LWDT 8: Hitting the Marx

[Byzconia]

The people, by and large, haven't given up on the Movement For Socialism nor Morales despite the coup. Hopefully, thanks to that, we'll be seeing Socialism's return to Bolivia soon.

They should save us the trouble and give up. I will be patient for the next election, however.

Of course you will, because you know there's literally no way the right can lose. These "elections" will be about as free and fair as the USSR's.

[Byzconia]

Btw, here's an actual scientific study that statistically demonstrates that the election results were legitimate and consistent.

http://cepr.net/publications/reports/bolivia-elections-2019-11

[Northern Davincia]

They should save us the trouble and give up. I will be patient for the next election, however.

Of course you will, because you know there's literally no way the right can lose. These "elections" will be about as free and fair as the USSR's.

I'm not seeing any indication yet that the elections will be rigged.

[Byzconia]

Of course you will, because you know there's literally no way the right can lose. These "elections" will be about as free and fair as the USSR's.

I'm not seeing any indication yet that the elections will be rigged.

The fact that they're being held by an un-elected government installed by a military coup might be an indicator.

[Northern Davincia]

I'm not seeing any indication yet that the elections will be rigged.

The fact that they're being held by an un-elected government installed by a military coup might be an indicator.

Not really. Pinochet held a valid election once his time was up.

[Byzconia]

The fact that they're being held by an un-elected government installed by a military coup might be an indicator.

Not really. Pinochet held a valid election once his time was up.

He held a valid election after killing off most of the the opposition and torturing/threatening the rest into submission and after the Pope publicly called him a dictator and (privately) personally asked him to step down and restore democracy. Bolivia's regime has hardly even begun to quell their opposition and free elections will almost definitely return a Socialist candidate, so they're obviously not going to let that happen.

[Democratic Communist Federation]

Or in other words, "It's okay to overthrow democratically-elected governments if they're lefties." And also, "Morales would be the real villain for urging people to fight against the forcible takeover of their country."

Sadly, that is a very good description of the history of U.S. foreign policy.

[Proctopeo]

Blah blah blah le coup meme, more to the point is that mass death is only likely if Morales incites a civil war or gets someone to invade to put him back on the throne in office.

Or in other words, "It's okay to overthrow democratically-elected governments if they're lefties."

He wasn't overthrown, though?

And also, "Morales would be the real villain for urging people to fight against the forcible takeover of their country."

Yes, he would be the real villain if he incited a civil war. Given that he subverted the democratic process to remain in power.

You're literally not even trying to hide your ideological biases, are you? I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Libertarians are the tankies of the right.

Nah, Libertarians are closer to being the ancoms of the right.

Not really, since his popular support dipped enough that he had to cheat to win again without contest... which almost worked, until people cried foul.

[citation needed]

Again, Morales cheated.

And, again, source, please?

The OAS provided a solid argument for something fucky going on in the election in his favor - whether he himself cheated or someone fudged the results on his behalf doesn't exactly matter.

Notably, the transition of power didn't seem to be very violent - the military and police expressed a refusal to support him, and he and his pals fled to Mexico. It could've been violent if he remained in power anyway, though likely at the hands of a civilian or a militia, not the military or police.

TIL the military forcing elected officials out of office under threat of forcefully removing them isn't violence.

Threats aren't violence, and IIRC they didn't actually threaten him with that. Just revoked protection.

Also, the new "government" literally giving the military total indemnity to shoot protesters isn't violence either, I guess.

That's not really relevant here.

Morales's actions have made it clear that his loyalty is with power and his specific portion of Bolivia's indigenous population. Worst case scenario, loyalties shift laterally.

"His specific portion." Yes, namely, all of the people who voted for him. Also, indigenous people make up ~95% of Bolivia's population, so piss off with the dismissive tone.

I don't count mestizos due to their partial Spanish heritage. Indigenous people make up about 20% of the population.

As for my thoughts on the original question, Morales cheating,

Which you haven't provided a source for. (And I can almost guarantee the only link you're going to provide will be the OAS, or something else that cites it--because as we all know, a Cold War organization created explicitly to prevent the spread of leftism in Latin America is going to be the most trustworthy source on the subject.)

They're damn well more trustworthy than the only group backing him up: literal Maduro shills.

Labour crashing and burning,

Which was caused by their terrible position on Brexit.

And in part by Corbyn.

and everything to do with Venezuela were major bruh moments for the Left globally.

I don't even like Venezuela's government, but last time I checked they're still in power, after the US openly tried (and failed) to incite the military to overthrow the government.

It's still a bruh moment for Venezuela, though.

Not sure on the positive, though there certainly was some.

Like a leftist being elected President of Argentina and the appointment of Finland's new prime minister.

See, there was some!

TikTok?

