Re: [Salon] US gov’t cites groups it funds to allege electoral ‘fraud’ in Venezuela

Michael:

There is no Committee imprimatur implied by anything published on the listserv.  I post many items with which I disagree because they represent viewpoints or information that would not otherwise be available for consideration by readers, who I am confident can make up their own minds about the situations they relate to..

That said, the U.S. government has been openly conducting information warfare and subsidizing efforts to oust the chavista regime in Venezuela for many years.  These regime change efforts characteristically have included gross interference in the election processes there, as pioneered in Italy and France after World War II, as well as sanctions designed to cripple the Venezuelan economy.  One does not have to have any regard at all for Maduro or to doubt that he is entirely capable of cooking electoral results to his advantage (in the ways you cite) to suspect that this election and its results were not an exception to these entrenched U.S. policies.  If half of the things reported in the article happened, Maduro was far from alone in distorting the election results.  It seems appropriate to call the attention of those on the salon list to the fact that our official narrative -- like the Venezuelan government's -- is questionable.  There can be no doubt that the USG has been "orchestrating a campaign" to discredit Maduro and this election. 

This effort to skew the elections in favor of the candidate we favored was conducted in the name of "democracy."  Was it effective?  I am inclined to believe that Maduro lost the vote but our own determined contributions to ensure the installation of a more congenial government in Caracas democracy in Venezuela make it impossible to be sure what the outcome actually was. 

I do not think it is inappropriate that many of the groups opposed to the Maduro regime have been paid for by the USG and U.S. civil society.  We bar foreign governments from doing the same here because we consider such activities improper when they affect us. 

As for the destruction of the Venezuelan economy and the impoverishment of its citizens, surely the sanctions we imposed explicitly to achieve these ends have played a part along with the ineptitude of the government in Caracas?

Chas

On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 1:47 PM Michael Telson <mltelson@aol.com> wrote:
Chas,

I'm not sure what you intended by putting this out.  I'm roping John Henry into this discussion because we shared friendship with a great Venezuelan, Mariano Gurfinkel, who went to MIT before me. 

Do you agree with the point the writer is making that the US is orchestrating a campaign to show that Maduro committed electoral fraud?   Who is this guy?

Maduro invited the Carter center to monitor his reelection because it had previously validated all of his elections and those of Chavez.

 This time, surprising me, the Carter center found massive fraud.

 The Carter center does receive some funding from the US Govt.  However, it did not object to Maduro's election in 2018, so I don't understand why the article implies that getting any US Govt money automatically disqualifies it from opining on the fairness of the election.

 So I'm bothered by distributing an article that clearly implies or states that the idea that Maduro had committed electoral fraud is entirely a US govt conspiracy.  I may not fully understand the article, but please correct me if you disagree. 

 I think it is clear that Maduro lost the election by at least 2 to 1.  

Despite all the of obstacles Maduro created!  Among them: 1) allowing I think 13 lines on the ballot to vote for Maduro but only one to vote for his opponent, 2) prohibiting his main opponent (Maria Corina Machado) from running, 3) making it nearly impossible for Venezuelans abroad to vote for his opponent, and 4) terrorizing people who went to the polls who he thought might be voting for his opponent.

Beyond that, his opponents have been able to produce voting records from about (80%) of the vote showing that they won by a margin of about 70% to 30%.  Maduro said he would release voting data showing his victory but has yet to do so almost 9 days after the election.  Why?

And it is easy to see why he lost: the country is experiencing economic chaos, oil production is down by at least 70% from its peak, and 7 million Venezuelans already have left the country, and more to come.

I agree that the US should not intervene but asserting that all negative commentary on the election should automatically be discounted is offensive to me, and many others.

So please help me understand why the Committee is distributing this article, thus giving it its imprimatur.  I don't understand it.



 



On Monday, August 5, 2024 at 09:20:26 PM EDT, Chas Freeman via Salon <salon@listserve.com> wrote:
This archive was generated by a fusion of Pipermail (Mailman edition) and MHonArc.