39

US and Canada Back the White Supremist Minority in Venezuela

David William Pear

Simon Bolivar, El Libertador, Early 19th century South American who, along with Jose de San Martin, lead Latin America in the war of independence from The Spanish Empire. Bolivar is the symbol of Hugo Chavez’s Bolivarian Revolution of the 21st century.

Racism is one of the main engines and expressions of the current counter-revolution. In Venezuela the revolutionary struggle to end white supremacy and for self-determination is slow, and complicated by white elites, backed by US imperialism, and by the denial of many that racism persists.”
Venezuelanalysis.com, “Racism Without Shame in the Venezuelan Counter-Revolution

The US and Canada are not supporting “the return of democracy” in Venezuela as they claim.  Instead, they are following in their shameful histories of colonialism, imperialism, exploitation, illegal wars of aggression, and overthrowing governments.  They are crushing democracy in Venezuela by exploiting class and race warfare, being carried out by an elite white-supremist minority against the poor, Afro-Indigenous, and other Venezuelans of color.

A white-minority has dominated commerce and politics in Venezuela since the days of slavery in the 19th century.  Venezuela had slavery, just as did the rest of the Caribbean and Latin America.  Slavery went back to the early 16th century Spanish conquistadors.  More abducted Africans were trafficked to the Caribbean and Latin America, than to the USA.

Slavery was officially abolished in all of the Americas in the 19th century.  The history of slavery in the Caribbean and Latin America has left a legacy of prejudice, discrimination and class conflict, which has largely gone unresolved.

Different skin complexions of Latin Americans are due mostly to various mixtures of European, Spanish and Indigenous bloodlines.

The darker the skin color, along with other ethnic features, the more there is of discrimination in education, employment, and opportunity.

Discrimination against blacks and people of color perpetuates poverty and class conflict. In Venezuela, as elsewhere in the Caribbean and Latin America, political power, commerce and wealth is largely in the hands of a minority of upper-class elites, whom are mostly whiter and lighter than those with darker skin complexion.

One can get a sense of how much class and race affect Latin American society by watching Spanish language movies and soap operas.  Below are just two examples below: the setting for the TV series “The White Slave” is 19th century Columbia; and the setting for “Teresa” is contemporary Mexico.

Hugo Chavez and his successor Maduro are exuberantly despised by the elite white-supremacist minority.  They still call Chavez negro, savage, monkey and ape.  Maduro gets the same; and the media never fails to remind the public that he was a former bus driver, which is code for “low-class”.

Maduro is proud of his humble beginning as a bus driver and his Afro-Indigenous ethnicity. Chavez was proud of his poor Afro-Indigenous background too, and his final resting place is in the barrio where he and Maduro came from.

In 1998 the elite white minority was voted out of the presidential residence Miraflores Palace.  Instead of being purged by Chavez, as an authoritarian dictator would have done, the elites maintained their political power base, dominance in commerce, and control of the media.

They have been trying to get back the Miraflores Palace, and indignantly consider it their birthright. They have used every means at their command, and even invited the US to invade the country, which would result in thousands of deaths.

In April 2002 the elite white minority tried a coup against Chavez, backed and financed by the US, which failed.  In December 2002 they tried a strike by the management at the Venezuelan oil company Petróleos de Venezuela.

They tried a recall referendum against Chavez in 2004, and lost at the polls.

They tried to unify the opposition political parties with the sole purpose of defeating Maduro in 2013, and failed.

They tried to delegitimize the 2018 presidential election by organizing a boycott.

They tried to assassinate Maduro with a drone in 2018. Their attempts have failed.

The white elites have sabotaged the economy, used mass demonstrations, and organize violence.  The self-appointed Juan Guaido declared himself the interim president, and called for a military coup d’etat, that failed miserably.  Even with their control of the media and commerce they have failed to oust Maduro.

The elite upper class has millions of dollars of financial support from the US and Canada.  Some of the EU countries, following pressure from the US, have thrown their support behind the Guaido coup plotters.  The UK froze $1.2 billion of Venezuela’s much-needed reserves for life-saving food and medicine. Spain turned its back on the people of Venezuela, too.

The above political caricature of Afro-Indigenous Hugo Chavez, is titled “Ape Commander”, an obvious racial slur.  As the article Racism Without Shame in the Venezuelan Counter-Revolution from Venezuelanalysis explains:

In Venezuela, the revolutionary struggle to end white supremacy and for self-determination is a slow slog, complicated by two forces: One, the white elites, backed by U.S. imperialism, and many of the middle class who support them, cling tenaciously to their power and privilege. Two, the denial by whites, and nearly everyone else that racism persists.”

Above is a caricature of Nicolas Maduro as a donkey, which is a racist slur.  Animalization of black and brown people is a common theme in the white media. Maduro is pictured as a dumb animal being driven by a white Cuban.  Ironically, one of the early achievements of the Cuban Revolution was to pass strong antidiscrimination laws, and largely end the racial divide in Cuba.

*

The US and Canada have opposed the government of Venezuela since the election of Hugo Chavez in 1998.  Chavez won the election by a landslide on his platform of participatory democracy, local governance, frequent elections, rewriting the constitution, social reforms, healthcare for all, free education, adult literacy programs, and other basic economic freedoms.

He called his platform the Bolivarian Revolution, his movement is called Chavismo, his followers are called Chavistas and they are fiercely loyal to Maduro.  Maduro is fiercely loyal to Chavez’s memory, and the Bolivarian process.

The country is renamed The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, after el liberator Simon Bolivar.

The Bolivarian process has had dramatic success in reducing inequality, cutting poverty in half, providing adequate housing, fighting child malnutrition, improving public education, practically eliminating adult illiteracy, reducing unemployment, and providing social security.

(See appendix A for economic charts of the success of the Bolivarian Revolution, or click the link HERE.)

The US and Canada are trying to destroy the successes of the Bolivarian process with an illegal economic blockade and violent subversion.

