The Latin America thread

[Jairzinho]

Is it really something (US/Venezuela) that can be accurately summed up by some facts? I mean, if that's all you want you could probably find some in a Daily Mail article or a Guardian one. The very idea of an agenda is entirely subjective though, isn't it? Whoever anyone suggests as a news source will be portrayed as having an agenda by someone.

 

Because so much of the mainstream media is right wing, or more accurately, pro establishment (the extreme centre as Tariq Ali describes them), I want a left wing agenda as a response. It's the only way of scrutinising them. I want resistance to those that control the general narrative. Like you, I'd rather that this didn't have to be the case, but it does.

[Strontium]

I see Obama has signed an executive order declaring Venezuela a national security threat and imposed sanctions. 

 

What this has highlighted for me personally though, is how difficult it is to find impartial news sources these days. I would genuinely like to know what's going on, but all the usual suspects are saying it's justified, and all the other usual suspects are saying it's not.

 

You're never going to find truly impartial sources, are you?

 

For instance, people tend to be split between those who favour democracy and those who oppose it, so you're unlikely to get anyone who's on the fence about it and ambivalent of attempts to curtail it.

 

There was a good article in the Independent the other week, which is hopefully, er, independent enough for you to be able to get the gist of things.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/dissent-in-venezuela-maduro-regime-looks-on-borrowed-time-as-rising-public-anger-meets-political-repression-10070607.html

[Jairzinho]

http://johnpilger.com/articles/the-struggle-of-venezuela-against-a-common-enemy

 

The struggle of Venezuela against 'a common enemy'

 

Albert: Why would the United States want Venezuela's government overthrown?

Pilger: There are straightforward principles and dynamics at work here. Washington wants to get rid of the Venezuelan government because it is independent of US designs for the region and because Venezuela has the greatest proven oil reserves in the world and uses its oil revenue to improve the quality of ordinary lives. Venezuela remains a source of inspiration for social reform in a continent ravaged by an historically rapacious US. An Oxfam report once famously described the Sandinista revolution in Nicaragua as 'the threat of a good example'. That has been true in Venezuela since Hugo Chavez won his first election. The 'threat' of Venezuela is greater, of course, because it is not tiny and weak; it is rich and influential and regarded as such by China. The remarkable change in fortunes for millions of people in Latin America is at the heart of US hostility. The US has been the undeclared enemy of social progress in Latin America for two centuries. It doesn't matter who has been in the White House: Barack Obama or Teddy Roosevelt; the US will not tolerate countries with governments and cultures that put the needs of their own people first and refuse to promote or succumb to US demands and pressures. A reformist social democracy with a capitalist base - such as Venezuela - is not excused by the rulers of the world. What is inexcusable is Venezuela's political independence; only complete deference is acceptable. The 'survival' of Chavista Venezuela is a testament to the support of ordinary Venezuelans for their elected government - that was clear to me when I was last there.  Venezuela's weakness is that the political 'opposition' - those I would call the 'East Caracas Mob' - represent powerful interests who have been allowed to retain critical economic power. Only when that power is diminished will Venezuela shake off the constant menace of foreign-backed, often criminal subversion. No society should have to deal with that, year in, year out.

Albert: What methods has the US already used and would you anticipate their using to unseat the Bolivarians

Pilger: There are the usual crop of quislings and spies; they come and go with their media theatre of fake revelations, but the principal enemy is the media. You may recall the Venezuelan admiral who was one of the coup-plotters against Chavez in 2002, boasting during his brief tenure in power, 'Our secret weapon was the media'. The Venezuelan media, especially television, were active participants in that coup, lying that supporters of the government were firing into a crowd of protestors from a bridge. False images and headlines went around the world. The New York Times joined in, welcoming the overthrow of a democratic 'anti-American' government; it usually does. Something similar happened in Caracas last year when vicious right-wing mobs were lauded as 'peaceful protestors' who were being 'repressed'. This was undoubtedly the start of a Washington-backed 'colour revolution' openly backed by the likes of the National Endowment for Democracy - a user-friendly CIA clone. It was uncannily like the coup that Washington successfully staged in Ukraine last year. As in Kiev, in Venezuela the 'peaceful protestors' set fire to government buildings and deployed snipers and were lauded by western politicians and the western media. The strategy is almost certainly to push the Maduro government to the right and so alienate its popular base. Depicting the government as dictatorial and incompetent has long been an article of bad faith among journalists and broadcasters in Venezuela and in the US, the UK and Europe. One recent US 'story' was that of a 'US scientist jailed for trying to help Venezuela build bombs'. The implication was that Venezuela was harbouring 'nuclear terrorists'. In fact, the disgruntled nuclear physicist had no connection whatsoever with Venezuela.

