Maduro Is Gone, and the Purge Has Begun • The successor to Venezuela’s captured President Nicolás Maduro is purging the people who kept him in power.
Posted by Naurgul@reddit | anime_titties | View on Reddit | 104 comments
U.S. Special Forces brought down President Nicolás Maduro of Venezuela swiftly and publicly.
Now, the people who kept him in power are being purged gradually and inconspicuously. Some have been fired or detained, and others are anxiously looking over their shoulders, worried they might be next.
Oligarchs close to Mr. Maduro’s family have been snatched from their homes. His political allies have been summarily removed from their posts. His relatives have been sidelined from business deals and barred from media appearances.
In the three months since Mr. Maduro’s capture, Ms. Rodríguez has changed 17 ministers, replaced military commanders and installed new diplomats. She has also overseen the detention of at least three businessmen tied to Mr. Maduro, fired several of his relatives and cut off most of his family from oil contracts.
In their places, she has appointed her own loyalists or championed businessmen beholden to her, while opening the doors to American oil and mining investors.
The housecleaning is being carried out by Mr. Maduro’s former vice president, Delcy Rodríguez, who is running the country under instructions from the Trump administration. The detentions and leadership purges have unfolded without public explanation, but often with the approval — and sometimes at the urging — of the White House, according to people close to Ms. Rodríguez’s government.
She is dismantling his ruling coterie and embarking on the largest redistribution of power in Venezuela in decades.
Ms. Rodríguez is now using that threat of U.S. coercion to go after ruling party power brokers once considered untouchable. The result has been a political win for Mr. Trump and Ms. Rodríguez, allowing U.S. officials to settle scores with Maduro allies who had defied them, while simultaneously cementing Ms. Rodríguez’s leadership.
Venezuela’s transformation from U.S. adversary to a protectorate has been head spinning for most Venezuelans.
The apparent ease with which U.S. forces snatched Mr. Maduro from a heavily guarded military base has fueled suspicion that he was betrayed by people who benefited from his downfall. The Trump administration had been considering Ms. Rodríguez as Mr. Maduro’s successor since 2025, and had indirect contact with her.
“We are not handing down a legacy of traitors and cowards,” Ms. Rodríguez said a week after Mr. Maduro’s capture, leading a retinue of power brokers. Most of those by her side that day have since been cast aside.
Here's a copy of the full article, in case you cannot access the original page.
R1donis@reddit
So they are not even hiding anymore. Right after kidnaping there were reports that goverment was hunting down traitors, but by now its clear that opposite happened, and traitors were hunting down loyalists.
npc_housecat@reddit
I met Venezuelan refugees in Colombia a few years ago. I'm sure they'd be happy about the change of leadership.
ctnoxin@reddit
Ya I met them too, they said they would have been even happier to not suffer economic hardships from US sanctions strangling their economy and forcing them to flee their country
npc_housecat@reddit
Fair point
calmdownmyguy@reddit
Venezuela was run by a cartel regime. It still is, but the people the new boss is purging don't really deserve sympathy.
BendicantMias@reddit
The new boss doesn't deserve sympathy either. But she'll get it. All the moral justifications used fall flat if you're just going to replace one dictator with another, but they're gonna disappear anyway. Excuses like yours will be used to dismiss them. Suddenly Venezuela is no longer a 'bad guy', simply cos it's aligned with the 'good guys', similar to Saudi Arabia. And Americans will happily go along with that and think they did the country a favor. Hopefully Latin America isn't as gullible.
calmdownmyguy@reddit
I never suggested anything otherwise. I just said people shouldn't feel bad for the people in the regime who ended up on the losing side.
Professional-Syrup-0@reddit
People should always feel bad about other humans being violently hunted down and killed.
While your stance is an inhumane and uncivilized one, not only do you assume they only get the “right” people (which is wrong) you are openly endorsing lynch justice as long as it affects people you politically disagree with.
rynosaur94@reddit
Where does it talk about anyone being killed? They're getting fired and ostracized from power, not killed.
