It’s interesting that I agree with you, here. A major difference I see between Venezuela and the USSR is that the USSR generally tried to assimilate, arrest or murder the resistant capitalist classes (ie dekulakization), while Venezuela seems to be generally exiling or marginalizing them.
It’s my understanding that Venezuela has kept its political assassinations and imprisonments low and targeted, which was not the case in the USSR.
Yes he’s certainly an authoritarian. Authoritarian doesn’t automatically mean bad…there’s such a thing as the concept of a benevolent dictator.
What evidence do you have that “the country went to shit” or “Venezuela is not a nice place to live in” or that he’s a “corrupt dictator”?
This original post, presumably, attempts to scratch slightly beneath the surface of what we hear on the news and suggest that your above statements only apply to a certain “deserving” class.
I don’t actually know a lot about Venezuela, and I’m asking these questions in earnest. I started to ask questions a lot earlier, but certainly looking into Maria Machado (this years Nobel Peace Prize winner) made some alarm bells go off. Could it be that the narrative is controlled by Machado and her neoliberal/right wing ilk, and she actually represents a large minority class of people that was purged/displaced in Venezuela?
I’m still investigating.
If you believe culture war spin defines policy…there’s your issue.
Harpers’ culture war posturing wasn’t policy. He was bad, but no worse than Justin - who’s trade and corporate policy was to the right of Harper. Justin, of course, was a culture war liberal with his gender equal cabinet etc
Oh? Not McKenzie King who brought in UI and the Baby Bonus? Not Diefenbaker who mass-funded hospitals? Not Pierre that brought in the Charter of Righrs on Freedoms? EtcEtc. Justin governed right of centre…a boiler plate neoliberal just like Harper was. Pardon me, but you don’t have any idea what you’re talking about.
You’re arguing that the conservatives are worse…I agree with that.
I’m arguing that the Liberals acting like conservatives makes the conservatives tack even further to the right, and we slide and slide into late stage capitalist hell.
Trudeau was to the right of Mulroney and on-par with Harper…you’re just cold-trippin’. He’s not even in the too 10 most-leftist. Now it sounds like I’m listening to conservative propaganda. Totally nuts. Conservative Icon Diefenbaker was more socialist than Trudeau Jr…as was Trudeau Sr, and Pearson, and MacKenzie King, etcetcetc
Dental care was an NDP policy…let’s not rewrite history and forget we literally had a snap election because Trudeau initially didn’t want to pass it.
I mean…I’m sure Che said that tho…
I don’t agree at all that the electorate moved right. Elections are about voter suppression, voter activation, and holding your nose before you vote. This election happened to feature a giant swath of socialist voters abandoning the NDP for the LPC or being suppressed entirely: they didn’t “move right”, they were just swayed by the allure of strategic voting - or turned off entirely.
Then there’s other factors like the chunk of traditional non-voters who were activated by the pandemic…the poor right…maple MAGA. Then there’s the traditional conservative voters (a small group) that stayed home because Pollivre is a bridge too far. Then there’s the armchair liberals that got of their asses and voted for once. On and on. Mash all that together and you have like 70% of Canadians voting…very high, but not great in context. My point is that the same people don’t vote in every election.
Well, there is a large difference between running national economies and running actual banks.
…but what you said is an apt criticism because Carney is a Stephen Harper era conservative banker…and his interim job was working in the ultra capitalist banking system. His economic policy, very broadly speaking, is designed to promote the private banking system…rather than increase social health…like a Yanis Veroufakis type economist from the same era.
I’m not sure what you mean by “just public servants”. I mean…that’s not true…but, yes, austerity governments tend to salivate when they look at salaries as a line-item, and cut labour…because it’s the biggest and bluntest instrument you can show cuts with. But less people means less services - as well as less citizens making a decent wage means a lower bar for the industry. Just take housing…promises promises on units…but actual cuts to the ministry of housing…and his plan, by all appearance, is to infuse the private sector with tax dollars, offload services to the private sector, and provide bubble protection to its investors: when these government jobs are transferred to the private sector, they will come with wage reductions, reduced labour protections, much less transparency and accountability, less customer service, and more AI & automation. With additional cuts to veterans affairs and the CRA (all seeing the same effect as staff cuts do Canadian labour health)…this budget would be indistinguishable from a conservative budget…if it weren’t for the deep 10-15% cuts (I predict those will expand as they get drunk on how it makes their budgets look), which sets it “above” (below!) conservative budgets.
