mintpressnews--2020-12-07--Chris Hedges: The Collective Suicide of the Liberal Class

Princeton , New Jersey ( Scheerpost ) — Liberals who express dismay , or more bizarrely a fevered hope , about the corporatists and imperialists selected to fill the positions in the Biden administration are the court jesters of our political burlesque .
They long ago sold their soul and abandoned their most basic principles to line up behind a bankrupt Democratic Party .
They chant , with every election cycle , the mantra of the least worst and sit placidly on the sidelines as a Bill Clinton or a Barack Obama and the Democratic Party leadership betray every issue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thing that mattered to liberals in the presidential race , once again , was removing a Republican , this time Donald Trump , from office .
This , the liberals achieved .
But their Faustian bargain , in election after election , has shredded their credibility .
They are ridiculed , not only among right-wing Trump supporters but by the hierarchy of the Democratic Party that has been captured by corporate power .
No one can , or should , take liberals seriously .
They stand for nothing .
They fight for nothing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And so , the liberals do what they always do , chatter endlessly about political and moral positions they refuse to make any sacrifices to achieve .
Liberals , largely comprised of the professional managerial-class that dutifully recycles and shops for organic produce and is concentrated on the two coasts , have profited from the ravages of neoliberalism .
They seek to endow it with a patina of civility .
But their routine and public humiliation has ominous consequences .
It not only exposes the liberal class as hollow and empty , it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to uphold .
Liberals should have abandoned the Democratic Party when Bill Clinton and political hacks such as Biden transformed the Democratic Party into the Republican Party and launched a war on traditional liberal values and left-wing populism .
They should have defected by the millions to support Ralph Nader and other Green Party candidates .
This defection , as Nader understood , was the only tactic that could force the Democrats to adopt parts of a liberal and left-wing agenda and save us from the slow-motion corporate coup d ’ état .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ change , not oily promises of mutual goodwill .
Short of this pressure , this fear , especially with labor unions destroyed , there is no hope .
Now we will reap the consequences of the liberal class ’ s moral and political cowardice .
The Democratic Party elites revel in taunting liberals as well as the left-wing populists who preach class warfare and supported Bernie Sanders .
How are we supposed to interpret the appointment of Antony Blinken , one of the architects of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and supporter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as Secretary of State ?
Or John Kerry , who championed the massive expansion of domestic oil and gas production , largely through fracking , and , according to Barack Obama ’ s memoir , worked doggedly to convince those concerned about the climate crisis to “ offer up concessions on subsidies for the nuclear power industry and the opening of additional U.S. coastlines to offshore oil drilling ” as the new climate policy czar ?
Or Brian Deese , the executive who was in charge of the “ climate portfolio ” at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fuels , including coal , and who served as a former Obama economic adviser who advocated austerity measures , to run the White House ’ s economic policy ?
Or Neera Tanden , for director of the Office of Management and Budget , who as president of the Center for American Progress raised millions in dark money from Silicon Valley and Wall Street while relentlessly ridiculing Bernie Sanders and his supporters on cable news and social media and who proposed a plank in the Democratic platform calling for bombing Iran ?
The Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by Franz von Papen in 1932 that sought to recreate the ancien régime , a utopian conservatism that ensured Germany ’ s drift into fascism .
Biden , bereft like von Papen of new ideas and programs , will eventually be forced to employ the brutal tools Biden as a senator was so prominent in creating to maintain social control – wholesale surveillance , a corrupt judicial system , the world ’ s largest prison system and police that have been transformed into lethal paramilitary units of internal occupation .
Those that resist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as agents of a foreign power and censored , as many already are being censored , including through algorithms and deplatforming on social media .
The most ardent and successful dissidents , such as Julian Assange , will be criminalized .
The shock troops of the state , already ideologically bonded with the neofascists on the right , will hunt down and wipe out an enfeebled and often phantom left , as we saw in the chilling state assassination by U.S .
Marshals of the antifa activist Michael Reinoehl , who was unarmed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lacey , Washington , in September when he was shot multiple times .
I witnessed this kind of routine state terror during the war in El Salvador .
Reinoehl allegedly killed Aaron Danielson , a member of the far-right group Patriot Prayer during a pro-Trump rally in Portland , Oregon in August .
Compare the gunning down of Reinoehl by federal agents to the coddling of Kyle Rittenhouse , the 17-year-old accused of killing two protesters and injuring a third on August 25 in Kenosha , Wisconsin .
Police officers , moments before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thanking Rittenhouse and other armed right-wing militia member for coming to the city and handing them bottles of water .
Rittenhouse is also seen in a video walking toward police with his hands up after his shooting spree as protesters yell that he had shot several people .
Police , nevertheless , allow him to leave .
Rittenhouse ’ s killings have been defended by the right , including Trump .
Rittenhouse , who has received hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations for his legal fees , has been released on $ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the cusp of a frightening authoritarianism .
Social unrest , given a continuation of neoliberalism , the climate crisis , the siphoning off of diminishing resources to the bloated war machine , political stagnation and the failure to contain the pandemic and its economic fallout , is almost certain .
Absent a left-wing populism , a disenfranchised working class will line up , as it did with Trump , behind its counterfeit , a right-wing populism .
The liberal elites will , if history is any guide , justify state repression as a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of law and order .
That they , too , are on the Christian Right and the corporate state ’ s long list of groups to be neutralized will become evident to them when it is too late .
It was Friedrich Ebert and the Social Democratic Party of Germany , siding with the conservatives and nationalists , that created the Freikorps , private paramilitary groups composed of demobilized soldiers and malcontents .
The Freikorps ruthlessly crushed left-wing uprisings in Berlin , Bremen , Brunswick , Hamburg , Halle , Leipzig , Silesia @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Freikorps was not gunning down left-wing populists in the streets and carrying out hundreds of political assassinations , including the murder of Walther Rathenau , the foreign minister , it was terrorizing civilians , looting and pillaging .
The Freikorps became the antecedent of the Nazi Brownshirts , led by Ernst Röhm , a former Freikorps commander .
All the pieces are in place for our own descent into what I suspect will be a militarized Christianized fascism .
Political dysfunction , a bankrupt and discredited liberal class , massive and growing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tone-deaf oligarchic elite , the fragmentation of the public into warring tribes , widespread food insecurity and hunger , chronic underemployment and unemployment and misery , all exacerbated by the failure of the state to cope with the crisis of the pandemic , combine with the rot of civil and political life to create a familiar cocktail leading to authoritarianism and fascism .
Trump and the Republican Party , along with the shrill incendiary voices on right-wing media , play the role the antisemitic parties played in Europe during the late 19th and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anti-Semitism into the political debate in Europe destroyed the political decorum and civility that is vital to maintaining a democracy .
Racist tropes and hate speech , as in Weimar Germany , now poison our political discourse .
Ridicule and cruel taunts are hurled back and forth .
Lies are interchangeable with fact .
Those who oppose us are demonized as human embodiments of evil .
This poisonous discourse is only going to get worse , especially with millions of Trump supporters convinced the election was rigged and stolen .
The German Social @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that fascism “ is a constant appeal to the inner swine in human beings ” and succeeds by “ mobilizing human stupidity.
” This mobilized stupidity , accompanied by what Rainer Maria Rilke called “ the evil effluvium from the human swamp , ” is being amplified and intensified in the siloed media chambers of the right .
This hate-filled rhetoric eschews reality to cater to the desperate desire for emotional catharsis , for renewed glory and prosperity and for acts of savage vengeance against the phantom enemies blamed for our national debacle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fabulist conspiracy theories will , I fear , embolden extremists to carry out political murder , not only of mainstream Democrats , Republicans Trump has accused of betrayal such as Georgia governor Brian Kemp and those targeted as part of the deep state , but also those at media outlets such as CNN or The New York Times that serve as propaganda arms of the Democratic Party .
Once the Pandora ’ s box of violence is opened it is almost impossible to close .
Martyrs on one side of the divide demand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ becomes the primary form of communication .
And , as Sabastian Haffner wrote , “ once the violence and readiness to kill that lies beneath the surface of human nature has been awakened and turned against other humans , and even made into a duty , it is a simple matter to change the target.
” This , I suspect , is what is coming .
The blame lies not only with the goons and racists on the right , the corporatists who pillage the country and the corrupt ruling elite that does @ @ @ @ @ @ @ class that found standing up for its beliefs too costly .
The liberals will pay for their timidity and cowardice , but so will we .
Chris Hedges is a Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist who was a foreign correspondent for fifteen years for The New York Times , where he served as the Middle East Bureau Chief and Balkan Bureau Chief for the paper .
He previously worked overseas for The Dallas Morning News , The Christian Science Monitor , and NPR .
He is the host of the Emmy Award-nominated RT America show @ @ @

