Venezuela: Resistance or disintegration?

[Windmill knight]

That's a very interesting article, mabar, thank you. It has many graphs (I like graphs!), which show that shortages in Venezuela cannot be explained by production or imports (which have increased), nor consumption (which has not increased as much as the previous two).

However, imports have increased in the amount of dollars allocated to the private sector for that purpose, but not in amount of goods (as measured in kgs) as purchased by those companies. In other words, the private sector has deposited those excess dollars abroad, while not using them for imports as they were supposed to. The fact that shortages appear to increase during political sensitive periods (like elections), indicates that the private sector is doing this for political reasons. From the article:

The private sector practice of siphoning off foreign exchange delivered by the government into deposits abroad represents a failure to comply with the purpose of such allocations (i.e., the import of goods and services). This is precisely why the government has repeatedly denounced the hoarding of goods by private suppliers of food, medicines and personal care products, as well as parts and car spare parts.

Hoarding is a mechanism that prevents goods from reaching the shelves of domestic markets, thus adding a factor to the explanation of shortages. It is important to draw attention to the characteristics of the goods that have been the subject of hoarding. These are, first of all, prime necessities, food, medicines, personal and household hygiene goods, car spare parts, spare parts for machinery and seeds. That is to say, they are goods very much needed in the households or in the manufacturing of goods or the performance of services.

Secondly, as far as food is concerned, of the twenty food products mostly consumed by Venezuelans, shortages have been observed primarily for nonperishable items, especially those produced and distributed by monopolistic or oligopolistic corporations (for example corn and wheat flour, sugar, coffee, oil); but not for goods produced and distributed by many farmers (for example, fruits and vegetables). This led us to hypothesize that the cost of agreements between production and distribution companies to control the supply is less when it comes to one or a few companies than when there are many producers and distributors.

Thirdly, shortages have been observed primarily within retail sector. The shortage of these goods for industrial or commercial use has been much less significant. For example, bakery stores have had access to wheat flour but it remains being absent in supermarkets.

Further, the Government has denounced smuggling, mainly to Colombia, to the extent that the border check-points with that country have been closed as a measure to stop the massive exit of Venezuelan products to this neighbouring country. Shortages are also connected with such smuggling.

Three factors—1) the relative decrease of imports with respect to the foreign exchange delivered to the private sector; 2) hoarding by oligopolistic companies that dominate the markets of some goods; and 3) smuggling—in that order, are determinants explaining the level of shortages in Venezuela.

Although they seem to be factors based on economic interests seeking to maximize profits, and even worse in the case of the Venezuelan economy, to seize oil revenues, they imply a predominantly political interest. This conclusion is supported by the observation that the episodes of shortages coincided with moments of political tension, greater polarization and in the context of electoral events.

Such political interest, as repeatedly denounced by the government, seeks to generate economic, social and political destabilization, and to promote the idea that the model established in 1999 has failed; at the same time the tactic allows the destabilizing sectors to obtain economic profit—unlike in 2002, when the call for a general strike with similar political objectives involved large economic losses, not only for the nation, but also for these sectors.

As a conclusion of this first section we must point out: 1) shortage in Venezuela is not explained by declines in production or in imports resulting from a failed model that has not allocated foreign exchange to the private sector; 2) on the contrary, the amount of foreign exchange delivered to the private sector has increased, along with production; 3) the real reasons for shortages in Venezuela are (in order severity): a) the decrease in imports despite having delivered the necessary foreign exchange to the private sector; b) the selective hoarding of goods to meet prime necessities; and c) smuggling.

The main recommendation that emerges from this analysis is the urgent need to establish greater controls on the delivery of foreign exchange to the private sector and to revise the criteria for the allocation of dollars, especially when we are faced with a drop in oil prices and, therefore, a decline in national income.

The info contradicts what this other article posted above states, which blames the problem on government price controls:

When price ceilings are implemented, this price coordination mechanism is turned on its head. An artificially low price leads consumers to demand more of a good than producers are willing to supply. When demand outstrips supply, shortages emerge.

These arbitrary ceilings disrupt the productive structure of businesses and do not allow them to bring goods to the market in a cost-effective manner. Unsurprisingly, many businesses are forced to incur losses, especially if the legislated price falls below the natural market price that is needed to meet operational costs. Less fortunate enterprises will find themselves compelled to shut down their operations as they can no longer afford to supply goods to the market given the artificially low prices.

