Venezuela

The fightback
User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10587
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Venezuela

Post by blindpig » Sat Oct 02, 2021 1:38 pm

The Imprint of an Insurrectional Past: A Conversation with Iraida Vargas and Mario Sanoja
Posted by INTERNATIONALIST 360° on OCTOBER 1, 2021
Cira Pascual Marquina
Image
Mario Sanoja and Iraida Vargas (Escuela Venezolana de Planificación)

Two eminent anthropologists talk about Venezuela’s history and its relation to the present.

Iraida Vargas and Mario Sanoja are not detached social scientists, indifferent to what they investigate. Instead, their work in anthropology and archeology is overtly engaged, seeking to link Venezuela’s history and prehistory to its present, including to its current political projects. Their 2015 book, The Long March toward Communal Society [La larga marcha hacia la sociedad comunal], scours Venezuela’s history and prehistory for precedents to its contemporary socialist communes. In this interview for Venezuelanalysis, Vargas and Sanoja talk about the methodology they apply in their research and about the historical and cultural roots of the communes that Venezuelans are building today.

Although a historical perspective is important for both Marxists and Chavistas, some sectors of the left have failed to recognize the contributions of the past when projecting a post-capitalist future. However, in your practice as anthropologists, you insist that a society’s history must be taken into consideration when projecting a socialist future.


Vargas: Karl Marx’s analysis includes the study of historical events prior to the formation of capitalism. Marc Bloch developed a concept of progressive history where the starting point for studying the present would be in the past, and he argued: “the past is, by definition, something that cannot be modified. However, our understanding of the past is something that is in a constant process of change, in a constant process of transformation and perfecting.”

In a similar way, I would say that a dynamic and living conception of history is key to our methodology.

In the early days of our work as anthropologists and archeologists – and that was way back in the 60’s when the Rómulo Betancourt government was killing people – the best way for us [as researchers] to participate in the transformation of our reality was to engage in an anthropology for the here and now. What does this mean? In our archeological expeditions, we had a commitment with the present, but we did this intuitively.

That conception brought us to Gramsci, who thought that the past should allow us to imagine how to transform the present. Our methodology (and the methodology of the Latin American Social Anthropology school) developed assuming a theoretical position. In other words, we were not neutral, and we always defined the “why,” the “to what end” and (very important for us) the “for whom.”

We were formed by Federico Brito Figueroa, Miguel Acosta Saignes, and Rodolfo Quintero. These were three communist UCV [Venezuela’s Central University] professors who not only knew a great deal about Venezuelan history but were committed to building a better society. They taught us that as archeologists we had to have objectives relevant to the here and now.

While it is true that our study objects were generally buried under tons of dirt and couldn’t talk to us, there was still much to be learned. Let me give you an example: when studying the hunter and gatherer community that lived in Apure [south of Venezuela] hundreds of years ago, the archeological work showed that the women in that community established a norm that prohibited hunting baby chigüires. Now you can ask, is this really relevant today? As it turns out, that code teaches us about the environmental protection practices developed by the indigenous women of Apure, which is all too relevant nowadays.

We carried out our research and archeological expeditions looking for answers or seeking questions that would be relevant to our present. A relevant question to organize an archeological expedition today could be, how – from what we learn at the dig – can we develop practices of “good living” [buen vivir, the Aymara concept that was rescued by Hugo Chávez].

In short, in our methodology, understanding the social structures, practices, and values of a community became more important than “objectivity,” and this has much to do with our commitment to the present and even to the future.

The European colonial invasions provoked protests, riots, and rebellions. You argue that the legacy of these rebellions contributed not only to the independence struggle but also left a mark in the present with their emancipatory projects. Can you talk about this?

Vargas: Insurrections were continual from the early days of colonization, and the maroon rebellions are the better-known ones. Let’s take the Negro Miguel rebellion in 1553, where enslaved blacks and large contingents of Jiraharas [indigeneous population] rebelled against the colonizers, establishing a kingdom with its seat in Buría [Lara state].

Of course, the rebels always had a project, but historians often deny that because their interpretation is permeated by racist conceptions. They will say: Bolívar had a project, but what was the project of the Negro Miguel? In fact, he proposed to make a kingdom based on what he had experienced in Benin before being turned into a slave.

Sanoja: In the late 18th century there were black Jacobin insurrections influenced by the Haitian Revolution. They began in the West of the country, but they rapidly grew and challenged the colonial regime. The rebels had a project: establishing an all-black republic that would follow the “law of the French.” As opposed to the Negro Miguel rebellion, their aim was to annihilate all whites.

Later, in 1830, the country was rapidly swept, from East to West, by another rebellion against creole domination that also aimed to create a black republic.

All these rebellions had projects and they challenged the established creole order. They have left their rebellious imprint in the here and now.

In The Long March toward Communal Society you write: “The persistence of communitarian traditions of both aboriginal and black-Venezuelan societies contributes to supporting the development of extensive communal systems, both rural and urban, propelled by the Bolivarian Revolution.” This is interesting but could a culture as urban as that of most Venezuelans today really preserve elements of that communitarian past?

Vargas: If anything has been revived thanks to the Bolivarian Revolution, it is communal life. The Chavista people have put into practice Chávez’s slogan Commune or Nothing! and this, in turn, is a product of popular organization or popular power.

We see communal construction not only in rural areas but also in cities. To understand the phenomenon we should point to the fact that urban barrio cultures here have a campesino origin. In the 50s, 60s, and 70s people from rural areas came to the cities, and with them they brought vestiges of communal life. In fact, you can see this in the distribution of domestic spaces, which are somewhat reminiscent of the houses in the Llanos [center-south of the country] and Andes [Venezuela’s mountainous region] where common spaces with flower gardens are often found.

In Caracas barrios, rural forms of solidarity also express themselves in the cayapas [indigenous Caribe word referring to collective labor activities] and in other practices of mutual aid. In fact, the collaborative construction of houses in some Housing Mission initiatives [Campamentos de Pioneros] is a good example of mutual or collaborative work processes.

Communal solidarity also operates among women in the barrios. Those who work outside the community will often get help from other women to care for their children, who may even eat at the community canteens that offer food to those who need it. The canteens likewise maintain campesino culinary traditions.

Finally, when we think about the living traditions that we inherit from communal societies, we cannot overlook the festivities nominally dedicated to patron saints. These distinctive cultural practices have much to do with sharing, joy of life, and the love for music. Venezuelans tend to be cheerful, lively, and relaxed, and these are traits that don’t have their origin in the colonizers.

Sanoja: One case that is relevant to the debate about communes in urban spaces is 23 de Enero in western Caracas. Up until 1954 poor black communities inhabited Caño Amarillo [a part of 23 de Enero barrio] maintaining many practices of solidarity and powerful cultural traditions. As it turns out, 23 de Enero is an epicenter of communal organization in Caracas today. That isn’t coincidental: the vestiges of communal organization are a key factor.

When Chávez began promoting the construction of communes, the people in 23 de Enero were better positioned to advance. No doubt the recent history of rebelliousness against the governments of the Fourth Republic [1958-99] strengthened these communities. However, I am convinced that the pre-existing forms of communality and cultural identity also played an important role.

If you go to El Panal Commune, you will find not only a new political organization but also a radio, a TV station, etc. They have a socio-political project in which one can see past communal practices reemerge and shape the new society.

Vargas: In Venezuela, there is a socio-cultural movement that is very powerful and the enemy is generally blind to it. Collectivized life here is rather common even if it is not immediately evident. US sanctions have inadvertently promoted communal forms that were underlying in our society. The objective of the blockade was to end the revolution but, as it turns out, we have seen a growing identification between the people and communalized initiatives in recent years.

The Caquetío civilization flourished in the center region of what we now know as Venezuela through the 16th century. They lived communally, produced fine pottery, and grew corn. In that same territory, some of Venezuela’s most important communal initiatives are taking shape right now. You have argued that this is not accidental, that the vestiges of that society are important in the present.

Vargas: What is the first thing that colonizers do when they take control of a people? They break the value system, particularly the existing forms of communal life and solidarity. They do it because they understand that such value systems go against their interests. In turn, we should be aware that maintaining or recovering value systems based on solidarity, systems where the vestiges of communal life remain, is necessary if we are committed to a socialist future.

In fact, the story of the Caquetíos, who settled for hundreds of years where we now see cooperatives such as Cecosesola [a large cooperative union in Lara state] and communes such as Ataroa or El Maizal, is a good argument for our thesis.

Our archeological research allowed us to understand that today’s communes do not constitute an external implant in that territory. On the contrary, as shown by the anthropological and historical record, many manifestations of communal culture that we now find are rooted on aboriginal traditions.

Today the communes constitute one of the key territorial forms of popular resistance against capitalism. They are based on social property, on the collective accumulation of knowledge, on a non-capitalist socio-spatial organization of productive forces, and they embody a strong class and cultural identity. Many of these traits can be found in the socio-cultural organization of the peoples that inhabited the territory before colonization.

Sanoja: Indeed the concept of the commune is prehispanic. The Caquetíos people developed a very rich communal culture in what we now know as Falcón, Lara, Yaracuy, and part of Barinas [center and west of Venezuela], and it is in those territories where we find more communes.

In the 60s, we carried out excavations in that region, but we also got to know the local cultures. What we found is that, while the creole-settler socio-economic formations were the most visible ones, there was also an underlying communal substrate. We learned that communal structures were never fully erased, and that is why we see projects like El Maizal flourishing there.

In other words, the meeting of the past and the present is opening the way for new social, political, and economic formations in that territory.

Vargas: Communal living is defining of humanity, but capitalism destroys the commons. That is why the vestiges of communal life are so important in the projection of a socialist society.

https://libya360.wordpress.com/2021/10/ ... io-sanoja/

**************************

Image

The Media Myth of ‘Once Prosperous’ and Democratic Venezuela Before Chávez
October 1, 2021
By Joe Emersberger & Justin Podur – Sep 28, 2021

Joe Emersberger and Justin Podur look at some of the mainstream mistruths about Venezuela.

The following piece is adapted from the authors’ new book, Extraordinary Threat: The US Empire, the Media and 20 Years of Coup Attempts in Venezuela, published by Monthly Review Press.

In his State of the Union address on February 6, 2019, Donald Trump said:

We stand with the Venezuelan people in their noble quest for freedom—and we condemn the brutality of the Maduro regime, whose socialist policies have turned that nation from being the wealthiest in South America into a state of abject poverty and despair.

Trump’s ridiculous comment was not considered controversial, because the Western media, including the anti-Trump outlets like the New York Times, have spent many years conveying a lie: that Venezuela had been very prosperous and democratic until Hugo Chávez, and then his successor Nicolás Maduro, came along and ruined everything. If readers believe that, then they may indeed wonder, “Why shouldn’t the US government help Venezuelans return to that prosperous state?”

