“Ineligible for recommendation”. Turns out that freedom of speech was when TikTok was Chinese.

To be entirely honest, i don’t know what our “values” are anymore.

Additions from other posts&comments :

If i understood correctly, mexicans would need to work 3-4 times more in order to buy the same thing :

So much “justice”.

Has anyone here ever looked at what a normal oil contract looks like ? That is just plain robbery and it’s considered normal. Once an oil company reimbursed its expenses(, cost oil), it won’t ever gift the equipment/… to the state but keep it to themselves, nor will they stop there because they need to make a profit, but even once they’ve had a 20% ROI it’s still not enough, it’s never enough, so they won’t say that the remaining profit afterwards will be 100% for the state and its population but, e.g., 60-40 for the state, or at best 80-20, and they’ll also lie on the real price of the cost oil, and prevent countries to do 100% of the initial investments/risks in order to gain 100% of the profits, and it’s not just about oil.

You probably already know that Mohammad Mossadegh in Iran was overthrown by the west two years after nationalizing Iran’s oil in 1958, but did you know that the same thing happened a decade earlier for Rómulo Gallegos, 9 months after implementing a 50-50 share of Venezuela’s oil in 1948 ?
He wasn’t replaced by a western-backed bloodthirsty king, but by one of our many western-backed bloodthirsty dictator, Pérez Jiménez, who received the Legion of Merit in 1954 for its anti-communist activities.
Guatemala also had a similar experience when it nationalized territories from the United Fruit Company(, 1954), or when S.Allende nationalized copper in 1971, or Syria in 1949, Congo in 1960, … Because their ressources are ours.
They should increase the prices of the raw materials as OPEC did in 1973, unite together, and nationalize their ressources. They’ll be sanctioned/overthrown/attacked/invaded/…

In regard to the apparent faster growth of the US, Gabriel Zucman says that the US’s national income per adult has not grown faster than Europe since 2010, even if its GDP per capita has :


The GDP is the total (market )value of all goods&services produced in a country, while the national income(GNI) is the total (market )value of all goods&services produced by a country.
The GDP of India will then include goods&services produced by, e.g., Coca-Cola in India, but won’t do so in the GNI(, apart from wages/taxes/…).
Conversely, the GDP of India won’t include what indian companies produce when operating in foreign countries, but the profits repatriated to India will be added to the GNI.
The United States apparently has a large negative net international investment position(, roughly –$27 trillion), while Europe still records a positive balance

From Our world in data again :

(ouch)

They are more likely to install a friendly government in Kiev

How though ?
You’re excluding a russian occupation of Ukraine, so have you something else in mind to make it happen ?

When either the Kiev regime or the Ukrainian armed forces collapse the Russians can occupy as much of Ukraine as they want.

How will that happen, a full-scale invasion seem possible to you ?
It seems to me that Ukraine cannot progress further, and Russia either can’t or refuses to.
I think it’ll end up with a negotiation as said previously(, i.e. Ukraine in the e.u., but demilitarized and not in the n.a.t.o., with the risks it entails), i’m curious to know if you’d attempt a more precise prediction for this year.

i am not angry in the slightest

Oh ! Great then, thanks for saying that :) !

No, i see no indication of that. (…) I think the current regime in Kiev is never going to accept those demands.

I partially agree with you, Ukraine wasn’t aiming for a negotiated settlement in 2022 with its unreasonable demands that can only be asked of a defeated country, and they didn’t care about multiplying the proposals or intensifying the negotiations.
It’s just much less excessive nowadays, e.g. the 4th and 13th point aren’t interesting, but it’s still far from there, so Russia won’t accept.

Why would the result be any different than in 2022 ?

Because they were opposed to an anti-russian shift, so could eventually want to reconcile with a pro-russian Ukraine, whether by nostalgia or more pragmatically to influence it from the inside.