Businesses that have the means to adjust to these regulations end up supplying less products or products of inferior quality. Consumers must then cope with a market that provides fewer and inferior goods, thus leading to lower consumer welfare.

If the figures of the first article are correct, then it seems to me that price controls were implemented by the government after the fact - when there were already shortages - in an attempt to handle the situation. The graphs show that consumption has not increased at a higher rate than production and imports.

I think there are only two options: either the data for the graphs was cooked by the Venezuelan government (which I doubt), or the private sector has really been waging war against its own government, as they claim. This is not to say that the situation wasn't perhaps made worse by overspending on welfare, but the overall impression I get is that the main cause of the crisis is indeed an economic war.

 

[msante]

I think that's probably the most objective way of looking at the situation. I've listened to and read some criticism of Chavismo from previous supporters on the Left, as well as from libertarians who are totally anti-neocon but equally anti-socialist.

Indeed the information (in Spanish) that I have referenced in previous posts is on the same line...

The latter tend to argue that Chavez and Maduro made a mess of things with policies like the following:

-price controls leading to shortages on the production side, which then requires subsidization that just produces more debt and hyperinflation (Maduro apparently has admitted these policies weren't successful, but hasn't proposed anything better) - see Price Controls Are Disastrous for Venezuela, and Everywhere Else | José Niño for example

Many have referred to this problem. State control of prices is not a problem in itself, but its poor implementation. I personally have seen in my country how this practice can sometimes give good results and sometimes end up in a disaster. IMO the factor that determines one or the other (leaving aside aptitude or ineptitude) is related to how the underlying dynamics are understood. Left wing intellectuals tend to put companies (all companies) in the place of the greedy demon that wants to enrich itself regardless of human cost. Although this is true in some cases (especially with large corporations), a majority business sector is respectable SMEs that employ millions of people. Seeing all companies as "the enemy" and irresponsibly applying policies that make companies unsustainable (such as price control or very harsh tax policies), leads in the long run to the disappearance of SMEs, which leads to unemployment and market reduction (supply is reduced without decreasing demand -> increase prices / inflation), and ultimately corporations are the least affected.

-confiscating and redistributing private property and businesses, including foreign investors in the oil industry - refusing to fully compensate them alienated them from doing business with Venezuela and contributed to the brain drain (articles on the expropriations and subsequent lawsuits: Expropriations) - like what South Africa is proposing
-firing thousands of industry employees, replacing them with loyalists, which lowered production capacity (plus oils prices fell)

This is another common practice among strongly ideologized left governments, and is related to the above: the idea that there is a war between the proletariat and the capitalists (represented by the companies). There are dozens of reports that tell how key positions in the big oil companies were occupied by "friends" of the government who were not qualified to hold such positions. This and other worse abuses have been documented not by CNN or Deep State propagandists, but by researchers who have tried to get an honest and objective look at the whole thing. Such is the case with some of the documents I cited in previous posts.

They also point out that the effect of sanctions at the beginning wasn't large. The original sanctions were against select members of the government, not food and medicine. Trump's sanctions are another matter and have had (and will have, with the new ones) a much greater negative effect. Basically, the U.S. are like vultures trying to scoop up a dying economy, and doing what they can to speed up the process to provoke a crisis from which they can benefit.

This is also one of the points made in other posts. No one doubts that what the U.S. wants is a change of regime and that they are using all their "bad arts" to achieve it, even (as it has always been) at a tragic human cost. But there is no concrete evidence suggesting that between 2003 and 2006/2007 the Chavez government had suffered too much from U.S. attacks, in fact there does seem to be fairly clear indications that the government's policies laid the groundwork for Venezuela become an easy target later.

I can understand that strategically maybe we should focus most of our energy on unmasking as much as possible the pathological actions of USA et al; what makes me feel uncomfortable is that IMHO I have noticed a slight tendency to say that "the vast majority of Venezuela's problems are due to the USA".

