Venezuela's Triumphant Socialist Paradise

#1,351
#1,351
zeppelin128 said:
You don't know **** about me. So take your opinion and shove it up your ass. I do not have a crappy job or wage, not that it is any of your damn business anyways. I dislike conservatives because of this, because of what you are doing right now. You specifically as a person is why I have a disdain for conservatives. So I can put you on ignore or you can block me. Your choice.
Click to expand...

You say this while I’m hated from the people you support just for being a straight white dude.

You consistently side with liberal trash. Liberals are terrible people. Start looking at what trash liberals are and you will start to see the error in your ways.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TN-POSSUM, Big Al Orange and 82_VOL_83
#1,352
#1,352
AM64 said:
I get what you are saying, and why. When you look at Japan in particular, they were monolithic (if that's the correct term ... pretty much one national identity) and easily united behind a leader. The Germans tend to be regimented and, therefore, similar. Iran, Afghanistan, most of South America are more like herding cats ... different reasons but same basic result. S America is a collection of screwed up countries probably due to a temperament prone to corruption and disunity ... a Latin thing we can't fix. So, yeah, trying to fix that on a US model is a problem ... of course, their migrants have no problem with coming here because they like the safety and future that the US model provides them. I'm honestly not sure there is a solution to the Latin temperament with regard to unity and governance.
Click to expand...

Clearly Iraq has a different culture than Germany, and America might struggle reading Venezuela.

But is there really a Latin temperamental aversion to national unity? I don't hear of Uruguay, for example, having problems. (maybe there are and I'm just not aware of it)
 
#1,353
#1,353
Velo Vol said:
Clearly Iraq has a different culture than Germany, and America might struggle reading Venezuela.

But is there really a Latin temperamental aversion to national unity? I don't hear of Uruguay, for example, having problems. (maybe there are and I'm just not aware of it)
Click to expand...

You really can't say it's all due to the Latin influence; but if you look at the part of Europe that's been free, you'd be hard pressed to say Italy, Spain and Greece exactly compete rationally with the other part of Europe. Graft and gangs/cartels or other affiliations of less than savory characters seem to be a prominent South and Latin American feature. Political and police corruption from Mexico to Tierra del Fuego seem to be a feature of most countries in this hemisphere, and Spanish or Portuguese origins appear to be the common denominator ... unless you want to throw in Catholicism, too. The result of poor governance and leadership has generally led to extreme wealth and extreme poverty and not a whole lot in between ... the perfect breeding ground for revolution and particularly of the socialist/communist kind. Castro pulled it off in Cuba and left all but the very poorest worse than they were ... many significantly worse. I guess you have to ask why did we and why did Canada turn out so differently from S America. I keep coming back to the origins ... who colonized the western hemisphere and how and why they did so.

I'll also throw in Puerto Rico. As a US territory they have a lot going for them, but how are they really different from S and L America?
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#1,354
#1,354
Never thought about that. Interesting. Other than Catholicism, and latin i influence...what else do all those countries have in common? Even the ones with fertile soil, and natural resources like Venezuelan oil...still are all 2md and 3rd world countries living decades. Behind the US in most cases. Never thought about it. Correlation and causation are different things, but you may be onto something there.

What do yall think?
 
#1,355
#1,355
AM64 said:
You really can't say it's all due to the Latin influence; but if you look at the part of Europe that's been free, you'd be hard pressed to say Italy, Spain and Greece exactly compete rationally with the other part of Europe. Graft and gangs/cartels or other affiliations of less than savory characters seem to be a prominent South and Latin American feature. Political and police corruption from Mexico to Tierra del Fuego seem to be a feature of most countries in this hemisphere, and Spanish or Portuguese origins appear to be the common denominator ... unless you want to throw in Catholicism, too. The result of poor governance and leadership has generally led to extreme wealth and extreme poverty and not a whole lot in between ... the perfect breeding ground for revolution and particularly of the socialist/communist kind. Castro pulled it off in Cuba and left all but the very poorest worse than they were ... many significantly worse. I guess you have to ask why did we and why did Canada turn out so differently from S America. I keep coming back to the origins ... who colonized the western hemisphere and how and why they did so.

I'll also throw in Puerto Rico. As a US territory they have a lot going for them, but how are they really different from S and L America?
Click to expand...

There's definitely a difference between Northern and Southern Europe, which is mirrored in North/South America.

I wouldn't say that Latins necessarily are going to going to have poor government/corruption, though.

However, this is a good reason for the US to avoid getting entangled in political engineering projects down there.
 
#1,356
#1,356
Velo Vol said:
There's definitely a difference between Northern and Southern Europe, which is mirrored in North/South America.

I wouldn't say that Latins necessarily are going to going to have poor government/corruption, though.

However, this is a good reason for the US to avoid getting entangled in political engineering projects down there.
Click to expand...