But this attitude is the result of common deceptions about Venezuela’s economic history, and it ignores how the rise of Chávez actually brought democratic reform, not regression, to Venezuela. The story the Western media tell should instead make people wonder how Chavismo could have become the dominant political force if everything had once been wonderful in Venezuela.

‘Once the richest’
This vague claim about Venezuela’s economic history, in various forms—“once prosperous,” “once the richest”—has become ubiquitous in the Western media. A Nexis search of English-language newspapers for “Venezuela” and “once prosperous” turned up 563 hits between 2015 and 2019.

The “once prosperous” claim cannot refer to Venezuela’s natural wealth: The huge oil and gold reserves are still there. The clear intent of describing Venezuela as “once prosperous” is to suggest that living conditions were “once” those of a rich country.

So by what measure was Venezuela “once” wealthy? When exactly was that? What is the ranking criteria being used to say it was one of the wealthiest? Was it once in the top 10% (by whatever measure)? The top 50%?

It’s always implied that Venezuela’s economic glory days were in the pre-Chávez era, but the financial journalist Jason Mitchell has made this claim explicitly. Writing for the UK Spectator (2/18/17), he said, “Twenty years ago Venezuela was one of the richest countries in the world.” So Venezuela had supposedly enjoyed its wealthy status in 1997, the year before Hugo Chávez was first elected. That’s utter nonsense.

In reality, when Chávez was first elected in 1998, Venezuela had a 50% poverty rate, despite having been a major oil exporter for several decades. It started exporting oil in the 1920s, and it was only in the early 1970s that the biggest Middle Eastern oil producers, Saudi Arabia and Iran, surpassed Venezuela in production. In 1992, the New York Times (2/5/92) reported that “only 57% of Venezuelans are able to afford more than one meal a day.” Does that sound like “one of the richest countries in the world”? Obviously not, but it is worth saying more about the statistics that can be used to mislead people about Venezuela’s economic history.

Income and distribution
Economists typically use GDP per capita to assess how rich a country is. It is basically a measure of the average income per person. If journalists cared to be at all precise when they say that Venezuela had once been “rich,” then that’s a statistic they’d cite.

The chart below shows World Bank data for Venezuela’s real (inflation-adjusted) GDP per capita since 1960, and it contradicts Western media’s relentlessly insinuated story that a transition from prosperity to poverty took place because of Chavismo. Real GDP per capita peaked in 1977, near the end of an oil boom, then went into a long-term decline. When Chávez took office in 1999, it was at one of its lowest points in decades. Then it was driven even lower by the first two attempts to oust Chávez: the April 2002 coup and, several months later, a shutdown of the state oil company—the “oil strike.” By 2013, real GDP per capita recovered dramatically, nearly reaching its 1977 peak.

Image
Venezuelan GDP per Capita (constant local currency). (Emersberger and Podur / Extraordinary Threat)

Under Chávez, the poverty rate was cut in half, so there certainly is a correlation between GDP per capita and living conditions in Venezuela. But a country’s GDP per capita, by itself, says nothing about how income is distributed. And that can also make international comparisons very misleading.

For example, 1980 was very close to Venezuela’s historic peak in real GDP per capita, which ranked 32nd in the world that year when adjusted for purchasing power parity, as economists recommend for international comparisons. But its infant mortality rate ranked 58th in the world, far below Cuba, whose infant mortality rate was 28th that year. Infant mortality is a basic health indicator that helps reveal the extent to which a country’s wealth is actually being used to benefit its people. In fact, Venezuela’s infant mortality rate in 1980 was more than twice as high as that in Cuba.

Another revealing year is 1989, when the massacre of poor demonstrators later known as the Caracazo took place. In terms of GDP per capita (adjusted for purchasing power parity), Venezuela ranked highest in Central and South America—while its government perpetrated the most infamous slaughter of poor people in its modern history.

The massacre exposed the essentially fraudulent nature of Venezuela’s prosperity and democracy. It explains the rise of Chávez, and also reveals how the US government and media reflexively helped the Venezuelan government that perpetrated the massacre.

From Caracazo to Chavismo

It began on February 27, 1989. Venezuelan security forces killed hundreds, and possibly thousands, of poor people over a five-day period. The poor had risen up in revolt against an IMF-imposed “structural adjustment” program that involved stiff hikes to fuel prices and bus fares. The program was imposed by President Carlos Andres Pérez, a man who had campaigned saying that IMF programs were like a “neutron bomb that killed people but left buildings standing.”

Image
New York Times photo (2/5/92) of the aftermath of Hugo Chávez’s unsuccessful 1992 coup. (New York Times)

US President George H. W. Bush called Pérez on March 3, 1989, while the Caracazo massacre was still taking place, to commiserate with Pérez and offer Venezuela loans. The US media’s Venezuela narrative suited Bush’s foreign policy. A New York Times article (11/11/90) about Venezuela by Clifford Krauss described Pérez as “a charismatic social democrat.” Not a word was written about the Caracazo massacre. The article focused on Bush’s gratitude toward Pérez for, among other things, boosting Venezuela’s oil output to help protect the United States from negative economic consequences after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait.

On February 5, 1992, Lieutenant Colonel Hugo Chávez first became widely known to Venezuelans by attempting a military coup. The day Chávez’s coup failed, a news article in the New York Times (2/5/92) referred to Venezuela as “one of Latin America’s relatively stable democratic governments,” and to Pérez himself as “a leading democrat,” despite the Caracazo massacre only three years earlier, which is never mentioned. The Times also quoted then–President Bush calling Pérez “one of the great democratic leaders of our hemisphere.”

Not another Pérez

When Chávez first took office after elections in 1999, the US government did not go immediately on the attack. When you consider the flashy anti-IMF campaign rhetoric of Carlos Andres Pérez—the president who then massacred people to implement an IMF austerity plan—it’s unsurprising that the US would feel Chávez out for a while. Maybe Chávez would be similarly phony—and therefore worthy of US support.

By 2001, the US government realized that Chávez was not going to be like Pérez, who made a sick joke of his anti-IMF rhetoric once he was in office. Chávez was actually going to try to follow through on his promises to change the system and assert his country’s sovereignty. Chávez aggressively opposed the US invasion of Afghanistan, and even said that the US ambassador came calling and disrespectfully asked him to reverse his position. That provoked Chávez to order the ambassador out of the room. This was a key event in the souring of Venezuela/US relations (Bart Jones, Hugo!, Steerforth Press, 2007, p. 297).

Domestically, Chávez also had a short honeymoon period with Venezuela’s old elite and middle class. As Gregory Wilpert put it in Changing Venezuela by Taking Power (Verso, 2006, p. 20):

When Chávez first took office, he enjoyed approval ratings of 90%, which would suggest that racism and classism for eventual middle-class opposition to Chávez could not be an important factor. Venezuela’s middle class had been sliding into poverty for two decades and supported Chávez in 1998 because they were desperate for change.

But soon enough, the old political elite, like the US ambassador, deeply resented Chávez asserting his authority. They had expected Chávez’s deference. His African and Indigenous roots, and his working-class origin, could be overlooked, until he shunned the usual power brokers when making his cabinet appointments.

The conflict intensified when a constituent assembly, elected by voters, drafted a new constitution which was then approved in a referendum. Transitional authorities were appointed under the new democratic order. As Wilpert described it (Changing Venezuela, p. 20):

The old elite then used its control of the country’s mass media to turn the middle class against Chávez, creating a campaign that took advantage of the latent racism and classism in Venezuelan culture.

By 2004, predictably, Chávez relied much more heavily on the support of poor people to win elections (Changing Venezuela, p. 268–269).

New constitution, new era

In the first year he took office, Chávez initiated a three-step process to give Venezuela a new constitution. In April 1999, he went to voters asking if they wanted to initiate the process by electing a constitutional assembly, and if they approved of the rules specifying how the assembly would be elected. His side won that referendum with 92% of the vote on the first question, and with 86% on the second (which specified basic electoral rules) (Changing Venezuela, p. 21).

Elections were held in July to choose the members of the assembly. Chávez supporters won 125 of the assembly’s 131 seats. The assembly then drafted a constitution and, four months later, it was approved by 72% of voters in another referendum.

The assembly also appointed a transitional body, known as a Congressillo (small congress), that appointed a new attorney general, human rights defender, comptroller general, national electoral council and supreme court.

In July 2000, Chávez went to voters again for a fresh presidential mandate under the new constitution and prevailed easily with 59.8% of the vote. But these were “mega-elections,” as Wilpert (Changing Venezuela, p. 22) put it, ones that “eliminated the country’s old political elite almost entirely from the upper reaches of Venezuela’s public institutions”:

Thirty-three thousand candidates ran for over 6,000 offices that day. In the end, Chávez was reconfirmed in office with 59.8% of the vote. Chávez’s supporters won 104 out of 165 National Assembly seats and 17 out of 23 state governorships. On the local level, Chávez candidates were less successful, winning only about half of the municipal mayors’ posts.

Ominously, a New York Times editorial in August 1999 already presumed to lecture Venezuelans and distort a very democratic reform process as a power grab:

They should be very wary of the methods Mr. Chávez is using. He is drawing power into his own hands, and misusing a special constitutional assembly meeting now in Caracas that is composed almost entirely of his supporters. Mr. Chávez, a former paratroop commander who staged an unsuccessful military coup in 1992, has so far shown little respect for the compromises necessary in a democracy, which Venezuela has had for 40 years.

Clearly, any genuine reform process in Latin America was going to be vilified by liberal outlets like the New York Times.

Key lies
The lies peddled about Venezuela’s past make US aggression against it possible in the present. It is worth summing up some of these key lies:

• Venezuela was “once prosperous” and ruined by socialism. In fact, Venezuela was an unequal country in which most people were poor despite the country’s oil wealth, which had generated huge export revenues since the 1920s.
• Venezuela was a democracy before Chavismo. In fact, Venezuela’s democracy was a gravely flawed system in which politicians alternated holding power according to an undemocratic agreement, and rammed austerity down the throats of Venezuela’s poor by committing massacres, such as the Caracazo.
• Chavismo ruined Venezuela’s democracy. Chávez indeed attempted to carry out a coup in 1992, but he came to power through an election in 1998, and afterward made changes through extensive democratic processes.



Featured image: Hugo Chávez swept to power in 1998. (Reference)

(Venezuelanalysis.com)

https://orinocotribune.com/the-media-my ... -chavez-2/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10587
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Venezuela

Post by blindpig » Sat Oct 09, 2021 12:56 pm

NOT KNOWING THE REALITY DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE LACK OF REASON OR THE FARCE
Sergio Rodriguez Gelfenstein

7 Oct 2021 , 8:30 am .

Image
Josep Borrell, High Representative for Foreign Affairs of the European Union (Photo: Reuters)

The erroneous views on Venezuela that observe the country from stereotypical visions have many times led governments and international organizations to make decisions based on pre-established opinions that are based more on wishes than on realities. Of course, by viewing Venezuela as a threat, they have transformed the country into an enemy to be defeated.