Before his death, Chavez endorsed his Vice President Nicolas Maduro as his successor.  Chavez died in March of 2013, and a new election as required by the constitution was held in April.  Maduro won by a surprisingly small margin of 1.5% against the pro-business opponent Henrique Capriles.  The opposition cried foul as they always do when they lose.

Venezuela has a voting systems with both an electronic ballot and a hard copy, which Jimmy Carter called the best voting technology in the world in 2012.  In that election, which Carter monitored, Chavez beat Capriles by a landslide, 55.1% to 44.3%.  Still, the US and the mainstream media called Chavez a dictator. Now they call Maduro a dictator.

In the 2018 presidential election Maduro won easily with 67.8% of the vote against his two opponents Henri Falcón and Javier Bertucci.  Maduro had invited the United Nations to send election observers, but the UN declined because the opposition told the UN not to come.

Why would the opposition disinvite the UN observers, if they thought the election was going to be rigged?  Answer, because they have given up on democratic elections. They are outnumbered by the politically awakened poor, Afro-Indigenous, and people of color who live in the barrios.

The US and Canada are violating international law and the UN Charter by interfering in the internal affairs of Venezuela.  The fact that Venezuela has tremendous wealth in oil, gold, precious earth, minerals and abundant natural and human resources is the obvious lure in whetting their greed.

The killer economic blockade that the US and members of the Lima Group have imposed is causing tens of thousands of deaths, needless suffering, and is destroying Venezuela’s economy.  The Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) estimates that 40,000 Venezuelans have died as a direct result of the economic blockade.

Since the blockade is intentionally targeting civilians, it is a violation of the Geneva Conventions, and a crime against humanity.

The CEPR disputes the US, Canadian, and mainstream media narrative that Nicolas Maduro is the blame for the current economic crisis. Mark Weisbrot of CEPR says that denying that the blockade is the cause of Venezuela’s economic crisis is like “climate change denial”.

The US and the mainstream media blame Maduro for “wrecking” the economy.  They blame the Bolivarian process for having spent too much on social programs for the poor, not diversifying the economy, not fighting crime, and not putting away reserves in anticipation of low oil prices.  The problem is that it is not true. Watch the 17-minute interview of Mark Weisbrot below:

According to a United Nation’s analysis, and 150 experts and activists, the economic slump from falling oil prices was exacerbated by Obama’s economic sanctions in 2015.  The sanctions imposed by Trump in 2017, and the blockade in 2019 has sent the economy into crisis. That is what economic sanctions and blockades are intended to do, as is well-known (e.g. “make the economy scream.”).

Other oil dependent countries in the region are struggling through the depression in oil prices.  Venezuela could have too, except for the economic blockade, confiscation of Venezuela’s US oil company Citco, and the freezing of assets by the US, Canada, and the EU countries.  The constant threat of a US invasion diverts needed resources to increased defense spending, which is another drain on the economy.

What the US and Canada are doing to Venezuela meets the definition of terrorism.  They are using violence against civilians, starving them to death and preventing life-saving medicine from getting through, for political and economic purposes.  It is robbery in plain sight, but many people believe the mainstream media propaganda, rather than their own “lying eyes”. The blindness is caused by “blockade denial”.

*

The elite white minority of Venezuelans want control of the vast wealth of Venezuela’s natural resources, and the US and Canada are helping for their own imperial designs.  It is a historical pattern. The US and Canada have long supported dictators and opposed anti-colonial and democratic movements in the Caribbean, Latin America, Africa and Asia.

Before the rise of the US Empire, Canada backed the British Empire in the Caribbean, and even considered annexing its own colonies in the West Indies.  Now the UK and Canada are the US Empire’s junior imperial partners.

After the 1898 Spanish-American war the US colonized Cuba and Puerto Rico, as well as the Philippines.  The US invaded Mexico in 1914 to support the oligarchy against the nationalists.

The US refused to recognize Haiti’s government until 1862, even though it had gained independence from France in 1804.  The US militarily occupied Haiti from 1915 to 1934. During the Spanish Civil War, the US supported the fascist dictator Franco.

Some of the most notorious dictators that the US has backed are Batista in Cuba, Trujillo in the Dominican Republic, Pinochet in Chile, Noriega in Panama, and “Papa Doc” and “Baby Doc” Duvalier in Haiti.

During the 1980’s the US sponsored death squads in Central America.

The US backed the French in Indochina and Africa, the British in the Middle East and the 1982 colonial Falkland Island War.

The US backed Suharto of Indonesia in his genocidal invasion of East Timor.

The US backed apartheid South Africa, and had Nelson Mandela on its terrorist list until 2008.  Is this the picture of a country that loves democracy and human rights?

Just as the US overthrew a democratic government in Guatemala in 1954 for United Fruit Company, the US is now trying to overthrow a democratic government in Venezuela for the benefit of US oil companies, and Canadian mining companies.  And just as neocon Elliot Abrams was in charge of the death-squads in Central America during the 1980’s, he is now Trump’s special envoy for Venezuela.  To believe that the US wants to “restore democracy” in Venezuela takes cognitive dissonance.

The US is supporting a cabal of elite white supremist in Venezuelans to push the Washington Consensus of IMF loans, privatization of state-owned enterprises, invasion of foreign capital, Structural Adjustment Programs (SAP) by the IMF, neoliberal debt slavery and austerity for the poor, Afro-Indigenous, and people of color.

Even Monsanto is behind the coup because Venezuela is one of the few countries that bans cancer causing Roundup and GMO seeds.

*

An article in the Journal of the US Army from 2005 laid out in detail the US’s objections against the Bolivarian process.  Even when there was no question about the legitimacy of the elections and the economy was doing great, the US was planning a coup d‘etat.  One reason is oil, and the US Army article is blunt about it:

…friction arose between Venezuela and the United States over the U.S. preference for private ownership of the oil industry in Venezuela, led by international corporations, and Venezuela’s preference for policies that maximized national control over this strategic asset.”

