Elections free of sanctions is the fallacy that the Chavista regime uses to justify abandoning the negotiations in Mexico.
Humberto Gonzalez Briceno
There is no way to sweeten the decomposition or to hide the reality. Whichever way you look at it, it is impossible not to characterize Chavismo and its false opposition as two expressions of the same absurd way of doing politics that irreversibly leads to the destruction of Venezuela.
Although both are presented as the antithesis of the other, the truth is that Chavismo and false opposition are the two sides of the same coin that, in different ways, share the same patronage and opportunistic essence of doing politics. There is no way to explain one without having the other as a reference, Alberto Franceschi has repeated a thousand times in his analysis on YouTube.
And it is that just as Chavismo feeds on the false opposition to legitimize and sustain itself in power, it in turn needs the gifts and perks of the regime to continue operating as such opposition. Caught in this macabre dance, Venezuela agonizes in the hands of those who say they love it while destroying it and those who say they oppose the regime while crawling at its feet.
To hide its corrupt essence and patronage, both Chavismo and its false opposition accommodate a discourse that tries to justify itself, at least before its own client base. It is the deception of the season that continues to be recycled in the following ones, over and over again, without shame or blush.
The false opponents are obliged to play the role of legitimizers of the Chavista regime if they want to continue charging for their services. For these purposes, they are obliged to do everything necessary to get people to vote, even though they themselves admit that there are neither conditions nor guarantees for free elections.
How is it that without conditions or guarantees and in the face of another guaranteed fraud, the false opposition insists on calling to vote and validate that spurious electoral system? How can one justify politically that it is necessary to submit to unfree elections in order to achieve free elections? The masquerade is evident and the majority of Venezuelans prefer to exercise abstention than lend themselves to the farce.
For its part, Chavismo is not far behind and turns the fallacy around to ensure that they also want free elections… free of sanctions, Jorge Rodríguez quickly delimits so that its meaning is clear. But what sanctions is Rodríguez talking about if the aforementioned sanctions were nothing more than a salute to the flag that left the regime intact and allowed it to continue trading through proxy countries?
Some angst must exist in the regime when they are desperately trying to convince their clienteles that they cannot be paid because of the so-called sanctions. However, it is becoming increasingly clear, even for Chavistas, that the economic deprivations are attributable to the negligence of the regime more than anything else.
Elections free of sanctions is the fallacy that the Chavista regime uses to justify abandoning the negotiations in Mexico while trying to deceive its own client base.
The idea of free elections from Chavismo or from the false opposition have different meanings but both synthesize opportunism and clientelism in their attempt to continue trivializing politics in Venezuela.-@humbertotweets
https://www.larazon.net/category/humberto-gonzalez-briceno