Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[LordBaal]

Well the military merely suggested him to renounce. His canditature wasn't legal to being with. He made a referendum to ask if he could run for a FOURTH term and he lost, but then simply wiped his ass with the results and asked his friends of the supreme court to allow him anyway. Then as he was lossing he tried to tamper with the elections and got caught.... people protested in the streets until he resigned. The police and military refused orders to suppress protesters with deadly force...

And only now that he is out of town the violence is scalating no in small part of what Im sure are members of the "bolivarian breeze".

But yeah it was totally a coup.

[Magistrum]

The problem isn't much what has happened but what will happen.
Right-wing repression is merely a reactionary turn against a perceived slight. It will die out as the situation improves, let's all hope that public order is restored quicky.
A coup isn't necessarily bad, and it would be definitely better to wait for that second election, but now we can't know. Maybe he would just ignore the problem and never do it.

I just want Brazil to fix our damn voting machines already.

[smjjames]

*stares as a distant observer*

Well, um, from what little I've read, it seems more complicated than just a military coup or the military acting alone. Usually in a military coup, the military takes control of power, but that doesn't seem to be the case here. This seems more political coup. Calling it a military coup seems to oversimplify the complexity of the situation. It doesn't quite fit the absolute dictionary definition since the military didn't start the whole thing, but still.

Anyways, the US and Russia have chosen their respective sides, so, I'm sure it's a heck of a lot of Cold War Deja Vu for people in South America.

A coup isn't necessarily bad, and it would be definitely better to wait for that second election, but now we can't know. Maybe he would just ignore the problem and never do it.

I just want Brazil to fix our damn voting machines already.

Coups are almost by very definition violent though, and rarely (if ever?) do they turn out for the better than before.

'coup' can definetly be used in a non-military intervention context, but in this case some are calling it a military coup when it didn't start as one.

[Magistrum]

You are basically right about how complex this all is.
The key point however, is as LordBaal so eloquently put:

Well the military merely suggested him to renounce.

Which you might recognize as a coup, no matter the intention or circumstances involved.

[Teneb]

The forum ate one of my posts, looks like.

But coups can totally not be violent, I had said in it but with more words and an example.

[smjjames]

I know bloodless coups can be and have been a thing, just that it looks like the military saying 'no, we won't/can't support you' was just the final straw before he decided to bail.

I'm probably thinking of the type where the person getting coup'd is physically forced out, it looks like this was of his own accord. But I'm pretty much just splitting hairs here as the dictionary definition doesn't say anything about physically. It's a coup in the sense of getting forced out all right, but whether it's strictly a military one is something that can be split hairs over.

[Powder Miner]

my post is, as PM astutely noted pure mockery devoid of any information scratch that of my opinion towards the coup

there is no point in making a long detailed post if the responses will amount to accusing me of supporting deadly evil communist dictatorships. discussion doesnt work if nobody wants to change their minds

besides, i really do not see what kind of discussion could this become. there's not much to be fucking said about a literal military coup to oust a democratically elected president. to claim that the coup was a good thing for democracy without good reason is the hottest take of the week.

i will not bother to put any effort into debating arguments that do not exist.

This really appears to me to be based off of a refusal to take anyone else in good faith — I’ve been trying my best to engage with other people in the thread honestly, but you’re basically making up a narrative out of whole cloth here that you’re going to get dogpiled on if you dare to invest any effort when that quite clearly isn’t the case based on the overall discussion in the thread. Like... look, I don’t spend a lot of time in the political threads down here because I often have similar worries, it’s not like you HAVE to immerse yourself in these discussions, but to come in and throw nothing out but mockery and accusations and ignore what isn’t favorable to said accusations and then further act like that’s the right thing to do is something that I find myself resenting somewhat, because it’s largely my own efforts I feel are being ignored. I mean, like, yeah, Baal is definitely mostly throwing out anti-socialist invective, but that’s pretty much just him

[LordBaal]

In the Simpsons show, at least on the Latino American sub there's a joke Homer say about Jimmy Carter making a bloodless coup.

Powder thanks for teaching me that word. Invective. Didn't knew it before. I apologize to anyone here if I've been insulting or you have taking anything I say here personal.

[Powder Miner]

https://twitter.com/CNNArgentina/status/1194399284210348033
This doesn't bode well for her declarations of herself as just pursuing another election immediately.

[smjjames]

https://twitter.com/CNNArgentina/status/1194399284210348033
This doesn't bode well for her declarations of herself as just pursuing another election immediately.

'The bible returns to the palace', is that Bolivia's version of 'Churchills bust returns to the White House'?

[Powder Miner]

No, it's Áñez making a point of look how Christianity is coming back to Bolivia -- I don't actually know the intricacies of race and religion in Bolivia, but indigenous groups seem to have a history of conflict with Christian groups in Bolivia even when Christian themselves, and being that Morales was both socialist and highly pro-indigenous I suppose he'd then have been seen as anti-Christian. What this means that very much concerns me is that despite having just portrayed herself as seeking to immediately put through elections, Áñez is making a point of how a value will now take increased precedence in Bolivia through her succession of presidency, which makes me suspect she will want to use that power actively.

[Magistrum]

Orthodoxy, Autocracy, and Nationality.

We are in for a wild ride.

[smjjames]

Or could just be making a show of it, because politics.

[Powder Miner]

I would certainly like that to be the case, smj -- I am not here to make prescriptive statements about the future, because predicting the future is a loser's game. Right now at the stage the Bolivia situation is at, we can only really take things as good signs or as bad signs, especially because we're not exactly going to be personally deciding the outcome; whatever happens will happen regardless of us. What this means, though, is that we really don't have much reason to avoid considering what we view as more or less likely to happen, and unfortunately as time goes on I begin to think the idea of an ultimately democratic resolution looks shakier and shakier. I am not dismissing it entirely, as it's not really as if I have grounds to make such a prediction, but I'm not getting more optimistic.

[LordBaal]

Well the most logical step is for them to have a new elections were most likely Mesa would win, or not, as the plot tickens. This is up to their congress I guess, which by now should have at least have it in the agenda and should be only waiting for the country to settle down again? However announcing elections should have that effect by themselves