Crisis in Venezuela

[Antonio the Sixth]

I'm also skeptical that recognizing Guaidó achieves anything to resolve the political crisis, but for goodness' sake, Jacobin, what the hell happened to you? You used to be such a smart guy. You're better than this.

Maduro is a dictator, plain and simple, and dictators have no right to sovereignty. If there actually is a way to remove him peacefully and lead Venezuela through a peaceful democratization (which I don't know if there is, but is worth at least considering) it would be immoral not to take it.

[PSOL]

I'm also skeptical that recognizing Guaidó achieves anything to resolve the political crisis, but for goodness' sake, Jacobin, what the hell happened to you? You used to be such a smart guy. You're better than this.

Maduro is a dictator, plain and simple, and dictators have no right to sovereignty. If there actually is a way to remove him peacefully and lead Venezuela through a peaceful democratization (which I don't know if there is, but is worth at least considering) it would be immoral not to take it.

The skepticism is understandable considering the heavy attacks on radicals and reformers by a US-led coalition. I don’t support Maduro, but I can understand those who don’t want the board to shift even more on the adversary’s favor.

[Big Abraham]

I'm not even sure what people posting this even mean - are they arguing that it is preferable to avoid hypocrisy by supporting all dictatorships, including Maduro's, than to support some but not others, or what?

Preferably supporting no dictatorships would be sufficient.

So why complain when it moves one step towards that?

Because this isn't as benign as merely "not supporting" Maduro, this is an active call for replacing Maduro's government in the midst of an internal crisis. If the United States or the United Kingdom (or any nation) continues to get involved in their affairs it will almost certainly lead to a civil war and in turn spark a massive refugee crisis and de-stabilisation of the region.

This isn't tu quoque either; the United States is allied with some of the most repulsive states in the world, and so rather than caring about Venezuelan "democracy", they are obviously singling out Venezuela due to their oil reserves, with the ultimate goal of international investors controlling Venezuelan natural resources. This is a description of the state of affairs. It's not even about hypocrisy, it's why and how they are targeting Venezuela to the exclusion of almost all others.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

There already is a massive refugee crisis.

[parochial boy]

I don't really buy the "we shouldn't meddl in other countries affairs" really. Our responsibilities to other human beings doesn't cease just because there is a border in the way.

And foreign interventions can be succesful - see Sierra Leone, Macedonia or Mali for starters.

[Big Abraham]

There already is a massive refugee crisis.

Yes. Let's not exacerbate the crisis

I don't really buy the "we shouldn't meddl in other countries affairs" really. Our responsibilities to other human beings doesn't cease just because there is a border in the way.

And foreign interventions can be succesful - see Sierra Leone, Macedonia or Mali for starters.

There is no "responsibility to other human beings" that the United States intends in the context of Venezuela. None. It's a matter of economic interest. At any rate, though I obviously prefer Guaidó to Maduro, the U.S. propping up Guaidó runs contrary to the right of the Venezuelan people to self-determination and I'm sceptical that "recognising" Guaidó as the legitimate leader will do much to aid the crisis anyway.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Maduro is the one denying "the right of the Venezuelan people to self-determination". The Venezuelans elected an opposition legislature so he took action to strip its powers and set up a sham alternate legislature instead, and then a sham election with all his major opposition disqualified.

There's no question that Guaidó would defeat Maduro in an actual free and fair election.

[Skye]

Hi. Understand that every day that Maduro controls Venezuela is another day of suffering for the average Venezuelan. Please, at least consider that before posting pictures in support of Maduro while in the comfort of your room. I won't argue anymore.

Thanks to those who have expressed support to us in these dark times.

Are you actually suggesting that people are not suffering in Venezuela?

No, I’m not. What I’m suggesting is that a Venezuelan who speaks English online likely isn’t a very good representative of the average Venezuelan and how they view things. That’s all.

I'm not poor, if that's what you mean by that. But I'm also a guy who, until November 2018, lived 25 years in Venezuela. I know what I'm talking about. Don't try to diminish my opinion because you believe I'm not an average Venezuelan.

