Venezuela inflation so far this year at 128 percent: congress - Polidicks

[quote]Inflation in Venezuela's crisis-hit economy was 127.8 percent in the first five months of 2017, the opposition-led congress said on Friday in the absence of official data. Economic hardship in the country, where many are skipping food and there are severe shortages, is helping fuel opposition protests that have led to at least 67 deaths in the last two months. Various factors underlay the five-month price rise, including excess money-printing by the central bank, restrictions on imports and a recent devaluation of the bolivar, opposition lawmaker and economist Angel Alvarado said.[/quote] [url]https://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-economy-idUSKBN1902CT[/url]

Maduro is a crook and a murderer, and should be tried in an international court for crimes against humanity.

[QUOTE=Big Bang;52348351]Maduro is a crook and a murderer, and should be tried in an international court for crimes against humanity.[/QUOTE] The bigger issue is that Venezuala was utterly dependant on Oil and pretty much the entire economy ran on it. Even if he were replaced by a blessed all knowing democracy today, the issue would still be just as bad.

[QUOTE=wraithcat;52355667]The bigger issue is that Venezuala was utterly dependant on Oil and pretty much the entire economy ran on it. Even if he were replaced by a blessed all knowing democracy today, the issue would still be just as bad.[/QUOTE] no it wouldn't. democracies usually have to appeal to a wider support base, so they'd have introduced some more sane policies because the politicians would otherwise have been thrown out of power if venezuela was actually a democracy it wouldn't be in the midst of a famine right now

[QUOTE=wraithcat;52355667]The bigger issue is that Venezuala was utterly dependant on Oil and pretty much the entire economy ran on it. Even if he were replaced by a blessed all knowing democracy today, the issue would still be just as bad.[/QUOTE] No it wouldn't, and Venezuela has never been as poor as it is now, you're saying that because you don't just how horrible the Venezuelan government is. He is responsible for every crisis the country is facing and there's not two ways to look at it.

but it's ok because it's not real socialism, right?

[QUOTE=hankster112;52363597]but it's ok because it's not real socialism, right?[/QUOTE] the fuck is this supposed to mean? it isn't real socialism

[QUOTE=hankster112;52363597]but it's ok because it's not real socialism, right?[/QUOTE] Which part of Venezuela's 66% privately owned non-worker controlled economy is socialist exactly?

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;52363617]the fuck is this supposed to mean? it isn't real socialism[/QUOTE] President Maduro - Continues with Chavez's policies (socialism) even though they don't work VP El Aissami - Mentored by Chavez's older brother, known launderer and drug trafficker by U.S. President of the NA Borgres - Supported social democrat Manuel Rosales totally not real socialists running a socialist government, right?

[QUOTE=hankster112;52363684]President Maduro - Continues with Chavez's policies (socialism) even though they don't work VP El Aissami - Mentored by Chavez's older brother, known launderer and drug trafficker by U.S. President of the NA Borgres - Supported social democrat Manuel Rosales totally not real socialists running a socialist government, right?[/QUOTE] [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/q1NBznm.jpg[/IMG] Venezuela literally isn't socialist in any way you fucking dolt. They have a nationalized state-planned oil industry, and a privatized "free" market for the other half of their economy. Neither of these are characteristics of socialism - an economic model where workers democratically control production for the benefit of the public.

[QUOTE=nulls;52363704][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/q1NBznm.jpg[/IMG] Venezuela literally isn't socialist in any way you fucking dolt. They have a nationalized state-planned oil industry, and a privatized "free" market for the other half of their economy. Neither of these are characteristics of socialism.[/QUOTE] again with the "not real socialism" argument. every time. it's almost laughable, I didn't think it was true, but holy shit you're all delusional. Again, if NOT SOCIALIST Venezuela is NOT SOCIALIST, then clearly NOT SOCIALIST Maduro's policies should be working. Yet we have a country overflowing with poverty and crime ready to go into civil war because of NOT SOCIALISM, but of EBIL CABITALISM. Am I hearing this right?