Princeton, New Jersey (Scheerpost) — Liberals who express dismay, or more bizarrely a fevered hope, about the corporatists and imperialists selected to fill the positions in the Biden administration are the court jesters of our political burlesque. They long ago sold their soul and abandoned their most basic principles to line up behind a bankrupt Democratic Party. They chant, with every election cycle, the mantra of the least worst and sit placidly on the sidelines as a Bill Clinton or a Barack Obama and the Democratic Party leadership betray every issue they claim to support.
The only thing that mattered to liberals in the presidential race, once again, was removing a Republican, this time Donald Trump, from office. This, the liberals achieved. But their Faustian bargain, in election after election, has shredded their credibility. They are ridiculed, not only among right-wing Trump supporters but by the hierarchy of the Democratic Party that has been captured by corporate power. No one can, or should, take liberals seriously. They stand for nothing. They fight for nothing. The cost is too onerous. And so, the liberals do what they always do, chatter endlessly about political and moral positions they refuse to make any sacrifices to achieve.
Liberals, largely comprised of the professional managerial-class that dutifully recycles and shops for organic produce and is concentrated on the two coasts, have profited from the ravages of neoliberalism. They seek to endow it with a patina of civility. But their routine and public humiliation has ominous consequences. It not only exposes the liberal class as hollow and empty, it discredits the liberal democratic values they claim to uphold. Liberals should have abandoned the Democratic Party when Bill Clinton and political hacks such as Biden transformed the Democratic Party into the Republican Party and launched a war on traditional liberal values and left-wing populism. They should have defected by the millions to support Ralph Nader and other Green Party candidates.
This defection, as Nader understood, was the only tactic that could force the Democrats to adopt parts of a liberal and left-wing agenda and save us from the slow-motion corporate coup d’état. Fear is the real force behind political change, not oily promises of mutual goodwill. Short of this pressure, this fear, especially with labor unions destroyed, there is no hope. Now we will reap the consequences of the liberal class’s moral and political cowardice.
The Democratic Party elites revel in taunting liberals as well as the left-wing populists who preach class warfare and supported Bernie Sanders. How are we supposed to interpret the appointment of Antony Blinken, one of the architects of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and supporter of the apartheid state of Israel, as Secretary of State? Or John Kerry, who championed the massive expansion of domestic oil and gas production, largely through fracking, and, according to Barack Obama’s memoir, worked doggedly to convince those concerned about the climate crisis to “offer up concessions on subsidies for the nuclear power industry and the opening of additional U.S. coastlines to offshore oil drilling” as the new climate policy czar? Or Brian Deese, the executive who was in charge of the “climate portfolio” at BlackRock, which invests heavily in fossil fuels, including coal, and who served as a former Obama economic adviser who advocated austerity measures, to run the White House’s economic policy? Or Neera Tanden, for director of the Office of Management and Budget, who as president of the Center for American Progress raised millions in dark money from Silicon Valley and Wall Street while relentlessly ridiculing Bernie Sanders and his supporters on cable news and social media and who proposed a plank in the Democratic platform calling for bombing Iran?
The Biden administration resembles the ineffectual German government formed by Franz von Papen in 1932 that sought to recreate the ancien régime, a utopian conservatism that ensured Germany’s drift into fascism. Biden, bereft like von Papen of new ideas and programs, will eventually be forced to employ the brutal tools Biden as a senator was so prominent in creating to maintain social control – wholesale surveillance, a corrupt judicial system, the world’s largest prison system and police that have been transformed into lethal paramilitary units of internal occupation. Those that resist as social unrest mounts will be attacked as agents of a foreign power and censored, as many already are being censored, including through algorithms and deplatforming on social media. The most ardent and successful dissidents, such as Julian Assange, will be criminalized.
The shock troops of the state, already ideologically bonded with the neofascists on the right, will hunt down and wipe out an enfeebled and often phantom left, as we saw in the chilling state assassination by U.S. Marshals of the antifa activist Michael Reinoehl, who was unarmed and standing outside an apartment complex in Lacey, Washington, in September when he was shot multiple times. I witnessed this kind of routine state terror during the war in El Salvador. Reinoehl allegedly killed Aaron Danielson, a member of the far-right group Patriot Prayer during a pro-Trump rally in Portland, Oregon in August.
Compare the gunning down of Reinoehl by federal agents to the coddling of Kyle Rittenhouse, the 17-year-old accused of killing two protesters and injuring a third on August 25 in Kenosha, Wisconsin. Police officers, moments before the shooting, are seen on video thanking Rittenhouse and other armed right-wing militia member for coming to the city and handing them bottles of water. Rittenhouse is also seen in a video walking toward police with his hands up after his shooting spree as protesters yell that he had shot several people. Police, nevertheless, allow him to leave. Rittenhouse’s killings have been defended by the right, including Trump. Rittenhouse, who has received hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations for his legal fees, has been released on $2 million bail.
We stand on the cusp of a frightening authoritarianism. Social unrest, given a continuation of neoliberalism, the climate crisis, the siphoning off of diminishing resources to the bloated war machine, political stagnation and the failure to contain the pandemic and its economic fallout, is almost certain. Absent a left-wing populism, a disenfranchised working class will line up, as it did with Trump, behind its counterfeit, a right-wing populism. The liberal elites will, if history is any guide, justify state repression as a response to social chaos in the name of law and order. That they, too, are on the Christian Right and the corporate state’s long list of groups to be neutralized will become evident to them when it is too late.
It was Friedrich Ebert and the Social Democratic Party of Germany, siding with the conservatives and nationalists, that created the Freikorps, private paramilitary groups composed of demobilized soldiers and malcontents. The Freikorps ruthlessly crushed left-wing uprisings in Berlin, Bremen, Brunswick, Hamburg, Halle, Leipzig, Silesia, Thuringia and the Ruhr. When the Freikorps was not gunning down left-wing populists in the streets and carrying out hundreds of political assassinations, including the murder of Walther Rathenau, the foreign minister, it was terrorizing civilians, looting and pillaging. The Freikorps became the antecedent of the Nazi Brownshirts, led by Ernst Röhm, a former Freikorps commander.
All the pieces are in place for our own descent into what I suspect will be a militarized Christianized fascism. Political dysfunction, a bankrupt and discredited liberal class, massive and growing social inequality, a grotesquely rich and tone-deaf oligarchic elite, the fragmentation of the public into warring tribes, widespread food insecurity and hunger, chronic underemployment and unemployment and misery, all exacerbated by the failure of the state to cope with the crisis of the pandemic, combine with the rot of civil and political life to create a familiar cocktail leading to authoritarianism and fascism.
Trump and the Republican Party, along with the shrill incendiary voices on right-wing media, play the role the antisemitic parties played in Europe during the late 19th and early 20th century. The infusion of anti-Semitism into the political debate in Europe destroyed the political decorum and civility that is vital to maintaining a democracy. Racist tropes and hate speech, as in Weimar Germany, now poison our political discourse. Ridicule and cruel taunts are hurled back and forth. Lies are interchangeable with fact. Those who oppose us are demonized as human embodiments of evil.
This poisonous discourse is only going to get worse, especially with millions of Trump supporters convinced the election was rigged and stolen. The German Social Democrat Kurt Schumacher in the 1930s said that fascism “is a constant appeal to the inner swine in human beings” and succeeds by “mobilizing human stupidity.” This mobilized stupidity, accompanied by what Rainer Maria Rilke called “the evil effluvium from the human swamp,” is being amplified and intensified in the siloed media chambers of the right. This hate-filled rhetoric eschews reality to cater to the desperate desire for emotional catharsis, for renewed glory and prosperity and for acts of savage vengeance against the phantom enemies blamed for our national debacle.
The constant barrage of vitriol and fabulist conspiracy theories will, I fear, embolden extremists to carry out political murder, not only of mainstream Democrats, Republicans Trump has accused of betrayal such as Georgia governor Brian Kemp and those targeted as part of the deep state, but also those at media outlets such as CNN or The New York Times that serve as propaganda arms of the Democratic Party. Once the Pandora’s box of violence is opened it is almost impossible to close. Martyrs on one side of the divide demand martyrs on the other side. Violence becomes the primary form of communication. And, as Sabastian Haffner wrote, “once the violence and readiness to kill that lies beneath the surface of human nature has been awakened and turned against other humans, and even made into a duty, it is a simple matter to change the target.”
This, I suspect, is what is coming. The blame lies not only with the goons and racists on the right, the corporatists who pillage the country and the corrupt ruling elite that does their bidding, but a feckless liberal class that found standing up for its beliefs too costly. The liberals will pay for their timidity and cowardice, but so will we.
Feature photo | Art by Mr. Fish | Original to Scheerpost
Chris Hedges is a Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist who was a foreign correspondent for fifteen years for The New York Times, where he served as the Middle East Bureau Chief and Balkan Bureau Chief for the paper. He previously worked overseas for The Dallas Morning News, The Christian Science Monitor, and NPR. He is the host of the Emmy Award-nominated RT America show On Contact.


mintpressnews--2020-12-07--US Media, Pols Rage After Venezuelans Defy US Empire to Re-elect Socialists