[Big Abraham]

Maduro is the one denying "the right of the Venezuelan people to self-determination". The Venezuelans elected an opposition legislature so he took action to strip its powers and set up a sham alternate legislature instead, and then a sham election with all his major opposition disqualified.

There's no question that Guaidó would defeat Maduro in an actual free and fair election.

Maduro ≠ the Venezuelan people

[Wikipedia delenda est]

Did the US recognize Guaidó out of principle in support of democracy? Absolutely not. America's support for much worse dictatorships proves that it's simply due to our strategic interests in the region. However, would Guaidó be a better leader for Venezuela than Maduro? Undoubtedly so. It's possible to do the right thing for the wrong reasons, which is exactly what America did here.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

https://twitter.com/dylanmatt/status/1088921862846013443?s=19

[JA]

JA, I have a relative that lived through persecution for being Baha’i after the show of a Revolution in 1979, only to have to live through this. From her own words, she blames Chavez and Maduro for the deteriorating situation. This isn’t the case of someone entitled or wealthy suffering, she sees the same air of despair in Venezuela that was present in Iran before she left.

On the supposed trustworthiness of English speaking Venezuelans, well I always say be thinking about who you’re talking to online, but in this case they are correct on the deteriorating situation from their vantage point. The truth is that everyone is suffering. Mind you, this is not to endorse a hard or soft intervention in Venezuela, I’ve already spoken on the matter as needing a pragmatic and cautious hand.

I really don’t know how many times I must elaborate on my views of this issue. I never said Venezuela is doing well, that people aren’t suffering, that Maduro isn’t corrupt, etc... What I said was that Venezuelans’ suffering isn’t solely attributable to Maduro’s regime; it’s also, significantly, due to food producing/distribution corporations intentionally sabotaging access to these essential goods, sanctions/embargoes designed to starve the Venezuelan people as a way of applying pressure to force them to overthrow Maduro, and that the claims to Maduro’s legitimacy are more complex than typical “unelected dictator.” None of that excuses his failures or suggests that he shouldn’t resign, the country hold new elections, etc...

But, what is far more important, is that nobody besides Venezuelans have the right to decide who is the legitimate leader of Venezuela and if/when Maduro needs to be removed from power. That is not for America, Brazil, Canada, UK, etc... to decide in any way, shape, or form. And the only reason they place priority on Venezuela has nothing to do with democracy, civil rights, or humanitarianism; America is allied with autoricious regimes like Saudi Arabia, provides arms to 73% of the world’s dictatorships, and is aiding Saudi Arabia in creating a manmade famine that threatens the lives of over 10,000,000 Yemenis while also ignoring other domestic and international crises relating to access to food. It’s due to financial interests. That’s what this is all about. Venezuela is unfriendly to America, international finance, and global Western corporations; they’re restricting access to the Venezuelan market and, most importantly, the oil profits. Venezuela has the world’s largest proven oil reserves; that’s what all this is about. Claims of concern for the Venezuelan people are a sick joke.

[Green Line]

It's time to let freedom rain down on Venezuela.  Marco will make it happen.

[jaichind]

As much as I am a supporter of Trump overall and obviously I have negative views toward Maduro I think Trump made a mistake here.  We should let them fight it out on their own.  Now, if Guaidó  wins out then Trump/USA will "own" the result of Guaidó plus add to the resentment at the local level toward a perceived Yankee Imperialism.   Just like Xi and Putin made a mistake in putting all their eggs with Maduro which now looks like are going down the drain, the USA/Trump should not make the same mistake.  Just stay out of the way and see what emerges.

[Omega21]

Germany, France and Spain have requested Maduro to hold elections within 7 days. Otherwise, they said they would be ready to recognize Juan.

https://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/venezuela-machtkampf-101.html

[DavidB.]

The Netherlands has unsurprisingly followed Germany on this. Wonder what this means for the Dutch Antilles. I suppose some sort of cooperation with the Venezuelan authorities is necessary and takes place, for instance with regard to drug trafficking. And if this cooperation takes place, I wonder whether this is still possible if we recognize Guaidó.