[QUOTE=hankster112;52363711]again with the "not real socialism" argument. every time. it's almost laughable, I didn't think it was true, but holy shit you're all delusional. Again, if NOT SOCIALIST Venezuela is NOT SOCIALIST, then clearly NOT SOCIALIST Maduro's policies should be working. Yet we have a country overflowing with poverty and crime ready to go into civil war because of NOT SOCIALISM, but of EBIL CABITALISM. Am I hearing this right?[/QUOTE] Venezuela's economy is failing because it relied on a state-planned oil industry waaayyy too much, which eventually came back to bite them when other nations stopped buying oil from them. This led to unemployment leading to poverty, crime and anger at Maduro's government. Here's an infograph to help you understand the topic of socialism though, if I get banned for meme'ing at least you may have learned something. [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/iRNbxxe.jpg[/IMG] You don't get to label anything you don't like as socialism. Sorry bud.

[QUOTE=nulls;52363740]You don't get to label anything you don't like as socialism. Sorry bud.[/QUOTE] beyond "public control of the means of production", socialists usually fail to actually agree on what socialism is the venezuelan chavistas and their party believe very much that they are socialists and are attempting to enact policies which would move them towards socialism given the public ownership of the major industries and extensive control over the economy by the state, it could be argued (as it was when venezuela was still a democracy) that since the state was owned by the people and directed by them, state ownership (public ownership) of the means of production therefore meant that the public owned it venezuela is a failure due to many reasons, and to ignore the idiotic policies which attacked the very basis of the market economy and nationalized whatever a "capitalist" company was up to is ludicrous [quote]They have a nationalized state-planned oil industry, and a privatized "free" market for the other half of their economy[/quote] what privatised free market lmao does trading smuggled eggs count as capitalism or something

[QUOTE=nulls;52363740]Venezuela's economy is failing because it relied on a state-planned oil industry waaayyy too much, which eventually came back to bite them when other nations stopped buying oil from them. This led to unemployment leading to poverty, crime and anger at Maduro's government. Here's an infograph to help you understand the topic of socialism though, if I get banned for meme'ing at least you may have learned something. [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/iRNbxxe.jpg[/IMG] You don't get to label anything you don't like as socialism. Sorry bud.[/QUOTE] Alright then, tell me what [I]your[/I] idea of socialism is. Not a textbook definition, not from a dictionary, I want to hear [B]your[/B] belief on what a socialist society should look like and how you would govern and manage it [B][I][U]successfully.[/U][/I][/B]

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;52363775]beyond "public control of the means of production", socialists usually fail to actually agree on what socialism is[/QUOTE] Not sure about you, but every leftist I talk with on the subject agrees that socialism is worker's democratic ownerahip of the MoP. They disagree on how it should be achieved or maintained though. [QUOTE] the venezuelan chavistas and their party believe very much that they are socialists and are attempting to enact policies which would move them towards socialism [/QUOTE] I'm sure they do consider themself socialist and I'm sure they do want worker ownership of the MoP. It doesn't change the fact that workers don't currently own the MoP. [QUOTE] given the public ownership of the major industries and extensive control over the economy by the state, it could be argued (as it was when venezuela was still a democracy) that since the state was owned by the people and directed by them, state ownership (public ownership) of the means of production therefore meant that the public owned it [/QUOTE] Yeah, no. That's not what worker ownership of MoP is. If that were the case US federal employees would technically be working under socialism. The state of Venezuela owns and controls production, they simply employ people directly now rather than through a business. State-ownership != Worker-ownership. [QUOTE] venezuela is a failure due to many reasons, and to ignore the idiotic policies which attacked the very basis of the market economy and nationalized whatever a "capitalist" company was up to is ludicrous [/QUOTE] Yup. They shouldn't have nationalized an idustry 90% of their economy relies on. I agree. [QUOTE] what privatised free market lmao does trading smuggled eggs count as capitalism or something[/QUOTE] The one that 4,000+ privately owned Venezuelan businesses participate in (as of 2016. I imagine many have left due to the growing violence and shittier economy).

How in the fuck did this thread get derailed this hard so fast Seriously, every thread involving something negative in Venezuela somebody just has to pull the "oh but its not real socialism" thing out of the blue