President Nicolas Maduro and his United Socialist Party of Venezuela ( PSUV ) are celebrating today , after a clear victory in yesterday ’ s National Assembly elections .
The elections , boycotted by many major right-wing opposition groups , but still participated in by over 100 political parties , ended with the PSUV and its allies receiving an estimated 67.6 % of the votes cast , meaning they will control a two-thirds supermajority of the 277-seat National Assembly , the only major body that was controlled by anti-government forces .
“ We have recovered the national assembly with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Maduro said in his victory speech .
“ It ’ s a great victory without a doubt for democracy , ” he added , also announcing that the government had delivered the 3.3 million houses for the needy that it promised when it launched the Great Venezuelan Housing Mission program in 2011 .
Self-declared opposition president Juan Guaidó , a former leader of the National Assembly himself , did not see the result in the same way , seemingly calling for another coup on Saturday .
“ The rejection of the regime @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we must respond in the street .
December 12 will mobilize us like the immense majority of us who want to choose their future , ” he announced on social media .
Yet even his backers in the Western press fear the result has neutralized him .
The Guardian , for example , wrote that yesterday ’ s events “ deal a further blow to Guaidó ’ s flagging crusade , ” quoting bitterly anti-Maduro figure Phil Gunson , who said that “ the coalition around Guaidó is really crumbling.
” Turnout in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ considerably lower than the PSUV was hoping for , although perhaps understandable , given the continued boycott of much of the opposition ( meaning the outcome was barely in doubt ) , the COVID-19 pandemic , the crippling U.S. sanctions — which included those imposed on opposition figures that defied U.S. instructions not to participate in the election .
Nevertheless , pro-government figures will be disappointed with the figure .
What is not in doubt is the veracity of the election itself , which was overseen by 4,500 international observers , including many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lugo of Paraguay , Evo Morales of Bolivia , and Jose Luís Zapatero of Spain .
“ Here in Venezuela nobody can doubt the electoral system , ” said former Ecuadorian president Rafael Correa , who agreed with former Honduran president Manuel Zelaya ’ s assessment that the process was “ transparent and peaceful.
” Other official observers included MintPress contributors Professor Adrienne Pine and Dr. Margaret Flowers .
Despite this , the United States government had already decided that the process was a fiction .
“ Venezuela ’ s electoral fraud has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of State Mike Pompeo .
“ The results announced by the illegitimate Maduro regime will not reflect the will of the Venezuelan people .
What ’ s happening today is a fraud and a sham , not an election.
” Zelaya — who was overthrown in a coup supported Pompeo ’ s predecessor , Hillary Clinton — fired back , claiming that the U.S. had “ no moral high ground ” to criticize events in Venezuela .
“ They ought to be here as observers , ” he added .
Corporate media , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s side on Venezuela , did their level best to undermine confidence in the process when reporting on it .
“ Maduro consolidates power in Venezuela , dominating election boycotted by opposition , ” ran the Washington Post ’ s headline .
“ Venezuela ’ s Maduro tightens grip as opposition boycotts elections , ” wrote the Wall Street Journal .
Human Rights Watch ’ s Ken Roth , who supported the far-right coup in Bolivia last year that removed Maduro ’ s democratically-elected ally Evo Morales , also rejected the election as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a veneer of legitimacy to the government of Nicolas Maduro.
” Media was also not above simply printing demonstrably fake news , either .
Local opposition outlets insisted that turnout was below 20 % , a canard reprinted in major Western sources .
One-upping them , Geoff Ramsay of the pro-coup Washington Office on Latin America , perhaps Western media ’ s most quoted “ expert ” on Venezuela , claimed that turnout was only 15 % .
Meanwhile , Bloomberg ’ s Venezuela Bureau Chief Patricia Laya went furthest of all , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ % .
A similar phenomenon of attempting to wish something into being by lowballing turnout occurred in the 2018 elections , also boycotted by much of the opposition .
Concern over low participation rates appeared not to extend to U.S. ally and NATO member Romania , however , the Eastern European state also held elections yesterday , finishing with a turnout of 30 % .
Unlike with Venezuela , there was no outcry from the White House , nor any condemnation from corporate media , suggesting that the response had more to do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rather than what turnout figures say about the quality of democracy .
Ultimately , however , while turnout was relatively low , the ruling socialist party has gained a supermajority in the one body the opposition-controlled , handing them a clear victory and the U.S. government a defeat .
Added to the return of democracy to Bolivia in October and a leftist election victory in Guyana earlier this year , 2020 has not been a good year for Washington in Latin America .
Feature photo | Government supporters chant for parliamentary candidates representing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ closing campaign rally in Caracas , Venezuela , Dec. 3 , 2020 .
Ariana Cubillos | AP Alan MacLeod is a Staff Writer for MintPress News .
After completing his PhD in 2017 he published two books : Bad News From Venezuela : Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the Information Age : Still Manufacturing Consent .
He has also contributed to Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting , The Guardian , Salon , The Grayzone , Jacobin Magazine , Common Dreams the American Herald Tribune and The Canary .

President Nicolas Maduro and his United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) are celebrating today, after a clear victory in yesterday’s National Assembly elections. The elections, boycotted by many major right-wing opposition groups, but still participated in by over 100 political parties, ended with the PSUV and its allies receiving an estimated 67.6% of the votes cast, meaning they will control a two-thirds supermajority of the 277-seat National Assembly, the only major body that was controlled by anti-government forces.
“We have recovered the national assembly with the majority vote of the Venezuelan people,” Maduro said in his victory speech. “It’s a great victory without a doubt for democracy,” he added, also announcing that the government had delivered the 3.3 million houses for the needy that it promised when it launched the Great Venezuelan Housing Mission program in 2011.
Self-declared opposition president Juan Guaidó, a former leader of the National Assembly himself, did not see the result in the same way, seemingly calling for another coup on Saturday. “The rejection of the regime and its fraud united us, now we must respond in the street. December 12 will mobilize us like the immense majority of us who want to choose their future,” he announced on social media.
Yet even his backers in the Western press fear the result has neutralized him. The Guardian, for example, wrote that yesterday’s events “deal a further blow to Guaidó’s flagging crusade,” quoting bitterly anti-Maduro figure Phil Gunson, who said that “the coalition around Guaidó is really crumbling.”
Turnout in the election — 31% — was considerably lower than the PSUV was hoping for, although perhaps understandable, given the continued boycott of much of the opposition (meaning the outcome was barely in doubt), the COVID-19 pandemic, the crippling U.S. sanctions — which included those imposed on opposition figures that defied U.S. instructions not to participate in the election. Nevertheless, pro-government figures will be disappointed with the figure.
What is not in doubt is the veracity of the election itself, which, according to TeleSUR, “is being monitored by 1,500 observers and 300 representatives from 34 countries worldwide,” including many former heads of states, including Fernando Lugo of Paraguay, Evo Morales of Bolivia, and Jose Luís Zapatero of Spain. “Here in Venezuela nobody can doubt the electoral system,” said former Ecuadorian president Rafael Correa, who agreed with former Honduran president Manuel Zelaya’s assessment that the process was “transparent and peaceful.” Other official observers included MintPress contributors Professor Adrienne Pine and Dr. Margaret Flowers.
Despite this, the United States government had already decided that the process was a fiction. “Venezuela’s electoral fraud has already been committed,” said Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. “The results announced by the illegitimate Maduro regime will not reflect the will of the Venezuelan people. What’s happening today is a fraud and a sham, not an election.” Zelaya — who was overthrown in a coup supported Pompeo’s predecessor, Hillary Clinton — fired back, claiming that the U.S. had “no moral high ground” to criticize events in Venezuela. “They ought to be here as observers,” he added.
Venezuela's electoral fraud has already been committed. The results announced by the illegitimate Maduro regime will not reflect the will of the Venezuelan people. What's happening today is a fraud and a sham, not an election. — Secretary Pompeo (@SecPompeo) December 6, 2020
Corporate media, who reflexively take the U.S. government’s side on Venezuela, did their level best to undermine confidence in the process when reporting on it. “Maduro consolidates power in Venezuela, dominating election boycotted by opposition,” ran the Washington Post’s headline. “Venezuela’s Maduro tightens grip as opposition boycotts elections,” wrote the Wall Street Journal. Human Rights Watch’s Ken Roth, who supported the far-right coup in Bolivia last year that removed Maduro’s democratically-elected ally Evo Morales, also rejected the election as “a theater piece meant to lend a veneer of legitimacy to the government of Nicolas Maduro.”
Venezuela's election Sunday is "a theater piece meant to lend a veneer of legitimacy to the gov't of Pres Nicolás Maduro, who has spent the last 7 years jailing opponents, tearing apart opposition parties & using extrajudicial killings to stifle dissent." https://t.co/rWx4EJWvum pic.twitter.com/tr33xsECix — Kenneth Roth (@KenRoth) December 6, 2020
Media was also not above simply printing demonstrably fake news, either. Local opposition outlets insisted that turnout was below 20%, a canard reprinted in major Western sources. One-upping them, Geoff Ramsay of the pro-coup Washington Office on Latin America, perhaps Western media’s most quoted “expert” on Venezuela, claimed that turnout was only 15%. Meanwhile, Bloomberg’s Venezuela Bureau Chief Patricia Laya went furthest of all, insisting that participation stood at only 10%. A similar phenomenon of attempting to wish something into being by lowballing turnout occurred in the 2018 elections, also boycotted by much of the opposition.
From 23 de Enero to Petare, voting centers remained largely empty across Caracas on Sunday. Staff stood idly, with participation near 10% at most centers we visited: https://t.co/cgbdZ7I5s4 @AlexVasquezS — Patricia Laya (@PattyLaya) December 6, 2020
Concern over low participation rates appeared not to extend to U.S. ally and NATO member Romania, however, the Eastern European state also held elections yesterday, finishing with a turnout of 30%. Unlike with Venezuela, there was no outcry from the White House, nor any condemnation from corporate media, suggesting that the response had more to do with who was winning the elections, rather than what turnout figures say about the quality of democracy.
Ultimately, however, while turnout was relatively low, the ruling socialist party has gained a supermajority in the one body the opposition-controlled, handing them a clear victory and the U.S. government a defeat. Added to the return of democracy to Bolivia in October and a leftist election victory in Guyana earlier this year, 2020 has not been a good year for Washington in Latin America.
Correction | This article originally stated that the elections were overseen by 4,500 international election observers. In fact, it was reportedly overseen by 1,500 election observers. The original figure was based on a social media post by one of the election observers and has since been corrected.
Feature photo | Government supporters chant for parliamentary candidates representing the Great Patriotic Pole party at a closing campaign rally in Caracas, Venezuela, Dec. 3, 2020. Ariana Cubillos | AP
Alan MacLeod is a Staff Writer for MintPress News. After completing his PhD in 2017 he published two books: Bad News From Venezuela: Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the Information Age: Still Manufacturing Consent. He has also contributed to Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, The Guardian, Salon, The Grayzone, Jacobin Magazine, Common Dreams the American Herald Tribune and The Canary.