This led the United States and Europe to devise plans based on false information that announced almost daily the imminent overthrow of President Maduro. From this and with the support of claims, aspirations and personal ambitions of a bunch of thugs who turned politics into a business, they configured phantasmagorical projects that had no foothold on the national scene. Likewise, the profit motive that put the national interest and the lives of millions of citizens in the background, led them to provide imaginary insights that led Washington and Brussels to constant setbacks and a colossal ridicule from which they are just trying to get out.

The truth is that the global powers that were trying to overthrow the constitutional government of Venezuela believed or wanted and were interested in believing the lies that for many years they were told. Just at the time of writing, a note from the New York Times has been releasedwhich outlines a letter sent last week by the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to its offices in other countries in which it is stated that: "The central problem in this [refers to the increasing loss of local informants] is that CIA agents underestimate the capabilities of other countries' counterintelligence bodies. " Likewise, the letter "criticizes the low technical competence of its own officers and their excessive reliance on their sources," according to the note in the New York newspaper.

In Venezuela, it should also be said that the absurd interventionist policy of the United States in the country and the assumption of an early departure from the government of President Maduro led them to a level of interference without limits by recognizing Juan Guaidó as president, forcing the government to Venezuela to break relations in January 2019, leaving the northern country blind and deaf in its need to observe the situation in the country, at the same time that they were compelled to put themselves at the mercy of local informants who immediately captured the great business that was made way. In this context, they set about constructing fanciful scenarios for the fight against the "dictatorship" that they sold at a good price to their desperate employers. The same did the officials of the European embassies, contacted for the same purpose.

Once the American diplomats left Caracas, such a role began to be played by their European colleagues, some, such as the ambassadors of France, Spain, Germany and others, unleashed a veritable maelstrom of subversive activities - widely known and documented by the services. of intelligence - that when they were made public, it was possible to know that they always started from the idea that Maduro would leave soon. Some, such as the ambassadors of Spain and Germany and that of the European Union, were declared ungrateful and expelled from the country.

They justified their activities by saying - as Josep Borrell told Spanish television - that "they were innovating in international law." This is how they explained their recognition of Guaidó as interim president, at the same time that they negotiated - without knowing it - all kinds of deal with the only government that has always existed in Venezuela at this time: that of Nicolás Maduro. His diplomats in Caracas secretly attended the summons of ministers and government officials, imploring that it not be made public in order to maintain the farce of recognition of the impostor. It was worth watching veteran and honorable career diplomats making a fool of themselves on the orders of their governments.

The ineffable Borrell when he was still Spain's minister of foreign affairs and cooperation as early as March 3, 2019, just a month and a half after Guaidó's self-proclamation, said in an interview on the digital channel La Sexta that States Unidos, which had promoted the proclamation of Juan Guaidó as president in charge of Venezuela, did not think that Nicolás Maduro "was going to demonstrate that resilience." By qualifying the situation as "peculiar" and "atypical", he explained that Spain recognized as legitimate a president in charge who did not have control of the territory, knowing that the administration of the country was in the hands of a "de facto government" to whom Spain it does not recognize democratic legitimacy. It was the consecration of his stupidity.

For this reason, as there could not be two ambassadors, they gave Guaidó's envoy the non-existent title of "personal representative", making it clear that in case a Spaniard had a problem in Venezuela, who should be dealt with was that " de facto government, "which was the one that had" control of the territory and the administration. " Contradicting his own statement on Spanish national television, now he did not speak of "innovation" but of a situation not "foreseen in the manuals of International Law", because five weeks after Guaidó's self-proclamation, Maduro continued to attend from Miraflores and Guaidó from the jungle protected by the paramilitary band Los Rastrojos in alliance with the government of Colombia. Five weeks!


Europe, which quietly obeyed the orders of Trump who mistreated, spied on and humiliated them as is only done with those who have no principles or ethics about life, thought that the arrival of Joe Biden to the presidency would change everything and they would have a relationship again Between equals with the older brother. It was not like that, the permanent affront - which for Washington is state policy towards those it considers inferior - was maintained and even deepened.

The United States did not warn them that it intended to flee abruptly from Afghanistan, pursuing a "for himself" policy that left Europeans at the mercy of the "terrorists" they could not defeat and who seized power and other terrorists, rebels who follow acting despite 20 years of failed military intervention. It is worth saying that both were created by the same powers that now slipped through the back door of history.

The flight from Afghanistan and the most recent AUKUS agreement (Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States) against China, which among other things has meant the breaking of an oceanic country's contract with France to build submarines in order to replace them with another with the United States. , seems to be making Europe begin to wake up from its dream of love with Washington. The voice of General de Gaulle echoes in their consciences and makes them return to the reality of submission, indignity and disgrace in which they have fallen.

Paradoxically, these events have influenced the need for Europe to get rid of the United States' policy towards Venezuela and began to move its pieces: they have supported the negotiations between the government and the terrorist opposition in Mexico and have recognized the country's institutions , while preparing to send an observation mission to the local government elections in November. We hope that, as usual, they do not have the final report prepared before arriving in the country.

Like any negotiation, the parties must be prepared to compromise. The government of Venezuela has agreed to participate in Mexico assuming a responsible attitude in the face of the great hardships that the "sanctions" and the US and European blockade have placed on the shoulders of all citizens: both those who support the government and those who support the government. those of opposition.

But, despite that, for the opposition it is still a staging. We all know that you are participating in the dialogue on orders from Washington and Brussels, because they need to gracefully get out of the mess they got into. That is why such conversations take place abroad. Thus they continue to want to convey the idea that there are no conditions for dialogue in the country. When the opposition commissioners return to Caracas, they go home and sleep peacefully protected by the police and security institutions that guarantee it. I am sure that Pope Francis would be willing to offer the facilities of the apostolic nunciature to hold such meetings, or it could even be in any other institution in the country.

Finally, it is a dialogue between Venezuelans who are not persecuted or intimidated for doing so. They should not return from Mexico to go into a mountain or put on a guerrilla uniform. No, as I said, they sleep safely in their beds, after showing themselves to the reflectors of the world media that tries to show that there are no conditions in the country for it.

In that sense, these negotiations in Mexico are nothing more than an export product designed in Brussels and Washington to confuse international public opinion and hide the fact that there is governance and tranquility in Venezuela despite the fact that there are still national and foreign actors trying to destroy the peace that has cost so much to achieve.

I say this because in the aforementioned interview on March 3, 2019, Borrell denied that the Government of Spain is "following" the United States. If so, how is it understood that today, October 6, 2021, the spokesman for the United States Department of State, Ned Price, affirmed that in a meeting in Paris between Secretary of State Anthony Blinken and the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Spain José Manuel Albares discuss plans to cooperate on human rights in Latin America "including efforts to support the Venezuelan people as they work to restore democracy in their country"?

It is not only follow-along, but also subordination, absence of honor and dignity, submission, submission and the humiliation of the mediocre elite that has governed the peninsula for centuries and that intends to continue imposing a model that we shed more than two centuries ago.

https://misionverdad.com/venezuela/desc ... i-la-farsa

Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10587
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Venezuela

Post by blindpig » Mon Oct 18, 2021 1:55 pm

10 Key Facts About The Arbitrary Extradition Of Ambassador Saab

Image
Camila Fabri (C), Alex Saab's wife, in Bolivar Square, Caracas, Venezuela, Oct. 17. 2021. | Photo: Twitter/ @AlainAgreda21

Published 18 October 2021

Cape Verde challenged the binding decisions of the Justice Court of the Economic Community of West African States, the United Nations Human Rights Committee, five United Nations Special Rapporteurs, and one UN Working Group.


During the weekend, evidencing its submission to the wishes of the United States, the Cape Verde government extradited Venezuela's Special Envoy Alex Saab without waiting for all the legal processes to be completed as required by the laws of this African country. The main facts showing the arbitrariness of Cape Verde's proceedings are summarized below.

1). On June 12, 2020, Alex Saab was detained by the Interpol and Cape Verdean authorities during a technical stopover at the Amilcar Cabral Airport. This arbitrary action was justified by arguing the existence of an international arrest warrant issued by the United States, which considers him a “front man” of Venezuela’s President Nicolas Maduro.

2). Since then, the Venezuelan diplomat remained a prisoner of the Cape Verde government. His lawyers presented several legal resources to release him and evidence about the illegalities committed during his detention. These illegalities are related to aspects of form and content that violate international and national laws. After several legal proceedings, the Bolivarian ambassador was placed under house arrest due to his delicate health condition.

3). On Oct. 16, 2021, Cape Verdean police officers entered the house where Saab was being detained and took him to Sal airport, where he was handed over to U.S. agents. This action was taken with no representative of the defense team having been provided with prior notification and nor did they have the relevant documentation or resolution to that effect.

4). The Cape Verde government did not wait for the case to go down to the Barlavento Appeal Court, which could have ruled on the issue of Saab's health precluding extradition and on the dismissal of the money laundering allegations by the Geneva Public Prosecutor.

5). On Oct.13, the Constitutional Court dismissed the request for a declaration of nullity of judgment against Saab. However, judgments handed down by this Court only become final when they are not subject to appeal or claim. The Constitutional Court’s decision could have been appealed by Saab's lawyers as Cape Verde laws make the Court's decision final only five business days after its date of issuance. It is also incumbent upon the first instance court to issue the necessary dismissal warrants, without which the delivery of the extradited person to the requesting State is not possible.


6). The Defense Team of Ambassador Saab was not been made aware of any decision of the Barlavento Appeal Court, which issued the original extradition decision, confirming that it could be executed and nor is the existence of such a decision mentioned in the letter from the Justice Ministry.

7). Before this happened, this Appeal Court should have decided on the application submitted by Saab, through which it was requested that the extradition be declared inadmissible due to facts such as the violation of the right not to be tried twice on the same matter.

8). The surrender of the Venezuelan ambassador to the U.S. on a date prior to the final and unappealable decision granting the extradition, without the case having been transferred to the lower court for decision on the pending issues and for the issuance of the competent warrants of dismissal, constitutes a flagrant illegality, and disregard for the rules of international law.

9). Over the past 16 months, Cape Verde have challenged the binding decisions of the Justice Court of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), United Nations Human Rights Committee (UNHRC), five United Nations Special Rapporteurs, and one UN Working Group.

10). The decision to extradite a Special Envoy and Deputy Ambassador, who is entitled to immunity and inviolability, violates a long-established customary international law.