When I said you were speaking like a liberal it was in response to “tricking” Alberta into increasing the carbon tax. The only time I’ve seen the lead buried that deeply is in LPC press material and from its surrogates. Because, as we’ve seen in conservative projects, the perversely named “Build Canada Act” is an “abundance” act that removes environmental/indigenous consultation and regional sovereignty….all while privatizing the project. Yes, there’s lip service and no concrete plan to share royalties with the indigenous lands they pillage - an excellent way to drive a wedge between the IA councils and hereditary councils. There’s always been a form of taxation on tar sands exports…so describing the deal that they worked out (what amounts to an updated royalties deal - it’s dubious the math will math into an increase for Canada) as “tricking” Alberta is just incorrect. Canada is paying for a gift to Alberta and the private sector, for very little return…is the accurate headline.
Trudeau, for as much of a neoliberal as he was, traded boutique service expansions off with his private-public partnerships. Trudeau wanted to increase the capital gains tax and nationalize a pipeline. Trudeau had pet projects like equity and safe drinking water. Trudeau was still nudging Canada right, at large - but at least it wasn’t a disaster. Describing Carney as moving Canada toward the centre is absurd, considering what he’s actually doing. All of Trudeaus trade-offs and pet projects are gone…and it’s all austerity and cynicism now. If these are our supposed liberals…wait til we see how the party in waiting has to reposition themselves to the right of them: yea, what Pollievre is currently virtue signalling to his Rebel News subscribers is absolutely terrifying…but it’s only possible because Carney made many of his previous election promises come true.
“Hasn’t cut much?” He’s cut everything. Of course the conservatives have been forced to promise deeper cuts than the Liberals because the Liberals occupied all their policy positions.
No, cancelling taxes, cutting government across the board, putting the private sector in charge of housing and privatizing pipelines isn’t “moving to the centre”.
Guessing you’re a Liberal…because you’re repeating their PR.
You kidding?
Buddy was elected to “save” us from Polieve’s conservatism and MAGA…and has been the single most destructive force to the fabric of Canada in modern history. He’s cutting deeper than any conservative could ever hope to, as is he privatizing and outsourcing profits.
Just because our (small L) liberals went back to sleep after they think they averted a disaster doesn’t mean it’s not happening.
The worst part is conservatives have no idea how good they have it and they’re treating him like he’s Chairman Mao. It’s Paul Martin all over again.
Our PM is a feckless neoliberal stooge…Banker. He’s basically a northern Democrat…or a bit to the right.
Yeh. The strategy seems to be to wait for their “turn” and make it look like the care while they watch everything they claim to stand for be destroyed.
Things like Hexagons and the golden spiral occurring in nature are interesting - but very well-travelled.
I’ve never lived in Alberta…but I was in BC for ages so I’m familiar.
They, first and foremost, think they’re superior because there’s oil in Alberta. They don’t understand that all of the profits from oil are leeched from their province - or they do understand, but they’re happy as long as Quebecers and “Queers” don’t get a dime. When the province catches fire or there’s a downturn in oil prices…suddenly they’re all socialists. Don’t know how they function with so many conflicting realities.
It’s not just Albertans…it’s many, if not most, conservatives. My neighbour in Ontario idolizes Texas and even flies it’s flag. My sense is it’s just team sports…ideology…partisanship. These folks aren’t honest with themselves, and we can’t expect them to be honest with us.
This behaviour from conservatives obviously begs the question: Why don’t you just move to effing Texas, then? The short answer, as I see it, is because they love to troll and perform because they’ve been radicalized by their particular information bubble. They won’t admit that what they actually want is the best of both worlds: all the benefits of living in a liberal democracy with none of the repercussions or responsibilities of bigotry or stupidity (than they will never ever admit they display).
We also get it from Maduro and the rest of the Chavanistas: his party rules by supreme power and decree. The way his party allocates power as a matter of internal affairs, may be another story.
Please, let’s not talk in absolutes. This notion that any and all narratives that you deem negative are part of a grand conspiracy just isn’t true.
I implied in my original reply that I believe Maduro may be benevolent, along the lines of Castro. I don’t really have a problem with dictators…the problem with dictators is they’re usually fascists. That isn’t the case in Venezuela.