mintpressnews--2020-12-09--Bolivia: New Gov’t Sets to Work Undoing Damage Left by US-Backed Añez Regime

Only weeks after their landslide victory , the leftist Movement to Socialism ( MAS ) party is already enacting widespread changes to Bolivia in an attempt to undo the damage of one year of military rule .
Last November , a U.S.-backed coup removed democratically-elected president Evo Morales from power , placing the far-right authoritarian politician Jeanine Añez in power .
Internally , the new government , headed by Luis Arce , is facing many pressing concerns , as the country tries to come to grips with the fallout of the COVID-19 pandemic that has killed over 9,000 Bolivians , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ countries in the world per capita .
Arce , Morales ’ economy minister until the coup , has made the eradication of poverty and extreme poverty his top priority .
Under Morales stewardship ( 2006-2019 ) , Bolivia saw its poverty rate reduced by 42 % and extreme poverty cut by 60 % .
The government has already begun issuing what it calls “ hunger bonuses ” — cash sums to all adults who do not receive a salary .
This is a desperately needed financial transfer , as many sectors , including @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the pandemic .
As part of a wider economic program , Arce announced changes in public spending he hopes will “ optimize expenses and reactivate public investment to generate jobs.
” Part of Arce ’ s work entails undoing the damage done by the Añez administration over the past year .
The government is restarting public transportation projects canceled under Añez ’ s brief rule , such as a tramway project for the city of Cochabamba , and reopening its Ministry of Cultures , which Añez closed , labeling it an “ absurd @ @ @ @ @ @ @ indigenous Bolivian identity and will now be led by an indigenous Quechua Campesina ( farm worker ) .
Television and radio networks that were shut down under the previous administration have also been allowed to broadcast again .
Late last month , Latin American news network TeleSUR began operating in Bolivia after one year of silence.| Internationally , the changes have been perhaps more pronounced .
Bolivia has rejoined a number of progressive Latin American alliances and organizations , including the Union of South American Nations ( UNASUR ) and the Bolivarian Alliance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ALBA ) — a left-wing trade and political bloc aimed at promoting Latin American unity .
Former President Morales also traveled to Venezuela , observing the recent elections and embracing government officials there , also posing underneath a portrait of Cuban revolutionary Che Guevara .
While Añez ’ s interior minister Arturo Murillo invited Israeli security forces to the country to help quell dissent and crush any resistance to their rule , the country ’ s new Minister for the Presidency , Maria Nela Prada , pointedly wears a Palestinian Keffiyeh ( headscarf @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Bolivia had become a champion of Palestinian rights on the world stage , even declaring Israel a “ terrorist state ” in 2014 .
Bolivia ’ s position was part of a continent-wide shift in relations ; in 2005 , not one country in South America officially recognized Palestine , but by 2018 , all had changed their positions .
Añez was handpicked by the military after they intervened in the country ’ s 2019 presidential elections , claiming fraud and demanding Morales resign .
Morales fled to Mexico , then Argentina @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his life in prison if he returned to his homeland .
Añez and Murillo pushed forward a radical privatization program , cracking down on opposition to their rule .
Calling herself an “ interim president , ” she promised to immediately hold elections .
However , she postponed them three times .
Fearing permanent military rule , Bolivians organized a nationwide general strike that paralyzed the country and forced her to concede to elections in October .
While Morales was banned from standing , Arce and the MAS won in a landslide , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nearest challengers .
Morales returned to a hero ’ s welcome last month , accompanied by MintPress ’ Ollie Vargas .
Añez , meanwhile , was attempting to go the other way , but was prevented from fleeing the country on a plane to Brazil .
She complained that she was being “ persecuted ” for “ thinking differently.
” Others felt that she was being held to account for her crimes , which included overseeing two massacres of indigenous MAS supporters .
Murillo , on the other hand , managed to fly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the United States .
Given the U.S. ’ strong support for the coup , it is unlikely that he will be forced to return .
Perhaps a bigger problem for the U.S. than the fall of their client government , however , is the democratic election of a Marxist politician as head of state .
In 1973 , the U.S. organized the overthrow of the democratically-elected Marxist Salvador Allende in Chile .
With such widespread support for Arce and his policies , doing the same again in Bolivia might prove far harder this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Writer for MintPress News .
After completing his PhD in 2017 he published two books : Bad News From Venezuela : Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the Information Age : Still Manufacturing Consent .
He has also contributed to Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting , The Guardian , Salon , The Grayzone , Jacobin Magazine , Common Dreams the American Herald Tribune and The Canary .

Only weeks after their landslide victory, the leftist Movement to Socialism (MAS) party is already enacting widespread changes to Bolivia in an attempt to undo the damage of one year of military rule. Last November, a U.S.-backed coup removed democratically-elected president Evo Morales from power, placing the far-right authoritarian politician Jeanine Añez in power.
Internally, the new government, headed by Luis Arce, is facing many pressing concerns, as the country tries to come to grips with the fallout of the COVID-19 pandemic that has killed over 9,000 Bolivians, making it one of the worst affected countries in the world per capita.
Arce, Morales’ economy minister until the coup, has made the eradication of poverty and extreme poverty his top priority. Under Morales stewardship (2006-2019), Bolivia saw its poverty rate reduced by 42% and extreme poverty cut by 60%. The government has already begun issuing what it calls “hunger bonuses” — cash sums to all adults who do not receive a salary. This is a desperately needed financial transfer, as many sectors, including tourism, have virtually collapsed thanks to the pandemic. As part of a wider economic program, Arce announced changes in public spending he hopes will “optimize expenses and reactivate public investment to generate jobs.”
Part of Arce’s work entails undoing the damage done by the Añez administration over the past year. The government is restarting public transportation projects canceled under Añez’s brief rule, such as a tramway project for the city of Cochabamba, and reopening its Ministry of Cultures, which Añez closed, labeling it an “absurd expense.” The Ministry of Cultures promoted indigenous Bolivian identity and will now be led by an indigenous Quechua Campesina (farm worker). Television and radio networks that were shut down under the previous administration have also been allowed to broadcast again. Late last month, Latin American news network TeleSUR began operating in Bolivia after one year of silence.|
Internationally, the changes have been perhaps more pronounced. Bolivia has rejoined a number of progressive Latin American alliances and organizations, including the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR) and the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA) — a left-wing trade and political bloc aimed at promoting Latin American unity. Former President Morales also traveled to Venezuela, observing the recent elections and embracing government officials there, also posing underneath a portrait of Cuban revolutionary Che Guevara.
View this post on Instagram A post shared by Evo Morales Ayma (@evomoralesayma)
While Añez’s interior minister Arturo Murillo invited Israeli security forces to the country to help quell dissent and crush any resistance to their rule, the country’s new Minister for the Presidency, Maria Nela Prada, pointedly wears a Palestinian Keffiyeh (headscarf) on official business. Under Morales, Bolivia had become a champion of Palestinian rights on the world stage, even declaring Israel a “terrorist state” in 2014. Bolivia’s position was part of a continent-wide shift in relations; in 2005, not one country in South America officially recognized Palestine, but by 2018, all had changed their positions.
Under the Añez dictatorship, Bolivia invited Israeli secret police to the country to help them crack down on protestors. Today its Minister for the Presidency casually wears and Palestinian Keffiyeh on official business. pic.twitter.com/IAbT4ZGwB8 — Alan MacLeod (@AlanRMacLeod) December 5, 2020
Añez was handpicked by the military after they intervened in the country’s 2019 presidential elections, claiming fraud and demanding Morales resign. Morales fled to Mexico, then Argentina, and faced spending the rest of his life in prison if he returned to his homeland.
Añez and Murillo pushed forward a radical privatization program, cracking down on opposition to their rule. Calling herself an “interim president,” she promised to immediately hold elections. However, she postponed them three times. Fearing permanent military rule, Bolivians organized a nationwide general strike that paralyzed the country and forced her to concede to elections in October. While Morales was banned from standing, Arce and the MAS won in a landslide, nearly doubling the vote total of their nearest challengers. Morales returned to a hero’s welcome last month, accompanied by MintPress’ Ollie Vargas.
Añez, meanwhile, was attempting to go the other way, but was prevented from fleeing the country on a plane to Brazil. She complained that she was being “persecuted” for “thinking differently.” Others felt that she was being held to account for her crimes, which included overseeing two massacres of indigenous MAS supporters. Murillo, on the other hand, managed to fly to Panama and is now currently in the United States. Given the U.S.’ strong support for the coup, it is unlikely that he will be forced to return.
Perhaps a bigger problem for the U.S. than the fall of their client government, however, is the democratic election of a Marxist politician as head of state. In 1973, the U.S. organized the overthrow of the democratically-elected Marxist Salvador Allende in Chile. With such widespread support for Arce and his policies, doing the same again in Bolivia might prove far harder this time.
Feature photo | Graphic by Antonio Cabrera for MintPress News
Alan MacLeod is a Staff Writer for MintPress News. After completing his PhD in 2017 he published two books: Bad News From Venezuela: Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the Information Age: Still Manufacturing Consent. He has also contributed to Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, The Guardian, Salon, The Grayzone, Jacobin Magazine, Common Dreams the American Herald Tribune and The Canary.