So, the US and Venezuela disagree on their “preference” for “this strategic asset”.  The Venezuelan people want to use their oil wealth for the benefit of Venezuelans, and the US objects?  Of course, Canada’s “preference” is for Canadian mining companies to control Venezuela’s gold too.

Venezuela is a sovereign country, a member of the United Nations, and Maduro is the internationally recognized president. Venezuela has the right to choose its own preferences.

What the article calls “this strategic asset” is not up for grabs. The US and Canada don’t have a right to vote on it.  The fact that the US and Canada even think that they can dictate ownership of “this strategic asset”, shows how arrogant and bullying they are. This is the 21st century, the Monroe Doctrine should be dead, and the Caribbean and Latin America ain’t nobody’s “backyard”.

The US Army article further whines that Chavez and Maduro encouraged the unity of South America, challenging US hegemony. Venezuela has a right to its own foreign relations.

Other invented crimes are that Venezuela backed a stronger OPEC, and opposed the illegal Invasion of Iraq, and the Worldwide War on Terror.  Venezuela has good relations with Cuba and Nicaragua, thus irritating the US further.

Strangely, the US Army article finds the Bolivarian process of “participatory democracy” rather than “representative democracy” to be nefarious?  It’s odd that the US would object to the Venezuelan people having more democracy and local control, rather than less. Try explaining to Chavistas how Trump became president even though he got less votes than Clinton, and they will laugh in your face about “representative democracy”.

*

What is depressing is that most of the North American public is still fooled by the US propaganda that it is motivated by democracy and human rights.  The historical evidence is to the contrary. The US is a serial predator of illegal wars of aggression, which have killed millions of people, and Canada has been right there side-by-side.

They have invaded at least a half-dozen countries in the past few decades, and they are threatening a half-dozen more. The US has imposed illegal economic sanctions on Russia, Cuba, North Korea, Iran and Venezuela.

The US State Department has bragged that the sanctions are “working” because civilians are dying.  That is not concern for human rights.  It is coercion, hostage taking and demands for ransom.

The US often violates  international law, reneges on treaties, ignores the United Nations, defies the International Criminal Court, and breaks domestic laws.  It conducts illegal wars of aggression, drone assassinations, night raids, and covert operations . The US supplies weapons, logistics and ammunition that are used by Israel and Saudi Arabia to kill civilians.  The US supports 70% of the world’s dictators. Does any of that fit with a country that is concerned about democracy and human rights? The US and Canada are recklessly instigating a bloody civil war in Venezuela.

*

A State Department official named Brian Hook said in a leaked memo to his boss at that time, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson.

The memo tutored Tillerson that the US is only interested in weaponizing democracy and human rights to destabilize adversaries.

The US should treat friendly dictatorships, such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Honduras, “different and better”, according to Hook.

As Hook explains, agitating countries about democracy and human rights is destabilizing, and the US does not want to do that to friendly dictators.  With adversaries though, the US wants to destabilize them even if they are democracies, like Venezuela. For adversaries, they are never democratic enough to please the US.  They should be destabilized and kept off balance, according to Hook.

It is false that US foreign policy objectives are for the benefit of the US public. US foreign policy is for the benefit of corporations, special interest groups and oligarchs.  The beneficiaries of US foreign policy are the elites, and they grease US foreign policy with campaign contributions, bribes and other perks to government officials.

What drives US foreign policy is the quest for absolute military superiority, preservation of the US dollar as the world’s reserve currency, maintaining the capitalist world order, controlling the world’s natural and human resources, promoting a stable business-friendly environment for Western transnational corporations, and seeking opportunities for windfall profits for cronies.

In other words, the US wants to control the whole world.  If that means overthrowing non-compliant democratically elected governments and supporting military coups and dictators, killing millions of people, then as far as the US is concerned, so be it. That is criminally insane.

It is the US public that pays for US foreign policy and wars, either through taxes or by the lack of government programs, such as universal healthcare, education, mass transit and a “Green New Deal”.  US foreign policy does not keep the American people safer. Wars and the threat of wars make the American people less safe.

The foreign policy elites, also called the “power elite”, which is a phrase coined by C. Wright Mills in his book The Power Elite, are a closely knit alliance of “military, government, and corporate officials perceived as the center of wealth and political power in the US”.  The power elite usually come from wealthy families.

They all went to Ivy League schools, they belong to the same country clubs, they are members of the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, and the Bilderberg group.  They sit on the boards of corporations, the media, banks, foundations, universities, and think tanks; and they become Senators and Presidents.

The power elite is a clique. The members all go to the same cocktail parties, their spouses are friends, and their children go to private schools together. Those not born into the power elite have to earn admission by being faithful servants, and climb to the top while they gain experience, power and influence.

The power elite is the Deep State.  The Deep State makes US foreign policy and declares war; not the American people. The American people pay, but do not get to “play”.

The Deep State, and those that serve it, such as John Bolton and Mike Pompeo, have no moral and legal restraints.  Humanitarian interventionists, the right to protect (R2P), American values, democracy and human rights are weaponized, as Hook explained to Tillerson.  It is all about US hegemony and world domination. Under three US presidents, Bush, Obama and Trump, the US has been trying to overthrow the government of Venezuela.

*

Twenty years ago, the democratically elected president of Venezuela became a target of the US.  There was no question that the election was fair, democratic and it was declared so by international observers, including the Carter Center.

Hugo Chavez won the presidency by a landslide. Instead of cheering for democracy at work, the US and Canada soon started plotting to overthrow the elected government.

In 2002 the US backed an unsuccessful military coup d’etat.  The US immediately endorsed the coup government, and the mainstream media cheered.  The coup failed because the people demanded a return of their kidnapped president. Within 48 hours Hugo Chavez was back in the Miraflores Palace.

Below is a 15-minute documentary on the 2002 coup attempt and the US involvement.  The video features Eva Golinger. Golinger is a US attorney who has followed events in Venezuela for decades, she was a legal advisor to Hugo Chavez, and she has written several books.  The most well-known is The Chavez Code: Cracking US Intervention in Venezuela.