Once extradited to the United States, Alex Saab must defend his rights at the Court of Appeals of the 11th Circuit in Atlanta, Georgia. If this Federal Court recognizes the political motivations underlying the case, it must admit Saab's entitlement to immunity and annul the indictment issued against him.

https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/10- ... -0001.html
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10587
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Venezuela

Post by blindpig » Mon Oct 25, 2021 1:58 pm

US Illegally Extradites Venezuelan Diplomat from Cabo Verde to the US: Statement from the Free Alex Saab Committee
October 19, 2021

Image

US Illegally Extradites Venezuelan Diplomat from Cabo Verde to the US
By the Free Alex Saab Committee

October 18, 2021—The Venezuelan diplomat Alex Saab was renditioned, kidnapped to the US on October 16 without waiting for a final extradition decision. The action was taken in secret, without notifying his defense team and without relevant documentation. Saab had been imprisoned in Cabo Verde since June 12, 2020, for trying to buy humanitarian supplies for Venezuela in legal international trade but in violation of illegal US sanctions. His case raises dangerous precedents in terms of extraterritorial judicial abuse by the US in enforcing its sanctions – unilateral coercive measures on Venezuela and other countries, comprising a third of humanity.

The reason the US is persecuting Alex Saab, revealed by Forbes, is because he is “the key that unlocks the Venezuelan monetary mystery—that is, how a country facing sanctions from the US, the UK, and the European Union—is still able to export things like gold and oil…and really the only man who can actually explain how the country [Venezuela] survives today.”

As the New York Times admits: “If Mr. Saab were to cooperate with American officials, he could help untangle Mr. Maduro’s economic web.” The US has been attempting to extradite Saab to use whatever means necessary to extract sensitive information from him. Saab already reports that his surrogate captors in Cabo Verde had unsuccessfully employed torture to try to break his will and induce him to betray Venezuela.

After an exhaustive investigation by Swiss prosecutors of the US charge that Saab had used Swiss banks for “money laundering,” the case was dropped. Still, the US accuses Saab of “loot[ing] hundreds of millions of dollars from starving Venezuelans,” when this is precisely, admittedly, and purposely what the US blockade is doing.

Over 100,000 Venezuelans have perished due to a lack of food and medicine. Apologists for the US blame the government of Nicolás Maduro. But if Venezuela’s Bolivarian Revolution was so corrupt and inefficient, the US would have no need to violate international law by imposing unilateral coercive measures to achieve its policy of regime change.

UN Special Rapporteur on unilateral coercive measures and human rights, Alena Douhan, urged the US and its allies to drop sanctions imposed against Venezuela. Yet Biden, seamlessly following Trump and Obama before him, justifies the illegal sanctions on the incredulous grounds that Venezuela poses an “extraordinary threat” to US national security.

The United Nations has repeatedly condemned the use of unilateral coercive measures as a violation of international law. The UN Human Rights Committee has explicitly demanded the release of Alex Saab. The regional Economic Community of West Africa (ECOWAS) Court, which has legal jurisdiction over Cabo Verde, where Saab was imprisoned under US orders, demanded the diplomat’s release and payment to him of compensation.

Under the Vienna Convention, a credentialed diplomat such as Saab has absolute immunity from arrest, even in the time of war. Saab has also appealed to the US 11th Circuit Court on the basis of his diplomatic status. In response, Washington filed an application for an extension to reply in a legal delaying tactic to allow Saab’s extradition without recognizing his diplomatic immunity.

Washington has singled out Alex Saab for punishment because he has been instrumental in circumventing the illegal blockade of a country targeted by the US for regime change.

For further information on the Campaign to Free Alex Saab see https://afgj.org/free-alex-saab.

https://afgj.org/free-alex-saab-statement
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10587
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Venezuela

Post by blindpig » Mon Nov 15, 2021 2:08 pm

CHAVISTAS DO NOT VOTE FOR PROMISES OR COROTOS

The Cayapo

13 Nov 2021 , 10:27 am .

Image
Chavismo understands that the vote is one more tool for the consolidation of the construction of a new anti-capitalist culture in the country (Photo: Hernán Cano / Sputnik)

All Chavistas must always know why we vote and why we invite people to vote. Because we do not vote for people, for groups, for parties, for unions, even if the norm establishes it. We voted for a supreme proposal that Commander Chávez inherited to us and to which he entirely consecrated his existence until he was assassinated.

When Chávez called us for the first time to vote for him, he did not offer us houses or work, or study or any material goods, he invited us to get together to found a country, not to continue being a mine in this territory with foreign owners, and for that He asked us to go to a Constituent Assembly, to break the mold of the slave culture established by foreign power in this territory. He invited us to live, to know who we were.

Since then we have overcome betrayals by Miquilena, Peña, Barreto, Luisa Ortega, Rafael Ramírez, and unworthy army officers, and some other politicians who in their selfish ambitions abandoned the option of building another culture and dried up caressing the little slices of wealth with which pays them capital for their delivery. But that, instead of intimidating us, has rather hardened our skin, and in these elections we will show it again. The ambition of every Chavista is to overcome the current conditions of production and create another culture.

Approximately forty years ago the singer of Llanera music Santiago Rojas, in a song of his authorship, described the situation of the country in its exact chaos. In one of his verses he describes the roads of Venezuela as a "mouse cave", however, when the government of Hugo Chávez began, the opposition song about the collapse of the roads and highways could not stop being heard on radio and television, as if everything had started with the government headed by him.

The government drew up a plan to recover the roads and to a great extent succeeded, but to date there is no sign, a small note, a radio or television program where this achievement is mentioned. We simply passed swift and fast as if that was always the case, neither Chavistas nor emaciated feel inclined to recognition even though the achievement is evident.

The same happens with hospitals, schools, universities, housing, food, study and other daily tasks within capitalism, which are always in the field of spasm that you continually lend to the demagoguery carried out in time of elections at levels. of excellence, as expressed by this demagogue by profession: "There is no road in Venezuela that works, they are all guillotines against the oppressed people, that is why in my government my priority is to fix them all, that there is never a hole again , because I will dedicate one official per gap on each highway, because efficiency will be my north, as the humble Venezuelan people deserve. "

Or this other: "The health system is a bottomless jury, where corruption and the government prevail as if it were not with it, we cannot be selfish, when you elect me to govern this task I will dedicate myself with determination until Hospitals, dispensaries, including inner-city ones, no matter who created them, be put like a gold cup in every street or village if possible, and we will achieve it, we will install hospitals of all kinds so that only people feel a Slight discomfort, go to your health center because it will be individualized, which is what this endemic town deserves, that everyone has their own private doctor and specialists, and on the other hand, health workers and all the people in general will earn salaries according to their professions, that no one earn less than a thousand dollars a month,from the cleaning to the doctors and administrative staff will have their salary scale as it corresponds to this chained town. "

Or this other pedagogue, pardon demagogue: "Morals and lights as the Liberator said, but this infernal government has no morals and much less a candle to light the brains of abandoned childhood which I will welcome in my dinner and turn them into the Einsteins that we deserve, because the youth with everything, the women and the blacks and the indigenous people and the other genders and religions and races that inhabit this dismayed territory for which I suffer when I go on vacation to Miami harassed by the regime, which is what the only thing he knows how to do with his illustrious and prominent men like me, who humbly know how to solve all problems, yes, I will bring the best universities and schoolsprivate companies of the world, so that we are all Caribbean CEOs of the world market, successful entrepreneurs, envy of the north and far Asia, yes, my flagellated fellows, vote for me and you will see how I change this territory of blacks, Indians and stilt walkers for one of Blue blood, prosperity, open mind and that not a single ranch is left without being dignified with its air conditioning and Directv antenna, and finally as if that were not enough, I will democratically force you all to accept and understand Western values, which is like we deserve to live. "

Just as these tricksters, snake charmers, miracle sellers, the makers of rivers appear, the callers of hurricanes, the earthquakes subdue them, the overflowing rivers tame them. These traditional truhans, sustained by force of habit, by the great majority's lack of memory, every time there is an election they spring up as saviors of the country, even though they have burned and overturned their flag, mocked their anthem and trampled on. their shield, even though they have asked foreigners to militarily invade the territory, even if they have denigrated us abroad, even though they have called us a country of savages, barbarians, uneducated, deniers of the great values ​​of democracy and the freedom of the sacrosanct Western culture.


Yes, these are the same people who show up today with their well washed faces asking us for the vote, the same ones who denied the CNE, the same ones who repeatedly told us about fraud, those who gave and promoted coups, assassinations, guarimbas, the that they burned people alive, that they promoted a bacteriological war with puputov, that they shouted outrageously that all the Chavistas should die, those who sold themselves and are at the service of big capital and serve as mercenaries, in the political, military, cultural, professional and academic spheres Yes, these are the same ones who have governed us for five hundred years, those who have given the country to foreigners, those who whenever they have a conflict invoke the imperial luminosities to come and save them and in exchange they give them the country.

Yes, these mediocre murderers today present themselves to us as pristine children who come from Miami, Bogotá or Spain to save us from the savage Chavismo.

Some forgetful leftists cling to them who have no honor or respect for their dead and tortured, because their principles are lip service and they don't care about any country monstrosity, because they are only heirs of empty slogans, pamphlets and cliches that they use in politics as a take-away-and-go as long as they are given some crumbs of the surplus value that capitalism extracts from our forces on a daily basis.

In these eventful years, the Chavistas have learned how complicated, how difficult it is to try to create the other thought that leads us to plans to generate another culture, but the obstinacy of living forces us every day to overcome obstacles and be certain that what we do is what must be done collectively. Therefore, this November 21, 2021, rain, thunder or lightning, the Chavistas, the Venezuelans, will undoubtedly vote for life, because we are loyal to what we are: a sublime way of life, and to show this beautiful button.

ARAYA IS BORN! OF HOW THAT BEAUTIFUL VALLEY CAME INTO OUR LIVES
(Narration by Carlos Mendoza)

When we found out that we were going to be parents again, Sofia was already about four weeks pregnant. At that time there were many mixed feelings, since it was not something we expected so soon, our little Carmelia was barely one year and five months old. We thought it through and decided to give it a shot. We started with talks about how and where the delivery was going to be, if we gave birth in a clinic or hospital or if it would be at home. When Carmelia was born it was in a hospital and the traumas of that mistreatment were still alive in Sofía's body, therefore we decided that this was not an option, so we concluded to have the baby at home. In one go we rode around and squared off with Yoya, a midwife recommended by many friends (who after this story became our comadre, sister and friend). We talk to her and we balance everything.

They were nine months of many processes and changes (I want to point out that we never went to a control and we only did an echo when I was eight weeks old, the only control was the follow-up that Yoya gave us during pregnancy). In the end everything went well, with research, study and help from Yoya we prepared ourselves for the moment, a home birth is a nice idea but it needs your preparation.