[Antonio the Sixth]

There is no such thing as a "right to self-determination" for dictatorships. A non-democratic regime has the exact same amount of legitimacy in ruling over people as a foreign country (ie, zero).

So any foreign intervention that actually succeeds in reestablishing democracy (which of course is not the case for most of them) is by nature preferable to non-intervention.

[rc18]

There is no such thing as a "right to self-determination" for dictatorships. A non-democratic regime has the exact same amount of legitimacy in ruling over people as a foreign country (ie, zero).

So any foreign intervention that actually succeeds in reestablishing democracy (which of course is not the case for most of them) is by nature preferable to non-intervention.

Christ that's a lot of countries you want to invade.

[dead0man]

There is no such thing as a "right to self-determination" for dictatorships. A non-democratic regime has the exact same amount of legitimacy in ruling over people as a foreign country (ie, zero).

So any foreign intervention that actually succeeds in reestablishing democracy (which of course is not the case for most of them) is by nature preferable to non-intervention.

Christ that's a lot of countries you want to invade.

there are a lot of countries that need to be invaded.  It's unfortunate that the West has been very very bad at this, even when we've had good intentions.  Perhaps it's impossible to be "good" at it in many cases.  How the hell do you "fix" Iraq, for one, if dividing it up is off the table?

[Antonio the Sixth]

There is no such thing as a "right to self-determination" for dictatorships. A non-democratic regime has the exact same amount of legitimacy in ruling over people as a foreign country (ie, zero).

So any foreign intervention that actually succeeds in reestablishing democracy (which of course is not the case for most of them) is by nature preferable to non-intervention.

Christ that's a lot of countries you want to invade.

What a compelling refutation.

[OSR stands with Israel]

all The Justice Democrats aka the TYT caucus are horrendous in every way possible

[rc18]

There is no such thing as a "right to self-determination" for dictatorships. A non-democratic regime has the exact same amount of legitimacy in ruling over people as a foreign country (ie, zero).

So any foreign intervention that actually succeeds in reestablishing democracy (which of course is not the case for most of them) is by nature preferable to non-intervention.

Christ that's a lot of countries you want to invade.

What a compelling refutation.

It wasn’t an attempt at one, just an observation. Literally the first words that came to mind.

But personally I think I’ll pass on this democratic manifest destiny. Perhaps western democracies should consider how they’ve become a joke before exporting it any further.

[2952-0-0]

There is no such thing as a "right to self-determination" for dictatorships. A non-democratic regime has the exact same amount of legitimacy in ruling over people as a foreign country (ie, zero).

So I guess Adolf was correct in invading Poland (ruled by a slightly less nasty ethno-nationalist dictatorship) in 1939? What about Mussolini's invasion of Greece? Japan's invasion of China?

[Kingpoleon]

If we fail to intervene, I fear the loss of the Venezuelan people. If Guaidó falls, and millions of his supporters are gunned down or imprisoned, the world will turn to America and question us. Right here, right now, democracy is waging a war against the totalitarian, barbaric evil of Nicolas Maduro.

Can you not see? A barbaric, murderous lion strikes at a defenseless lamb, and we proclaim our neutrality. That is not just or right, by any stretch of the imagination. It is as the Archbishop Desmond Tutu once said: “If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.”

[PSOL]

If we fail to intervene, I fear the loss of the Venezuelan people. If Guaidó falls, and millions of his supporters are gunned down or imprisoned, the world will turn to America and question us. Right here, right now, democracy is waging a war against the totalitarian, barbaric evil of Nicolas Maduro.

Can you not see? A barbaric, murderous lion strikes at a defenseless lamb, and we proclaim our neutrality. That is not just or right, by any stretch of the imagination. It is as the Archbishop Desmond Tutu once said: “If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.”

You’re suggesting that we go in blind like in Iraq, Libya, and Syria for a “humanitarian intervention”? We literally no nothing of the actual situation the opposition is truly in, not to mention the effects of intervening.

Look at the failures of when the powers try to be statemakers, it always ends in failure if not organically based in the people and ages with ripeness.