Montana_Gamer@reddit
We should always FEEL bad? Dude, these people were by and large opportunists who benefit from a system of exploitation who are being buried under the foundation of the new set of opportunists. Should I FEEL bad? Fuck no.
But what do I think? It's unnecessary harm and instability brought forth for no good reason. It is to the benefit of no one except those who are now on top of the totem pole. It is a net negative on the world because of the knock on effects of US Empire (Trump likely struck Iran because he was emboldened from Venezuela) and the effects on the citizenry, not the former powerful.
Professional-Syrup-0@reddit
The irony here being that quite a few of those people justify their own actions in exact the same ways you are trying to justify violence against those people.
That happens because nobody sees themselves as the “bad guy”, but plenty of people with a chip on their shoulder see themselves as the “good guy” and consider that enough justification to do bad things to other people for them allegedly being bad.
Or is it not opportunistic of you to deny these people now even the slightest bit of empathy, of human rights and due process? Doing to them exactly what you blame them for/accuse them of?
That’s not justice, that’s just revenge, violence for violence sake and not for any grander “good” cause.
That feels like victim blaming considering Trump has already attacked Iran several times before abducting Maduro. Already during his first term he murdered Soleimani using diplomacy as a guise.
The only reason that didn’t escalate further was Iran restraining its response, not anything to do with Trump not having been emboldened enough through Venezuela, that happened many years later.
Montana_Gamer@reddit
Man, when did I JUSTIFY violence? Me saying I shouldn't feel bad is not promoting violence and don't fucking imply otherwise.
Why the fuck did you just go and make up every position of mine? Seriously that's the level of discussion you are having this discussion?
OHHHHH you mean to tell me Trump attacking Iran before means he didn't have an inflated ego over Venezuela and decided to commit to the largest campaign taken so far? You might not be clued into internal US news, which fair enough that's fine, but the senator Lindsey Graham got talking points for how to convince Trump to attack Iran. This was admitted, in a INTERVIEW, where he was bragging about getting pointers for what arguments to use, and a lot of that was minimizing the difficulty of the operation.
They would show him the 40 or so high ranking insiders they had in the regime that could replace the old head after a decapitation strike, painting the image that it was just like Venezuela. Then what? They're all dead in under a week assuming not literally every single one of them were killed in the initial strike.
Also, why the fuck did you call what I said victim blaming? Tbh it feels like a waste of time engaging with you because you just made up all of my positions in my head but I have to ask, where in the hell did this come from? I SUPPORT IRAN. America's the great satan, all that shit is fact. Me not shedding tears over the deaths of the oppressors in another country says NOTHING about my POLITICS except that I like it when the world is less awful for all living in it. I hope you don't think I'm literally Hitler when I say this but... I also don't shed tears over Ayatollah Khomeini's death. No, that doesn't mean I support Mossad, doesn't mean I support the CIA, merely that I think that the suffer of the Iranian people is tragic and vile to my humanitarian principles. It's a shame Israel and America has killed the moderate position in Iran, if anyone suffers out of this conflict it should be us and I hope whatever the outcome is that it pushes the world away from us and into a sustainable direction.
calmdownmyguy@reddit
I'm pretty they know who they're going after. High level government officials aren't anonymous.
Professional-Syrup-0@reddit
They ain’t anonymous but just because they are government officials also doesn’t mean they are automatically guilty.
Or would you also hold every single US government official, which would include Us postal service workers, accountable for the crimes of Trump?
calmdownmyguy@reddit
Bro, be serious for one second the government in Venezuela isn't targeting DMV workers.
sulaymanf@reddit
Innocent people always die along the way. People get lynched for false rumors they’re part of the regime etc.