Let's suppose this hypothesis: imagine being an ordinary Venezuelan, having lived the first moments of the Revolution with enthusiasm, and then having begun to notice little by little how this same Revolution had reprehensible practices (demagogy, favoritism, arbitrariness, abuses, misuse of institutions, manipulation of social groups - this doc http://nuso.org/media/articles/downloads/COY_Velasco_271.pdf relates how for example the "social militants" of the "23 de Enero" neighborhood were often used by Chavismo as informal paramilitary forces, etc). After a while, this person also began to notice the effect of all these practices on his own life and on the lives of his neighbors and friends. Over time came the demands of the people to the government to address the growing problems, and then, in 2015, the "punishment" of people to the government at the polls for not listening. As all this developed over several years, this person only heard from their leader that the "gringos" are to blame for everything, that they are "el diablo", and that everything is going to be fine because I (Maduro) traveled to the future and could see it (Maduro: 'I've Been to the Future,' Venezuela Full of 'Peace and Happiness' - I'm sorry. I couldn't find a better source in English). I imagine that it is humiliating to feel that your government takes you for an idiot... Now let's imagine that this person is a SOTT reader, and he likes SOTT because always has a unique and objective approach, and connects the dots like no one else does. What would happen to this person if he read SOTT and practically all he sees is that SOTT says basically the same thing his government says?

I think this person would like to know and understand all the U.S. criminal acts against his country, but I also think he would like to understand what went wrong with the Revolution, what were the mistakes that made Venezuela a weak adversary, made it vulnerable, and ultimately allowed the country to be on the verge of collapse.

 

[Galaxia2002]

Well that’s precisely what I’m saying. In the interest of truth Venezuela’s role in its own demise can’t be denied, but having said that, the US is at major fault here and carries more of the blame which does not deny the destructive nature of the ideologically possessed Venezuelan government.

Thinking in nonlinear terms, what the US has done while attempting to topple the government in Caracas is to perpetuate its existence. Does that make sense? If Venezuela had been left alone, the faults of the government (which again I’m not denying) may have already been enough for its own people to realize that this was not a good direction for the country to move towards.

Having the constant pressure from the outside provided the ponerized nation an external enemy (which is essential as we know) that justified everything domestically. Does that make sense?

Think of the analogy, Venezuela decided tofu was all it needed to live... which is a disastrous choice! But the US came and poisoned that tofu. Should we ignore that eating nothing but tofu is self destructive? Absolutely not. But that doesn’t mean we ignore the poison either.

And in the great scheme of things, someone choosing freely to eat nothing but tofu is, self destructive and silly yes, but their own choice and it ought to be respected, no matter how nuts it may seem to us.

But someone coming and poisoning that tofu is criminal.

Does that make sense?

This is a good explanation about what I have seen and experienced here. I see that the problem is that to try to defend Venezuela (in good stead) people try to appeal to:

• an institutionality that doesn't exist, which is respected by nobody, even Maduro and his companions (here I don't talk about the typical bureaucracy, I will put examples below)
• the original Bolivarian project that if you ask me I still don't know what consists of
• the good times that lasted maybe 5-6 years, by the high prices of oil, not by good administration nor a good plan of country development.
• Ethical character and respect more typical of more balanced countries don't apply also.

All that remains to defend is the free self-determination and independence of Venezuela, to settle this problem between us.

I will extend a bit here regard the institutionality and power separation, Chavez and Maduro put parallel government/institutions when its candidate not won or the winner wasn't to his liking. That's a mockery, a complete lack of respect to the electors and not democratic. This started as early as 2009 when Antonio Ledezma was elected for the Caracas Metropolitan Mayor's Office. Using legal and not so legal actions and the violence of the armed paramilitary government activists forcibly occupied the mayor's office and removed almost all his competences and budget.

President Chávez has arbitrarily appointed Jacqueline Farías as the new Head of Government of the Capital District, bypassing an authority that had recently been elected by popular vote. Farías was Chávez's Environment Minister, president of Hidrocapital and had been president of Movilnet; but she is also vice-president of the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) in the Western Region.

The truth is that on November 23, 2009, Antonio Ledezma was elected Mayor of the Metropolitan District with 52.42% of the votes. But from the first moment, the government has insisted on sabotaging any possibility of management and did not allow Ledezma to occupy the headquarters where the Mayor's Office has always operated, while in the National Assembly was debated and approved the new Law of the Capital District.

Antonio Ledezma, meanwhile, was ratifying a request for a consultative referendum before the CNE on the new designated metropolitan authority.

Jacqueline Farías was sworn in and immediately took over the Metropolitan Mayor's Office, from which the Mayor's Office had in fact been stripped, when there was still no legal floor for such an action. According to Farias, "there are powers that rest in the Metropolitan Mayor's Office, which must now be transferred to the Capital District.

