#nicolás maduro

[sleepytrashred]

Venezuela will be free.

[punishedsaints]

[araguaneys]

so maduro banned twitter now??

[tomorrowusa]

Anne Applebaum's book Autocracy, Inc.: The Dictators Who Want to Run the World was published a few days ago. in the book she describes the basic nature of contemporary autocracies and how they cooperate with each other.

About two-thirds of the way through this NPR audio she pivots from overseas autocracies to talk about how disinformation and outright lies are undermining democracy in the US.

The transcript for the audio can be found here.

A few bits from the transcript:

You know, for a long time, certainly since the end of the Cold War gave us this feeling that our political system was the best and it was inevitably the best, we took for granted the idea that somehow, you know, information was like - was another free market. And there would be a competition in the market between good ideas and bad ideas, and eventually the good ideas would win. That's actually not how it works. And that's not how the news business works anymore. It's not how information works. And understanding how important it is and how important it is to engage in it, both in our country and around the world, I think would do us a lot of good. I mean, we - you know, we sort of stopped competing or - again, out of complacency, out of the assumption that everybody would eventually agree with us, we didn't really have to do anything. We didn't have to try very hard. I think we misunderstood that. [ ... ] I want people to be convinced that ideas matter, that we're going to have to defend and protect our political system if we want to keep it. We have to do that around the world, but we also have to do it in our own country. So much of what I suggest is to do with changing the way things are done in the United States. And much of it is also to do with people becoming engaged in public life, in understanding what's happening, and not just voting, but participating. With autocrats, whether they're in American politics or in Russian politics or in Chinese politics, what they want is for you to be disengaged. They want you to drop out. They want you to become overwhelmed, and they want you to, you know, to say, I can't do anything. It's all hopeless. So it's very important to remember that our ideas are better. And our system is better, and however flawed it may be - and I'm sure you could do another whole radio program about the flaws of the United States and our democracy - it's still better than the autocratic world. And I should also say, it's still the case that our ideas are the ones that people in the autocratic world wish they had. The people who are really the most eloquent spokesmen for freedom of speech aren't the kind of free speech warriors in America. They're Russians who don't have it. And the people who are the greatest advocates for transparency in the rule of law are also people who live in states where they don't have it. And remembering that these are things that we have that they're under threat, and they need to be protected and defended, I think is extremely important.

We fight autocracy by being engaged and by challenging disinformation.

The book is brand new. Here's a link to the publisher's site for Autocracy, Inc.. Take note of the title and author's name and then buy it at a local independent bookstore. 😉

Autocracy, Inc.: The Dictators Who Want to Run the World

@npr

[nico-vega]

En otras noticias ya es navidad en Venezuela 🎄✨

[ms-boogie-man]

According to one of my sources, RDoctorD, a very good news provider, it is over

Above left is the pro-Maduro that occurred in Venezuela this past week. The left-wing media will not show you this On the right is the anti-Maduro march that also occurred. The media put this puny march on blast yo

Too in Venezuela, corrupt Supreme Court Justices have deemed that Elon Musk's bank accounts and other assets should be seized

Tyranny-much?!

Maduro, btw, is a Trump-type leader elected by the will of the people. His win was stolen from him, and he was replaced by Jair Bolsonaro, a true puppet and dictator

Angie/Maddie🦇❥✝︎🇺🇸

[evignonita]

presidentes latinos core ❤️

[welele]

[memenewsdotcom]

US says Edmundo González won Venezuela presidential election

[punishedsaints]

Senator Chris Murphy: "We tried to construct a coup in Venezuela in April 2019 and it blew up in our face".

I want you guys to watch this short video with sound.

[araguaneys]

i want everyone that still doesnt see venezuela is a dictatorship to comment on the timing of a NATIONWIDE BLACKOUT going on in venezuela after people have been protesting and getting arrested for a month, this isnt new the venezuelan dicatorship has been using these terrorism of state tactics for at least 12 years. Theyre letting a country die in the darkness whithout the possibility of telling the world what's going on while hugo chavez's mausoleum is completely lit for no reason. THIS IS VENEZUELA ASK ANY VENEZUELAN most of them have horror stories from the blackouts they've experienced.

EVERYONE PLEASE SPREAD WHAT'S GOING ON IN VENEZUELA THE REST OF THE WORLD ARE THE ONLY VOICES VENEZUELANS HAVE RIGHT NOW THEY HAVE BEEN SILENCING THEM AND SO MANY OTHER COUNTRIES FOR SO LONG.

[warningsine]

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Patricia Torres at The Guardian:

Nicolás Maduro has been declared the winner of Venezuela’s presidential election by the government-controlled electoral authority – a result that appeared to dash opposition hopes of ending 25 years of socialist rule and was immediately contested by his rivals and several governments in the region.