Three weeks ago Sofía began to throw off the mucous plug and began the run-and-run of calling Yoya and the other people who were waiting for that birth at home and who wanted to join us in that beautiful moment. The first to arrive was Julia, a sister who gave us life and since she arrived it was a joyous party with her two children Lluvia and Imarú. In those days, Yoya was attending another delivery for which she could not get there immediately, but she told us that "as soon as I finish here I go there", and that's how it was. A week later Yoya arrived with that unique energy of hers (those who know her know what I am talking about), there yes, we are readyto give birth! But as Yoya told us, home births are an idea that you have in your head and they never go as planned, even if you have everything coldly calculated, which I did not understand until the day the delivery arrived, but I am anticipating.

Those two weeks were of exercises, breathing, client baths, bonfires, singing and fucking, waiting for the birthing process to begin (it should be noted that in the week that Yoya arrived, Sofía was already forty weeks old; then we only had two weeks to give birth, if not, we had to go to a hospital, which just thinking about the idea caused us fear). When week forty-two arrived, we were already at a point of many emotions, because it is supposed to be the limit and also to this date we had not made any more echoes. Thus begins the habit to wreak havoc on people who do not understand our decision, comments that "the placenta was going to age", that "the baby's brain was going to freeze", that "we were at risk", that " labor had to be induced, "that"

One day before the good began, they offered us an echo to confirm that everything was fine; as we felt in a time limit, we accepted. The next day they would look for us at 7:30 am to do the echo and it was at 5:30 am that Sofía began her labor as such, with contractions and pains, so by 7am the echo had been canceled.

I was active with the stove, to have hot water and fill the pool where the delivery was to take place. I told my mom so she would be ready that I was going to look for her, while Sofia walked with Julia in search of coconut water. Back home, the day passed normally, with laughter, music and hip massages to make the contractions more bearable.


At around 3:30 pm Paz and Warrior arrived. They came to give us all their support and also to record the process, with photos and videos. By that time the contractions were stronger and more followed. We continue with squats, massages and fullbreathing. In the middle of the job, Sofía decides that she wants to bathe with hot water, so we went to the bathroom with a warm water pipe, I started pouring water on it and it was there when she squatted and broke fountains. At that moment we arrived at the pool where the delivery had been planned, but something was happening that none of us had noticed, only Yoya who is the one who has experience with more than a hundred assisted births, being in the pool after several pushes, Yoya stops us and says: "We have to go to a hospital, the baby became a poo and it is not a good sign."

This is where I see that the brown that came out was poop, when I began to feel an anxiety attack, but I had to control myself so as not to alter the situation further. Besides, it wasn't about me; I asked: "And if the poo was already made, what is the difference that it stops here, that it stops in a hospital?" swallow poo (Yoya throughout the process was listening to the heart of the baby with a pine forest, which kept us calm knowing that her heartbeat was fine).

He tells us: "I'm going to give you three more contractions, if not, we'll go on one." The three contractions passed and Yoya tells me: "Dad, go start the truck and we're going." I ran out to change and being alone in the room, from my nerves I couldn't find what to wear, I fell into tears because I only saw that history would repeat itself. I controlled myself, changed and got out, started the truck and left it outside the gate to go back to Sofia. When I entered the house, Sofía was already on a piece of furniture pushing and with a look she told me that we were not going anywhere, there I got back on the play and held her feet tightly, pushing her legs back. On the one hand Paz was holding and on the other Julia, while Yoya was in position to receive the baby, my mother was with Carmelia giving us support, both from behind.

By the way, Carmelia (two years) was excellent while waiting and she was a great help, or at least that is what Sofía told me, she felt it gave her strength, every time I saw her there with the coconut water, hoping that the mother asked. The pujadera began and the tension increased more and more, seeing that something half appeared through that door of life. At some point Yoya mentioned the hospital again, but Sofia was determined. In a strong push, something began to come out, but we did not define what part of the body it was. That's when Yoya tells us: "It's coming on your ass! Come on mom, push it, it's already here!" Between looks, gestures and almost fainting the body manages to get out. Yoya, in an act of extreme wisdom, applies a maneuver and manages to stick her head out; of one the baby sucks with her mouth and gives a loud cry,

Yoya put the baby on the teat and one of them began to suckle, in a next contraction the placenta came out. Already the atmosphere had changed between hugs, tears of joy, laughter. We ask about sex (which we didn't know because we never echoed each other), they tell us "It's a man!" Emotion flooded the house, it was time to take Sofía to bed so that she could rest and be in a more comfortable position. Up to that point the placenta and the cord were still attached to the young. They give it to me and we go to the room. Paz was carrying a glass bowl with the placenta. When Sofía went to bed, I grant her the baby and check her crotches and it is to my amazement to see that she was actually a beautiful female that we decided to call Araya, which means beautiful valley.

Today, several days after his birth, there are still many stories to create and tell, but this is how that beautiful valley came into our lives on November 3, 2021.

This example of collective perseverance helps us to continue forward in the tough battle of inventing the country that the Commander dreamed of and that we will continue to daydream, which is to say, thinking and doing, until the last breath.

We know how difficult, how tortuous, how uncomfortable it is to overcome the great force of habit. Conscious peoples understand that replacing the system that enslaves the species will take effort and time, but Venezuelans, the Chavistas, are as the llaneros say: "Faced with commitment, we are the size that comes our way," because we have what .

https://misionverdad.com/chavismo/los-c ... -o-corotos

Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10587
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Venezuela

Post by blindpig » Tue Nov 16, 2021 3:17 pm

FACEBOOK OR THE METHODS OF US INTERVENTION IN VENEZUELA
15 Nov 2021 , 11:57 am .

Image
US organizations have used Facebook to design a campaign in favor of the opposition (Photo: AP Photo)

Over the years, the United States has perfected the methods of intervention and regime changes in countries that do not submit to its designs. And for this it has counted, among others, with a powerful machinery that includes large media corporations and organizations that serve as arms of the US government in other latitudes.

One of those forms of not so silent interference occurs through the financing of opposition political parties in the countries where they want to intervene and non-governmental organizations that defend fundamental rights, lucky Trojan horses.

Therefore, it is not surprising that a journalistic work by Jacobin reveals that, after the death of President Hugo Chávez, the National Democratic Institute, which operates independently of the United States government and was created "to finance and support political parties in the foreigner in a more formal way than the Central Intelligence Agency, funded members of the Venezuelan opposition to use the social media giant [Facebook] to mobilize their supporters and attract supporters of the socialist government 'across the hall.' " .

IN 2015 THE NED TRIUMPHED

Documents from the United States government on a request for the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) arrived at the newsroom of the US media , demonstrating how the government developed a program focused on the use of Facebook to help the Venezuelan opposition. in the municipal elections of 2013 and the legislative elections of 2015. Basically, the document confirms that social networks are actively used to interfere in the elections of other countries.

Thus, the empire operates as one more element that is added to the electoral processes in the countries where they want to intervene. Did you activate this machinery for the mega-elections next Sunday, November 21?

It is enough that an autonomous government of the imperial designs is installed so that the United States, through its agencies, begins to promote, advise and finance the campaigns of the opposition parties. There is evidence that agencies such as USAID have not only spent millions of dollars in the campaigns of the different opposition candidates throughout these years of the Bolivarian government, they also invested in the Bolivian opposition as soon as Evo Morales took power.

"As of October 2013, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a government agency created by the Reagan administration, provided nearly $ 300,000 to the National Democratic Institute (NDI). English) for a program entitled Venezuela: Enhanced Training and Communication Skills for Political Activists . The NDI was also founded under the Reagan administration, as the international arm of the Democratic Party, along with its Republican counterpart, the International Republican Institute, "the newspaper reported. U.S.

It is worth noting that both institutes do not show rivalry and pursue the same imperial objectives, even on many occasions they work together and support the same actors.

They also point out that the NED serves as the parent agency for both groups and receives almost all of its funds from taxpayers. Although the NED and the NDI claim their independence from the US government, both must report their activities to Congress, which remains subject to FOIA requests.

The NED justifies the existence of the program by arguing that the Venezuelan government has sought to "control the media" of the country to use them as a tool of coercion against its citizens. Therefore, the US body assumes the task of pointing out that "political activists have particular challenges in communicating with citizens, as well as in organizing and mobilizing their supporters," while referring to the fact that social networks are "less vulnerable to social media. government restrictions and a useful tool for independent political activists in Venezuela to spread messages and organize. "

Jacobin points out that although the NED carefully describes these activists as independent, it is clear that this program was designed for activists and members of the Mesa de la Unidad Democrática (MUD), an organization that brings together several of the most important opposition parties in Venezuela.

Let us remember that since 2008 the MUD has sought a way to seize political power through a consensus candidate against members of the Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) in presidential electoral contests.

The US media points out that after the death of Chávez in March 2013, and the subsequent presidential victory of Nicolás Maduro the following month, the opposition began to develop strategies for the municipal elections of December 2013 and, more importantly, the elections. legislative 2015.

The result was a fierce campaign that aimed at wear and tear and fear, in which elements such as scarcity, hunger, inflation, among others, were used, which undoubtedly had an impact on society.

FACEBOOK AT THE SERVICE OF THE EMPIRE

It is here where the NED and the large media corporations designed the roadmap to follow, playing an important role in consolidating the victory of the MUD in the 2015 parliamentary elections, the immediate precedent of the subsequent political and social crisis.

The NED reports that at that time, although social networks were key to contemporary political organization, the Venezuelan opposition was not equipped in "the use of social networks and other information and communication technologies (ICT)."

In response, the NED funded the NDI to provide various services to the Venezuelan opposition. His first job consisted of planning and organizing "a seminar outside of Venezuela on the use of technology and social networks for citizen participation and participation."

In addition, NDI created a "Virtual Toolbox" hosted on a respective site entitled Innovation Network , a site also funded by NED, which offers a "personalized online capacity-building course on a variety of innovation-related topics. politics". According to Jacobin's research , the site and its courses remain active.

After the municipal elections of December 2013, the media said, NDI staff organized a "strategy review session" with members of the opposition "to develop longer-term strategies to maintain contact with citizens and improve their ability to communicate and disseminate information using ICT, "a follow-up that resulted in the improvement of the strategies that later consolidated the triumph of 2015. In addition, the NDI hired a consultant for permanent training.

"With funding and training from NDI, the MUD 'mobilized a voter database that identified and targeted undecided voters through social media' and in fact, in December 2015, the opposition won a majority in Venezuela's National Assembly for the first time since Chávez came to power in 1999. The NDI describes how the MUD created a database of voters, allowing them to 'extrapolate conclusions about political partisan leanings to large portions of the electorate ... calculate the probability that a voter is a supporter of the PSUV, a supporter of the MUD or an undecided voter, '"says Jacobin .