Don't you think from a security standpoint it's also a reason to care and be involved? What if Kennedy had allowed the Russian missiles on Cuba? Something like dealing with N Korea only a lot closer. The Russians have been on the lookout for trouble spots to exploit for a very long time, and I hope nobody really thinks they've changed their ways. Sometimes it's better to nip something early than have to deal with it or cower later because of it. I have a hard time with the need to deal with half witted terrorists half way around the world while ignoring the potential of a much closer and far more dangerous threat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 82_VOL_83 and marcusluvsvols
#1,357
#1,357
AM64 said:
Don't you think from a security standpoint it's also a reason to care and be involved? What if Kennedy had allowed the Russian missiles on Cuba? Something like dealing with N Korea only a lot closer. The Russians have been on the lookout for trouble spots to exploit for a very long time, and I hope nobody really thinks they've changed their ways. Sometimes it's better to nip something early than have to deal with it or cower later because of it. I have a hard time with the need to deal with half witted terrorists half way around the world while ignoring the potential of a much closer and far more dangerous threat.
Click to expand...
Nip it. Nip it in the bud!
 
#1,358
#1,358
AM64 said:
Don't you think from a security standpoint it's also a reason to care and be involved? What if Kennedy had allowed the Russian missiles on Cuba? Something like dealing with N Korea only a lot closer. The Russians have been on the lookout for trouble spots to exploit for a very long time, and I hope nobody really thinks they've changed their ways. Sometimes it's better to nip something early than have to deal with it or cower later because of it. I have a hard time with the need to deal with half witted terrorists half way around the world while ignoring the potential of a much closer and far more dangerous threat.
Click to expand...

I don't have a good read on Russia's current posture there. I know they have people in the country, but nothing that would be a threat outside Venezuela.

I could be wrong, but I'm skeptical Russia is willing/able to invest long-term what would be required to maintain a satellite state in South America. It's already stretched kind of thin.

This is somewhat far-fetched, but it's a plausible alternative.

 
#1,361
#1,361
AM64 said:
I get what you are saying, and why. When you look at Japan in particular, they were monolithic (if that's the correct term ... pretty much one national identity) and easily united behind a leader. The Germans tend to be regimented and, therefore, similar. Iran, Afghanistan, most of South America are more like herding cats ... different reasons but same basic result. S America is a collection of screwed up countries probably due to a temperament prone to corruption and disunity ... a Latin thing we can't fix. So, yeah, trying to fix that on a US model is a problem ... of course, their migrants have no problem with coming here because they like the safety and future that the US model provides them. I'm honestly not sure there is a solution to the Latin temperament with regard to unity and governance.

We can either choose to sit back and watch somebody else fill the vacuum ... Russia, Cuba, China; or we can support a faction. I don't think Russia, Cuba, and China have strayed far beyond the old Soviet Union (Russia Inc if you want to get right down to it). They will back a socialist/communist dictator as always with people coming out poorer for it ... at least the ones still living, or we can wade in and try to do something productive (at least there's not the Sunni, Shi'a, Kurd type issue). We should at least find and support a decent anti socialist leader. Whether there's a right or a wrong set of people in our government to do something right is a good question, but allowing the wrong countries to decide what should be an internal Venezuelan decision is no way to go either.

After congress denied the funds that caused South Vietnam to collapse while Russia and China still continued pumping aid to N Vietnam, Nixon stated:



That course seems to make sense in Venezuela. If there is a reasonable opposition, support them; if they are unwilling or incapable of carrying on the struggle, then don't beat a dead horse. Whether people in this country believe (or the media allow them to believe), the people of Venezuela will be the better for our assistance particularly if dictatorial socialism is defeated.
Click to expand...
Issue is they are replacing one socialist dictator for likely another. Yeah this one was elected but I think Madauro was too at some point.

You cant change same for same and expect different results.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#1,362
#1,362
82_VOL_83 said:
The guy they are trying to put in is a hard line socialist. I just don't think he will crush the people with it.......think more of Canadian socialism.
Click to expand...
No he is even further further left than Madauro. Literally spouting the same stuff. Free this, free that, better (more) than they were before. He is just trying to reset the shot clock. We will see of he turns over power, if achieved.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 82_VOL_83
#1,363
#1,363
marcusluvsvols said:
Never thought about that. Interesting. Other than Catholicism, and latin i influence...what else do all those countries have in common? Even the ones with fertile soil, and natural resources like Venezuelan oil...still are all 2md and 3rd world countries living decades. Behind the US in most cases. Never thought about it. Correlation and causation are different things, but you may be onto something there.

What do yall think?
Click to expand...
Saw a video that talked about Brazils problem with geography. Pretty much all of the developed world is north of the equator. It's just a "better", maybe safer, place to live.

Particularly on Brazil they have tons of resources but it's all in the wrong places. Not near rivers, for fast transportation. Or near major population centers. Apparently Brazil made a new capital to be closer to the resources. Which helps, but you can only do so much. But a lot of the country is very mountainous and cant physically have a metroplex develop because of how broken up the country is.

There is something to be said with a true coast to coast set up for a country. Which most of south America doesnt get.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Velo Vol and marcusluvsvols
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top