All this is reminiscent of the unrelenting attacks on Chávez, each with that peculiar malice reserved for dissenters from the west's 'one true way'. In 2006, Britain's Channel 4 News effectively accused the Venezuelan president of plotting to make nuclear weapons with Iran, an absurd fantasy. The Washington correspondent, Jonathan Rugman, sneered at policies to eradicate poverty and presented Chávez as a sinister buffoon, while allowing Donald Rumsfeld, a war criminal, to liken Chavez to Hitler, unchallenged. The BBC is no different. Researchers at the University of the West of England in the UK studied the BBC's systematic bias in reporting Venezuela over a ten-year period. They looked at 304 BBC reports and found that only three of these referred to any of the positive policies of the government. For the BBC, Venezuela's democratic initiatives, human rights legislation, food programmes, healthcare initiatives and poverty reduction programmes did not exist. Mission Robinson, the greatest literacy programme in human history, received barely a passing mention. This virulent censorship by omission complements outright fabrications such as accusations that the Venezuelan government are a bunch of drug-dealers. None of this is new; look at the way Cuba has been misrepresented - and assaulted - over the years. Reporters Without Borders has just issued its worldwide ranking of nations based on their claims to a free press. The US is ranked 49th, behind Malta, Niger, Burkino Faso and El Salvador.

Albert: Why might now be a prime time, internationally, for pushing toward a coup? If the primary problem is Venezuela being an example that could spread, is the emergence of a receptive audience for that example in Europe adding to the US response?

Pilger: It's important to understand that Washington is ruled by true extremists, once known inside the Beltway as 'the crazies'. This has been true since before 9/11. A few are outright fascists. Asserting US dominance is their undisguised game and, as the events in Ukraine demonstrate, they are prepared to risk a nuclear war with Russia. These people should be the common enemy of all sane human beings. In Venezuela, they want a coup so that they can roll-back some of the world's most important social reforms - such as in Bolivia and Ecuador. They've already crushed the hopes of ordinary people in Honduras. The current conspiracy between the US and Saudi Arabia to lower the price of oil is meant to achieve something more spectacular and tragic in Venezuela, and Russia.

Albert: What do you think the best approach might be to warding off US machinations, and those of domestic Venezuelan elites as well, for the Bolivarians?

Pilger: The majority people of Venezuela, and their government, need to tell the world the truth about the attacks on their country. There is a stirring across the world, and many people are listening. They don't want perpetual instability, perpetual poverty, perpetual war, perpetual rule by the few. And they identify the principal enemy; look at the international polling surveys that ask which country presents the greatest danger to humanity. The majority of people overwhelmingly point to the US, and to its numerous campaigns of terror and subversion.

Albert: What do you think is the immediate responsibility of leftists outside Venezuela, and particularly in the US?

Pilger: That begs a question: who are these 'leftists'? Are they the millions of liberal North Americans seduced by the specious rise of Obama and silenced by his criminalising of freedom of information and dissent? Are they those who believe what they are told by the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Guardian, the BBC? It's an important question. 'Leftist' has never been a more disputed and misappropriated term. My sense is that people who live on the edge and struggle against US-backed forces in Latin America understood the true meaning of the word, just as they identify a common enemy. If we share their principles, and a modicum of their courage, we should take direct action in our own countries, starting, I would suggest, with the propagandists in the media. Yes, it's our responsibility, and it has never been more urgent. 

[Stu Monty]

You're never going to find truly impartial sources, are you?

 

For instance, people tend to be split between those who favour democracy and those who oppose it, so you're unlikely to get anyone who's on the fence about it and ambivalent of attempts to curtail it.

 

There was a good article in the Independent the other week, which is hopefully, er, independent enough for you to be able to get the gist of things.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/dissent-in-venezuela-maduro-regime-looks-on-borrowed-time-as-rising-public-anger-meets-political-repression-10070607.html

 

People actually tend to be split on those who favour democracy in some situations depending on the actors involved and some who support it more consistently. That's actually a more genuine split of views. Very few people claim to not be in favour of it.

[Jairzinho]

Those that favour actual democracy and those that favour pretend democracy.

[Jairzinho]

Jen Psaki

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frO1T3vZNrA

[VladimirIlyich]

Democracy? What's that?

I might get to try it one day.