So, how does the US square what it now says is its concern for democracy, when the US tried to overthrow the government in 2002, regardless of it being a democratically elected government?  The US’s fallback argument is that an adversary is never democratic enough, as Hook explained.It is the same answer the US gave in 1954 when it overthrew the democratically elected president of Guatemala, Jacobo Árbenz.

It is the same answer the US gave in 1973 when it overthrew and assassinated Chile’s democratically elected president, Salvador Allende.

It is the same answer it gave in the 1980’s when it was backing the Contras in Nicaragua.It is the same answer the US gave when it overthrew the democratically elected Jean-Bertrand Aristide of Haiti in 1994, and then overthrew him again when he was elected in 2004.It is the same answer that the US gave when it backed the military coup in Honduras in 2009. For the US, an adversary is never democratic enough, and it must go.

Maduro must go because he is costing US and Canadian corporations and banks money.  He challenges the Washington Consensus. Maduro threatens US hegemony in Latin America and the Caribbean.  Those are unforgiveable sins in the eyes of the US. It is like putting a great big bull’s eye on your back.  Being a US target has nothing to do with democracy and human rights.

*

Vice President Pence and Prime Minister Trudeau met in Ottawa at the end of May.

In their joint statement they spoke about many issues that the US and Canada share.  They chitchatted about their peaceful borders, joked about basketball rivalry, and spared about trade.  One issue that they agreed on was Venezuela. Both said that President Nicolas Maduro must go. When the US says “must go”, it includes assassination.

Here is what Trudeau had to say on Venezuela:

This afternoon, the Vice President and I spoke about the concerning situation in Venezuela.  Our government remains committed to the importance of finding a peaceful return to democracy and stability for Venezuelans.”

Pence followed with his statement on Venezuela:

Canada has imposed sanctions on 113 of the dictator’s cronies.  You’ve promoted the cause of freedom and a free Venezuela inside the Lima Group and the OAS. And the two of us have said, with one voice, that Nicolás Maduro is a dictator with no legitimate claim to power, and Nicolás Maduro must go.”

Restoring democracy in Venezuela is a red herring. The US and Canadian foreign policies are not concerned about democracy.  It is lip service for the home folks. US foreign policy has always preferred strong dictators and puppet governments in their “back yard”.

The US and Canada have historically exploited their backyard for its natural resources, tropical monocrops, cheap labor, and schemes to get rich. Those that have opposed the US and Canada can be found in mass graves all over the Caribbean and Latin American.

Trump is refreshingly crude, compared to the smooth-talking Obama.  Reportedly when Trump first took office, one of his first questions was why is the US not at war with Venezuela, since they have all that oil and they are right in our backyard?

International law is meaningless to the US, and that is not new with Trump.  The US has a long history of ignoring international law. Both Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Trump’s national security advisor John Bolton have a vision of the world as the wild west, with no international law, just anarchy.  It is the cynical view that might-makes-right, and that the US is above the law.

It was the Bill Clinton administration that coined the phrases American exceptionalism and the indispensable nation.

That was the polite way to say that the US is above the law.  It is just that Trump, Bolton, Pompeo, and Abrams do not have good manners.  That is not a policy change, it’s Trump stepping into an imperial presidency that was left to him by Bush and Obama.

Oh, the Trump administration still speaks out of both sides of its mouth with platitudes that the US is a force for good in the world, and that its values are democracy and human rights.  Only fools believe that anymore.

APPENDIX A

Venezuelan Economic and Social Performance Under Hugo Chávez, in Graphs

1. Growth (Average Annual Percent)

1. Growth Average Annual Percent (Source: Banco Central de Venezuela)

This graph shows overall GDP growth as well as per-capita growth in the pre-Chávez (1986-1999) era and the Chávez presidency.

From 1999-2003, the government did not control the state oil company; in fact, it was controlled by his opponents, who used it to try to overthrow the government, including the devastating oil strike of 2002–2003.  For that reason, a better measure of economic growth under the Chávez government would start after it got control over the state oil company, and therefore the economy.

Above you can see this growth both measured from 2004, and for the 1999-2012 period. We use 2004 because to start with 2003, a depressed year due to the oil strike, would exaggerate GDP growth during this period; by 2004, the economy had caught up with its pre-strike level of output. Growth after the government got control of the state oil company was much faster.

*

2. Public vs. Private Growth – 1999-2012 (Average Annual Percent)

2. Public vs. Private Growth – 1999-2012 Average Annual Percent (Source: Banco Central de Venezuela)

This graph shows the growth of the private sector versus the public sector during the Chávez years.

*

3. Inflation: Pre-Chávez vs. Chávez Years

3. Inflation: Pre-Chávez vs. Chávez Years (Source: Banco Central de Venezuela, INEC)

Inflation in Venezuela, consumer price index.

*

4. Unemployment Rate: Before and After Oil Strike

4. Unemployment Rate: Before and After Oil Strike

After the oil strike (and the deep recession that it caused) ended in 2003, unemployment dropped drastically, following many years of increases before Chávez was elected. In 1999, when Chávez took office, unemployment was 14.5 percent; for 2011 it was 7.8 percent.

*

5. Poverty and Extreme Poverty Rate

5. Poverty and Extreme Poverty Rate (Source: INEC)

Poverty has decreased significantly, dropping by nearly 50 percent since the oil strike, with extreme poverty dropping by over 70 percent.

*

6. Gini Coefficient, 2001-2003 – Latin America

6. Gini Coefficient, 2001-2003 – Latin America
(Source: Economic Commission on Latin America and the Caribbean)

The Gini coefficient, measuring income inequality, fell from 0.5 to 0.397, the lowest Gini coefficient in the region.

*

7. Social Spending as a Percent of GDP

7. Social Spending as a Percent of GDP
(Source: SISOV)

Social spending doubled from 11.3 percent of GDP in 1998 to 22.8 percent of GDP in 2011.