Later, this database would serve to classify voters according to their political inclination. Thereafter, the NDI describes the specific way the MUD used Facebook to reach these groups: Chavistas, opponents, and undecided.

"The MUD ran its social media campaign on Facebook, targeting voters with different messages taking into account their political leanings. Using its database, the campaign also identified 8.5 million voters on Facebook and targeted them with equally specific messages. Facebook metrics indicated that targeted messages were reaching more people than previous campaigns. By Election Day, the campaign reached 6.3 million voters and 2.9 million voters had interacted with the Facebook content of the campaign at least once ", they detail.

It is clear that the success of the opposition in 2015 is due to financing by the interventionist arms of the United States, organizations that allied with one of the Silicon Valley giants in the imperial strategy of removing Chavismo from power. Another element that is added to the history of espionage and sale of user information that became a scandal that caused millions in losses to Mark Zuckerberg's company.

The National Democratic Institute , in the end, takes credit for the success of the opposition and argues that its strategy "finally played an important role in its resounding victory in the 2015 elections," an achievement that is due to the training and financing of the United States. the MUD. It is highly unlikely that they could be similarly successful, despite imperial support.

https://misionverdad.com/venezuela/face ... -venezuela

Google Translator

Gotta beware Jacobin, masters of damning with faint praise and the limited hangout.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10587
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Venezuela

Post by blindpig » Thu Nov 18, 2021 3:22 pm

WHO ARE THE DELEGATES TO THE CARTER CENTER ELECTION MISSION?
16 Nov 2021 , 10:00 am .

Image
The rector of the CNE, Tania D'Amelio, meeting with members of the Carter Center, including Andrea Nelli (Photo: @taniadamelio / Twitter)

Last October, the National Electoral Council (CNE) of Venezuela and the Carter Center signed a memorandum of understanding to guarantee the impartiality and objectivity of the observer mission that this body will deploy in the electoral process on November 21.

The highest electoral authority in Venezuela promised to guarantee the observation mission freedom of access to its facilities, to the subordinate electoral bodies and to all information on the electoral process. After the elections, the Carter Center mission will report to the CNE.

In this sense, it is appropriate to disseminate part of the profiles of these representatives, perhaps the most important on Venezuelan soil, as they could be key to analyzing the role that the Carter Center could play when the regional and municipal elections come to an end.

SALVADOR ROMERO BALLIVIÁN

Of Bolivian nationality, he appears as a member of the category of "consultant" of the electoral mission of the Carter Center present in Venezuela.

With the profile of a political sociologist and writer, Romero has a long and controversial career in electoral matters in Bolivia.

In 1998 Romero was the national coordinator in Bolivia of Fundemos, a foundation that functioned with funding from the German government.

In 2004, the government of Carlos Mesa appointed him Vocal of the Bolivian CNE (former electoral body) by the Executive Power. There he served as vice presidency and presidency exercising a mandate from 2004 to 2008, witnessing from his position the political transition that gave way to Evo Morales.

However, from his responsibilities in the Bolivian electoral body and after serving in it, Romero was an informant for the US government. According to cables leaked by WikiLeaks, Romero gave briefings to the US ambassador to the Andean country Philip S. Goldberg and his successor, Ambassador Michael Hammer, finding reports of his collaboration with the Americans in 2007 , 2008 and 2009 , according to WikiLeaks .

According to the diplomatic cable leaked by WikiLeaks in 2007, Romero went to the US embassy to denounce the alleged intentions of Evo Morales to "co-opt the independent electoral body." Romero expressed to Ambassador Goldberg concerns about the referendum that would give shape to the new Constitution of the Plurinational State that year and affirmed that he would hold on to his position until 2008.

In another vein, Romero has been singled out for favoring the flow of resources from the National Foundation for Democracy (known as NED), an arm of the US government, specifically in Honduras , after the overthrow of Mel Zelaya. Romero has been an active factor, from Bolivia, in soft power operations in the Central American nation and such has been his activism in that country that he has been questioned in Bolivia for doing so while holding positions in the Andean country.

In November 2019, he was appointed Member of the Supreme Electoral Tribunal (TSE) by the de facto president Jeanine Añez. Through an electoral body imposed by the coup government, Romero was elected President of the TSE.

Image
TITLE TEXT:
Salvador Romero was the highest representative of the Bolivian TSE during the dictatorship of Jeanine Áñez
CREDITS:
File

Romero was questioned by political actors in Bolivia for having caused delays in the presidential elections of 2020 on successive occasions, in actions and decrees considered "outside the law" by the leaders of the Movement to Socialism (MAS), Evo's party. Morales and Luis Arce.

Romero left office at the TSE in April 2021, but in June of this year the ousted former president of the Andean country, Evo Morales, declared that Romero should be investigated when solid indications were revealed of a conspiracy forged by way of fraud against the election of 2020 and via a classic coup, so that Luis Arce did not assume his mandate.

JENNIE LINCOLN

According to a profile posted on the Carter Center website, Jennie Lincoln is a senior advisor on peace initiatives in Latin America and the Caribbean. She is also a professor at the Sam Nunn School of International Affairs at the Georgia Institute of Technology, where she teaches Latin American politics and US-Latin American relations.

Despite her purely academic profile, Lincoln has been involved as a thinking piece in the extensive policy of US "security" on the continent, having been a policy advisor for the US Southern Command, the prolonged military arm of that country. On an inter-territorial scale, and it is worth adding, it has been a factor of open military threat against Venezuela.

Additionally, Lincoln serves as an adjunct professor at the US Department of Defense Security Assistance Administration Institute at Wright Patterson Air Force Base.

The observer referred in advance to the elections in Nicaragua, specifically in June of this year, clearly out of time for the development of this election, declaring them fraudulent in advance. Lincoln compared the actions of the Nicaraguan government with practices of the Nazi "Gestapo", arguing that the imprisonment of violent extremist opponents in the Central American nation was far from "international standards."

In his statements on Nicaragua in June, Lincoln dismissed the prolonged cycle of political violence perpetrated by opposition leaders to Daniel Ortega who were brought to justice.

After the recent elections in Nicaragua, Lincoln again spoke at a conference on this country, predicting an "international reaction" for the elections, for not being, in his words, "credible or inclusive", supporting the discourse that has cemented the programmatic route of coercive and unilateral measures, recently made against Nicaragua and its government officials.

In 2020, Lincoln, along with David Carroll, the director of the Carter Center's democracy program, communicated in response to the Venezuelan opposition party Prociudadanos, led by Leocenis García, where they responded negatively to an invitation from that political organization to do steps to observe last year's parliamentary elections.

"We believe that the necessary conditions are not currently in place for a transparent, inclusive, free and fair electoral process that allows the deployment of an International Electoral Observation Mission," they responded about the 2020 elections.

Indeed, the Carter Center did not send an electoral mission to Venezuela in the last parliamentary elections.

Image
TITLE TEXT:
Lincoln had already anticipated, months before, to pass a personal judgment on the supposed fraud that would be the presidential elections in Nicaragua on November 7
CREDITS:
File

ANDREA NELLI FEROCI

He is associate director of the Democracy program at the Carter Center. Its origin is from NGOs. He has worked for international and multilateral organizations, including the United Nations Development Program ( UNDP), the United Nations Office for Project Services ( UNOPS) and the European Union (EU), as well as for international NGOs Oxfam International, Christian Aid and Agenfor International, as indicated by their profile on the Carter Center site.

Nelli Feroci participated in the efforts of the Carter Center and carried out observation tasks of the disputed elections in Honduras in 2017, without said organization publicly making adverse comments to the election.

He also managed policy-focused initiatives in Latin America for the Carter Center, where he also led a research initiative to analyze the implications of China's growing presence in Latin America and the Caribbean and its impact on the region's Sustainable Development Goals.

Previously, he coordinated Oxfam research and policy in Latin America and the Caribbean and supported research initiatives in Oxfam's special program to support "civil society" networks in BRICSAMIT countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Mexico, Indonesia and Turkey).

https://misionverdad.com/venezuela/quie ... tro-carter

Google Translator

Just cause they ain't sending John Bolton doesn't mean that the fix ain't in. Much more plausible to use a bunch of faceless bureaucrats, especially if they have been associated with NGOs not recognized by the public as tools of empire.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10587
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Venezuela

Post by blindpig » Mon Nov 22, 2021 3:21 pm

THE ELECTORAL OBSERVATION MISSION THAT CAME FOR WOOL AND HAD TO BUY POPCORN
Augusto Marquez

20 Nov 2021 , 4:20 pm .

Image
Observers deployed in Venezuela fulfilling the agenda (Photo: EU EOM)

A troublesome situation in life is that you set out to do something and end up doing something else. It happens at home, at work and, above all, in politics, which has never stopped being measured by its results.

Now, the European Union will have to measure the results of its Electoral Observation Mission in Venezuela (EU EOM) based on why they came to Venezuela, is supposed to accompany a democratic electoral process, and how they ended up meeting (and taking scolding, surely) of factors that do not know what to eat that of democracy and that much less can show a result in politics.

Already the statements of the head of that mission, Isabel Santos, about the episode of the slap that Yusef gave De Grazia in Bolívar state, said that there is a problem in analytical aim. When he said that it was a "small incident" in a "highly polarized electoral environment", as happens "in many parts of the world", he stopped saying that violence is the most notable contribution of a certain anti-Chavismo, after the robbery and murder. and that it polarizes them that there is a sector that rejects it a priori.

Santos met last Thursday, November 18, with Juan Guaidó to "discuss the political situation in Venezuela," say the media, but how he meets with someone who says he does not believe in the electoral process even though he registered candidates is not much understood; and that, in addition, he has given up politics for a long time.

As is known, the interim fake has continuously declared against the regional and municipal elections (or mega-elections) that will take place this November 21, last May it stated that they would not lend themselves to "farces", qualifying the National Electoral Council (CNE ) of "absolutely illegitimate".

Who has been a key player in the looting of assets from his own country said that "there is a CNE designated in an irritant way, absolutely illegitimate in origin and the main thing is that we need an agreement, everything has to do with the conditions. For farces We are not going to lend ourselves ", but, as he does not know how to sing, the little dull song that ended in" free elections "was not released.

The same "opposition leader" (as the agencies resigned to call him) who decided on his own how long he will be interim president, or whatever they want to call him in Plaza Sadel, its surroundings and similar places, democratically decides when and when elections are valid. no, but everyone knows that he is not the one who decides what position to take on this matter.