I’m trying to see what would make Ukraine agree to give up its western shift, hence why i necessarily have to be looking for russian concessions.
It’d be easier(, but even more futile,) to just say that “there’s nothing to be done, let’s just wait until Russia invade the rest of Ukraine”, but i wanted to see if i/we could find what a negotiated resolution accepted by both sides would entail.
Promising such referendums could weight in the balance towards obtaining a ukrainian agreement, such promise could also be useful to maintain them in a pro-russian attitude since they’d want to become attractive again to their old territories. Russia, being the largest country on Earth, may agree to such potential loss if it’s worth it to them.

It’s just my opinion, and w/e, it’s not that easy to find a win-win situation :/

I added an edit to my previous answer, and if you’re angry/‘the one who downvoted my previous comment(, a few minutes after you posted yours)’, then chill out man, if you’re looking for opponents then go elsewhere than Lemmygrad where we’re all on the same side, don’t picture me for someone i’m not.

the Kiev regime had no intention of negotiating

Yeah, they thought they could win(, or that they had to take the chance). Wouldn’t you agree that they seem to have changed their mind since the last year, being now more inclined towards a negotiated settlement that doesn’t come ?
I suppose that not, based on your comment. Would you say that they’re simply delusional ? I tried here to imagine what would be conditions such that both sides could agree to it, as pointless as it is.

Here’s the russian’s June 2024 demands b.t.w.
So, i think that Ukraine could accept them, by asking for these economic promises and later referendums in surplus, since it’s not forbidden to add their conditions to the russian ones.
I think that both sides could end up agreeing on these conditions. If you don’t then ok, i don’t see what i could add to what i said.

The Russian people would see relinquishing what they fought and died for as a complete betrayal and would oust any Russian government that tried to do that.

Even if it’s a 2050 referendum from these regions(, after Ukraine went back to support Russia, Belarus, and the side it held for pretty much its whole past) ?
If they still don’t want to in 2050, then Ukraine will have taken its chance.

Ukraine had a chance to keep the entire Donbass with the Minsk agreements.

Yeah, because they were interested in Crimea, and instead of cancelling their western shift they increased it instead, motivated by revenge instead of recognizing their wrongs.
Similarly, they lost Crimea due to previous pro-western decisions that endangered Russia(, making Crimea a n.a.t.o. port, overthrowing Yanukovich, anti-u.s.s.r. and anti-russia sentiments, opening themselves entirely to western companies and organizations, …) It was multiplied under Poroshenko, etc.
They perfectly knew how the west intended to use them against Russia, how we destroyed Yugoslavia and acted in the Chechnyan conflict, or used other russian neighbours against it, but despite knowing the consequences for Russia they went for it anyway.

And that is exactly why they are incompatible with eastern Ukraine

They were pro-u.s.s.r. in the past, they can become pro-Rus again. As i said above, perhaps not for all of them though(, e.g. eastern Galicia).
And if you disagree and claim that Kiev, for example, will never rejoin its old side again, then we’ll both disagree, and so be it.

You may not have seen the edition of my previous comment

What “Ukraine” - aka the current illegitimate regime in Kiev - values is of no importance to Russia.

What’s the difference with the west then ? Aren’t they supposed to be the civilized side while we’re barbarians crowning ourselves the policemen of the world after having attempted to colonize it(, and continuing to steal their raw materials, etc.) ?
Or perhaps that there’s no difference and they should just do as they want to since they’re the strongest.

Those territories are essential to Russia’s security.

Having a pro-russian Ukraine is essential, not having n.a.t.o. and c.i.a. bases(/ports/…) at its borders is essential, …
Whether these territories are pro-russian or russian doesn’t change much.

If they were to give them back to a Russia-aligned Ukraine who’s to say Ukraine wouldn’t turn back into a hostile entity again at some point ?

Yeah, i developed that point when editing my previous comment.
Especially here : « That’s why i initially thought of a relative control of Ukraine as an autonomous territory inside the russian federation, but perhaps that any agreement leaving Ukraine’s military in Russia’s hands would be enough. »
With the conclusion that « So either Ukraine is proposed something that they desire more than their military/‘ability to threaten Russia’, and willingly agree to such negotiation, as said above. Or the strong takes what it can while the weak endures what it must. »
Russia hasn’t decided on a complete invasion of Ukraine for some reason(, which can be imagined), and everything indicate, from the first weeks of the war and the years preceding it, that they would prefer a negotiation to the use of force.

