this post was submitted on 01 Feb 2024
124 points (94.3% liked)

World News

38936 readers
2398 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The US has reimposed economic sanctions against a Venezuelan state-owned mining company and says it could go on to reimpose further sanctions on the country’s oil and gas sector after Venezuela’s Supreme Court barred main opposition candidate Maria Corina Machado from running for president last week.

The US Treasury on Monday revoked General License 43, which had authorized dealings with mining conglomerate CVG-Minerven. The Treasury said US companies have until February 13 to wind down transactions that were previously authorized by that license.

While US economic sanctions against the mining company are unlikely to cause significant damage to the Venezuelan economy, the US State Department has crucially signaled it intends to renew oil and gas sanctions from April 18, if there’s no progress between Venezuela’s authoritarian president Nicolas Maduro and the opposition “particularly on allowing all presidential candidates to compete in this year’s elections,” it said in a statement.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 7 points 9 months ago (4 children)

Should Trump be barred from running?

[–] [email protected] 38 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Yes, because he violated his oath of office

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago (2 children)

And that includes upholding the constitution. Not helping poor people kind of violates that in spirit right?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

I have no idea what you mean by this, sorry

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Many believe that your so called help for the poor makes things worse for the poor in the long run. You don't have to agree with their position, but you need to accept that they are reasonable people looking at facts and coming up with a different interpretation.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago

helping the poor actually harms the poor

That's supposed to be a reasonable argument worth entertaining? By that logic, trump violated the Constitution to protect! Do we have to accept that as a reasonable position too, even if we don't agree?

[–] [email protected] -5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Ok. So here's the situation then. In the US, a person that shouldn't be eligible for candidacy is not only running, but leading the Republican primary. In Venezuela, a person that would similarly harm their country is banned from running.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (3 children)

She is barred from office because the Venezuelan supreme court is the legal arm of Nicolas Maduro's Regime. On the other side IQ45 attempted a coup and that makes him ineligible to hold office.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Fix your own stupid supreme courts first before meddling in Latin America.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

We can't fix for what we can't vote in either country. Neither Venezuela or the US of A has a method, limits or guardrails to what these people could do. Also, not a fan of this concept where if the US fix the Supreme Court can meddle anywhere in the world, that view is colonialist AF.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago

Now they're going to make Venezuela people poorer for not fixing problems we can't even fix in our damn country? It seems hypocritical. Hell, people should sanction us for allowing a fascist insirrectiomist run for President against the law ofnour Constitution. That's way worse for the world.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago

I'm not saying I support Moduro, only that I think this is a decision that will protect the most vulnerable people from aggressive and brutal privatization. There are some pretty good parties in the opposition, but Come Venezuela should not be allowed. It would be disastrous for an already struggling country.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago

You sound exactly like a Trump supporter talking about "the establishment"

[–] [email protected] 16 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Well not only does he have shitty policies, he did also attempt a coup. Which is why he should be barred from running.

Stop attempting the false equivalence, it's not working.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Her party tried to rob a military arsenal, she was charged with a conspiracy and corruption, and so she can't run. It went through their courts. It all seems legal, considering people in the US can't run for similar reasons. It might be corrupt, idk, but the US doesn't have a leg to stand on with corrupt courts. Why sanction other countries, which always affects the regular citizens, for this stuff we can't even figure out ourselves?

[–] [email protected] 10 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Yes, because he's a traitor, fraud, and criminal. Your question is not quite the gotcha you think it is.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago

It wasn't intended as a gotcha. I wanted a baseline to know whether the conversation was worth continuing.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago

You literally just proved it is exactly the gotcha you think it is lol

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Yes, because he has been impeached and indicted multiple times for charges related to violations of the oath of office of the presidency.

What are Machado's crimes that she should be barred?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

From what I can tell, conspiracy (against the government), inciting violent protests, and corruption. It's weird they don't say it in the article. But she says the protests were supposed to be peaceful and some of the conspiracy evidence was faked, which it might be, idk, I wasn't in the court room.

But considering the US is still doing shit like this, I could see why they have to be paranoid.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (2 children)

I don't think a democratic process should be limited to only banning people that broke the law. Someone that intentionally wants to harm people through excessive austerity like Machado and Milei shouldn't be able to run.

Remember, Hitler was elected. If a democratic process can't stop a person like that from running, then the democratic process is failed.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 9 months ago (1 children)

This all sounds nice until you realize that a system like this would be easily abused. “I’m sorry, but the one candidate that actually stands a chance against me is banned because the courts full of judges I appointed has determined that their policies are harmful.”

Who gets to be the arbiter of what policies are acceptable and what are not? Let the voters decide for themselves.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

The system can be made robust though. Implementation is also important, and I'm just one person so I'm not going create that framework for an Internet discussion. The question that the framework should rely on power: is the candidate advocating for a distribution of power, or a centralization of power? Privatization seeks to centralize power, for example.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

State capitalism also centralizes power. It’s just centralized with the government instead of a monied class. I don’t think that’s necessarily a problem if there is a robust electoral system and a low level of corruption but I feel based upon everything I’ve read about Venezuela that they’re lacking in both.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago

The conversation drifted to theory rather than current conditions, so I chose to go in the direction of my idealized version of what this framework would look like. You're right, as an ML nation there is still a centralization of power in Venezuela. I don't have the answers for Venezuela, only the people of Venezuela do. However, I think the court made the right decision on behalf of the people, even if I disagree with the undemocratic nature of their courts.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Okay, so you don't believe in democracy.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

I can make reductionist arguments too:

Okay, so you believe it was a good thing that Hitler was elected.