*

8. Education: Net Enrollment

8. Education: Net Enrollment (Source: SISOV)

*

9. Graduates from Higher Education

9. Graduates from Higher Education (Source: Ministerio del P.P. para la Educación Universitaria)

*

10. Child Malnutrition- Age 5 and Under

10. Child Malnutrition- Age 5 and Under
(Source: Instituto Nacional de Nutrición)

*

11. Venezuelans Receiving Pensions

11. Venezuelans Receiving Pensions
(Source: Instituto Venezuela de los Seguros Sociales)

The number of Venezuelans receiving pensions has increased from less than 500,000 in 1999 to nearly 2 million in 2011.

David William Pear is a progressive columnist writing on U.S. foreign policy, economic and political issues, human rights and social issues. David is a Senior Contributing Editor of The Greanville Post and a prior Senior Editor for OpEdNews for four years 2014 to 2018, and he is still a "Trusted Writer" for OpEdNews. David has been writing for The Real News Network for over 10 years, and has been a long-term financial supporter.

Filed under: featured, latest, Venezuela

by

David William Pear is a progressive columnist writing on U.S. foreign policy, economic and political issues, human rights and social issues. David is a Senior Contributing Editor of The Greanville Post and a prior Senior Editor for OpEdNews for four years 2014 to 2018, and he is still a "Trusted Writer" for OpEdNews. David has been writing for The Real News Network for over 10 years, and has been a long-term financial supporter.

avatar
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Mark
Reader

Magnificent! In even sloppy stories – and this one is far from that – you always gain some insight that was right in front of you all along, but you didn’t see. In this instance, for me, it was the reminder that a dictator such as Chavez is regularly portrayed would have purged his enemies, the liberal elite, as soon as he took power. Not only did he not do so, it is obvious they knew he would not, as none made preparations to leave.

A useful article – I know; who would have thought? – appeared in The Guardian in 2013. It certainly was useful to the US State Department and others who have long sought to bring down Venezuela, because it laid out a premise that the economy of Venezuela could not be made to collapse as the country could always use accumulated wealth to buy its way out of a bad spot. Presto! confiscation of state assets held in foreign banks such as London, seizure of the assets of Venezuelan-owned Citgo in the USA, and those assets gifted to Guaido, who is apparently just black enough.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/07/venezuela-not-greece-latin-america-oil-poverty

The west will not allow a socialist government to live, as the myth that anyone can become rich and join the ranks of the super-wealthy is too important.

mark
Reader
mark

Big Mark from Little Mark

Don’t you think it’s crazy that a country like Venezuela would keep 80 tons of gold in London and leave it in the thieving hands of the Bank of England? And keep assets in the Yew Ess Ayy?

The billions in Libya’s sovereign wealth fund were stolen overnight in 2011. Cameron even stole a ship load of Libyan bank notes that had been printed in Britain.

Abramovich was denied entry to Britain, who threatened to confiscate Chelsea Football Club from him to spite Britain.

It took 30 years to recover some of its stolen billions as part of the nuclear deal.

What are these people thinking of? Have they got the sense they were born with?

Mark
Reader

I completely agree this constitutes an almost-unforgivable complacency. I suppose foreign leaders put their trust in western banks being comfortable with their greed as security, that they would reason where there was some gold, there might be more. Perhaps they fear armed uprisings in their own countries – perhaps even instigated by the west – in which gold reserves held in the country might be looted, and reason they would be safer offshore.

Whatever the case, I believe incidents like those which occurred in Libya and Venezuela have taught valuable lessons on the trustworthiness of western banks and their blind loyalty to the states which own them rather than to their depositors, and not only to countries like Venezuela and Libya. It was made clear to anyone who is watching that if you run afoul of Washington’s directives, it can and will seize your assets – so don’t put them in western banks. They’re not safe.

Incidentally, Venezuela made a mistake in trusting the USA as a sole-source refiner of its heavy crudes, as well. That gave Washington de facto control over Venezuelan oil shipments and sales, and now it can’t just go somewhere else because the State Department has poisoned all America’s allies and lickspittles against it. Venezuela is now striking deals with China to build refineries, and if it survives this coup attempt – as I believe it will – the USA will lose access to the heavy crudes it needs to keep its refineries in work. If the Trans-Mountain Pipeline in British Columbia goes ahead, it will in all probability lose the Canadian diluted bitumen market as well, in favour of Asian buyers. That depends on whether they will consider refining it themselves; it’s low-quality, and China uses it to make asphalt.

On the money angle, and the outright theft of depositors’ money by the bank, check out this interesting comment from Global Research;

But isn’t that theft?

Perhaps, but it’s legal theft. By law, when you put your money into a deposit account, your money becomes the property of the bank. You become an unsecured creditor with a claim against the bank. Before the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) was instituted in 1934, U.S. depositors routinely lost their money when banks went bankrupt. Your deposits are protected only up to the $250,000 insurance limit, and only to the extent that the FDIC has the money to cover deposit claims or can come up with it.

You can find it here:

https://www.globalresearch.ca/depositors-beware-theft-is-legal-for-big-banks-and-your-money-will-never-be-safe/5333631

mark
Reader
mark

The bank deposits issue is interesting. There was a test case in the UK way back in the 1840s, around 1847, where a depositor found that the bank had basically nicked his cash and left him with nothing. Can’t remember the names. He sued the bank for “conversion”, civil theft. He argued that he was like a farmer who stored his crop in a neighbour’s barn and found out that the neighbour had sold his crop. The judgment then was that if you deposited money in the bank, it was no longer yours, it was a sort of investment in the bank, and if they chose to nick your money, tough luck. It seems to have set some kind of a precedent for banking internationally. I suppose Britain used to control the world banking system.