[QUOTE=hankster112;52363684]President Maduro - Continues with Chavez's policies (socialism) even though they don't work VP El Aissami - Mentored by Chavez's older brother, known launderer and drug trafficker by U.S. President of the NA Borgres - Supported social democrat Manuel Rosales totally not real socialists running a socialist government, right?[/QUOTE] Idk why you're mentioning Julio Borges, he's part of the opposition, Manuel Rosales is also part of the "opposition" although it is well known he's a secret government ally. They're not comparable with the government, the government is nationalist, populist, militarist, authoritarian, anti-capitalist and want to establish what is basically a command economy while exploiting the fixed exchange rate to become individually rich. The opposition (Which is actually a rather loose alliance of ideologically different parties) seems to be mostly seeking for a system similar to Norway's, in which oil money is reinvested into the country to fund a welfare state under a mostly free market economy. The government has been actively privatising (Yes, you read that right) our natural resources to finance their own corrupt machine. There are international companies mining our diamonds, gold, silver, copper and other minerals. The military is in complete control of all oil exploitation in the country and are accountable to nobody. Russia owns half of Citgo, Petroleos de Venezuela's US subsidiary....Oh yeah, the US, did I forget to mention that the biggest buyer of Venezuelan oil is the United States of America, the "empire" itself? Oh, and of course, Goldman Sachs' itself gave the Venezuelan government a 2 billion bailout recently. In short, the ideology of the Venezuelan government is a complete fucking mess and it's mostly just lies to appease the international left and avoid scrutiny. In reality, the Venezuelan government is nearly a police state which exists solely to defend a small group of elites.

[QUOTE=hankster112;52363811]Alright then, tell me what [I]your[/I] idea of socialism is. Not a textbook definition, not from a dictionary, I want to hear [B]your[/B] belief on what a socialist society should look like and how you would govern and manage it [B][I][U]successfully.[/U][/I][/B][/QUOTE] I've already posted something exactly like this before, but whatever. Most ideologies that advocate for socialism agree for it to be achieved there needs to be a revolution of some kind. Marxist theory says thats disputes between the working and ruling class would grow violent leading to a forceful revolution of workers seizing the MoP. Leninist theory says that workers aren't capabale of organizing themselves, and they need a party to ralley behind which would seize the MoP duribg the revolution, transfer it to the workers, then keep the country on a path to communism (this was practiced in the USSR between 1917 - 1924). Then you have Marxism-Leninism (AKA Stalinism) which doesn't say how a socialist economy should come about, only how it should be maintained. Socialism is literally the worker's democratic ownership of the MoP, acquired through revolution, operated for the benefit of the public. Techincally it's a textbook definition, but it's the definition that leftists agree on, and the definition developed by Marx/Engels. The most realistic way for socialism to come about is through Leninism (in my opinion), in which a vanguard party leads the revolution and takes control afterwards.

[QUOTE]Most ideologies that advocate for socialism agree for it to be achieved there needs to be a revolution of some kind.[/QUOTE] Displace hundreds/thousands of state-employed individuals and their families through intimidation and/or bloodshed and/or death, good start there. [QUOTE]Marxist theory says that disputes between the working and ruling class would grow violent leading to a forceful revolution of workers seizing the MoP.[/QUOTE] Doing exactly what I stated above, gotta love Marx [QUOTE]Leninist theory says that workers aren't capable of organizing themselves, and they need a party to rally behind which would seize the MoP during the revolution, transfer it to the workers, then keep the country on a path to communism (this was practiced in the USSR between 1917 - 1924).[/QUOTE] So find a political party, infiltrate it, destroy it from within, pumping out your ideologies to replace the party's original focus, then seize power using the means above, and proceed down the path to an objectively more radical version of socialism? Sounds like a parasite to me. [QUOTE]Then you have Marxism-Leninism (AKA Stalinism) which doesn't say how a socialist economy should come about, only how it should be maintained.[/QUOTE] Violence. They didn't want to say it because they'd be laughed at/exiled/hanged, but it's violence. That's literally what a revolution is. [QUOTE]Socialism is literally the worker's democratic ownership of the MoP, acquired through revolution, operated for the benefit of the public. Techincally it's a textbook definition, but it's the definition that leftists agree on, and the definition developed by Marx/Engels.[/QUOTE] I'll give you this one. [QUOTE]The most realistic way for socialism to come about is through Leninism (in my opinion), in which a vanguard party leads the revolution and takes control afterwards.[/QUOTE] So you are [I]advocating[/I] for the overthrow of a major government, through [B][I]physical violence[/I][/B] (because new nations were never born from peaceful revolution) to advance a political ideology that has never [I]succeeded on a large scale[/I], which will almost undoubtedly lead to communism, which will also undoubtedly [I]slaughter[/I] its own people to achieve power? Consider mental help. pic also related [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/DFOJqE2.jpg[/IMG] [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Communism memeshit" - Reagy))[/highlight] [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Communism memeshit and threadshitting - Stop it" - Reagy))[/highlight]