And i think you are seriously underestimating the animosity that the people in the Donbass have toward the Ukrainian state.

Don’t you think that they still consider themselves ukrainian ?
I.m.o., they just don’t perceive Ukraine as pro-n.a.t.o., and consider themselves as the true ukrainians, while the other are fake newcomers that changed it after 1991, while painting the u.s.s.r. and Russia as an oppressive ruler instead of their brother.
Pro-e.u. ukrainians don’t have a problem with capitalism, n.a.t.o. interventionnism, nor the increasing grasp of the e.u. on the sovereignty of its member-states. They also consider themselves authentic by picturing ukrainians as having always struggle for independence, instead of belonging to the same Rus people, closer to Belarus and western Russia than to western Europe and eastern Russia.
What i think is that they would like to bring back the rest of Ukraine to their side.

The rest of your arguments seem to have been answered above :) ?

(Feels weird to argue with someone from my side, i should perhaps take my lemmy.world account again)

I think that Ukraine values these territories more than it values being able to contain&hamper Russia, but it could content itself with an immediate economic program and future territorial promises.
So, an option could be the implementation of a negotiated economic program, and to add referendums in its old territories for, e.g., 2030, and then again one ~last time in 2050.

In comparison, it’s my belief that Russia values a friendly/russia-aligned Ukraine more than it values keeping these territories for itself.
The west obviously cares more about Ukraine’s ability to hinder the Russian federation than Ukraine’s economy or territory.
However, Russia will care about its security much more than we(sterners) care about bringing its downfall(, just like we(sterners) would care about our security more than Russia would care about bringing our downfall).

I don’t think that there is that much hate between north-western and south-eastern ukrainians(, obviously there is once you start killing each other), the latter mostly fought against n.a.t.o., anti-russians, the e.u., …, as well as against cultural/linguistic/political/socio-economical/… ukrainian laws, and an overall change of their historical path.
Perhaps would there be some irredeemable exception to a pro-russian reunification, such as eastern Galicia, which Poland would pay a lot to gain(, if the local population is given a choice through a referendum between independence or joining either side).

Territories are a weird thing, we’re ready to hurt everything in our path(, including erasing the local culture,) to gain what seems to be the most important thing, yet won’t like extending it through an alliance of different ideologies.
It’s precisely because we lack experience throughout history in such alliance of different ideologies that it’d appear nonsensical to claim that if Ukraine joined (with )the russian federation, then it’d be (part of )the largest country on Earth.

I’d almost certainly learn more by talking with pro-n.a.t.o. redditors(, i.d.k. how long a single thread would take though, if i’m not censored before that), but let me know your thoughts if you ever feel inclined to.

hypocrites

Yeah, look at this ex-general, current member of the Congress, a classic lack of self-awareness, especially two weeks after what they did to Venezuela and are doing to Iran, and are threatening to do in Mexico/Colombia/Cuba/…, and the (parliamentary )coup they supported in Peru, etc. :

No doubt that if Ukraine was on Russia’s side, they would consider it a security threat just like they’re currently claiming for Russia, China, Iran, …
I think that Ukraine would be ready to rejoin the Russian federation in exchange for :
- a recovery of their territories(, even if they were given by Russia in the past) ;
- an autonomous status inside the federation(, since they’d have to be demilitarized to prevent a western influence again against Russia) ;
- a serious heavyweight economic program with China’s help for its development(, i.d.k. what China would receive, but ukrainian poverty was a huge factor that turned them against their previous family/side) ;
- the recovery of Transnistria according to the will of its population.
Of course, the west will complain, but nothing new at this point, they may forget a decade later, and historians will take into account the arguments presented in the russian speeches.

Anyway, we(sterners) won’t care about creating a world where everyone’s security would be ensured against ©overt influences. It’s not even discussed, much less researched. And if it’s not on our mind, it’s because hegemony is our goal, not living (united )in diversity. Hegemony, and hence we(sterners), should be opposed.
We may have many problems(&qualities), but i currently don’t care in comparison.