FeijoadaAceitavel@reddit
Calling it a "cartel" is buying into the American propaganda that this was done due to drugs.
calmdownmyguy@reddit
Oil cartels exist
FeijoadaAceitavel@reddit
That is not what is understood when you call a country a "cartel regime", and you know it.
calmdownmyguy@reddit
We'll have to disagree on that one. There a lots of different kinds of cartels and loyalty doesn't come with the territory. People being purged weren't loyal to Venezuela, they were loyal to the boss, for a price. Now they're out. Fuck'em.
MobileSuitBooty@reddit
you’re just wrong
HoidToTheMoon@reddit
I mean, its not really a matter of disagreement. You are being misleading, and willfully so. The Trump administration has repeatedly falsely claimed that Venezuela was a major source of drugs flowing into the United States.
calmdownmyguy@reddit
No one takes anything the trump administration says seriously. They are all clowns.
ChillAhriman@reddit
Guys like you are living proof that the USA is becoming our timeline's 1984. Words don't need to have meanings, they only need to mean whatever the current aparatus needs them to.
calmdownmyguy@reddit
I'm not sure if you're only concept of the word cartel comes from watching TV or not but in the real world cartel is defined asA cartel is an association of independent businesses or organizations that collude to fix prices, restrict output, and limit competition to increase their profits. Often illegal under antitrust laws, they function by dividing markets and rigging bids. Key synonyms include trust, combine, syndicate, and monopoly. Merriam-Webster Merriam-Webster +5 Usage Examples Business: The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) is a well-known international cartel that controls oil production and prices. Illegal Activity: Drug cartels, such as the Medellin or Sinaloa cartels, are criminal syndicates that dominate the production and distribution of illegal substances. General Usage: Companies in a specific industry might form a secret cartel to stop competing on price. Stephen G. Rodriguez & Partners Stephen G. Rodriguez & Partners +4 Key Characteristics Price Fixing: Members agree on a minimum price to avoid lowering prices. Market Allocation: Companies divide regions or customers among themselves. Output Control: Members restrict the quantity of goods produced to maintain high prices. Investopedia Investopedia +2 Synonyms Trust Combine Syndicate Monopoly Coalition Vocabulary.com Vocabulary.com +1 Cartels can be international, such as between countries, or domestic, often violating regulations like the Sherman Act in the United States. Merriam-Webster Merriam-Webster +1 CARTEL Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster Apr 13, 2026 — 1. : a written agreement between belligerent nations. 2. : a combination of independent commercial or industrial enterprises designed to limit competition or fi...
Merriam-Webster cartel | Wex | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute A cartel is a group of independent corporations or other entities that join together to: * Fix prices * Rig bids * Allocate markets * Conduct other similar ille...
LII | Legal Information Institute Cartel - Definition, Meaning & Synonyms | Vocabulary.com The word cartel has a negative connotation. It refers to organizations that join together to limit supply of a product to force prices to remain high. For exa...
Vocabulary.com
CARTEL Definition & Meaning - Dictionary.com cartel * an international syndicate, combine, or trust formed especially to regulate prices and output in some field of business. Synonyms: combination, merger,
Dictionary.com
1:06 Cartel Definition, Examples, and Legal Implications Explained
Investopedia·James Chen What Is a Cartel? | Los Angeles Criminal Defense Lawyer A cartel is a group of participants in an industry who have come together to either reduce or prevent competition among themselves by a variety of means, includ...
Stephen G. Rodriguez & Partners Cartel Definition Why Trust Us? Learn more about our history and our editorial standards. Learn more about our editorial standards. A group of independent corporations or other e...
Nolo Search Legal Terms and Definitions Browse: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W Y Z. Enter a Legal Term. all words any words phrase. Search the Definitions. all words any words phrase. c...
Law.com Legal Dictionary CARTEL - Definition & Meaning - Reverso English Dictionary (cartels plural )A cartel is an association of similar companies or businesses that have grouped together in order to prevent competition and to control prices.