Cyprus, a few years ago, was an EU dry run for bank “bail ins”, confiscation of depositors’ money. I knew people who found their bank accounts frozen. Anything over a few thousand euros could be confiscated by the bank. You’d get worthless shares instead of your money. There was a retired guy who lost his life’s savings. He was a Cypriot who emigrated to Australia and ran a jewellery business there for 30 years. He sold up and moved back to Cyprus. He put over a million euros in the Laiki Bank, intending to buy a house and a boat. When the Cypriot banking crisis blew up, he lost the lot.

This is what is planned on a large scale with the next banking crisis. They can’t afford another bail out at taxpayer expense. There’s no money left. This could come at any time. Deutsche Bank is bankrupt. It’s just set up a bad bank with $50 billion of worthless assets. They’ve got trillions of totally worthless crap on their books. The same goes for French and Italian banks. The Italians are planning to seize the contents of safety deposits. If you’ve got any money, you need to stick it under the mattress or get an empty biscuit tin. That’s one reason for getting out of the EU pronto – if there is some kind of EU bail out for these zombie banks, the UK could face demands for a few trillion.

Steve Hayes
Reader

“What is depressing is that most of the North American public is still fooled by the US propaganda that it is motivated by democracy and human rights.” What is the empirical evidence for this assertion?

David W Pear
Reader
David W Pear

@Steve Hayes, None, there is no empirical evidence that the US, Canada or the Western world is motivated by democracy and human rights. To the contrary, they prefer dictators and fascist governments. They consider them more “business friendly” (i.e. corrupt and open to letting corporations exploit their natural and human resources). It is the same for their domestic policies too.

Michael Cromer
Reader
Michael Cromer

Merkel is a fully paid up member of The Kalergi Plan for Pan European Genocide – Oxford University has educated many leading Genocide Supporters for decades.

DunGroanin
Reader
DunGroanin

Utter bollocks.

It is a lot more likely that Elon Musk believes it to be true and wants to go and take over Mars for the gammonites.

Harry Stotle
Reader
Harry Stotle

What both fascinates and appals in equal measure is the way cryprofascists can provoke illegal wars, murder literally millions of civilians, steal all the resources yet somehow manage to convince western observers that they are ‘helping’ people, or trying to suppress an evil force that threatens ‘our way of life’ in ways that ordinary people simply can’t understand – hell, they can murder thousands of their own citizens then reinvent the laws of physics to explain it away.

So can there be any doubt that despite years of scientific progress, burgeoning information streams and billions spent on education westerners are still some of the most gullible and ill-informed communities on the planet?

Personally I don’t think its that hard to work out but perhaps I am just being naive?

Tutisicecream
Reader

Well ‘arry I agree with your analysis .. “yet somehow manage to convince western observers that they are ‘helping’ people,”

As we know the Odserver and the the Fraudian as it is known the rest of the week has gone all out gullibility-stream. We have nonsense spewed by the likes of Luke Harding on an increasingly paranoid basis with no connection to reality let alone facts. And no apologies when it’s proved to be out and out GCHQ bilge.

As if the whole idea of news was a life-style choice, the luvies at the Fraudian are now peddling fiction as it it were fact and no one can comment. Yes comment is free, at the Grauniad [free of it]

It’s a neo-liberal ar*e wipe if ever there was one.

Harry Stotle
Reader
Harry Stotle

Nice quote on Twitter today – ‘Reading mainstream media is useful for one thing: to learn what the government wants you to think.’

How true.

David W Pear
Reader
David W Pear

@Harry Stotle, excellent quote. I used to read the Guardian daily until it sold out, then I could not bring myself to click on it for several years. Now like the quote I click it daily just to see what bs they are spreading.

David W Pear
Reader
David W Pear

@Tutsicream, The Guardian sold out after the Edward Snowden affair. They used to have some excellent journalists that knew their subject. Now as John Pilger said referring specifically to Tom Phillips, they are clowns.

David W Pear
Reader
David W Pear

@Harry Stotle, that goes double for Americans, and 2 squared for US liberals. Obama proved that. Trump is actually the real face of the US.

Rhys Jaggar
Reader
Rhys Jaggar

Lots more ‘Haven’t the US etc behaved terribly’ prose, with not a single discussions of what sanctions are appropriate for those who behave terribly.

The sanctions for psychopaths cannot be based on appeal to compassion or empathy, since they have none. They respond only to threats. They kill millions with impunity over decades of terror, so their own lives carry no value whatever. They will claim otherwise, and it will take judges and juries of unusual firmness, implacability and outraged blood-boiling decisiveness to tell the world the reality of these nazis wearing democratic disguises.

It is time to stop wailing with facts and come up with cold hard realistic responses.

Nothing will change by saying ‘It is terrible they murdered millions.’

They do not care, to them it is acceptable collateral damage.

Gandhi would have failed against Hitler as he relied on a sense of shame for nonviolent noncooperation to work.

It is time to decide whether Western powers can be shamed and if so how, whether simply ignoring them and cutting all trade links is the way to go or whether confrontation is required in some form or another.

David W Pear
Reader
David W Pear

@Rhys, none whatsoever. The US is a total police state and will never tolerate a yellow vest movement. Even the Black Lives Matter movement has been crushed.

mark
Reader
mark

Iran had the right idea a couple of days ago. They should have shot down the P8 spy plane as well.

Peter
Reader
Peter

Why is it people always talk about white as racists?

The British Empire abolished slavery yet we are still made to feel as if slavery was all the fault of the white Anglo Saxons?

Slavery goes back to pre-biblical times, the Romans and Persians had slaves. Indeed the Ottoman Empire had white [yes white slaves] slaves taken from Bulgaria etc parts of Europe conquered by the Ottomans.

The Russian Czars tried to protect the white Christian minority by invading the Ottoman Empire taking Georgia, to the east and finally reaching the Istanbul. But a coalition of the the Austrian/Hungarian Empire and the French and British drove them back [research the history of and leading up to the Crimean War]

The Ottoman’s only gave up slavery after the end of the first world war, being on the wrong side.