After a six-hour delay in releasing the results of Sunday’s election sparked an outpouring of concern from South American governments, the national electoral council claimed Maduro had won with 51.21% of votes compared with 44.2% for his rival, the former diplomat Edmundo González Urrutia. The council said with about 80% of votes counted, Maduro had secured more than 5m compared with González’s 4.4m. “I am Nicolás Maduro Moros – the re-elected president of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela … and I will defend our democracy, our law and our people,” the 61-year-old proclaimed as he addressed supporters in the capital, Caracas. Independent observers had described this election as the most arbitrary in recent years, even by the standards of an authoritarian regime that started with Maduro’s predecessor, Hugo Chávez. Maduro dedicated his win to Chávez, his late mentor, who anointed Maduro as his successor shortly before his death in 2013. “Long live Chávez. Chávez is alive!” Maduro shouted.

The result was celebrated by Maduro’s allies including the Cuban leader Miguel Díaz-Canel Bermúdez, who hailed a “historic victory” and called it a triumph of “the dignity and courage of the Venezuelan people”. “The people spoke and the revolution won,” he tweeted. Bolivia’s leftwing leader, Luis Arce, also celebrated the result of an election that was held on what would have been Chávez’s 70th birthday. “What a great way to remember the Comandante Hugo Chávez,” Arce tweeted. There was condemnation and questioning from elsewhere in the region, with many convinced the election had been stolen. The US secretary of state, Antony Blinken, said his government had “serious concerns that the result announced does not reflect the will or the votes of the Venezuelan people”.

“It’s critical that every vote be counted fairly and transparently, that election officials immediately share information with the opposition and independent observers without delay, and that the electoral authorities publish the detailed tabulation of votes. The international community is watching this very closely and will respond accordingly,” Blinken added. Chile’s president, Gabriel Boric, tweeted: “Maduro’s regime must understand that the results it has published are hard to believe … Chile will not recognise any result that is not verifiable.” Peru’s foreign minister, Javier González-Olaechea, said his government also rejected the result. “Peru will not accept the violation of the popular will of the Venezuelan people,” he tweeted. The government of Costa Rica said it categorically rejected what it considered a “fraudulent” result, while the president of Uruguay, Luis Lacalle Pou, said the count had been “clearly flawed”. “You cannot recognise a triumph if you do not trust the form and mechanisms used to achieve it,” Pou said.

The Venezuelan opposition leader, María Corina Machado – who had thrown her weight behind González’s campaign after being banned from running herself – rejected the result, claiming the opposition had won in every single state. “We won and everybody knows it,” she said. “We haven’t just defeated them politically and morally, today we defeated them with votes,” Machado told journalists, claiming González had in fact won the contest and should be considered the country’s president-elect. The result was a bitter blow to Venezuela’s notoriously fractured opposition, which had united around the unlikely candidacy of González – a 74-year-old former ambassador and political neophyte - hoping he could help lead the country out of one of the worst peacetime economic collapses in modern history.

Incumbent autocratic Venezuelan “President” Nicolás Maduro coronated himself as the fraudulent winner of the 2024 Venezuelan elections over Edmundo González Urrutia (who is running in María Corina Machado’s stead).

[jrlrc]

El autoritarismo de Maduro

Es Venezuela una dictadura? Para quienes son críticos pero les molesta el análisis -que no hacen- y recurren a la exageración “moral” -creen la tontería de que si no actúan así serán “tibios”-, la respuesta es que sí, Venezuela es una dictadura, y ya… Se enojan si se dice que no lo es pero también si se dice que es un autoritarismo y una cuasidictadura. Son casi tan malos analistas como los chavistas, quienes son los únicos que dicen que Venezuela no tiene nada que ver con lo dictatorial. Otros decimos otra cosa, muy distinta:

Otros hacemos análisis y luego criticamos; criticamos a Maduro -como criticamos a Chávez-, a quien caracterizamos o definimos como autoritario y dictatorial; afirmamos, por lo mismo, que Venezuela no tiene un régimen democrático sino un régimen autoritario, un tipo de autoritarismo, puesto que las elecciones son autoritarias y no democráticas, por lo que vemos no sólo como posible sino como lo más probable que haya habido fraude en la elección reciente; pero decimos también que -a la par de ser un autoritarismo indefendible- no es como régimen nacional una dictadura absoluta y “clásica” de la región. Esto es claro pero aun así es incomprensible para algunos, y no lo es porque sean tontos todos: no quieren hacer ningún esfuerzo para reconocer una complejidad y entenderla, es mucho más rápido y cómodo no pensar nada ni leer nada que no empate al 100% con su pre-conclusión. Y su “conclusión incuestionable” es que Venezuela es simplemente una dictadura, total. Si bien se dice explícitamente, lo que les pasa por encima o al lado es que:

a) Decir que Venezuela no es una dictadura total y típica NO es decir que es una democracia, tampoco es decir que Maduro no es dictatorial. Es decir o hacer un matiz por los hechos y sólo por los hechos: que no literalmente todo en el Estado y régimen político venezolanos es dictatorial; no todo, sí la gran mayoría y todo lo de Maduro/todo lo madurista; dado que hay unos pocos espacios de gobierno local y representación congresional que están en manos opositoras, enclaves democráticos por ser de oposición al autoritarismo dictatorial de Maduro, Venezuela no es una dictadura perfecta (cuantitativa y geoinstitucionalmente perfecta). Es posible, y tal es el caso venezolano, que el poder ejecutivo central sea dictatorial y no todo (en) el régimen-Estado sea dictatorial. Maduro es un dictador, que no tiene una dictadura completa: no dicta en absolutamente todos y cada uno de los espacios de gobierno y puede perder mayores grados de control real y final sobre las elecciones aunque las controle formalmente. Por qué puede perderlos? Porque, como acaba de pasar, él y el chavismo-madurismo son tan malos gobernando -son tan malos sus resultados de gobierno- que el conflicto social es permanente y ese conflicto inyecta cierta competitividad variable a las elecciones, sin hacerlas (REPITO) elecciones democráticas, una conflictividad-competitividad que la oposición puede aumentar bajo ciertas coyunturas. Y eso, ese efecto, es lo que está ocurriendo allá por el sur…

b) Quienes no ven, no aceptan ni quieren pensar mínimamente el argumento anterior, no se dan cuenta de algo más: le quitan méritos políticos preelectorales (previos a la reciente elección) a la oposición, al mismo tiempo que la defienden apasionadamente. Si, además de Maduro ser dictatorial, Venezuela es en el sentido más “simple” una dictadura, entonces, la oposición venezolana en su conjunto nada ha logrado, nada ha arrancado al chavismo-madurismo, no ha tenido ningún éxito de ninguna manera y sólo es víctima y nada más. Pero los hechos son otros: por un lado, que X sea dictatorial no necesariamente es idéntico a que Y sea dictadura; por el otro, la oposición venezolana ha logrado sobrevivir por muchos años ya e impedir por lo menos que Maduro dicte en literalmente todos lados. Es una oposición víctima del autoritarismo de los chavismos pero también es una oposición que a pesar de todo no ha desaparecido y que POR ESO causa la desesperación y el reendurecimiento periódico de “el régimen”, del gobierno central y de la gran mayoría del Estado. Así, esos antichavistas, los del tipo descrito, defienden ideológicamente a los opositores venezolanos pero les quitan méritos políticos de oposición. Yo no los defiendo ideológicamente, es decir, no defiendo la ideología de la oposición venezolana como si (para empezar) fuera monolítica, pero tampoco les quito sus méritos como agregado de opositores. Último apunte, apunte que apuntala nuestro argumento crítico y alternativo: algunos de esos antichavistas con los que disiento sobre la caracterización del régimen venezolano, son los que usan la expresión “presidencia imperial” para hablar en México del régimen priista, sin abusar de la palabra dictadura, y ahí no se equivocan de lleno: el priato no era técnicamente una dictadura, pero sí un régimen autoritario con una presidencia metaconstitucional e hiperpoderosa, sin ser exactamente absoluta, es decir, era “imperial” o “dictatorial” -ciertamente no era una democracia y ciertamente era una presidencia autoritaria más poderosa que cualquier otro actor nacional.

Invito a leer de nuevo, perdiéndole el miedo a la complejidad, a la precisión sobre la complejidad y a la crítica no acomplejada sino complejizada y por eso más crítica:

Adenda técnica: puede haber democracia con enclaves autoritarios, y autoritarismo con enclaves democráticos, porque al decir eso se señalan solamente unos tipos de democracia y de autoritarismo, no toda democracia ni todo autoritarismo, no todos sus tipos. No puede haber dictadura con enclaves (institucionales-estatales) democráticos porque la dictadura ya es un tipo extremo de autoritarismo, y si tuviera esos enclaves -que puede tener otro tipo autoritario- no sería propiamente dictadura. Por lo mismo surgieron y siguen usándose expresiones como “dictablanda”. Para no usar a la ligera, o simplistamente, o exagerada e imprecisamente, una palabra como dictadura, contemporáneamente ajena a su origen formal romano. No por nada uso en el texto otra expresión, cuasidictadura.

[dominiopublco]

Dos mil detenidos en Venezuela tras protestas por elección que dio como ganador a Maduro

La Comisión Interamericana de Derechos Humanos (CIDH) condenó la detención “arbitraria” de manifestantes Continue reading Dos mil detenidos en Venezuela tras protestas por elección que dio como ganador a Maduro