Reverso Dictionary Anatomy of a Drug Cartel - Video Infographic - The Ranch PA % Sep 10, 2013 — A drug cartel is a group of competing businesses that work together to transport and sell illegal drugs. Cartels often try to keep others out or prices up. Mexi...
Recovery Ranch PA
stonkmarxist@reddit
Given that we know exactly what kind of "cartel" the US admin claimed Venezuela was, which kind are you claiming it is?
calmdownmyguy@reddit
Trump installed a new leader for access to oil reserves. Drug smuggling accusations were made because it was more politically palatable than saying "we're taking the oil." That doesn't mean the Maduro regime wasn't a cartel.
stonkmarxist@reddit
Again, what sort of cartel are you accusing them of being? Explain that and explain how it lines up with all the definitions you've thrown up there
calmdownmyguy@reddit
It's an oil cartel. That's a well known and objective fact.
phedinhinleninpark@reddit
And telecom cartels (Canada/Australia)
ahundreddollarbills@reddit
Canadian law prohibits majority foreign ownership of Telecom networks.
Not saying its great here, but that is the reason why you don't see EU or American companies trying to break into the Canadian market.
calmdownmyguy@reddit
Rail cartels were a thing for like a century.
Professional-Syrup-0@reddit
So you are alleging Venezuela is part of an oil cartel?
What is the OPEC equivalent for Venezuela, and why hasn’t the US “raided” OPEC countries for their very blatant oil cartel?
22stanmanplanjam11@reddit
We've raided a lot of OPEC countries.
Meles_B@reddit
Venezuela is a founding member of OPEC, and never stopped being a member.
Are you serious?
LeGrandLucifer@reddit
The claim that the US was not in control was complete bullshit. Venezuela is now a puppet country.
Levitz@reddit
I don't know what you are talking about, from the start it seemed like they'd go after the people supporting the regime, and now it seems they went after the people supporting the regime. This is completely coherent with the release of political prisoners.
Are we supposed to be sympathetic towards those who enabled a dictatorship when it's overthrown?
By all means do criticize the new people whenever it's due, but it's insane to me that the sub turns pro-fascist as soon as it's the US on the other side.
joecitizen79@reddit
The US side is the pro-fascist side
Wintersage7@reddit
Wait, aren't you the ones gearing up to throw people in prison for misgendering folk online?
DragonDai@reddit
"Why won't your country tolerate my bigoted harassment of other humans? Why are you rightly treating it like the violence it is? HOW DARE YOU STOP ME FROM USING THE SLURS I WANT TO USE IN ORDER TO DEHUMANIZE THE PEOPLE I WANT REMOVED FROM SOCIETY!!"
/u/Wintersage7
joecitizen79@reddit
Lmao no. Where do you get your news 🤣
Levitz@reddit
Ah yes the democratically elected pro-fascist who fucked up the democratic despot.
Up is down and all.
joecitizen79@reddit
I can cite several fascist governments that were democratically elected, so that's a poor argument.
Levitz@reddit
At least it's not a staunchly pro-fascist one lmao
anillop@reddit
Was anyone under any illusion that this isn’t what happens during an actual regime change?
Silver_Middle_7240@reddit
It's certainly required when the previous regime was criminal. Like, if the previous government loses the election and steps down and gets purged that's one thing. If you dissolve other branches of government, suspend elections, run your opponents out of the country, murder their supporters, requiring a foreign intervention to remove you; yeah you're getting purged when your regime loses power. That's the price you pay for doing that shit.
R1donis@reddit
Well, at least media was pretending that it was hunt for traitors and not other way around.
Infamous-Cash9165@reddit
Isn’t that exactly what Trump wanted?
Existing_Customer392@reddit
That's the thing. They never hid their intentions and actions.
Naurgul@reddit (OP)
If you read the article carefully, there's also a third category of ex-loyalists who immediately swore allegiance to the new regime. For example Gen. Gustavo González López (former head of secret police, now defence minister) and Diosdado Cabello (interior minister who oversaw the governing party’s repression apparatus).