I am fed up in a globalist world were the white race [if you want to call it race] not simply a section the Human race of which there are many ethnic races. The white race being only one, and a minority one at that.

The Asian people were influenced by the Europeans and assimilated into the European Empires. They have now gained independence and are starting to flourish.

The African people were influenced by the Europeans and assimilated into the European Empires. They have now gained independence, but most of them are poor corrupt states.

Why the difference?

A simple question a] is it the people? or b] is it the people in charge?

In the 1800’s the common people in Europe were little better then serfs/slaves. But they changed the system from within to improve their living and working conditions. [No hand-outs from the UN] Maybe the common people in Africa should learn a lesson from the common people of Europe. If you don’t like your living conditions, change your leaders and keep a grip of any new ones.

George
Reader
George

“If you don’t like your living conditions, change your leaders …”

We do that all the time here in the “freedom loving West”. It makes no difference.

Peter
Reader
Peter

Jen
Common people in Africa are only allowed to have the leaders Britain, France or the US will allow them to have

Jen do you believe that the common people in the west really determine who their leaders are?

Both major parties be the Labour/Conservative, Republican/Democrat both are different sides of the same coin. But the main difference, to the African States, are that on the whole the leadership are all mainly honest, whilst the Bureaucrats again are mainly honest and are fairly efficient.

DunGroanin

[The Treaty of Westphalia in 1648?]

And your point? After almost 100 years of war on the continent of Europe fought by the common people on behalf of the elite [masters] of the day. They [the elite] had decided to make peace and for a relatively long time peace did reign in Europe. Yes it did allow the greater expansion of European elites into the Americas, Asia and yes Africa.
[But I won’t mention the two European Civil wars that decimated millions of European common people in the first half of the 20th century that spread its web into the rest of the world? WW1 & WW2]

But it does not change my argument, Asia, and to some extent the Americas have developed and have a reasonable standard of living. Whilst Africa?

Rhodesia [now Zimbabwe] South Africa both gained their independence are now basket cases and the common people are still no better off under the Black elites [masters] as when they were under the white elites [masters] Nigeria for all its oil wealth as far has the common people is a poor corrupt country with very little benefits from the oil wealth trickling down to them. Whilst their elites [masters] live high on the hog and their children get the best education that money can steal [buy]

[Look at the genocides of that continent as the diamonds, gold…ended up in the European centres.]

One could say that [whilst I don’t condone it] goes on to this day with the full agreement of the new African rulers, and sod the masses.

[Just because a human is born with a gammony skin tone does not make them ‘racist’]

I must admit I had to look up what the term gammony meant. I was surprised at its meaning?

Calling someone a ‘gammon’ is hate speech
Tanya Gold explains why calling someone a gammon is like calling a Jew a k**e or calling poor white Americans trailer trash
https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/what-does-gammon-mean

George
“If you don’t like your living conditions, change your leaders …”

We do that all the time here in the “freedom loving West”. It makes no difference.

Too true, but what is the alternative?

George
Reader
George

“Both major parties be the Labour/Conservative, Republican/Democrat both are different sides of the same coin. But the main difference, to the African States, are that on the whole the leadership are all mainly honest, whilst the Bureaucrats again are mainly honest and are fairly efficient.”

!?!?!?!?!?!!!!!!!!!!!!!?????????????????? WTF!? I mean WTFFFFFFFFF!!!!!!!!????????

DunGroanin
Reader
DunGroanin

Lol. Caught me a live one here.

Pete thanks for your half a reply to my response – you seem to have completely ignored a whole paragraph of it. An oversight? Have another go at answering it.

Gammon? Hate speech? Lol
I used to write ‘white’ but the albino peoples got on my case. So i tried pink, but the nordics got onto me.

English being a delightfully evolving language – gammon started to be used.

I think gammon covers a wide range of colour tone.

If you have a better suggestion, please do share.

DunGroanin
Reader
DunGroanin

Why? Are you colour blind or just blinkered?

It is centuries of Anglo-Imperialism duh.

Start with the treaty of Westphalia – and trace it through the various Euro colonialists activities.

A hundred and 20 years ago look at who and what and how Cecil Rhodes got to name a African country after his name!

Look at the genocides of that continent as the diamonds, gold…ended up in the European centres.

Look at how these imperialists inter-marry to grow their fortunes, how they control most of the countries they expanded into after Westphalia. How they make war between themselves for mutual profit and happily mustardise the peons of their adopted countries so that they get away with daylight robbery and murder.

There is plenty more …

Just because a human is born with a gammony skin tone does not make them ‘racist’ but the masters our ancestors and lands believe in their gammony superiority. So if you have a problem with the accusation of racism, you know who to blame.

Jen
Reader
Jen

Common people in Africa are only allowed to have the leaders Britain, France or the US will allow them to have.

David W Pear
Reader
David W Pear

@Peter, your history is excellent but you fail to see that most of us (maybe even you) still are slaves to the ruling class. Capitalism is slavery.

Peter
Reader
Peter

@David W Pear. Totally agree, slaves were abolished because free range slaves [or wage slaves] became more profitable and easier to manage.

You have to pay for your food, accommodation, clothing etc. Just think of all the money making opportunities to be had when everything is monetised and we are all given credit notes to buy essentials.