[QUOTE=hankster112;52363892]Displace hundreds/thousands of state-employed individuals and their families through intimidation and/or bloodshed and/or death, good start there. [/QUOTE] Ah yes, is this the part where you disregard a factual argument and argue based on misconceptions, strawmen, and feelings? Awesome. [QUOTE] Doing exactly what I stated above, gotta love Marx [/QUOTE] "kill kulaks lmao" - Marx, probably. [QUOTE] So find a political party, infiltrate it, destroy it from within, pumping out your ideologies to replace the party's original focus, then seize power using the means above, and proceed down the path to an objectively more radical version of socialism? Sounds like a parasite to me. [/QUOTE] What the fuck are you on about? Do you not understand what the definition of a vanguard party is? [QUOTE] Violence. They didn't want to say it because they'd be laughed at/exiled/hanged, but it's violence. That's literally what a revolution is. [/QUOTE] Reading back, I was wrong. Marxism-Leninism follows the Leninism theory of how socialism should be put in practice. [QUOTE] So you are [I]advocating[/I] for the overthrow of a major government, through [B][I]physical violence[/I][/B] (because new nations were never born from peaceful revolution)[/QUOTE] That's the idea. Revolutions are kinda inherently violent by definition. [QUOTE]to advance a political ideology that has , which will almost undoubtedly lead to communism,[/QUOTE] Yes, that's the goal, now you're getting somewhere! [QUOTE] which will also undoubtedly [I]slaughter[/I] its own people to achieve power? [/QUOTE] Nevermind. [QUOTE] Consider mental help. pic also related [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/DFOJqE2.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE] So, in conclusion it's pretty fucking evident you don't know anything about Marx/Lenin/Stalin/Mao's practices or ideology. I'm willing to bet you've never read a single paragraph of any of their writings either? (I'll avoid more political memes here so as not to shit up the thread) btw, let me know when the latest PragerU video is out, would you?

[QUOTE]Ah yes, is this the part where you disregard a factual argument and argue based on misconceptions and feelings? Awesome.[/QUOTE] what the fuck do you think a revolution is? what do you think is done with leaders of the previous government, that they just say "thanks for the government you can go home now lul"? No, they're murdered and their corpses are paraded in the streets. [QUOTE]"kill kulaks lmao" - Marx, probably.[/QUOTE] ...what [QUOTE]What the fuck are you on about? Do you not understand what the definition of a vanguard party is?[/QUOTE] While I was wrong on taking over current parties, they still form parties that spew out a toxic and deadly ideology with the goal of enforcing said ideology. Polished shit is still shit. [QUOTE]Reading back, I was wrong. Marxism-Leninism follows the Leninism theory of how socialism should be put in practice.[/QUOTE] i.e. lots of bloodshed and threats of bloodshed [QUOTE]That's the idea. Revolutions are kinda inherently violent by definition.[/QUOTE] So killing is ok as long as it's for a specific cause? Because the only way I'm interpreting this is that you want to kill those who hate/are against socialism. [QUOTE]Nevermind.[/QUOTE] are you denying that communists kill people to stay in power? [QUOTE]So, in conclusion it's pretty fucking evident you don't know anything about Marx/Lenin/Stalin/Mao's practices or ideology. I'm willing to bet you've never read a single paragraph of any of their writings either? [/QUOTE] Why should I? Why should I have anything to do with an ideology responsible for the deaths of millions? Why should I support the man that laid the foundation for humanity's destruction? (Rothschilds) [QUOTE]btw, let me know when the latest PragerU video is out, would you?[/QUOTE] literally who