In addition, Santos had a meeting with another abstentionist: María Corina Machado. This has openly rejected the participation of anti-Chavismo in the elections, in September it assured that in Venezuela the technical, political or logistical conditions for the deployment of an electoral observation mission are not given and on Wednesday 17 of this week it declared: "Serious error This does not help the democratic struggle of the Venezuelan people, but rather the permanence of the regime "(I owe them another three or four r's).


Machado shot them that their decision "violates the technical and political standards of the EU" for an electoral observation manual, which "affects their credibility." Knowing the character, he surely told her at the meeting last Thursday, she loves to make friends and surely Mrs. Santos would be left wondering why she meets with someone who does not believe in the topic of the meeting or the mission . I said: he proposed to do something but something else came out, orders are orders.

What is tragicomic about Guaidó, going back to the original pathos, is that he even nominated candidates for the elections, several former officials and fans of his fake government signed up and even threw their fight to let them participate. They had not gotten off the plane and were already nudging to be allowed to pronounce on anything they saw on the street, but above all to say "What balls, there is a hole in an avenue, this looks like a blocked country!"

It is not how the media posters want us to believe, that "they ignored him and signed up" is more false than a white-handed hunger strike, they signed up because their original plan is to assault the State whatever, from a mayor's office even a seat in the AN.

Those who drank the whiskeys with Guanipa, Scarano and Olivares, but did not leave, tell their civil society that they never left them alone, nothing more and nothing less. Nobody found out, but they were here asking for "sanctions" or letting them run without complaint, but here, working ... or declaring, as necessary. Other members of the troupe offer press releases to the candidates, in addition to other elements of media coverage at USAID prices because, apparently, they have already eaten the remittance.

Meanwhile, Mrs. Santos watches and writes down. It is almost impossible that she did not have an impression on María Corina similar to the one that travels throughout Venezuela, but she came to observe and score. For his part, Borrell, who is "convinced" that the work of the electoral mission "will be an important contribution to a peaceful solution controlled by the Venezuelans" has a lot to control but in the political sector that he supports.

In the end everything turns out well for them, with applying one of Abrahms and calling them mediocre, but with tender words, the EU and its superiority will come out well, to hide how the trail smells to the gringos is enough.

More if they put a marinade of "they have to be credible, inclusive and transparent" to the elections of the countries that they choose to intervene. Nobody has measured that credibility, but aha.

Meeting with the EU to tell them that they have nothing to do here because, according to her, these elections will be of no use is the least sepoy that María Corina could have said for a long time. Assuming that there are about 20 anti-Chavista candidates for each Chavista candidate, it could have been the first truth that Guaidó would have said in a long time.

They continue to ask for abstention and the people continue to go out to vote, for more pain: Chavismo continues to win elections and consolidate spaces to resist the fight that the United States has sworn to us.

https://misionverdad.com/opinion/la-mis ... ar-cotufas

Google Translator

*************************************************

Venezuela: Chavismo Wins Governorships in 20 of 23 States

Image
A man casts his vote, Caracas, Venezuela, Nov. 21, 2021. | Photo: Twitter/ @ALBATCP

Published 21 November 2021 (11 hours 7 minutes ago)

"It is a victory for the humble people, the noble people of Venezuela, who have endured a brutal war," President Nicolas Maduro stressed.

Venezuela's National Electoral Council (CNE) President Pedro Calzadilla reported a 41.80 percent turnout in Sunday's Subnational elections.

Having counted 90.21 percent of the ballots cast in the elections, Calzadilla reaffirmed that the elections took place in a peaceful environment.

The United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) candidates hold leads in 20 out of 23 states for the governor's race.

Meanwhile, the opposition coalition United Democratic Table (MUD) candidates secured a lead in the Cojedes and Zulia states. Neighbors Force (FV) party secured the other governor post for opposition sectors in the Nueva Esparta State.

"Nothing disturbed the electoral process ... International observers move freely throughout the country to verify the electoral process... It is a victory for the humble people, the noble people of Venezuela, who have endured a brutal war," President Nicolas Maduro stressed.


Over 21,000,000 Venezuelans were called to cast the ballots to elect 23 governors, 335 mayors, 253 lawmakers, and 2,471 councilors.

The CNE delivered credentials to over 300 international observers from 55 countries and institutions such as the European Union (EU), the United Nations (UN), and the Carter Center.

Nearly 70,000 candidates from all political forces in the South American nation contested the elections. They represented 37 national political parties and 43 regional organizations.

https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/Ven ... -0015.html

*****************************************

Image

Venezuela: The Dictatorship of Democracy
November 21, 2021
By Marcos Maranges – Nov 18, 2021

On this coming Sunday, November 21, Venezuela will go to regional and local elections to vote for over 3000 public officials. However, some governments and people still think that the country is a dictatorship ruled by President Nicolás Maduro. We all know where these words come from, but despite it, is there any solid evidence or argument to believe it? The upcoming electoral process gives us the perfect context to put a light on this issue.

In this opportunity, the right-wing parties have proposed candidates for the first time since 2018. The Venezuelan opposition intentionally missed three elections prior, arguing that there were no democratic guarantees in the country. Nevertheless, they have come back now, even when no major change has been implemented in the electoral order. The strategy was clear, targeting the Venezuelan democracy. This attitude was part of its role in the regime change project against President Maduro’s government, but now they are back to elections.

They tried to discredit the country’s democracy, but that did not work, and now they are back. After countless government attempts to establish a dialogue, the opposition agreed to negotiate in Mexico and signed a memo with the government on August 13. What kind of dictator is Maduro when he encourages the opposition’s participation in every election?

Over 80 political parties and regional organizations have presented candidates for this election. Meanwhile, the governing United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) organized primary elections where over three million people cast their votes and decided on their candidates. This figure represents over 10% of the country’s electoral roll (21 million people) and tells us that Maduro is a popular “dictator.”

The National Electoral Council (CNE) has been working hard during the last months, and it even has four new members, who were elected by the National Assembly last May, among them its President Pedro Calzadilla. The electoral authority will deploy over 30,000 polling machines, which have been audited 19 times before being used in the election. The Bolivarian National Guard will also take part in the election day, to safeguard polling stations and voters from terrorist acts, like the one they dismantled a few days ago when four individuals linked to the opposition fugitive Leopoldo López were arrested before they could destroy a CNE warehouse using explosives and gallons of fuel.

According to experts, Venezuela’s electronic voting system is one of the most upgraded in the world. Some people (including former US president Jimmy Carter) say that it is the best and most transparent system with biometric authentication since 2012 and seven verification steps, which reduces chances of fraud to practically zero. Even though some foreign governments continue to repeat, ad nauseum, that Venezuelan elections are a fraudulent, it is like throwing stones at their neighbors while living in a glass house.

Dictatorial Venezuela is not satisfied enough with its high-tech anti-fraud system, and has invited over 300 international and national observers to oersee the process. The European Union sent over 30 people, while the United Nations (UN) sent an expert panel. Nothing seems like it’s enough for Venezuela when it comes to electoral transparency.

Democracy is a pillar of the Bolivarian Revolution, started by Hugo Chávez in 1999. The campaign orchestrated by the western right-wing to depict the country as a totalitarian regime clashes with the democratic character of the PSUV and the many transparent measures taken by the government and the electoral authority. Even with all this the smear campaign keeps going, so they can retreat to screaming “fraud” every time they lose an election.

The truth is that calling Venezuela a dictatorship is a joke. It is probably the only country in the world that has held nearly 30 elections in the last 22 years. So after all this if somebody still insists on calling the South American country a dictatorship let’s at least be fair and call it the “dictatorship of democracy.”

https://orinocotribune.com/venezuela-th ... democracy/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10587
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Venezuela

Post by blindpig » Tue Nov 23, 2021 3:02 pm

The Venezuelan Elections Represent A Victory of Democracy

Image
Citizen at a polling station, Venezuela, Nov. 21, 2021. | Photo: Twitter/ @FraseSimple

Published 23 November 2021

The 2021 elections created greater opportunities for calls for unity to consolidate. This will allow national and subnational authorities to work in favor of economic development.

The results of the Venezuelan subnational elections held on November 21 ratified the democratic character of the Bolivarian people and their commitment to peace. Citizens went to the polling stations in a process described as successful by international companions, political parties, and authorities. Electoral attendance reached 42.26 percent of the people called to vote.

Venezuelans elected 23 governors, 335 mayors, 253 legislators, and 2,471 councilors. For the first time since 2007, the opposition participated in the democratic process.

People Ratified The Chavista Leadership

The Great Patriotic Pole (GPP) alliance, which is made up of political organizations that support the President Nicolas Maduro, obtained 18 out of 23 states in dispute. The United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) and its allies also obtained 205 out of 335 mayoralties.

These results show that the revolutionary forces are willing to continue promoting the legacy of Commander Hugo Chavez despite the U.S. blockade, which has seriously affected the population's daily well-being. According to the political analyst Franco Vielma, the Chavismo's electoral victory is very significant because it happened "in asymmetric and unfavorable conditions. The revolutionary forces won despite the accumulation of foreign pressure and the damage to the country's economic structure caused by the blockade. A victory in these conditions is no small thing."

The Mission Verdad Editor Ernesto Cazal commented that "the participation of Chavismo has given a resounding victory to the revolutionary bloc and showed that the opposition forces are clearly divided. Voters reaffirmed Chavismo as the main political force."

Radical Opposition Resumes Peaceful Struggle for Power

One of the main achievements of the dialogue between the Venezuelan government and the opposition was the return of the most belligerent opposition sectors to non-violent political struggle. The 2021 subnational elections evidenced this precisely because they were attended by opponents who had openly rejected the electoral processes for years.

"It is a matter of time for those extremist sectors to return to the electoral path. Democratic institutions are stronger than ever," President Maduro said in August.

According to CNE data, Democratic Unity Table (MUD), the largest opposition party, won the governments of the states of Cojedes and Zulia, while Neighborhood Force (FV) won in the state of Nueva Esparta. Two of the opposition candidates were re-elected to their positions as governors.

Regarding the results of the mayoralties, the MUD won 59 mayoralties, the Democratic Alliance achieved control of 37 cities, and other opposition groups achieved 21 mayoralties. Once the official results were known, the opposition candidates expressed their opinion on the lesson left by the Venezuelan people in the elections.


"Politics cannot be practiced seeking division. Nor can it be exercised from social networks, which will never replace direct contact with the people," said Manuel Rosales, an opposition politician who was reelected as governor of the state of Zulia.

"The opposition made mistakes for many years," said David Uzcategui, a FV politician who ran for governor of Miranda state but lost to the PSUV candidate. His statements reveal the existing division between opposition groups, which could not agree to present a single candidate for each position in dispute. On Sunday, he acknowledged that his group lost about 44,000 votes because the MUD leaders gave wrong, contradictory political messages to their followers.