[Jairzinho]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-32261550

 

Obama says ‘days of meddling’ in Latin America are past

 

US President Barack Obama has told Latin American leaders that the days when his country could freely interfere in regional affairs are past.

 

He was speaking just before the seventh Summit of the Americas in Panama City.

 

Mr Obama and Cuban leader Raul Castro shook hands as the opening ceremony began, their first encounter since a December detente.

But their historic formal talks due on Saturday could be overshadowed by tensions between Venezuela and the US.

 

Mr Obama told a forum of civil society leaders in Panama City that "the days in which our agenda in this hemisphere presumed that the United States could meddle with impunity, those days are past".

 

At past Summits of the Americas, which bring together the leaders of North, Central and South America, the US has come in for criticism for its embargo against Cuba and its objection to having Cuba participate in the gatherings.

 

This seventh summit is the first which Cuba will attend and much of the attention will be focussed on the body language between the former foes.

 

Barack Obama and Raul Castro are due to meet again later on Saturday. It will be the first formal encounter between the leaders of the US and Communist-run Cuba in more than five decades.

 

Before the summit began, the US president stressed that he hoped the thaw in relations would improve the lives of the Cuban people.

 

"Not because it's imposed by us, the United States, but through the talent and ingenuity and aspiration and the conversation among Cubans, among all walks of life. So they can decide what is the best course of prosperity."

 

Later, Mr Obama and Mr Castro joined representatives from 35 nations for the summit's inauguration ceremony.

 

A marching band and children in national dress of the participating countries waved flags as the summit opened to applause.

 

Analysis: Vanessa Buschschluter, BBC News, Panama City

 

While Mr Obama name-checked Cuba when he was talking about the US's days of meddling being in the past, the message was equally - if not more so - aimed at Venezuela.

 

Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro has not only accused the US of meddling but of fomenting a coup against his government.

 

His open distrust of Mr Obama was only heightened when the US president signed an executive order last month declaring Venezuela a threat to the national security of the US.

 

US officials have since said the wording was "completely pro-forma" but the damage had been done.

 

It had not only incensed Mr Maduro but also Latin American leaders sensitive to what they see as US imperialist rhetoric.

 

The tone of the summit could well hang on whether Mr Obama's latest assurances sway Mr Maduro and his left-wing allies, who form a powerful bloc at the summit.

 

Mr Obama's speech before the summit came a day after the State Department recommended that Cuba be removed from the US lists of countries which sponsor terrorism.

 

Its presence on the list has been one of the main hurdles on the way to closer ties between the two countries.

 

The president said on Thursday that all he was waiting for now was a recommendation from his advisers, leaving many expecting an announcement at the summit.

 

The smooth progress made between Cuba and the US stands in contrast to the bumpy ride that have been relations between Venezuela and the US over the past months.

 

The two countries have not exchanged ambassadors for more than six years, but tensions rose last month when the US imposed sanctions on a group of Venezuelan officials it accuses of human rights abuses.

 

As part of the sanctions, Mr Obama issued an executive order declaring Venezuela a threat to the national security of the United States.

President Maduro has collected more than 10 million signatures demanding its repeal.

 

Their meeting at the summit, while less historic than the one between Mr Castro and Mr Obama, is drawing as much attention for its unpredictability.

Mr Maduro sent out mixed messages on Friday.

 

In a clear swipe at the US, he visited a monument to the victims of the 1989 US invasion of Panama just hours after he landed.

But he also said that it was "time not for imperialism, but for peace".

 

"We're in a battle of ideas, in a fight so that Venezuela is respected, we're coming here in a constructive spirit, to make history through respect," he said.

[Kevin D]

He should have condemned Kennedy's intent to invade Cuba that started the Cuban Missle crisis and apologised on behalf of the American government, in my view.

[Jairzinho]

He should have condemned Kennedy's intent to invade Cuba that started the Cuban Missle crisis and apologised on behalf of the American government, in my view.

 

I agree, but he's in a pretty difficult position. Quite a lot of America think he's a communist as it is. I've just finished reading a book called Rogue State, recommended by someone on here (Kopout, possibly, and thanks). Some of the stuff the CIA was doing in Cuba (as well as about 50 other countries for that matter) was absolutely disgusting, and at times utterly surreal.

