coup leaders. The right wing, racist opposition are very unpopular.


Yes, very true.
“It means finding the very human narrative of a man navigating between idealism and pragmatism, faith and politics, non- violence, the pitfalls of acclaim as the perils of rejection” - Lesley Hazleton on the first Muslim, the prophet.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #86 posted 02/01/19 5:22pm

IanRG

hausofmoi7 said:

IanRG said:

.

Where did I say nazis don't exist? You are just trying to avoid recognising that Amnesty International documented that the violence is also by government forces and rioters supporting the president.

.

As to calling the far left Venezuela government far left, it is because they are. It has nothing to do with the nature of their opposition. The reason you like them so much and accept their violence is you know they are far left and you are excited by their struggle with the far right and racists on the other side. It excites you that you can use this against the US and Australia - It is far left porn to you.

.

Amnestry International (a well known nazi organisation in your mind) disagrees with you as whether is only the opposition doing the attacks and the government supporters and forces are innocent - You even disagree with you because you already admitted that some (only some!) on your side disagreed with the violence for and by Maduro's government. You even knew some had been charged for this violence you are now saying did not occur!

.

You are muddying the waters just as much as anyone else. You are supporting violence so long as it favours your side, just as much as anyone else.

[Edited 2/1/19 15:03pm]

You sound worse than Trump at Charlottesville. Rehinge yourself. Stop referring to marjilanised and groups of people who the world over are targets of hate violence as the “far left” “far left” is code for black, brown, queer, women, Muslim, Jewish people. The humanity and existence of people can not be reduced to just being “a political opinion” Which is what you do when you try and create a fake centrist position for our existence and humanity. . [Edited 2/1/19 16:40pm]

.

What a complete load of absolute hogwash - Me referencing Amnesty International reporting on violence you want to ignore (despite being forced to admit it exists) is worse than Trump excusing far right violence at Charlotteville? It is YOU who is seeking to excuse the violence of your side - You who is acting all Trump like. I am condeming the violence against, for and by the Maduro presidency.

.

Then to make this even more ridiculous you say "far left" is code for a skin colour, a sexual preference, a gender, two opposing religions.

.

And you think that me referring to a government that proudly proclaims itself as a revolutionary far left socialist government is me referring to "marjilanised (sic) and groups of people ... the world over". This is the unhinged bit - It is the the violence in Venezuela against, by and for the PSUV presidency is what we are talking about - not your fantasy world and your political opinion that no one can be anything but far left or nazi.

.

Why do you find the common and non-pejorative term for socialist revolutionary governments so offensive? It is just a spectrum.

.

And importantly, why are you unable to condemn violence for and by Maduro's presidency as bad along with the violence of those opposed to Maduro's presidency? You always fall back to false accusations when you cannot answer person.

.

PS In a political thread you started about the extremely violent political actions occuring within Venezuela currently and being threatened from outside to determine who shouild be the political leader of the Venzuelan political system, you accuse me of making this unecessarily political!

[Edited 2/2/19 1:28am]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #87 posted 02/02/19 4:21am

hausofmoi7

avatar

We just gave you context about the situation.
You can ask a socialist party supporter who voted this government in.
Who were not fighting the state forces. Those people fighting state force are lynching black people in the street.
So ask government voters what they think about this.
A Chavista perhaps.
“It means finding the very human narrative of a man navigating between idealism and pragmatism, faith and politics, non- violence, the pitfalls of acclaim as the perils of rejection” - Lesley Hazleton on the first Muslim, the prophet.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #88 posted 02/02/19 2:28pm

IanRG

hausofmoi7 said:

We just gave you context about the situation. You can ask a socialist party supporter who voted this government in. Who were not fighting the state forces. Those people fighting state force are lynching black people in the street. So ask government voters what they think about this. A Chavista perhaps.

.

Oh, I understand your context only too well.

.

I listen to all sides, not just one side, not just your spin. And in this I condemn the violence by all sides. In all the deaths and detentions in 2019 (note the date is not during the 2014 and 2017 riots), how many of these have been black lynchings by nazis? I know you wont answer this, so I will. The perpetrators are largely the state forces of the president. The victims are increasingly the poor.

.

SurGentes is a human rights collective that for the last four years has been working with popular organisations in San Agustin del Sur, Venezuela and elsewhere. This includes a group of women in the collective who do the direct work in the poor quarter, and they do it with a lot of passion and revolutionary spirit. Here is what SurGentes is saying about the at least 28 deaths just in three days last month (21-24 Jan):

.

3. With the available data, it is possible to identify some irregularities in the demonstrations that occurred between January 21 and 24, 2019 and their public control:

  • At least 38 percent of the protests were violent and 28.5 percent of them saw confrontations with security forces, with firearms and blunt objects used. One of the people killed is a Second Sergeant of the Bolivarian National Guard (GNB) and two members of this organisation were beaten by protesters in Chacao (east Caracas), constituting a lynching attempt, with their motorcycles being burned. There are several security officials wounded and several government offices in different parts of the country have been burned.

  • In 42.8 percent of the cases, it is alleged that the action of state security forces was responsible for the killings. The Bolivarian National Police (in particular its special forces command, FAES) is the body most denounced, followed by the Bolivarian National Guard (GNB). In the rest of the cases, information is lacking about the possible perpetrators or civilians who have been accused (business owners who defend their property and committed killings, civilian supporters of the government or pro-opposition protesters).

  • Almost all of these deaths occurred in poor areas.

  • The high number of protester deaths (both in peaceful and violent protests) indicates that security forces have departed from progressive and differential standards of the use of force.

  • We have seen direct testimony concerning police actions following the protests, where the FAES has illegally entered homes, threatened and abused people.

4. The background of repressive and systematic practices in poor sectors (extrajudicial executions, illegal raids, torture and ill-treatment, threats) in the last five years by the PNB and other security forces, as well as the high number of deaths occurring in just four days, shows that state security bodies are fixed in a pattern of class-based and racist actions, that has been consolidated since 2013. The poor areas are seen as occupied territories and populations which need containing, all in a context of a growing socio-economic and political crisis.

.

Western far left media outlets, such as the Australian Green Left Weekly have shortened this statement by SerGentes to only discuss the red highlighted sections because the rest is about the systemic violence by and for the president.

.

Why won't you condemn what the people in Venzuela are condeming: That is the violence by the far right opposed to Maduro, the far left supporting Maduro and Maduro's security forces? Why won't you stand up for the poor of all races, genders, orientations and religions if the violence is by your side?

[Edited 2/2/19 14:38pm]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #89 posted 02/03/19 10:29am

2freaky4church
1

avatar

Maduro is not a socialist. Norway has more state run corps.

All you others say Hell Yea!! woot!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 3 of 9 <123456789>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Politics & Religion > Venezuela - Sanctions and blockade continue as U.S now attempts a coup