mintpressnews--2020-12-09--John Kerry’s Think Tank Calls for War With Russia Over Climate Change

Recently-appointed Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry has announced his intention of dealing with the pressing issue of global warming as a national security concern .
“ America will soon have a government that treats the climate crisis as the urgent national security threat it is , ” the 76-year-old former Secretary of State wrote .
“ I am proud to partner with the President-elect , our allies , and the young leaders of the climate movement to take on this crisis.
” The announcement drew praise from many professional climate activists and groups , perhaps assuming that Kerry @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , who has for years been saying the same thing .
Executive Director of the Sunrise Movement , Varshini Prakash said his statement was an “ encouraging move , ” while 350.org ’ s Bill McKibben , predicted Kerry would be an excellent climate czar .
Yet , as media critic Adam Johnson argued , Kerry ’ s proclamation should deeply concern progressive activists and will likely lead to expanding the already bloated military budget .
Kerry is a founding member of the Washington think tank , the American Security Project ( ASP @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s who of retired generals , admirals and senators .
The ASP also hailed the appointment of their man , explaining , in a little-read report , exactly what treating the climate as a national security threat entails .
And it is nothing like what Sanders advocates .
For the ASP , climate change constitutes an “ accelerant of instability ” and a “ threat multiplier ” that will “ affect the operating environment , ” and notes that Kerry will have three priorities in his role as President Biden ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ priorities ?
Making sure people in the Global South could eat and have access to safe drinking water ?
Reparations ?
Disaster relief or response teams ?
Cutting back on fossil fuel use ?
Indeed not .
For the ASP , the primary objectives were : • Preparing for a war with Russia in the newly-melted Arctic .
The ASP notes that rising sea levels will neutralize or destroy dozens of American naval bases around the world , including the world ’ s largest such base in Norfolk , VA .
The ASP @ @ @ @ @ @ @ protect readiness ” of the military to strike at any time , also warning that rising sea levels will hurt the combat readiness of the Marine Expeditionary Force .
Thus , a rebuilding of the U.S. ’ worldwide network of military bases is in order .
The report notes that the nations most immediately affected by climate change are South Pacific island chains like Vanuatu or the Marshall Islands , claiming that these countries are “ strategically important in the contest between the U.S. and China.
” It recommends that the U.S. must @ @ @ @ @ @ @ control of those islands , claiming that China is “ showering cash ” on them , building seawalls , ports , and clean energy stations that are a threat to U.S. dominance of the region .
The ASP also notes that the Arctic is the fastest-warming area of the world , and envisions a pitched battle with Russia to control the area , which is increasingly open to maritime traffic thanks to melting arctic ice .
“ NATO faces a severe military challenge in the European Arctic area of operation , ” it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ U.S. military should actively participate in Arctic joint exercises , and publicize U.S. military deployments to the region , with particular focus on the Russian border – perhaps by returning the U.S. Marine deployment to Norway.
” “ There is no time to waste , ” it concludes , insisting that , “ the region needs a concerted diplomatic , security , and economic push from the U.S. government.
” What will the designation of the climate crisis as a “ national security threat ” entail domestically ?
Last year , the ASP @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will force more families to migrate , funding for border security should include improving facilities for holding and transporting migrants.
” In other words , an expansion of the militarized border and network of detention centers , often condemned as “ concentration camps.
” Michelle Flournoy , tipped by many for a top job in Biden ’ s team , also argued that the military as part of the solution to climate change , suggesting it could be turned into a force for environmentalism .
Yet there is little chance of this happening @ @ @ @ @ @ @ polluter in the world , and the U.S. has historically insisted on exempting the military from any climate treaties .
Just one B-52 bomber consumes as much fuel in an hour as an average car driver uses in seven years .
As the Institute for Policy Studies wrote , “ militarism and climate justice are fundamentally at odds ” while “ climate change and border militarization are inextricably linked.
” While many activists may have taken heart at Kerry ’ s tough words , it is doubtful whether occupying Norway or expanding the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they had in mind when they said they wanted the government to act on climate change .
Feature photo | U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry speaks to troops at America ’ s only base in Africa , Camp Lemmonier in Djibouti , Djibouti , May 6 , 2015 .
Andrew Harnik | Pool via AP Alan MacLeod is a Staff Writer for MintPress News .
After completing his PhD in 2017 he published two books : Bad News From Venezuela : Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He has also contributed to Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting , The Guardian , Salon , The Grayzone , Jacobin Magazine , Common Dreams the American Herald Tribune and The Canary .

Recently-appointed Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry has announced his intention of dealing with the pressing issue of global warming as a national security concern. “America will soon have a government that treats the climate crisis as the urgent national security threat it is,” the 76-year-old former Secretary of State wrote. “I am proud to partner with the President-elect, our allies, and the young leaders of the climate movement to take on this crisis.”
The announcement drew praise from many professional climate activists and groups, perhaps assuming that Kerry was taking his lead from Bernie Sanders, who has for years been saying the same thing. Executive Director of the Sunrise Movement, Varshini Prakash said his statement was an “encouraging move,” while 350.org’s Bill McKibben, predicted Kerry would be an excellent climate czar. Yet, as media critic Adam Johnson argued, Kerry’s proclamation should deeply concern progressive activists and will likely lead to expanding the already bloated military budget.
Kerry is a founding member of the Washington think tank, the American Security Project (ASP), whose board is a who’s who of retired generals, admirals and senators. The ASP also hailed the appointment of their man, explaining, in a little-read report, exactly what treating the climate as a national security threat entails. And it is nothing like what Sanders advocates.
For the ASP, climate change constitutes an “accelerant of instability” and a “threat multiplier” that will “affect the operating environment,” and notes that Kerry will have three priorities in his role as President Biden’s right-hand man. What were those three priorities? Making sure people in the Global South could eat and have access to safe drinking water? Reparations? Disaster relief or response teams? Cutting back on fossil fuel use? Indeed not. For the ASP, the primary objectives were:
A huge rebuilding of the United States’ military bases, Countering China in the Pacific, Preparing for a war with Russia in the newly-melted Arctic.
The ASP notes that rising sea levels will neutralize or destroy dozens of American naval bases around the world, including the world’s largest such base in Norfolk, VA. The ASP recommends “prioritizing the measures that can protect readiness” of the military to strike at any time, also warning that rising sea levels will hurt the combat readiness of the Marine Expeditionary Force. Thus, a rebuilding of the U.S.’ worldwide network of military bases is in order.
The report notes that the nations most immediately affected by climate change are South Pacific island chains like Vanuatu or the Marshall Islands, claiming that these countries are “strategically important in the contest between the U.S. and China.” It recommends that the U.S. must use all tools available to remain in control of those islands, claiming that China is “showering cash” on them, building seawalls, ports, and clean energy stations that are a threat to U.S. dominance of the region.
The ASP also notes that the Arctic is the fastest-warming area of the world, and envisions a pitched battle with Russia to control the area, which is increasingly open to maritime traffic thanks to melting arctic ice. “NATO faces a severe military challenge in the European Arctic area of operation,” it writes, advocating that, “the U.S. military should actively participate in Arctic joint exercises, and publicize U.S. military deployments to the region, with particular focus on the Russian border – perhaps by returning the U.S. Marine deployment to Norway.” “There is no time to waste,” it concludes, insisting that, “the region needs a concerted diplomatic, security, and economic push from the U.S. government.”
What will the designation of the climate crisis as a “national security threat” entail domestically? Last year, the ASP wrote that “Given that climate change will force more families to migrate, funding for border security should include improving facilities for holding and transporting migrants.” In other words, an expansion of the militarized border and network of detention centers, often condemned as “concentration camps.”
Michelle Flournoy, tipped by many for a top job in Biden’s team, also argued that the military as part of the solution to climate change, suggesting it could be turned into a force for environmentalism. Yet there is little chance of this happening. The Pentagon is the largest single polluter in the world, and the U.S. has historically insisted on exempting the military from any climate treaties. Just one B-52 bomber consumes as much fuel in an hour as an average car driver uses in seven years. As the Institute for Policy Studies wrote, “militarism and climate justice are fundamentally at odds” while “climate change and border militarization are inextricably linked.”
While many activists may have taken heart at Kerry’s tough words, it is doubtful whether occupying Norway or expanding the network of ICE camps was exactly what they had in mind when they said they wanted the government to act on climate change.
Feature photo | U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry speaks to troops at America’s only base in Africa, Camp Lemmonier in Djibouti, Djibouti, May 6, 2015. Andrew Harnik | Pool via AP
Alan MacLeod is a Staff Writer for MintPress News. After completing his PhD in 2017 he published two books: Bad News From Venezuela: Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the Information Age: Still Manufacturing Consent. He has also contributed to Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, The Guardian, Salon, The Grayzone, Jacobin Magazine, Common Dreams the American Herald Tribune and The Canary.