Then it continues creating corporations with parallel budgets to compete with governors positions that the opposition won with votes, and more recently maduro arbitrarily designate "protectors" to some politicians to undermine the opposition governors who won in 2018. This is as though Trump designated to Nicole Malliotakis, the loser of the votation for the NY mayor's office as "protector" of NY and give her a parallel budget and undermine Di Blasio's functions.

Chavismo created special entities that function as "parallel governments" in Venezuelan states controlled by the opposition and that, one month after the mayoral elections, have millions in budgets to carry out public works for electoral purposes, say experts.

Provided for in the law, these corporations were created between March and April in the states of Miranda (north) -governed by oppositionist Henrique Capriles-, Lara (northwest) and Amazonas (south), and their presidents are the defeated Chavista candidates in last December's regional elections.

"The government seeks to weaken the image, the authority and the financial resources available to carry out the administration of the elected authority and founds a parallel administration raising the rivalry between the two administrations because they become parallel governments," explained political scientist John Magdaleno.

Then "Venezuela: Chavismo installs Communal Parliament after losing the majority in National Assembly" (2015)
and next, they installed the Constituent Assembly, whose purpose in to redact a new constitution, which is a lie because that people haven't done anything of that.
Besides, chavismo create parallel trade unions in all instances and only dialogued with these syndicates created to its measure, collaborating in undermining wages and flattening wage scales of the workers.

 

[luc]

Now let's imagine that this person is a SOTT reader, and he likes SOTT because always has a unique and objective approach, and connects the dots like no one else does. What would happen to this person if he read SOTT and practically all he sees is that SOTT says basically the same thing his government says?

Maybe it would be good then to have such detailed analysis as you guys are giving here on Sott? The last posts here were a fascinating read for me who doesn't know a lot about the situation, so thanks for that. The ability to hold two seemingly conflicting narratives in mind without blinking is so important these days.

 

[Alejo]

Right,

Which is why I liked the video above because it takes that a step further. Once you’ve established as a reality that the government made itself weaker thus making it easier for external forces to hurt the entire nation, and accept it, you’re presented with a “then what?” Situation.

Because if tomorrow one of two things could stop. One being Maduro and the other being US interference, Venezuela in general would be better off if the latter went. Even if it means a painful collapse under Maduro. OSIT

That’s where I’m stuck currently, the culpability of both the US and Chavez/Maduro is beyond question. What now?

What are the options? What are the proposals that are being put forth by anyone to get the country off to a recovery?

On the one hand you’ve got Maduro saying “all we need is to resist, nothing changes” which isn’t good. And on the other you’ve got sketchy individuals saying “all we need is to get rid of Maduro” and how’s that not a Bolivarian revolution only towards the other extreme. And both of those are appalling proposals.

 

[Windmill knight]

That’s where I’m stuck currently, the culpability of both the US and Chavez/Maduro is beyond question. What now?

What are the options? What are the proposals that are being put forth by anyone to get the country off to a recovery?

Someone on Youtube asked us that same question, and I replied that I thought that the only realistic but unlikely solution would be to establish the dialogue as countries like Russia, Mexico and Uruguay are proposing. IF they wanted it, they could all sit down in an Astana-type conference, with international mediators, reach compromises and agree to play by democratic rules and let the chips fall where they may. Chavismo wouldn't have to disappear - it could transform itself into another political force as it would supposedly be in 'normal' countries. And the opposition could stop being such clowns and US puppets, so that people could take them seriously.

But that's very unlikely to happen, because Mike Pence explicitly stated the US sentiment: No time for dialogue, time for action! And by that, he means a coup, a color revolution or an invasion. Also, the opposition are in the pocket of the US, starting with that guy Guaidó, so they are also not going to have any of that. And although Maduro has stated that he does want a dialogue, I don't see him making enough concessions to keep everyone happy, cause he won't go down in history as the 'traitor to the revolution'. Even worse - if some sort of agreement is reached, the US and some of the old Venezuelan oligarchy are likely to be unhappy with it, because what they want is the whole pie, so they'll keep causing trouble. Although perhaps less than before.

The Venezuelans could also get some economic consulting from Russia - in fact, I read somewhere that Russia was already sending them some proposals to fix the economy.

In any case, although Zhakarova said today that she believes the US already made up its mind about invading Venezuela, I find it hard to believe that Trump would commit to that. I think the US will still try to go for one of the 'cheaper' regime-change options.