As the song goes “I owe my soul to the company store”, I don’t know what the alternative is? but so long as the majority manage to have a decent lifestyle they [the majority] may moan and groan, but they certainly won’t rock the boat.

mark
Reader
mark

All this is quite true.
You know it’s true because you will never hear it from the state controlled BBC or Guardian.
But I think some of the emphasis is wrong.
The racial and national elements are present but they are side issues.
Figureheads like Trump, Trudeau and their ilk are just that. They are trained monkeys serving the same organ grinder, the transnational Global Power Elite.
They are just flunkeys and office boys, implementing the instructions that are handed down by an interlocking network of globalist power institutions.
Bilderberg, Davos, Trilateral Commission, Council on Foreign Relations, Bank of International Settlements, amongst others, and an extensive web of lesser organisations like the Atlantic Council.
This Elite meets at periodic jamborees where general broad policy decisions are taken and passed down to their political satraps for implementation.
A decision was taken recently to destroy Venezuela.
All the trained monkeys in the US, UK, EU, France, Canada, Germany and elsewhere immediately leapt aboard the bandwagon screaming, “Maduro must go!!!”
A few years ago, Syria was in the cross hairs in a similar fashion, with the “Assad must go!!!” bandwagon.
There has been a recent decision to confront China.
Now we see the Trade War, the targeting of Huawei, the hysteria over “Uighur concentration camps”, and the unrest in Hong Kong.
The US and Canadian Regimes are leading actors in Elite Intrigues, but these people and the powerful vested interests they serve have no loyalty to any particular country. The only loyalty these people know is to themselves, their own power and wealth.
There are a little over 2,300 billionaires in the world, people who are worth at least $1.000 million.
Many are American, Canadian, French and British, but many are not.
For a time the richest person in the world was a Mexican called Slim, who had a telecoms monopoly in Mexico, amongst many other interests.
These people and others form the Globalist Power Elite. The ruling elite in the US numbers about 6,000 people, and about 5,000 in the UK. These people and similar elites in other countries control much of the world economy and politics. They physically own most of the global media.
There is a group of just 17 financial institutions who control assets of over $50 trillion. $50,000,000,000,000. And of course there are many others.

People like Trump, Trudeau, Macron, Merkel and the like, are just expendable hired help. Provided they are good little boys and girls, and loyally serve The People Who Matter, they are given good seats on the gravy train when they leave office. Clinton and Gore, who each picked up a cool $500 million within a few years of leaving office. Blair with his £100 million plus fortune. To The People Who Matter, this is no more than tossing them a few crumbs to set an example and encourage further loyal service from their successors.

However loathsome and contemptible people like Trump and Blair and their ilk may be, it is important to remember that they are just the organ grinder’s monkey, the mechanic’s oily rag, the loyal and servile flunkies of the people who matter. Focussing hatred and contempt on them is perfectly understandable, but it is a waste of time, a distraction and a diversion. They aren’t that important.

It is crucial to recognise this fundamental reality.

One last point is that Chavez didn’t nationalise the oil industry in Venezuela. It was nationalised in the 1970s by the governing elite who were displaced by him. They used it as their private piggy bank until Chavez spoiled their fun by spending the money on social and welfare programmes. One Wall Street luminary complained indignantly that Chavez had squandered Venezuela’s wealth by using it to finance health, education, and eliminating poverty. And he wasn’t joking.

Guy
Reader
Guy

Very astute post to be sure. It is socialism for the rich when times are going according to their diktats .When the plans go south ,the people pick up the tab .

David W Pear
Reader
David W Pear

@mark, I appreciate you input and agree with most of it. Of course there is a lot of chicken or egg paradyne involve. The pattern though is the same: the US has always come to the rescue of other settler colonies. It is not an accident that they happen to be white European colonial settlers. While all billionaires are not US-Canadian-European, the plurality are, and the West has been the world’s dominate power for a few centuries.

mark
Reader
mark

Thanks for the article. I just think a lot of people focus on personalities like Trump and they’re just going down a rabbit hole. This elite despises their own people. But I wouldn’t for a moment deny the bloodthirsty record and present of the US and its satellites like Canada and the UK.

Canada seems to have got a bit big for its britches of late, picking fights with Russia, China, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia, with Trudeau being slapped down by each in turn. Xi has refused to meet him and the Chinese Foreign Minister has refused to meet Freeland despite repeated requests.

DunGroanin
Reader
DunGroanin

Agree almost 100%, Mark.

I suggest you need to give more consideration to Merkel – if she was one of them, they wouldn’t have been putting so much effort into removing her for the past decade.

mark
Reader
mark

Mini Merkel is waiting in the wings. Not much difference – she even looks like her.

Headlice
Reader
Headlice

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/22/russians-spread-fake-plot-to-assassinate-boris-johnson

Meanwhile your hidden masters have dropped another turd out for you lot to swallow whole. Yummy huh.? Your nation’s media jackals continue to vomit their filth upon the entire world. What a scumbag place is ol blighty.

mark
Reader
mark

They seem to be obsessing about his love life. Strange how this “domestic abuse” scandal suddenly surfaces just before 100,000 Tory OAPs choose our next glorious leader.

Guy
Reader
Guy

I think I will send this article to all the the different party leaders in Canada.After all we are going to have an election this fall .Not that it will make much difference but hey, I least if any of them have a conscience
it might make them uncomfortable.

Ramdan
Reader
Ramdan

If….

Jim
Reader
Jim

This article is totally out of touch with reality.
The writers is showing that he does not know what is really happening in Venezuela.
1) people dying of starvation.
2) Children on the streets and in the hospitals
3) Death squats.
4) Cuban agens
killing Venezuelans
5) High ranked officials getting rich.
6)Free oil for Cuba but No gasoline for Venezuela
7) No medicines for the people.

The writer says a lot about The US and Kanada; however, nothing about Cuba.
The foreing intervention in Venezuela is taking palace right now and is done by Cuba.

Another interesting point. A good question to my beloved writer.
Are the Castro black?

I am very dure theCuban Regime paid you good money for this.

Ramdan
Reader
Ramdan

You are right man! That’s true!!

Haven’t you heard about the 2 new Aircraft carrier “Karl Marx” and “Frederick Engel” they just sent to Margarita Island?

And the high end spying technology they are using too?

These cubans, you know!!! The comunist power elites that have invaded, overthrow, manslaughter, enslaved and been always planning to dominate the world for their own advantage!!!!!

That’s how they got so rich and that’s why Cuba has so much money and is sooooo well developed and advanced!!!!

Sure man, sure!

mark
Reader
mark

Sounds like the talking points hand out Abrams and Pompeo gave to Fox News.