mintpressnews--2020-12-10--Low Turnout, but Free, Elections in Venezuela Are a Blow To Regime Change

Venezuela held legislative elections on December 6 and , as has become the norm , the U.S. and sectors of the opposition that boycotted the election are claiming fraud without presenting evidence .
The coalition of parties supporting President Maduro won 68 % of the vote and a supermajority in the National Assembly .
All the evidence suggests the elections were free and fair .
However , turnout was only 31 % , a participation rate that was hampered by a partial opposition boycott of the election .
This call to abstain was made by Juan Guaidó and his allies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opposition participated fully .
In the past three years , this faction of the opposition has taken a moderate stance that involves engaging in dialogue and participating in elections .
The moderates accepted the election ’ s results , called for reflection and strongly criticized the call for a boycott .
The Trump administration spent the last several months attempting to sabotage Venezuela ’ s elections by characterizing them as a “ sham ” and sanctioning some of these moderates .
Yet now that the vote took place , there is no evidence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fraudulent before they ’ re even held – and insisting that fraud occurred in the face of overwhelming evidence against such a claim – is a specialty of the Trump administration .
The U.S. government repeatedly said that there were “ no conditions ” for free and fair elections , but the condition it sought to impose was the resignation of President Maduro .
Unsurprisingly , the European Union , the Lima Group ( an ad hoc set of Latin American countries pushing for regime change in Venezuela ) and the corporate media @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , attempting to delegitimize what is likely one of the most fraud-proof electoral processes in the world .
In contrast , observers on the ground , including the Latin American Council of Electoral Experts , underscored the election ’ s compliance with international standards .
Back in 2012 , Jimmy Carter called Venezuela ’ s process “ the best in the world.
” It ’ s not hard to see why .
Venezuela has electronic voting machines that print paper receipts .
The machines are only unlocked when a voter ’ s identity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a spot-check of their national identity card .
After voting on the machine ( a simple process that can take as little as ten seconds ) , it prints out a paper receipt so electors can verify that their vote was correctly recorded .
The elector then places this receipt in a secure ballot box , and then signs and places a thumbprint on the voter roll .
After polls close , the digital vote count is compared to a random sampling of at least 54 % of the ballot boxes ( a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have a statistically significant result ) .
It ’ s a system with multiple redundancies that is backed by 16 different audits that must be signed off on by representatives of political parties .
In these elections , 14,000 candidates from 107 parties ( 97 of which oppose the Maduro government ) ran for 277 seats .
The choices ran the ideological spectrum from communists and socialists to evangelicals , Christian conservatives and neoliberals .
Opposition candidates got air time on state television stations and took part in several debates .
The elections @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 34 countries , as well as over 1,000 national observers from political parties and social organizations .
Teri Mattson , who observed two previous elections in Venezuela , led a CODEPINK observation delegation and described this year ’ s elections as free and fair , and without fraud or tampering .
“ Voting is easy , fast and secure : an incentive for all voters while also preventing long lines due to cumbersome ballots and voter procedures such as those seen in the U.S. , ” Mattson said .
Of course , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , yet it ’ s important to place it into context .
One factor that depressed participation is a gasoline shortage induced by U.S. sanctions , which made it difficult for some voters to travel to polls .
Migration is another factor that artificially reduced turnout .
Only citizens who currently reside in the country can vote in legislative elections , but most who left in recent years still appear on voter rolls as living in Venezuela .
A further factor is the pandemic .
Venezuela is doing significantly better than most countries @ @ @ @ @ @ @ per million population and 33 deaths per million population , versus 46,348 cases per million and 877 deaths per million in the U.S. ) .
However , there ’ s still enough fear of the virus that it serves as a disincentive to voting .
International comparisons should also be taken into account when analyzing the turnout .
For example , parliamentary elections were also held Sunday in Romania , which had similarly low voter turnout ( 33 % ) .
Other countries have also had poor participation this year , including legislative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) , Mali ( 35 % ) , Jamaica ( 38 % ) and Jordan ( 30 % ) , as well as municipal elections in Costa Rica ( 38 % ) .
Additionally , U.S. midterm elections typically feature 40 % voter turnout ( it ’ s not an apples-to-apples comparison , as virtually all eligible voters are registered in Venezuela , which is not the case in the U.S. ) .
None of these elections are less legitimate for their low participation , and neither is Venezuela ’ s .
Clearly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was the extremist opposition ’ s call for a boycott .
This tactic of boycotting elections has been used by the opposition in the past , including in the 2005 legislative elections , the 2017 national constituent assembly elections , the 2017 municipal elections ( partial boycott ) and the 2018 presidential elections ( partial boycott ) .
However , at no point has boycotting elections helped them in any way .
So why do the extremists keep engaging in a failed tactic ?
After all , the opposition routinely claims ( again @ @ @ @ @ @ @ % of the population disapproves of the Maduro administration ; it doesn ’ t make sense to cede ground when there ’ s the possibility of winning .
One explanation is that they were afraid of losing .
In the last elections that featured full participation , the 2017 gubernatorial elections , the opposition ended up losing in 19 of 23 states .
It ’ s not clear that they would have won this time around , particularly as a significant percentage of their base has migrated in recent years .
A loss @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the fiction of Juan Guaidó ’ s so-called interim president ( his “ claim ” to the presidency is based on his being a legislator in the current National Assembly ) .
Better to not run than run and lose .
Another explanation is that a boycott was part of the Trump administration ’ s maximum pressure campaign , which involves ongoing attempts to delegitimize Venezuela ’ s democratic credentials .
This strategy was threatened when the moderate opposition engaged in dialogue and announced they were running in the elections .
The Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” with and “ puppets ” of the Maduro government , before sanctioning several of those leaders .
The U.S. got the European Union on board with this plan as well .
In January , the EU sanctioned three moderate opposition figures for “ acting against the National Assembly ’ s democratic functioning ” after they were elected to leadership positions in the legislature , replacing Juan Guaidó and two of his allies .
More recently , the EU refused the calls from two-time presidential candidate Henrique Capriles to monitor the elections .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ EU monitoring , which didn ’ t occur because the EU claimed it did not have enough time to prepare a delegation .
This was back in September , three months before the vote .
After the elections , the EU had the gall to criticize the Venezuelan government for failing “ to mobilize the Venezuelan people to participate.
” In practical terms , higher turnout may have opened the doors for negotiations between the U.S. and moderate opposition , but that possibility now seems less likely .
Other than that , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much impact on the ground in Venezuela .
The Maduro government will have a supermajority in the National Assembly for the next five years , which should help it develop measures to counter the economic sanctions .
It ’ s in a stronger position now than it was prior to the elections .
After four years of sanctions , sabotaged industries , attempted coups , an assassination by drone attempt , a mercenary incursion and paramilitary attacks , among others , Venezuela managed to survive the Trump administration ’ s maximum pressure .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ tranquility .
That is quite an achievement and puts to rest the magical thinking of the Trump administration and extreme opposition , which have spent years saying that regime change is just around the corner .
Feature photo | A voter casts her ballot during elections to choose members of the National Assembly in Caracas , Venezuela , Dec. 6 , 2020 .
Matias Delacroix | AP Leonardo Flores is a Latin American policy expert and campaigner with CODEPINK .