[Kevin D]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-iL1bDR2vak

[Sugar Ape]

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/dec/06/uruguay-climate-change-reform-progress?CMP=twt_gu

 

Where Uruguay leads, the rest of the world struggles to keep up

 

As the world’s most powerful nations squabbled in Paris over the cost of small cuts to their fossil fuel use, Uruguay grabbed international headlines by announcing that 95% of its electricity already came from renewable energy resources. It had taken less than a decade to make the shift, and prices had fallen in real terms, said the head of climate change policy – a job that doesn’t even exist in many countries.

 

This announcement came on top of a string of other transformations. In 2012 a landmark abortion law made it only the second country in Latin America, after Cuba, to give women access to safe abortions. The following year, gay marriage was approved, and then-president José Mujica shepherded a bill to legalise marijuana through parliament, insisting it was the only way to limit the influence of drug cartels.

 

What’s more, the country cracked down so strongly on cigarette advertising, in a successful bid to cut smoking rates, that it is now being sued by tobacco giant Philip Morris.

 

Mujica himself became internationally famous for refusing to enjoy the trappings of presidential power – staying in his tiny house rather than moving into the official mansion – and giving away 90% of his salary.

 

To those who have never taken much interest in South America’s second smallest country, Uruguay seems to be quietly reinventing itself as a beacon of innovation and progress. In fact, the changes fit into a long progressive tradition, stretching back over a century and a half, celebrated by Peruvian literary giant Mario Vargas Llosa in a recent tribute to Mujica’s initiatives on gay marriage and marijuana.

 

In the 1870s, Uruguay pioneered universal, free, secular education, the first Latin American country to make it compulsory for every child to attend school. That focus on education has its echoes in a modern-day policy to give every student a laptop.

 

It was also one of the first countries in the region to give women the right to vote, and legalised divorce in 1907. That was decades ahead of other South American countries, and nearly a century ahead of nearby Chile, which only passed a similar law in 2004.

 

“We must remember that Uruguay, in contrast with most Latin American countries, has a long and solid democratic tradition, to the extent that when it was a young nation it was known as ‘the Switzerland of America’ for the strength of its civil society, deep-rooted rule of law, and for armed forces which are respectful of the constitutional government,” said Vargas Llosa.

 

He traced many of those traditions back to the rule of early-20th-century president José Batlle y Ordóñez, who fought for workers’ rights and universal suffrage, abolished the death penalty and laid the foundations of the welfare state. The country’s level of education, cultural life and civic mindedness had made it “the envy of all the continent”, he added.

 

Not all of Batlle’s successors were interested in his progressive legacy. The country came under the rule of a military dictatorship from 1973 to 1985, when generals jailed huge numbers of political prisoners and earned Uruguay the nickname “the torture chamber of Latin America”. But this century it has been returning to its political roots, to become a model not just for the region, but for the world.

[Sugar Ape]

http://gu.com/p/4ep42?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

 

Venezuela elections: socialists dealt a blow as opposition wins landslide

 

Voters dismiss the party of Hugo Chavez and Nicolas Maduro, handing the opposition a resounding victory and marking a major political shift

 

Venezuela’s opposition has won an overwhelming victory in parliamentary elections in the oil-rich nation, which is mired in economic turmoil and violent crime.

 

Candidates for the centre-right opposition seized a majority in the national assembly, with most of the results in, marking a major political shift in the country, which set out on a leftist path in 1999 under the late president Hugo Chavez and his project to make Venezuela a model of what he called “21st century socialism”.

 

Five hours after polls closed the electoral commission said that the opposition had won 99 of the 167 seats in the national assembly. The socialist party won 46. Twenty-two additional seats were still undecided.

 

Fireworks burst in the sky above Caracas as election officials announced partial results of the vote, indicating the opposition coalition Democratic Unity Roundtable (MUD) had broken the dominion the ruling United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) has held on the legislature for 16 years.

 

“Venezuela wanted a change and today that change has begun,” said Jesus Torrealba, leader of the MUD coalition.

 

“The results are as we hoped. Venezuela has won. It’s irreversible,” tweeted Henrique Capriles, a former presidential candidate and one of the leading figures in the coalition.

 

President Nicolás Maduro said his government would “recognize these adverse results and accept them”.

 

However, he said the outcome of the election did not mean an end to the “Bolivarian revolution” he inherited from Chávez who died in 2013 from cancer.

 

“We have lost a battle today but now is when the fight for socialism begins,” he said in a late night address.

 

Various opposition sources predicted that once counting was finalised, they would win as many as 113 seats. That would give them a crucial two-thirds majority needed to shake up institutions such as the courts or election board.

 

The opposition victory deals a serious blow to the socialist revolution started 17 years ago by the late Hugo Chavez, who until his death in 2013 had an almost-magical hold on the political aspirations of the country’s long-excluded masses.