 

[msante]

That’s where I’m stuck currently, the culpability of both the US and Chavez/Maduro is beyond question. What now?

What are the options? What are the proposals that are being put forth by anyone to get the country off to a recovery?

That's a good question, but I think that it's not one we can answer, or in any case one we should focus on. I am more concerned to be clear about what we should do. I understand that in the state of binary polarization in which the world finds itself, if we put all our emphasis on exposing the United States, we are pro-Chavism and we are avoiding talking about other ways in which a society is ponerized, and if we criticize Chavism, we feel conflicted because we are collaborating to a certain extent with the Deep State and its agenda for regime change in Venezuela.

This is the point where I think that, with the necessary prudence/caution/wisdom, we should stick to the truth as much as we can and shed light on both aspects of reality giving each one its rightful place in importance and magnitude.

 

[Galaxia2002]

If the figures of the first article are correct, then it seems to me that price controls were implemented by the government after the fact - when there were already shortages - in an attempt to handle the situation. The graphs show that consumption has not increased at a higher rate than production and imports.

I think there are only two options: either the data for the graphs was cooked by the Venezuelan government (which I doubt), or the private sector has really been waging war against its own government, as they claim. This is not to say that the situation wasn't perhaps made worse by overspending on welfare, but the overall impression I get is that the main cause of the crisis is indeed an economic war.

I did remember that some items disappeared just before important elections as the article said. It surely there was manipulation as stated, but I remember that the shortage of an item started after the price control, not the other way. Or so I perceived at that time. This happened with meat, corn flour, toilet paper etc, etc, and lasted months, but there is a factor that is not well considered in that article that is natural in this country for the next reason. Those government controls fixed the price for an item for months, and the inflation here has been always high (30 to 300 % a year) before the hyperinflation started.

In fact, there was a continual complaint of the producers and distributors to adjust that fixed prices, but the government living in denial didn't correct that and the Central Bank finally stopped to publish the inflation rate. Then you come to a situation where the government wanted to the producers to sell for a loss, because the cost of production increases continuously by inflation and the selling price should be always the same, then, they logically hide the goods until a more favorable time or they sold them to Colombia.

Now we are in a situation where there is almost no controls and you find items, with little variety of brands and with prices arising 5 % day after day. I think that people don't get what a 1000000 % annual inflation means, it destroys everything and made poor everybody. So I think the economic war comes more for the inflation side in these days together with poor economic management.

 

[msante]

Someone on Youtube asked us that same question, and I replied that I thought that the only realistic but unlikely solution would be to establish the dialogue as countries like Russia, Mexico and Uruguay are proposing. IF they wanted it, they could all sit down in an Astana-type conference, with international mediators, reach compromises and agree to play by democratic rules and let the chips fall where they may. Chavismo wouldn't have to disappear - it could transform itself into another political force as it would supposedly be in 'normal' countries. And the opposition could stop being such clowns and US puppets, so that people could take them seriously.

But that's very unlikely to happen, because Mike Pence explicitly stated the US sentiment: No time for dialogue, time for action! And by that, he means a coup, a color revolution or an invasion. Also, the opposition are in the pocket of the US, starting with that guy Guaidó, so they are also not going to have any of that. And although Maduro has stated that he does want a dialogue, I don't see him making enough concessions to keep everyone happy, cause he won't go down in history as the 'traitor to the revolution'. Even worse - if some sort of agreement is reached, the US and some of the old Venezuelan oligarchy are likely to be unhappy with it, because what they want is the whole pie, so they'll keep causing trouble. Although perhaps less than before.

I agree with this analysis in general, there does not seem to be a remotely healthy solution in sight

The Venezuelans could also get some economic consulting from Russia - in fact, I read somewhere that Russia was already sending them some proposals to fix the economy.

I remember that in October Russia sent its finance minister and a team to help Maduro draw up an economic plan to rescue him from the crisis. The meetings were private and what was said then was the usual for those cases ("both countries are looking for a solution to the crisis and blah blah blah"). What spread as a rumor was that the Russian proposals did not please the Venezuelan government because they implied great sacrifices and concessions. It was also commented then that Maduro not only did not approve the suggested plan but tried to ask for more loans and more patience when paying the debts that Venezuela has with Russia (and China as well).