The fuck does TikTok have to do with anything. Oh right, "Herr durr, internet memes."[/quote]
The CCP is using TikTok to gather personal information on America's youth while disseminating shitty memes into the populace to weaken it. Seems like a left-wing victory to me :^)

EDIT: I wanted to add something else. Even if literally everything you said is true. So what? What's your argument? That two wrongs make a right? Even if Morales had openly and flagrantly rigged the elections, that still doesn't give the military the authority to overthrow him. Military coups are not a "weapon of democracy," it's a weapon against it.

Still regurgitating this tired meme, Byz?

[Loben The 2nd]

Or in other words, "It's okay to overthrow democratically-elected governments if they're lefties." And also, "Morales would be the real villain for urging people to fight against the forcible takeover of their country."

Sadly, that is a very good description of the history of U.S. foreign policy.

I fail to see anything wrong.

[Northern Davincia]

Not really. Pinochet held a valid election once his time was up.

He held a valid election after killing off most of the the opposition and torturing/threatening the rest into submission and after the Pope publicly called him a dictator and (privately) personally asked him to step down and restore democracy. Bolivia's regime has hardly even begun to quell their opposition and free elections will almost definitely return a Socialist candidate, so they're obviously not going to let that happen.

Not really. Even if we take the maximum count of Pinochet's victims, it would not be enough to sway the vote in the plebiscite. Had the opposition been completely removed, Pinochet would have won.

[Byzconia]

He wasn't overthrown, though?

TIL removing public officials from office doesn't count as "overthrowing" them.

Yes, he would be the real villain if he incited a civil war. Given that he subverted the democratic process to remain in power.

Except no, he didn't

Nah, Libertarians are closer to being the ancoms of the right.

Ancoms don't abandon their libertarian principles as soon as they see a dictator they like, which right-libertarians do without even the slightest hesitation.

The OAS provided a solid argument for something fucky going on in the election in his favor - whether he himself cheated or someone fudged the results on his behalf doesn't exactly matter.

A "solid argument" with absolutely no actual numbers, statistics, or citations. Their entire argument is basically them going, "He cheated, guys, we promise." Read the link I posted. The results are completely mathematically consistent

Threats aren't violence, and IIRC they didn't actually threaten him with that. Just revoked protection.

World Health Organization's definition of violence: "the intentional use of physical force or power, threatened or actual, against oneself, another person, or against a group or community, which either results in or has a high likelihood of resulting in injury, death, psychological harm, maldevelopment, or deprivation."

That's not really relevant here.

You: "There wasn't that much violence, though."

Me: *posts a link showing that the government has authorized the use of violence against protesters*

You: "That's not relevant."

You're not even trying, are you?

Of course, we both know that if a left-wing government did this it prove "the ebuls of socielism." The cognitive dissonance is almost impressive.

I don't count mestizos due to their partial Spanish heritage. Indigenous people make up about 20% of the population.

Whether you "count" them or not is irrelevant.

They're damn well more trustworthy than the only group backing him up: literal Maduro shills.

"More trustworthy" based on what? Oh, right, the fact that you agree with them.

And in part by Corbyn.

Yes, his decision to not take any particular stance on Brexit was seen as spineless.

It's still a bruh moment for Venezuela, though.

You keep telling yourself that.

The CCP is using TikTok to gather personal information on America's youth while disseminating shitty memes into the populace to weaken it. Seems like a left-wing victory to me :^)

The only people who think the PRC are left-wing are tankies and right-wing Cold Warriors who haven't gotten over the fact that the USSR doesn't exist anymore.

Still regurgitating this tired meme, Byz?

So, you don't have an actual rebuttal, got it.

Also, weren't you the one a couple of days ago who accused the left of "celebrating wanton violence"?

That's right, violence is bad, unless it serves your ideological purposes, then it's a-okay.

I honestly don't even know why I'm trying. Right-libertarians are just as dogmatic as fundamentalist Christians. An economist could literally create a theorem that objectively proves Libertarianism will never work and you'd just accuse him of being a Marxist. I'm done. Live in your fantasy world if you want, I'm comfortable in knowing you'll never be able to convince a significant-enough amount of people to follow you in your delusions.

[Byzconia]

Sadly, that is a very good description of the history of U.S. foreign policy.

I fail to see anything wrong.

Yes, we get it, "Democracies bad, dictatorships good." You've played that one already, please write a new song.

[Bear Stearns]

Blah blah blah le coup meme, more to the point is that mass death is only likely if Morales incites a civil war or gets someone to invade to put him back on the throne in office.

Or in other words, "It's okay to overthrow democratically-elected governments if they're lefties."

US imperialism is pretty awful and disastrous, and 99% of the time the US implements regime change, it is always for the worst.

Chile is maybe the one example where it sort of worked out okay. At least the CIA didn't turn it into El Salvador.