[QUOTE=hankster112;52363963]what the fuck do you think a revolution is? what do you think is done with leaders of the previous government, that they just say "thanks for the government you can go home now lul"? No, they're murdered and their corpses are paraded in the streets. [/QUOTE] No shit? People who exploit others and make citizen's life's hell don't deserve a long life. [QUOTE] ...what [/QUOTE] I was making fun of you misconception that Marx wrote anything about displacing or harming innocents. [QUOTE] While I was wrong on taking over current parties, they still form parties that spew out a toxic and deadly ideology with the goal of enforcing said ideology. Polished shit is still shit [/QUOTE] Anything I don't like is wrong: the capitalist's guide to economics [for children]. [QUOTE] i.e. lots of bloodshed and threats of bloodshed [/QUOTE] Yup, glad you didn't skip the history lesson on revolution too. [QUOTE] So killing is ok as long as it's for a specific cause? Because the only way I'm interpreting this is that you want to kill those who hate/are against socialism. [/QUOTE] Yes (in specific contezt). Killing people in revolution because they're not your ideology = bad. Killing naturally exploitative cunts who contribute nothing and profit off people = good (riddance). Romanovs deserved worse. [QUOTE] are you denying that communists kill people to stay in power? [/QUOTE] Not really, depends on context thought, as communism requires revolution to come about which as said before is violent. [QUOTE] Why should I? Why should I have anything to do with an ideology responsible for the deaths of millions? Why should I support the man that laid the foundation for humanity's destruction? (Rothschilds) [/QUOTE] It's gonna get you a lot further in an argument about communism/socialism when you know at least a single thing about what it actually is. And wtf do Rothschilds have to do with this? Are you high? [QUOTE] literally who[/QUOTE] Infamous anti-communist youtube channel notorious for misrepresenting what communism and socialisn are.

Holy fuck, quit it already. Ideology is not the reason why Venezuelans are starving, I already explained the government doesn't really give a shit about what they themselves say.

[QUOTE=hankster112;52363711]again with the "not real socialism" argument. every time. it's almost laughable, I didn't think it was true, but holy shit you're all delusional. Again, if NOT SOCIALIST Venezuela is NOT SOCIALIST, then clearly NOT SOCIALIST Maduro's policies should be working. Yet we have a country overflowing with poverty and crime ready to go into civil war because of NOT SOCIALISM, but of EBIL CABITALISM. Am I hearing this right?[/QUOTE] Holy shit drop your ideological boner for one second and think about a corrupt leader destroying a nation and take that for what that is

[QUOTE=nulls;52363813]Not sure about you, but every leftist I talk with on the subject agrees that socialism is worker's democratic ownerahip of the MoP. They disagree on how it should be achieved or maintained though.[/quote] it's public control of the means of production (common to the whole, the public, everybody). not necessarily democratic depending on how one views democracy nor by workers (who don't constitute the full population). [quote]I'm sure they do consider themself socialist and I'm sure they do want worker ownership of the MoP. It doesn't change the fact that workers don't currently own the MoP. Yeah, no. That's not what worker ownership of MoP is. If that were the case US federal employees would technically be working under socialism. The state of Venezuela owns and controls production, they simply employ people directly now rather than through a business. State-ownership != Worker-ownership.[/quote] according to your sect of socialism that is. there are quite a few who call themselves socialists and would disagree with you. i am curious as to which socialism is the true socialism, given that few of them agree on little [quote]The one that 4,000+ privately owned Venezuelan businesses participate in (as of 2016. I imagine many have left due to the growing violence and shittier economy).[/QUOTE] the vast bulk of these are marginal businesses which have gone completely defunct and cannot operate in any capacity whatsover. there is no electricity, money is useless, there is a famine in the country, the market economy has completely broken down into a form of crude bartering, and supplies of almost everything are virtually nil. most of the people involved in running businesses are either ruined, have fled the country, are in prison, or are underground [quote]he most realistic way for socialism to come about is through Leninism (in my opinion), in which a vanguard party leads the revolution and takes control afterwards.[/quote] leninism has been an abject failure and is complete and utter nonsense that lends itself towards tyranny

[QUOTE=nulls;52364015]Romanovs deserved worse.[/QUOTE] Kids who got bayoneted to death deserved worse? Why are we supposed to take you (and other far left miscreants) seriously again?

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;52363617]the fuck is this supposed to mean? it isn't real socialism[/QUOTE] And this isn't real Democratic Socialism either. But this moronically vocal anti-socialist Facepunchers still refused to learn what ideology means. [editline]15th June 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=hankster112;52363892] [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/DFOJqE2.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE] This look like 4chan's explains what "Communism" or any far-left ideology is.

It amazes how any time Venezuela is brought up, someone immediatly bardges in and says "Hhahahaha dumb socialists hahahaha" The situation in Venezuela is far more complicate than that, always has been. Its about a group of elites exploiting the masses, not some ideological failure or something. It could of been happening if it their government used capitalist, nationalist or some other rhetoric to excuse what they do