 

[Joe]

I think there are only two options: either the data for the graphs was cooked by the Venezuelan government (which I doubt), or the private sector has really been waging war against its own government, as they claim. This is not to say that the situation wasn't perhaps made worse by overspending on welfare, but the overall impression I get is that the main cause of the crisis is indeed an economic war.

And it's an economic war waged primarily by private Venezuelan companies (including multi-national or foreign companies operating in Venezuela). Now the question is: are they right to do this? Their motivation is likely to push back against what they see as overbearing government regulation and oversight that likely reduces their potential profits, but the Venezuelan govt. in line with their socialist model, sees nothing wrong with that.

In the end, I tend to conclude that the socialist economic model, while perhaps a nice idea, is simply too idealistic and therefore unsuited to a world such as ours, where people are fundamentally self-serving. In human society, you will always have to brutally enforce a largely 'egalitarian' system. As a general rule, when you have to brutally force people to accept something, you know you're on the wrong track. It seems that the Western 'elite' know this and know that they have to manipulate people via their base emotions of fear - to get them to accept what would otherwise be unacceptable to them - and greed - to gain control over them by corrupting them (ponerization). That said, I still admire the Venezuelan leaders and people that attempted to implement Bolivarian socialism, even if I think they are hopelessly naive.

 

[angelburst29]

And it's an economic war waged primarily by private Venezuelan companies (including multi-national or foreign companies operating in Venezuela). Now the question is: are they right to do this? Their motivation is likely to push back against what they see as overbearing government regulation and oversight that likely reduces their potential profits, but the Venezuelan govt. in line with their socialist model, sees nothing wrong with that.

The Saker just posted an interview with Michael Hudson, a top economist. Some of the same questions that came up in this Forum were asked in the interview. Through out the dialog, it becomes evident that the US did a lot of meddling and manipulating to serve it own purposes. For example, Venezuela has it own oil fields but sends out it's crude oil to be refined in the US and Trinidad, thus the Country is using middlemen to process it's product, losing profits in the exchange. Same with Venezuela's mined Gold, it sends it to Turkey to be processed. To be self sufficient, Venezuela should have it's own refineries. For what is lost or skimmed off between shipment, processing and return, refineries cold have been built and maintained within it's own economic base, while also providing more jobs and still turning a profit. As it stands now, Venezuela has 20 oil tankers anchored off the US Gulf Coast to be processed but due to recent US Sanctions, they're sitting dead in the water. The US is trying to further manipulate the situation, to take possession of that oil and use the profits towards over throwing Maduro.

Another mis-step, Venezuela possess an agricultural infrastructure to produce it's own domestic food subsidies but reduced it's financial support in that sector, electing to import food and other necessities that it could have produced at home.

February 7, 2019 - Saker Interview with Michael Hudson on Venezuela
Saker interview with Michael Hudson on Venezuela


U.S. sanctions strand Venezuelan oil cargoes on 21 tankers
More than 20 tankers loaded with 9.6 million barrels of Venezuelan oil have anchored off the U.S. Gulf Coast in recent days. Some buyers had purchased the cargoes ahead of U.S. sanctions imposed last week, using the vessels as floating storage. Others weighed how to pay under new rules, according to traders, shippers and data from Refinitiv Eikon.

Venezuela opposition will name new Citgo board this week: WSJ
Venezuela's self-declared interim president, Juan Guaido, will name a new board for Citgo Petroleum Corp this week, Republican U.S. Senator Marco Rubio told the Wall Street Journal on Wednesday.

Total says accounts blocked, evacuating staff from Venezuela
French oil group Total has evacuated its remaining staff from Venezuela and its bank accounts there have been blocked as a result of U.S. sanctions, the company's chief executive said on Thursday.

U.S. military ready to protect diplomats in Venezuela: admiral
The U.S. military is prepared to protect U.S. personnel and diplomatic facilities in Venezuela if needed, the U.S. admiral in charge of American forces in South America said on Thursday.

U.S. might lift sanctions on Venezuelan military who back Guaido: Bolton
The United States would consider lifting sanctions on senior Venezuelan military officers if they recognize the government of self-declared interim president Juan Guaido, White House national security adviser John Bolton said on Wednesday.