History of the voting on the United Nations General Assembly resolution entitled “Necessity of ending the economic, commercial and financial embargo imposed by the United States of America against Cuba” (1992-2021).

(annexes)

The US is currently the main(only?) obstacle to world peace and shared prosperity, and we(sterners) are increasing our military budget

I reiterate that we could leave in peace, united in diversity instead of struggling to impose our hegemony, we just don’t want to, and actively oppose such future. We’re humankind’s enemies. Seems like an objective statement.

Has anyone here ever looked at what a normal oil contract looks like ? That is just plain robbery and it’s considered normal. Once an oil company reimbursed its expenses(, cost oil), it won’t ever gift the equipment/… to the state but keep it to themselves, nor will they stop there because they need to make a profit, but even once they’ve had a 20% ROI it’s still not enough, it’s never enough, so they won’t say that the remaining profit afterwards will be 100% for the state and its population but, e.g., 60-40 for the state, or at best 80-20, and they’ll also lie on the real price of the cost oil, and prevent countries to do 100% of the initial investments/risks in order to gain 100% of the profits, and it’s not just about oil. Nothing is just down here, this has to change and if the euro-americans have to be sacrificed in order to bring down the main wall to a better future then we’re not left with a choice.

So much horrors heard every day about Gaza, Israel is destroying Palestine, beating/torturing/killing innocent palestinians every single day. But let’s attack Cuba, Iran, Venezuela, China, Russia, the DPRK, the AES, and any country that remains after our multi-decades wars&coups all around the world. https://x.com/i/status/2010689634292859227
We don’t have values, and should be opposed.

And before being accused of double standards : Ukraine should respect the will of the crimean population and its south-east. If it doesn’t want to lose territories then it should give up on its european future, especially since it means excluding/opposing Russia. The will of the population doesn’t work only in the case of the u.s.s.r.'s or Yugoslavia’s destruction. So many lies and double standards as usual, no wonder that someone honest-looking like D.Trump was elected, and other populists(, even if he’s a liar like all western presidents i know that).

Don’t be active(, or inactive,) towards the imposition of our will/interests, but be active towards the imposition of the common good, even for “regimes” we despise, that our propaganda will always depict as authoritarian hellholes that await our liberation.
So pointless to talk online, i.d.k. why i keep doing it and should have stopped a long time ago instead of imagining/fantasizing that it has some use.

Homicides went down 30% because repression/violence isn’t the only way(, nor the best i.m.o.,) way to lower criminality : https://mexiconewsdaily.com/news/mexico-homicide-rate-2026

(AMLO was awesome, and Ecuador proved among other countries that repression without social measures is less efficient that the right depicts it, they should just look at what works, e.g. many studies point to abortion in order to explain the diminution of criminality in the 90s)

Anyway, D.Trump shouldn’t strike territories that don’t want his “help”.

Marco Rubio give countries some tips on how to remain sovereign/free :

More infos :

The Government of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela reiterates its international condemnation of being the victim of a criminal, illegitimate, and illegal aggression against its territory and its people, an action that has resulted in the deaths of more than one hundred civilians and military personnel who, in defense of the Homeland, were killed in flagrant violation of international law.
As is well known, within the framework of this aggression, the illegal kidnapping of the Constitutional President of the Republic, Nicolás Maduro Moros, and the First Lady, Cilia Flores, took place, an act that constitutes a serious violation of the personal immunity of heads of state and of the fundamental principles of the international legal order.
In order to address this situation within the framework of international law, and in strict adherence to the principles of national sovereignty and Bolivarian Peace Diplomacy, the Bolivarian Government of Venezuela has decided to initiate an exploratory diplomatic process with the Government of the United States of America, aimed at re-establishing diplomatic missions in both countries, with the purpose of addressing the consequences of the aggression and kidnapping of the President of the Republic and the First Lady, as well as addressing a working agenda of mutual interest
In this context, a delegation of diplomatic officials from the United States Department of State arrives in the country to conduct technical and logistical assessments inherent to the diplomatic function. Likewise, a delegation of Venezuelan diplomats will be sent to the United States to carry out the corresponding tasks. As the Acting President, Delcy Rodriguez, has reiterated, Venezuela will confront this aggression through diplomatic channels, convinced that Bolivarian Diplomacy of Peace is the legitimate path for the defense of sovereignty, the restoration of international law, and the preservation of peace.
Caracas, January 9, 2026.