[Byzconia]

He held a valid election after killing off most of the the opposition and torturing/threatening the rest into submission and after the Pope publicly called him a dictator and (privately) personally asked him to step down and restore democracy. Bolivia's regime has hardly even begun to quell their opposition and free elections will almost definitely return a Socialist candidate, so they're obviously not going to let that happen.

Not really. Even if we take the maximum count of Pinochet's victims, it would not be enough to sway the vote in the plebiscite. Had the opposition been completely removed, Pinochet would have won.

Which has fuck all to do with what I said. To "completely remove" the opposition, he would've had to kill half the country. As it actually stood, he didn't even want to do the referendum, but the Pope kind of gave him no choice, since the Catholic Church in Chile had been a part of his power base (and a strong one, at that). However, he'd terrorized enough people that the Chilean left was sufficiently neutered for the time being, so it's not like he had a lot to lose. The dude also genuinely thought he was more popular than he really was. Even despite his loss, Chile wouldn't have a another left-wing government until the turn of the century.

And of course, none of this brings back all of the people he murdered.

[Byzconia]

Or in other words, "It's okay to overthrow democratically-elected governments if they're lefties."

US imperialism is pretty awful and disastrous, and 99% of the time the US implements regime change, it is always for the worst.

Chile is maybe the one example where it sort of worked out okay. At least the CIA didn't turn it into El Salvador.

Not sure how Chile "worked out okay" considering that Pinochet murdered thousands of people and massively increased economic inequality while also doing very little good for the economy overall (despite what the Chicago Boys and his Libertarian fanboys try to claim).

[Proctopeo]

Given that this is most certainly an exercise in futility, I'll let you smugly see yourself as the """"victor"""". I hope that works for you.

Except no, he didn't

>citing CEPR
I have confirmation that I can safely dismiss everything you've said if you see them as a valid source.

[Rostavykhan]

IMO Morales' only mistake was not purging the military of traitorous leadership to ensure that they wouldn't turn on him.

Can't get couped if you weed out the bad eggs who would make you stand down.

[Northern Davincia]

Not really. Even if we take the maximum count of Pinochet's victims, it would not be enough to sway the vote in the plebiscite. Had the opposition been completely removed, Pinochet would have won.

Which has fuck all to do with what I said. To "completely remove" the opposition, he would've had to kill half the country. As it actually stood, he didn't even want to do the referendum, but the Pope kind of gave him no choice, since the Catholic Church in Chile had been a part of his power base (and a strong one, at that). However, he'd terrorized enough people that the Chilean left was sufficiently neutered for the time being, so it's not like he had a lot to lose. The dude also genuinely thought he was more popular than he really was. Even despite his loss, Chile wouldn't have a another left-wing government until the turn of the century.

And of course, none of this brings back all of the people he murdered.

You said Pinochet killed/tortured the majority of the opposition. If the opposition is half the country, the victim count should be much higher. The 1980 plebiscite put a term on Pinochet's power until the one in 1988 fully restored democracy.

US imperialism is pretty awful and disastrous, and 99% of the time the US implements regime change, it is always for the worst.

Chile is maybe the one example where it sort of worked out okay. At least the CIA didn't turn it into El Salvador.

Not sure how Chile "worked out okay" considering that Pinochet murdered thousands of people and massively increased economic inequality while also doing very little good for the economy overall (despite what the Chicago Boys and his Libertarian fanboys try to claim).

The long-term economic good came from Pinochet's reforms.

[Torrocca]

Okay, I'm confused. Why did three pages of this thread just disappear?

[Jack Thomas Lang]

So this gay commie wrote a letter to Stalin asking whether homosexuals can be party member.

Stalin's response? “Archive. An idiot and a degenerate. J. Stalin.”

[Proctopeo]

Okay, I'm confused. Why did three pages of this thread just disappear?

A semi-regular got purged, I think. I can't tell you why they were purged, though. It's a riddle for the ages.

[Pasong Tirad]

Okay, I'm confused. Why did three pages of this thread just disappear?

A semi-regular got purged, I think. I can't tell you why they were purged, though. It's a riddle for the ages.

Who?

[Proctopeo]

A semi-regular got purged, I think. I can't tell you why they were purged, though. It's a riddle for the ages.

Who?

Eternal Lotharia.

[Totally Not OEP]

So this gay commie wrote a letter to Stalin asking whether homosexuals can be party member.

Stalin's response? “Archive. An idiot and a degenerate. J. Stalin.”

A very interesting historical note.

[Torrocca]

So this gay commie wrote a letter to Stalin asking whether homosexuals can be party member.

Stalin's response? “Archive. An idiot and a degenerate. J. Stalin.”

This kinda shit is an example out of many of exactly why the USSR and its derivatives fucking suck and did nothing good for furthering the cause of Socialism.