In the end, I tend to conclude that the socialist economic model, while perhaps a nice idea, is simply too idealistic and therefore unsuited to a world such as ours, where people are fundamentally self-serving. In human society, you will always have to brutally enforce a largely 'egalitarian' system. As a general rule, when you have to brutally force people to accept something, you know you're on the wrong track. It seems that the Western 'elite' know this and know that they have to manipulate people via their base emotions of fear - to get them to accept what would otherwise be unacceptable to them - and greed - to gain control over them by corrupting them (ponerization). That said, I still admire the Venezuelan leaders and people that attempted to implement Bolivarian socialism, even if I think they are hopelessly naive.

The Philippine's are trying to establish "a Parliamentary System" instead of a Presidential system.

2019-02-01 - A Confident Philippines Will go For Parliamentary Governance – a Fearful Nation Will Cling to The Old And Discredited
A Confident Philippines Will go For Parliamentary Governance - a Fearful Nation Will Cling to The Old And Discredited - Eurasia Future

Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte’s proposed federal reforms and the proposals of his PDP-Laban party for the establishment of a parliamentary system to replace the existing convoluted presidential/congressional system represent a clean break from a past whose success record is appalling by the standards of virtually all of The Philippines’ ASEAN partners.

Someone on Youtube asked us that same question, and I replied that I thought that the only realistic but unlikely solution would be to establish the dialogue as countries like Russia, Mexico and Uruguay are proposing. IF they wanted it, they could all sit down in an Astana-type conference, with international mediators, reach compromises and agree to play by democratic rules and let the chips fall where they may. Chavismo wouldn't have to disappear - it could transform itself into another political force as it would supposedly be in 'normal' countries. And the opposition could stop being such clowns and US puppets, so that people could take them seriously.

2019-01-30 - Russia Might Be Planning An Astana-Like Conference For Venezuela
Russia Might Be Planning An Astana-Like Conference For Venezuela - Eurasia Future

Russia just dropped a huge hint suggesting that it might be trying to assemble an Astana-like conference for resolving the Venezuelan Crisis in the same spirit as what it’s been trying to do with Syria over the past two years, which could present the most peaceful solution available even if this initiative ultimately results in “painful compromises” by the government if it succeeds.

Another Astana?
Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov revealed earlier today that his country is in talks with other states and international organizations over the role that every concerned party could play in “mediating” the Venezuelan Crisis. He said that “There is the EU’s initiative to set up a contact group. The Caribbean Community (CARICOM) has also put forward some initiatives, there is also some ideas that Uruguay and Mexico have come up with…We truly wish to help create conditions for dialogue between the government and the opposition. We are discussing it with our Venezuelan partners, China, Latin American and European countries. We are also ready to participate in international efforts on platforms that would be acceptable for the Venezuelan parties.” Although it can’t be known for certain at this point, all indications suggest that Russia might be ready to “pull a Syria” by assembling an Astana-like conference for resolving the Venezuelan Crisis.

 

[herondancer]

In the end, I tend to conclude that the socialist economic model, while perhaps a nice idea, is simply too idealistic and therefore unsuited to a world such as ours, where people are fundamentally self-serving. In human society, you will always have to brutally enforce a largely 'egalitarian' system. As a general rule, when you have to brutally force people to accept something, you know you're on the wrong track.

Amen, but that goes to the heart of the whole Marxist shtick. There is this perverse unwillingness to acknowledge that human beings can be greedy, uncaring, destructive creatures. Maduro should know better. If Putin had not recognized this and channeled a fact of human nature in a productive direction, Russia would have been lost. In a sense, he "betrayed the (Soviet) Revolution", but thank god he did.

I stumbled on a site called The Red Phoenix, a dyed-in-the-wool, true-believin' Marxist web site, which carried this article A Marxist Perspective on Human Nature.

The capitalists would argue that human beings are compelled by self interest alone, yet they cannot fathom that self interest is dialectically related with the interests of the masses in society. We are defined by others, and serve as a means of giving others definition. It is in our very nature to depend on one another, as it is also in our very nature to be depended on by others. At the end of the day, human beings cling to one another not merely for the purpose of exploitation, which serves to oppose a human beings pursuit of their production ends in the social and material sense, but to fulfill their common needs. We have and always will need one another, and considering this, communist revolution is essential for safeguarding our collective interests against the few who would alienate us from these interests.

They just don't see the psychopaths in their own midst.