 

The vote was seen as a referendum on Maduro’s handling of the country, which despite having the world’s largest oil reserves, faces chronic shortages of basic foods, inflation in the triple digits and a wave of violent crime.

 

The government says much of the country’s woes are the result of a “economic war” being waged against the government by the opposition and the United States, exacerbated by the shrinking price of oil, Venezuela’s lifeblood.

 

“The economic war has won, for now, circumstantially,” Maduro said, predicting that the opposition would try to dismantle the gains of the “Bolivarian revolution” which while oil prices were high established a broad social welfare system that won Chávez a fervent following.

 

In the working class 23 de Enero neighbourhood a stylized image of Chávez’s eyes painted on apartment buildings looked down on voters as they cast their ballots Sunday.

 

Carlos Ortega, a retired construction worker and long time chavista, worried about an opposition win.

 

“Things are going to get worse for us,” he said across the street from the school where he had just voted for the chavista candidate of his district.

 

“My pension is going to disappear,” he said. “And I can forget about getting assigned a house through the ‘housing mission’,” said Ortega, referring to a current government program to grant social housing to the poor.

 

“With an opposition win, all that is over,” he said.

 

But Alexandra Barreto, a 32 year old systems engineer, hoped that with the opposition controlling the assembly, the changes will be positive.

 

“Today of you aren’t killed by street crime, you die of hunger or from something as simple as dengue,” she said while standing in a long line in the eastern Caracas district of Petare, waiting to cast her vote. “There is no security, basic subsidized foods are scarce and essential medicines are hard to come by.”

 

Barreto hopes that with the majority of seats in the assembly, the opposition will be able to begin separating the branches of government and reinstate a balance of power in the country. “The Chavistas have controlled the whole state for too long,” she said.

 

The opposition victory was also a major blow to Latin America’s left, which gained power in the wake of Chavez’s ascent but more recently has been struggling in the face of a region-wide economic slowdown and voter fatigue in some countries with rampant corruption.

[VladimirIlyich]

The Neo Cons have now achieved their goal and Venezuela will sink back to Banana Republic levels of existence.

[Strontium]

The Neo Cons have now achieved their goal and Venezuela will sink back to Banana Republic levels of existence.

 

Would it be possible for Venezuela to be more of a basket case than it already is. I doubt that very much.

 

The first act of the new assembly will be to free all the political prisoners imprisoned by the socialists. Long overdue.

[Red Phoenix]

Would it be possible for Venezuela to be more of a basket case than it already is. I doubt that very much.

 

It might've been a lot better if the US hadn't been stirring things up inside the country for so long.

[Strontium]

I fail to see how the unsubstaniated claims of interference would have any impact on oil prices tanking and taking the economy with them.

[Red Phoenix]

I fail to see how the unsubstaniated claims of interference would have any impact on oil prices tanking and taking the economy with them.

 

Well you'd have to look at oil price manipulation, and the fact that the US has been after "regime change" in Venezuela for quite a long time. It's fairly obvious why they're doing it; they're said to have the largest proven oil reserves in the world. I think the US is kind of interested in oil, and that's been more or less accepted for quite some time now.

 

If you actually check the links and have a read for a bit it might be clearer.

[SasaS]

Are Neo Cons back in power?

[Sugar Ape]

I saw a comment before on Twitter I think it was from a Venezuelan saying it's alright us telling them, from our first world country, to rally against capitalism but he's trying to live on $70 a month and he wants a change. 

[Hand Shandy]

He won't get a lot of change out of $70 a month.

[Jairzinho]

I bet he'll be minted now.

[Sugar Ape]

I bet he'll be minted now.

When you're living in poverty and desperate you'll try anything. It reasonated with me what he said because there's a lot of truth in it, I'm sitting here now having a shit typing on my iPhone talking about what the poor bastard should or shouldn't do.

[Jairzinho]

I have very little opinion on what he should or shouldn't do. I feel sorry for him because whatever he picks things will probably continue to be shit.

 

It's so incredibly difficult to analyse politics and economics in South America because of the poisonous influence of the US.

 

Left alone I think they'd probably end up with something inbetween the mismanaged socialism and neo con cuntery that they're no doubt about to experience

 

I don't pretend to be objective here. I've heard stuff from my mother's side of the family that is absolutely heartbreaking.

[Sugar Ape]

I was reading somewhere the socialists have control over legislative powers until 2019 or something so there looks to be something of a stalemate on the cards.