Venezuela held legislative elections on December 6 and, as has become the norm, the U.S. and sectors of the opposition that boycotted the election are claiming fraud without presenting evidence. The coalition of parties supporting President Maduro won 68% of the vote and a supermajority in the National Assembly. All the evidence suggests the elections were free and fair. However, turnout was only 31%, a participation rate that was hampered by a partial opposition boycott of the election.
This call to abstain was made by Juan Guaidó and his allies, but a different faction of the opposition participated fully. In the past three years, this faction of the opposition has taken a moderate stance that involves engaging in dialogue and participating in elections. The moderates accepted the election’s results, called for reflection and strongly criticized the call for a boycott.
The Trump administration spent the last several months attempting to sabotage Venezuela’s elections by characterizing them as a “sham” and sanctioning some of these moderates. Yet now that the vote took place, there is no evidence of irregularities. Claiming that elections are fraudulent before they’re even held – and insisting that fraud occurred in the face of overwhelming evidence against such a claim – is a specialty of the Trump administration.
The U.S. government repeatedly said that there were “no conditions” for free and fair elections, but the condition it sought to impose was the resignation of President Maduro. Unsurprisingly, the European Union, the Lima Group (an ad hoc set of Latin American countries pushing for regime change in Venezuela) and the corporate media followed the State Department’s lead, attempting to delegitimize what is likely one of the most fraud-proof electoral processes in the world. In contrast, observers on the ground, including the Latin American Council of Electoral Experts, underscored the election’s compliance with international standards.
A secure electoral system
Back in 2012, Jimmy Carter called Venezuela’s process “the best in the world.” It’s not hard to see why. Venezuela has electronic voting machines that print paper receipts. The machines are only unlocked when a voter’s identity is verified by digital fingerprint scan and a spot-check of their national identity card. After voting on the machine (a simple process that can take as little as ten seconds), it prints out a paper receipt so electors can verify that their vote was correctly recorded. The elector then places this receipt in a secure ballot box, and then signs and places a thumbprint on the voter roll.
After polls close, the digital vote count is compared to a random sampling of at least 54% of the ballot boxes (a figure that is higher than necessary to have a statistically significant result). It’s a system with multiple redundancies that is backed by 16 different audits that must be signed off on by representatives of political parties.
In these elections, 14,000 candidates from 107 parties (97 of which oppose the Maduro government) ran for 277 seats. The choices ran the ideological spectrum from communists and socialists to evangelicals, Christian conservatives and neoliberals. Opposition candidates got air time on state television stations and took part in several debates.
The elections were monitored by 300 international observers from 34 countries, as well as over 1,000 national observers from political parties and social organizations. Teri Mattson, who observed two previous elections in Venezuela, led a CODEPINK observation delegation and described this year’s elections as free and fair, and without fraud or tampering. “Voting is easy, fast and secure: an incentive for all voters while also preventing long lines due to cumbersome ballots and voter procedures such as those seen in the U.S.,” Mattson said.
Voter turnout
Of course, the low turnout is bound to raise eyebrows, yet it’s important to place it into context. One factor that depressed participation is a gasoline shortage induced by U.S. sanctions, which made it difficult for some voters to travel to polls. Migration is another factor that artificially reduced turnout. Only citizens who currently reside in the country can vote in legislative elections, but most who left in recent years still appear on voter rolls as living in Venezuela.
A further factor is the pandemic. Venezuela is doing significantly better than most countries in handling the coronavirus (3,694 cases per million population and 33 deaths per million population, versus 46,348 cases per million and 877 deaths per million in the U.S.). However, there’s still enough fear of the virus that it serves as a disincentive to voting.
International comparisons should also be taken into account when analyzing the turnout. For example, parliamentary elections were also held Sunday in Romania, which had similarly low voter turnout (33%). Other countries have also had poor participation this year, including legislative elections in Egypt (28% turnout), Mali (35%), Jamaica (38%) and Jordan (30%), as well as municipal elections in Costa Rica (38%). Additionally, U.S. midterm elections typically feature 40% voter turnout (it’s not an apples-to-apples comparison, as virtually all eligible voters are registered in Venezuela, which is not the case in the U.S.). None of these elections are less legitimate for their low participation, and neither is Venezuela’s.
The failed strategy of boycotts
Clearly, a significant factor in reduced turnout was the extremist opposition’s call for a boycott. This tactic of boycotting elections has been used by the opposition in the past, including in the 2005 legislative elections, the 2017 national constituent assembly elections, the 2017 municipal elections (partial boycott) and the 2018 presidential elections (partial boycott).
However, at no point has boycotting elections helped them in any way. So why do the extremists keep engaging in a failed tactic? After all, the opposition routinely claims (again, offering no evidence) that 80% of the population disapproves of the Maduro administration; it doesn’t make sense to cede ground when there’s the possibility of winning.
One explanation is that they were afraid of losing. In the last elections that featured full participation, the 2017 gubernatorial elections, the opposition ended up losing in 19 of 23 states. It’s not clear that they would have won this time around, particularly as a significant percentage of their base has migrated in recent years. A loss would have destroyed once and for all the fiction of Juan Guaidó’s so-called interim president (his “claim” to the presidency is based on his being a legislator in the current National Assembly). Better to not run than run and lose.
Another explanation is that a boycott was part of the Trump administration’s maximum pressure campaign, which involves ongoing attempts to delegitimize Venezuela’s democratic credentials. This strategy was threatened when the moderate opposition engaged in dialogue and announced they were running in the elections. The Trump administration quickly denounced them as “complicit” with and “puppets” of the Maduro government, before sanctioning several of those leaders.
The U.S. got the European Union on board with this plan as well. In January, the EU sanctioned three moderate opposition figures for “acting against the National Assembly’s democratic functioning” after they were elected to leadership positions in the legislature, replacing Juan Guaidó and two of his allies.
More recently, the EU refused the calls from two-time presidential candidate Henrique Capriles to monitor the elections. Capriles said his participation was contingent upon EU monitoring, which didn’t occur because the EU claimed it did not have enough time to prepare a delegation. This was back in September, three months before the vote. After the elections, the EU had the gall to criticize the Venezuelan government for failing “to mobilize the Venezuelan people to participate.”
In practical terms, higher turnout may have opened the doors for negotiations between the U.S. and moderate opposition, but that possibility now seems less likely. Other than that, the low turnout is not going to have much impact on the ground in Venezuela.
The Maduro government will have a supermajority in the National Assembly for the next five years, which should help it develop measures to counter the economic sanctions. It’s in a stronger position now than it was prior to the elections. After four years of sanctions, sabotaged industries, attempted coups, an assassination by drone attempt, a mercenary incursion and paramilitary attacks, among others, Venezuela managed to survive the Trump administration’s maximum pressure. The elections were carried out in complete tranquility. That is quite an achievement and puts to rest the magical thinking of the Trump administration and extreme opposition, which have spent years saying that regime change is just around the corner.
Feature photo | A voter casts her ballot during elections to choose members of the National Assembly in Caracas, Venezuela, Dec. 6, 2020. Matias Delacroix | AP
Leonardo Flores is a Latin American policy expert and campaigner with CODEPINK.


mintpressnews--2020-12-10--Shunned by Trump, Mahmoud Abbas Looks to Biden to Revive  a Long Dead “Peace Process”