The Unit for National Development Becomes a Priority

The National Assembly (AN) President Jorge Rodriguez affirmed that "the first and main defeated" in the elections was violence. "We defeated those who argued that the elections were not the way to resolve political conflicts among Venezuelans. They received their dose of loneliness on November 21 because they aspired for electoral abstention to be immense," he said.

In the legislative elections held on December 2020, the most radical opponents called on the population not to vote and not to recognize the electoral results. Eleven months later, however, they participated in the subnational elections and called on their supporters "to vote to make a difference."

The 2021 elections also created greater opportunities for calls for unity to consolidate. This will allow national and sub-national authorities to work in favor of economic development and the defense of sovereignty. The electoral results reformulated "the political equation" since the trends towards political stability and economic recovery will allow political actors "to do what they have to do without leaving anyone behind," Vielma explained.

"We are going to guarantee with our work a great and powerful destiny to build together the new prosperity," President Maduro pointed out.

https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/The ... -0002.html

*************************************************

'Chavismo Swept The Polls': International Opinions

Image
EU electoral observer watching people who walks towards a polling station, Venezuela, Nov. 21, 2021. | Photo: Twitter/ @LuchoXBolivia

Published 22 November 2021 (21 hours 48 minutes ago)

Despite all the everyday difficulties caused by the U.S. blockade, the Venezuelans gave a lesson in democracy to foreign powers and ratified their willingness to continue the Bolivarian revolution.

On Sunday, a photo went viral on social media: a European Union (EU) electoral observer watched from a terrace at thousands of Venezuelans who were walking together towards a polling station. This image summarized a powerful lesson for history: despite all the difficulties caused by the U.S. blockade against the Venezuelan people, "Chavismo swept the elections."

Below are some reactions to the victory of the Great Patriotic Pole (GPP), a coalition of parties defending the Bolivarian revolution.

From Nicaragua:
President Daniel Ortega and Vice President Rosario Murillo: “United by victories, our brotherhood is further confirmed. These are moments of triumph, joy, dignity, and courage, for the great people of Bolivar and Chavez, your people, Nicolas. We celebrate with you and with the Venezuelan families the successful election day and the formidable results showing the infinite strength of the Bolivarian people and their revolution… Let's go forward, all together, looking at the sun that illuminates us.”

From Bolivia:
President Luis Arce: “We congratulate the Venezuelan institutions and the people who decided to overcome their political differences democratically through the ballot box and banish all kinds of foreign interference. We acknowledge the work of the observers who accompanied this process.”


From El Salvador:
Veronica Marroquin, member of the Political Commission of the Farabundo Marti Front for National Liberation (FMLN): "Venezuela is an example of struggle and resistance against the imperialist boot. We congratulate the United Socialist Party of Venezuela and the Bolivarian people for that overwhelming victory at the polls. Chavismo swept electorally."

From Spain:
International observer and journalist Juan Carlos Monedero: “Today we have to hold these elections because they imply a turning point in Venezuela. They also highlight the prestige and enormous capacity of the National Electoral Council (CNE). With these elections, the government and the opposition recognize each other.”

https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/Cha ... -0007.html
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10587
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Venezuela

Post by blindpig » Wed Nov 24, 2021 2:50 pm

Image

EU Observation Mission: Venezuela’s Electoral Process was “Good or Very Good”
November 24, 2021

After recognizing the balance of Venezuela’s National Electoral Council (CNE), the head of the European Union’s Electoral Observation Mission, Isabel Santos, earlier today presented the preliminary report of its work in Venezuela.

The EU’s Electoral Observation Mission (EOM), which participated as an observer in last Sunday’s elections on the invitation of Venezuela’s government, will deliver its final report between January and February of next year, according to Santos.

“This is a preliminary report to comment on the observations to date,” Santos said at a press conference. “There are still critical stages… I will return to Venezuela at the end of January, the beginning of February, to present the full report.”

The report, written in a typical European supremacist tone, mentioned alleged flaws in the process, and was plagued with familiar US and European talking points attempting to smear Venezuela and its political system. While the preliminary report fails to provide a clear picture of the overall process, it does at one point stress that the observers evaluated the electoral process as “good or very good.”

Santos emphasized that the five CNE rectors achieved improvements in technical components of the elections through internal dialogue. In addition, she added that the three rectors considered close to the government had control of the executive bodies of the CNE, while the other two rectors did not hide their dissenting opinions from public opinion on issues on which consensus could not be reached. She failed to mention, however, that the most important decisions of the electoral authority were taken by consensus among the five rectors.

On the other hand, Santos saluted the CNE for its professionalism and the spirit of cooperation with which it always responded to the requests of the EOM. She also expressed her appreciation to all European observers, as well as to the Venezuelan staff who worked on the process, both in the long and short term.

She also said that the EOM and all the members of the organization adhered to the Code of Conduct, respecting the sovereignty of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.

“All of our observers have adhered to the Code of Conduct,” Santos said. “This means that they have committed themselves at all times to respect the sovereignty of the country, its laws, maintain strict political impartiality and not interfere in internal affairs.”



In this regard, she specified that she will “fight” so that the preliminary text presented this Tuesday is not used by partisan interests.

“The preliminary report that we present today cannot be the object of political opportunism,” Santos said. “It is a technical approach, to an electoral context and an electoral moment lived, and a useful tool to improve electoral processes.”

“We will fight, personally, I will fight any… attempt to interpret this declaration in favor of partisan interests,” Santos added.

Among the advances, the head of the EU Mission highlighted the balance and professionalism on the part of the National Electoral Council.

“The current administration of the National Electoral Council has been the most balanced that Venezuela has had in 20 years, which is key to rebuilding trust in political life,” Santos said. “The five rectors achieved improvements in the technical components of the elections, through internal dialogue.”

On the other hand, Santos described the visit of the EU Observation Mission to Venezuela as “historic,” after 15 years of deciding not to participate as observers in Venezuela’s elections.

“This work has been possible thanks to the invitation of the CNE, I understand that this has also been the result of a process of dialogue between two Venezuelan political factors, all Venezuelan political actors,” Santos said.

In this sense, she pointed out that 136 observers were deployed for election day, from 22 EU member states, throughout all the states of Venezuela plus the Capital District, visiting more than 600 voting centers.


“The elections were a first and crucial test for the return of the majority of the opposition parties in Venezuela,” Santos noted. “The elections were implemented in better conditions in relation to others.”

However, she considered that the “CNE needs to be strengthened in its sanctioning powers,” because—according to the EOM—the electoral campaign “was marked by the extended use of state resources,” as well as “check points, known as red dots (Puntos Rojos) in different states,” despite the explicit prohibition by the electoral body.

Trust in electronic voting
For his part, Jordi Cañas, head of a delegation from the European Parliament, highlighted the trust generated by the electronic voting system on this election day, which passed through more than 18 audits to guarantee the secrecy and accuracy of the vote.

“I would like to highlight the correct functioning of electronic voting as a positive aspect,” Cañas said. He went on to commend the “respect for our observation mission by the CNE, with the proper functioning of the electoral process.”

He also pointed out that the opposition’s decision to participate in these elections led to an EOM being sent to the country, despite the fact that the invitation was made by the CNE.

“We have been able to verify progress in the Venezuelan electoral process, progress as a result of political dialogue,” Cañas said. “The first is the majority decision of the opposition to participate, after years of not participating in electoral contests—a participation that was decisive for the European Parliament to come. Without the participation of the opposition in these elections, there would have been neither an Observation Mission nor a delegation from the European Parliament.”

He also highlighted the participation of women in political life. However, he considered progress in electoral matters to be slow in the country.

“These elections can be a first step, which can only advance in the political dialogue between Venezuelans, which we are willing to take,” Cañas said.



Featured image: Member of European Parliament Isabel Santos, head of the EU EOM to Venezuela, presenting its preliminary report. Photo by EU EOM.

(Últimas Noticias) by Ariadna Eljuri, with Orinoco Tribune content

Translation: Orinoco Tribune

https://orinocotribune.com/eu-observati ... very-good/

***********************************************

Image

Morally Bankrupt US Criticizes Venezuela’s 21N Elections—Venezuela Responds
November 24, 2021

On Monday, November 22, Washington, through the US Department of State, issued a statement about Venezuela’s election process, making remarks against the transparency and reliability of the electoral system of the South American nation.

The new attack by Washington, this time against the regional and municipal elections of November 21, occurred while the international oversight teams continue to report with their observations on the process.

In the official statement, State Department spokesman Anthony Blinken accused the government of President Nicolás Maduro of having supposedly prevented Venezuelans from voting.

“The Maduro regime deprived Venezuelans yet again of their right to participate in a free and fair electoral process, during Venezuela’s November 21 regional and local elections,” Blinken said on Monday. “Fearful of the voice and vote of Venezuelans, the regime grossly skewed the process to determine the result of this election long before any ballots had been cast.”

However, the voting process was peaceful process, and included the participation of more than eight million voters, an increase in voter turnout of almost 10% compared to last year’s parliamentary elections. The vote took place from 6 a.m. on Sunday until late at night, with no incidents that interrupted the schedule, and with the participation of some 70,000 candidates, 67,000 of them from opposition parties.

More conspiracy?

In addition, the document issued by the Secretary of the Department of State of the Biden administration, Anthony Blinken, reiterated the White House’s non-recognition of the elected head of state Nicolás Maduro. It also dare to reiterate that the US regime continues to “support the efforts of the democratic Venezuelan opposition and interim President Juan Guaidó. ”


“We will continue to work with Venezuelan and international partners using all diplomatic and economic tools available to press for the release of all those unjustly detained for political reasons, the independence of political parties, respect for freedom of expression and other universal human rights, and an end to human rights abuses,” the statement said.

These affirmations received a spirited rejection by the Venezuelan government. The Venezuelan Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued its own statement in response, categorizing Washington’s accusations as another failed attempt to discredit the November 21 elections. The Foreign Relations office added that the action is part of the systematic practice of the White House in ignoring democratic processes in sovereign countries.


“It is the height of cynicism that a country in which there is an indirect democracy, with second-degree elections, and that has declared a brutal economic war against Venezuela, that subjects the Venezuelan people to a generalized blockade and that supports a group of criminals who currently plunder the assets of the nation [abroad], pretend to have the morality to question the elections, alleging lack of freedoms or other types of conditions,” read the Venezuelan communiqué.


For his part, Venezuelan Minister for Information and Communication Freddy Ñáñez referred to the “low moral” standing of Washington, which nevertheless tries to give lessons on electoral processes.



Featured image: US Secretary of State Blinken looking pensive during a trade show in Senegal. File photo by Reuters.

(RedRadioVE) by José Manuel Blanco Díaz, with Orinoco Tribune content

Translation: Orinoco Tribune

https://orinocotribune.com/morally-bank ... -responds/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

Post Reply