Whenever there is a discussion about any aspect of socialism, there is always someone who brings up the HORRORS OF VENEZUELA!
This is just a distraction from what could be a productive conversation and a lazy way to dismiss any positive points one may make on the topic of socialism.
Professor Richard Wolff says it best in the following video.
3
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
2 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.About money, I understand little more than buying low and selling high.
Help me understand something America’s Founders did.
- Revolutionary War veterans were paid with paper they could exchange for land.
- Speculators offered to buy the paper.
- Many veterans sold the paper for less than the land’s market value.
- The new government bought the paper for the land’s market value.
Was that socialism for the well off and competitive free enterprise for the not well off? Or was it unregulated capitalism?
yvilletom
Level 8
July 16, 2020
0
Who would choose Maduro to be the person to represent socialism ?
Is it clear that the Venezuelans (legitimately) chose him ?
FearlessFly
Level 9
July 14, 2020
0
That's exactly the point. Maduro and Venezuela are very poor examples of what socialism is.
Yes they legitimately chose him. The opposition willing chose to boycott the election so of course Maduro's numbers were abnormally high. They weren't impeded from voting, they made a choice not to because they, and their American backers, were hoping to make it look illegitimate to increase the likelihood of their coup attempt succeeding.
@RoboGraham How/who decides whether any election was/not legitimate. How are we to know ?
@FearlessFly
If you don't believe that it's possible to know if an election was legitimate or not, why even ask the question in the first place?
I doubt that it was totally fair. Most election aren't. But when the opposition purposefully refuses to vote, how can they then get upset because they've lost?
@RoboGraham "how can they then get upset because they've lost?"
With the backing of the Venezuelan army, that's roughly analogous to a rape victim being upset for what happened.
A rape victim does not choose to be raped. They chose not to participate in an election which was open to them.
Are you saying the army prevented them from voting?
@RoboGraham It is not hard to imagine them thinking they had (and still have) no choice.
Chaves was enormously popular. Maduro too but less so. The opposition knows they can't win in a democratic election. So they do what oppositions have done all over Latin America, they turn to the USA for help in putting them in power at the expense of the populists.
This time, thankfully, it didn't work. Guaido's coup failed for lack of support. They couldn't take power with the help and influence of the US because so many Venezuelans are still loyal to the regime. So of course they wouldn't be able to win an open election. Their only hope was to make the election look flawed so they boycotted. They tried to do what the opposition did in Bolivia. Spread rumors that the election was illegitimate, rile up the right wing with US backing and force the elected leader out. They didn't have enough support for that. So Maduro is the president, like it or not.
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
Share this post
Categories
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.