No one seemed as excited about the election of Joe Biden being the next President of the United States as Palestinian Authority President , Mahmoud Abbas .
When all hope seemed lost , where Abbas found himself desperate for political validation and funds , Biden arrived like a conquering knight on a white horse and swept the Palestinian leader away to safety .
Abbas was one of the first world leaders to congratulate the Democratic President-elect on his victory .
While Israeli Prime Minister , Benjamin Netanyahu , delayed his congratulatory statement in the hope that Donald Trump would eventually @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Abbas suffered no such illusions .
Considering the humiliation that the Palestinian Authority experienced at the hands of the Trump Administration , Abbas had nothing to lose .
For him , Biden , despite his long love affair with Israel , still represented a ray of hope .
But can the wheel of history be turned back ?
Despite the fact that the Biden Administration has made it clear that it will not be reversing any of the pro-Israel steps taken by the departing Trump Administration , Abbas remains confident that , at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can be restored .
This may seem to be an impossible dichotomy , for how can a ‘ peace process ’ deliver peace if all the components of a just peace have already been eradicated ?
It is obvious that there can be no real peace if the US government insists on recognizing all of Jerusalem as Israel ’ s ‘ eternal ’ capital .
There can be no peace if the US continues to fund illegal Jewish settlements , bankroll Israeli apartheid , deny the rights of Palestinian refugees , turn a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Occupied Palestine and recognize the illegally-occupied Syrian Golan Heights as part of Israel , all of which is likely to remain the same , even under the Biden Administration .
The ‘ peace process ’ is unlikely to deliver any kind of a just , sustainable peace in the future , when it has already failed to do so in the past 30 years .
Yet , despite the ample lessons of the past , Abbas has decided , again , to gamble with the fate of his people and jeopardize their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Not only is Abbas building a campaign involving Arab countries , namely Jordan and Egypt , to revive the ‘ peace process ’ , he is also walking back on all his promises and decisions to cancel the Oslo Accords , and end ‘ security coordination ’ with Israel .
By doing so , Abbas has betrayed national unity talks between his party , Fatah , and Hamas .
Unity talks between rival Palestinian groups seemed to take a serious turn last July , when Palestine ’ s main political parties issued @ @ @ @ @ @ @ defeat Trump ’ s ‘ Deal of the Century ’ .
The language used in that statement was reminiscent of the revolutionary discourse used by these groups during the First and Second Intifadas ( uprisings ) , itself a message that Fatah was finally re-orienting itself around national priorities and away from the ‘ moderate ’ political discourse wrought by the US-sponsored ‘ peace process ’ .
Even those who grew tired and cynical about the shenanigans of Abbas and Palestinian groups wondered if this time would be different ; that Palestinians would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ through which they could express and channel their struggle for freedom .
Oddly , Trump ’ s four-year term in the White House was the best thing that happened to the Palestinian national struggle .
His administration was a jarring and indisputable reminder that the US is not – and has never been – ‘ an honest peace broker ’ and that Palestinians can not steer their political agenda to satisfy US-Israeli demands in order for them to obtain political validation and financial support .
By cutting off US funding of the Palestinian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the shutting down of the Palestinian mission in Washington DC , Trump has liberated Palestinians from the throes of an impossible political equation .
Without the proverbial American carrot , the Palestinian leadership has had the rare opportunity to rearrange the Palestinian home for the benefit of the Palestinian people .
Alas , those efforts were short-lived .
After multiple meetings and video conferences between Fatah , Hamas and other delegations representing Palestinian groups , Abbas declared on November 17 , the resumption of ‘ security coordination ’ between his Authority and Israel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ announcement on December 2 to release over a billion dollars of Palestinian funds that were unlawfully held by Israel as a form of political pressure .
This takes Palestinian unity back to square one .
At this point , Abbas finds unity talks with his Palestinian rivals quite useless .
Since Fatah dominates the Palestinian Authority , the Palestine Liberation Organization ( PLO ) and the Palestine National Council ( PNC ) , conceding any ground or sharing leadership with other Palestinian factions seems self-defeating .
Now that Abbas is reassured that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ again , with the title of ‘ peace partner ’ , a US ally and a moderate , the Palestinian leader no longer finds it necessary to seek approval from the Palestinians .
Since there can be no middle ground between catering to a US-Israeli agenda and elevating a Palestinian national agenda , the Palestinian leader opted for the former and , without hesitation , ditched the latter .
While it is true that Biden will neither satisfy any of the Palestinian people ’ s demands or reverse any of his predecessor ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from what he sees as a seismic shift in US foreign policy – not in favor of the Palestinian cause but of Abbas personally , an unelected leader whose biggest accomplishment has been sustaining the US-imposed status quo and keeping the Palestinian people pacified for as long as possible .
Although the ‘ peace process ’ has been declared ‘ dead ’ on multiple occasions , Abbas is now desperately trying to revive it , not because he – or any rational Palestinian – believes that peace is at hand , but because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and this US-sponsored political scheme .
While most Palestinians gained nothing from all of this , a few Palestinians accumulated massive wealth , power and prestige .
For this clique , that alone is a cause worth fighting for .
Feature photo | Joseph Biden , left , talks with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas ahead of a meeting in the West Bank city of Ramallah , March 10 , 2010 .
Tara Todras-Whitehill | AP Ramzy Baroud is a journalist and the Editor of The Palestine Chronicle .
He is the author of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ These Chains Will Be Broken : Palestinian Stories of Struggle and Defiance in Israeli Prisons ” ( Clarity Press ) .
Dr. Baroud is a Non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Islam and Global Affairs ( CIGA ) and also at the Afro-Middle East Center ( AMEC ) .
His website is www.ramzybaroud.net

No one seemed as excited about the election of Joe Biden being the next President of the United States as Palestinian Authority President, Mahmoud Abbas. When all hope seemed lost, where Abbas found himself desperate for political validation and funds, Biden arrived like a conquering knight on a white horse and swept the Palestinian leader away to safety.
Abbas was one of the first world leaders to congratulate the Democratic President-elect on his victory. While Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, delayed his congratulatory statement in the hope that Donald Trump would eventually be able to reverse the results, Abbas suffered no such illusions. Considering the humiliation that the Palestinian Authority experienced at the hands of the Trump Administration, Abbas had nothing to lose. For him, Biden, despite his long love affair with Israel, still represented a ray of hope.
But can the wheel of history be turned back? Despite the fact that the Biden Administration has made it clear that it will not be reversing any of the pro-Israel steps taken by the departing Trump Administration, Abbas remains confident that, at least, the ‘peace process’ can be restored.
This may seem to be an impossible dichotomy, for how can a ‘peace process’ deliver peace if all the components of a just peace have already been eradicated?
It is obvious that there can be no real peace if the US government insists on recognizing all of Jerusalem as Israel’s ‘eternal’ capital. There can be no peace if the US continues to fund illegal Jewish settlements, bankroll Israeli apartheid, deny the rights of Palestinian refugees, turn a blind eye to de facto annexation underway in Occupied Palestine and recognize the illegally-occupied Syrian Golan Heights as part of Israel, all of which is likely to remain the same, even under the Biden Administration.
The ‘peace process’ is unlikely to deliver any kind of a just, sustainable peace in the future, when it has already failed to do so in the past 30 years.
Yet, despite the ample lessons of the past, Abbas has decided, again, to gamble with the fate of his people and jeopardize their struggle for freedom and a just peace. Not only is Abbas building a campaign involving Arab countries, namely Jordan and Egypt, to revive the ‘peace process’, he is also walking back on all his promises and decisions to cancel the Oslo Accords, and end ‘security coordination’ with Israel. By doing so, Abbas has betrayed national unity talks between his party, Fatah, and Hamas.
Unity talks between rival Palestinian groups seemed to take a serious turn last July, when Palestine’s main political parties issued a joint statement declaring their intent to defeat Trump’s ‘Deal of the Century’. The language used in that statement was reminiscent of the revolutionary discourse used by these groups during the First and Second Intifadas (uprisings), itself a message that Fatah was finally re-orienting itself around national priorities and away from the ‘moderate’ political discourse wrought by the US-sponsored ‘peace process’.
Even those who grew tired and cynical about the shenanigans of Abbas and Palestinian groups wondered if this time would be different; that Palestinians would finally agree on a set of principles through which they could express and channel their struggle for freedom.
Oddly, Trump’s four-year term in the White House was the best thing that happened to the Palestinian national struggle. His administration was a jarring and indisputable reminder that the US is not – and has never been – ‘an honest peace broker’ and that Palestinians cannot steer their political agenda to satisfy US-Israeli demands in order for them to obtain political validation and financial support.
By cutting off US funding of the Palestinian Authority in August 2018, followed by the shutting down of the Palestinian mission in Washington DC, Trump has liberated Palestinians from the throes of an impossible political equation. Without the proverbial American carrot, the Palestinian leadership has had the rare opportunity to rearrange the Palestinian home for the benefit of the Palestinian people.
Alas, those efforts were short-lived. After multiple meetings and video conferences between Fatah, Hamas and other delegations representing Palestinian groups, Abbas declared , on November 17, the resumption of ‘security coordination’ between his Authority and Israel. This was followed by the Israeli announcement on December 2 to release over a billion dollars of Palestinian funds that were unlawfully held by Israel as a form of political pressure.
This takes Palestinian unity back to square one. At this point, Abbas finds unity talks with his Palestinian rivals quite useless. Since Fatah dominates the Palestinian Authority, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and the Palestine National Council (PNC), conceding any ground or sharing leadership with other Palestinian factions seems self-defeating. Now that Abbas is reassured that the Biden Administration will bequeath him, once again, with the title of ‘peace partner’, a US ally and a moderate, the Palestinian leader no longer finds it necessary to seek approval from the Palestinians. Since there can be no middle ground between catering to a US-Israeli agenda and elevating a Palestinian national agenda, the Palestinian leader opted for the former and, without hesitation, ditched the latter.
While it is true that Biden will neither satisfy any of the Palestinian people’s demands or reverse any of his predecessor’s missteps, Abbas can still benefit from what he sees as a seismic shift in US foreign policy – not in favor of the Palestinian cause but of Abbas personally, an unelected leader whose biggest accomplishment has been sustaining the US-imposed status quo and keeping the Palestinian people pacified for as long as possible.
Although the ‘peace process’ has been declared ‘dead’ on multiple occasions, Abbas is now desperately trying to revive it, not because he – or any rational Palestinian – believes that peace is at hand, but because of the existential relationship between the PA and this US-sponsored political scheme. While most Palestinians gained nothing from all of this, a few Palestinians accumulated massive wealth, power and prestige. For this clique, that alone is a cause worth fighting for.
Feature photo | Joseph Biden, left, talks with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas ahead of a meeting in the West Bank city of Ramallah, March 10, 2010. Tara Todras-Whitehill | AP
Ramzy Baroud is a journalist and the Editor of The Palestine Chronicle. He is the author of five books. His latest is “These Chains Will Be Broken: Palestinian Stories of Struggle and Defiance in Israeli Prisons” (Clarity Press). Dr. Baroud is a Non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA) and also at the Afro-Middle East Center (AMEC). His website is www.ramzybaroud.net