 

[goyacobol]

That's a good question, but I think that it's not one we can answer, or in any case one we should focus on. I am more concerned to be clear about what we should do. I understand that in the state of binary polarization in which the world finds itself, if we put all our emphasis on exposing the United States, we are pro-Chavism and we are avoiding talking about other ways in which a society is ponerized, and if we criticize Chavism, we feel conflicted because we are collaborating to a certain extent with the Deep State and its agenda for regime change in Venezuela.

This is the point where I think that, with the necessary prudence/caution/wisdom, we should stick to the truth as much as we can and shed light on both aspects of reality giving each one its rightful place in importance and magnitude.

msante,

I think as you said above if we "stick to the truth" as so many posting on this thread are trying their best to do it may help create at least more "order out of chaos". You would think I would have figured this out better by now but I am a slow learner at times. Laura explains this in great detail in a SOTT article from 2008. The whole article reads like it could have been written in 2019 except some of the players have changed.

Order out of Chaos

The details are that the resulting state of the system under observation can be more pure, or
more chaotic depending on the "direction" of the jump. The direction of the jump depends
on how objective - how close to the reality of the actual state - the observation is.

 

[mabar]

-firing thousands of industry employees, replacing them with loyalists, which lowered production capacity (plus oils prices fell)

This is another common practice among strongly ideologized left governments, and is related to the above: the idea that there is a war between the proletariat and the capitalists (represented by the companies). There are dozens of reports that tell how key positions in the big oil companies were occupied by "friends" of the government who were not qualified to hold such positions. This and other worse abuses have been documented not by CNN or Deep State propagandists, but by researchers who have tried to get an honest and objective look at the whole thing. Such is the case with some of the documents I cited in previous posts.

I think it is a practice among strongly ponerized people, either right or left, I’m in the chapter of the abominable oil unionism of Pemex Rip, book by Ana Lilia Perez, what you mention is just... honey on flakes, in comparisson. Key and non key positions, they were not just occupied be friends, they were/are? sold, union leaders living as millionaires, family members included in the package, and many etcéteras ... the whole company had been ponerized to the bone marrow ...

The syndicate is like a large free market where everything is sold: Peso over peso from the sales of positions and tokens (to aspire to work at Pemex) falls into the same wallet. Mario Galicia, from the National Energy Studies Committee, a civil association made up of energy sector professionals, academics and analysts, says:

“In times of the Quinna (Joaquin Hernandez Galicia-- (was a mexican trade unionist and politician), the tokens were sold at 50,000 pesos, in times of Romero Deschamps are at least 150,000 pesos for the lowest level, which is the messenger. As tokens are increasingly scarce, they also sell temporary contracts for one, three or six months, with "facilities", to pay them in fortnightly installments, but with the obligation to go to the meeting on time, cheer the leader or even the president, if the leader so orders."

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator

If US manage –via Guaidó, took over Venezuelan oil companies, they are going to take an energy reform out of the sleeve and they are going to sell Venezuelan oil companies to the highest bidder and, gasoline, electricity, gas are going to go up in price. They are going to level out a little of the mega inflation difference, so that people get the idea that change is better. –I assume- All with the great "help" of the mass media structure... in Pemex, goverment and oil union consented to each other to became symbiotic relationship, to do what they want, when they want and were able to release de energy reform. What Joe mentioned is just an awful truth.

 

[mabar]

International Contact Group to Send Technical Mission to Venezuela - Mogherini
European Union foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini said that the international contact group on Venezuela to send technical mission to the country.

European Union foreign policy chief said that international contact group on Venezuela aims to create peaceful resolution of crisis and to avoid violence. Mogherini added that the group will meet on ministerial level in early march.

The chief also said that the European Union was ready to open a humanitarian aid office in Caracas in coming weeks.

The recently formed Contact Group on Venezuela includes the European Union as well as eight European states — France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, and Britain — and Latin American nations — Bolivia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Mexico, and Uruguay.

According to Portugal Foreign Minister, participants of the contact group meeting agreed on need for new elections through credible process. The minister also told Sputnik that the contact group would inform UN Security Council about its actions.

Meanwhile, US envoy on Venezuela Abrams urged countries to deal only with Venezuelan opposition leader Guaido, claiming that time for dialogue with Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro had long passed.

Earlier, Maduro proposed to hold early parliamentary elections. This comes after Juan Guaido declared himself interim president of Venezuela in January. Guaido has been recognised as the country's leader by the United States, Canada and key Latin American and European states, while democratically elected Maduro is recognised by China, Mexico, Turkey, Iran, Russia, and others.