Here’s the full declaration(, automatic spanish subtitles translated in english works well).
Does anyone here think that they shouldn’t ?

The argument/fear would be that they survived until now partly because they were authoritarian&cautious enough to prevent multiple coup attempts that would have worked in a lot of other countries(, but also because they got through economically, etc.). What if the u.s. warmed up the relations only to get close enough with them to do a coup ?

I’d like to believe that after so many years they won’t put themselves in a situation where the expected western betrayal has too much of an impact, among other precautions.
I also believe in their participatory(&protagonic) process(, its critiques would prefer bourgeois democracies). A contented population is useful against coups, and if all goes well economically then the best is yet to come and they’ll have many more reasons to be proud of their collective accomplishments.
They ‘know what’s a stake’/‘feel the “weight of the centuries”’ better than i do, and won’t lower their guard, may there be no more killings&destructions.

I’m perhaps wrong but if they sell the oil at an unfair price, while paying for the whole infrastructure themselves, then they could keep 100% of what the u.s. leaves them, and use it for the good of the venezuelans.


https://open.substack.com/pub/gzucman/p/understanding-us-intervention-in
« In 1958, the 40–50 thousand workers employed by the oil and iron industries, comprising less than 3% of the country’s total workforce, earned more than half of the country’s wages. In addition, their housing, education and health services were provided by their employers.
In contrast, the common city wage earner employed in industry and commerce on the other hand, spent 48% of his income on food. Less than one-third of dwellings were reported to have running water in the 1957 national census. Thus, even if Venezuela reportedly had the continent’s highest per capita income at the time—US$743 in 1962—this wealth was concentrated in the hands of those who benefited from the oil industry. » (source)

It depends on how much the u.s. intends to rob them but, foolishly perhaps, i’d like to naively hope that D.Trump would then leave them in peace despite their direct democracy and egalitarian values(, until the next u.s. president).

A weird idea would be a national referendum along the lines of “Would you rather [u.s. economic demands post-negotiations], or fight an invasion ?”, both to show that they’re not a dictatorship, and in order to leave the fate of the revolution to their hands.

Through negotiations, these kind of demands could be granted as long as it doesn’t exceed +10% of non-us products, reducing it to a selection of sectors. If it’s understood that it’d ease the negotiations on oil, and be included in the eventual national referendum, just my ignorant opinion.

https://www.presidencia.gob.ve/ and https://www.mppre.gob.ve/ don’t seem to load :

But https://prensapresidencialvenezuela.gob.ve/index.php/author/prensa still works

Does anyone know of a website with english subtitles for speeches from venezuelan officials(, ideally like https://youtube.com/@michaelrossipolisci) ?

It’s very close to the historical US invasion of Panama in 1989

B.t.w., Manuel Noriega surrendered in Panama on January 3, 1990

Banned for 30 days for lashing out in anger.
I hope that the mods will reduce his sentence(, they pinned his post on Venezuela and then ban him for a month for being angry that N.Maduro didn’t managed to avoid capture ?)

You can often hear the argument that the sanctions against Venezuela began after its economic crisis, whereas in fact they started when the oil’s crisis ended :

https://cepr.net/images/stories/reports/venezuela-sanctions-2019-04.pdf
« According to the National Survey on Living Conditions (ENCOVI by its acronym in Spanish), an annual survey of living conditions administered by three Venezuelan universities, there was a 31% increase in general mortality from 2017 to 2018. This would imply an increase of more than 40,000 deaths. »

These numbers were now back to a million barrels per day and rapidly rising.

The truth is, of course, not that socialism never works, but that capitalists fear that socialism works so much that they fight it until it falls. That’s what they did/do with Cuba or the USSR.

I thought i edited that info, seems like the lemmygrad servers bugged, i added telesurtv in the edit though, thanks :)