RisingDeadMan0@reddit
Hm, a top quality NY Times post, I am sure well sourced and cites...
Whose to say this is direct from Washington orders?
Didnt her dad die/detained by the last US backed regime, cant imagine she's a fan of trump.
SuperKiller94@reddit
Her options are do what the US says or get snatched up and thrown in prison with Maduro. Which would she rather do? Power is clearly more important for her than getting revenge against the CIA.
BendicantMias@reddit
In order for her to be snatched up, you'd need to find another sellout to cooperate and let you conduct another showpiece kidnapping. And now that person is in charge and the whole rigmarole starts over again. Possible, but each time you need to find a new well positioned traitor to facilitate it.
Somehow I don't think anyone's gonna be interested in investing in Venezuela is this keeps happening.
PreviousCurrentThing@reddit
If that includes China and Russia, the planners in Washington find that acceptable.
BendicantMias@reddit
China and Russia didn't invest much into Venezuela anyway, yet Washington still saw fit to attack it. They barely even justified it that way, Trump was openly crowing about oil lol. China just bought its oil, but it didn't rely on it.
Also, an unstable Venezuela will end up becoming exactly what Trump accused it of being and used to justify his war - a narco state. Also more refugees btw...
PreviousCurrentThing@reddit
Paying attention to Trump's rhetoric is a bad way to understand US foreign policy. lol.
Why would you expect American leaders justify their actions based on their actual motives? Did you believe Bush and Cheney when they said we invaded Iraq because of WMD? Follow actions, not words.
Agreed, it's more about preventing them from getting a foothold in the hemisphere. But taking it out as a source of oil is still advantageous, nonetheless.
Neither of these are a problem for Washington. Narco states are easier to work with because the leaders care about their own wealth and power more than the long-term health of the country or its people. Refugees are cheap labor and a great wedge issue to keep the populace preoccupied and polarized.
Don't get me wrong, if they can pull off the rest of this regime change and get American companies producing oil, that's the ideal for them. It's just not necessary for it to be considered a success.
Mando177@reddit
I mean she could go with the Iranian approach and grow a pair
22stanmanplanjam11@reddit
They only do that because they think they're going straight to Jannah specifically for dying in that manner.
Mando177@reddit
Putting your bigotry aside, martyrdom is a shared belief among both Catholics and Muslims, but they’re not fighting back for the same reason other Muslim countries like Jordan and Egypt done fight back, religion isn’t their primary motivator, greed and power is.
22stanmanplanjam11@reddit
Can you be for real please? The last Catholic martyr was centuries ago, the Papal States have all collapsed, and the Vatican is closer to being a museum in Rome than a theocracy. No Catholic is doing anything today with the belief that their specific method of death is going to send them to heaven.
Today, there are many Muslim men that very much believe that dying specifically in the process of waging war with Israel will be the reason they spend eternity in paradise. This genuine belief is reflected in their actions.
Old_Wallaby_7461@reddit
And then she ends up inside the NYC federal prison like Maduro
BendicantMias@reddit
Or she completely destroys the so-called 'Gulf of America'...
Old_Wallaby_7461@reddit
Okay but then people would have to want to fight for her. They would have to see Delcy as someone that they want to die for. They would have to see Chavismo as something worth dying for. Clearly nobody does anymore.
BendicantMias@reddit
The people don't have to do anything. You're still thinking ideologically, cos you like to frame all your own warmongering in moralistic terms so ideology comes easy to you. Such a small mind lol...
comocho00@reddit
What would she use as leverage? They don’t have a strait to block
BendicantMias@reddit
Oil. Oil isn't just a resource, it's a toxic weapon.
Iran doesn't just have the strait as a bargaining chip, it has several. Including the nuclear option that isn't nukes - just blowing up all regions' infrastructure, including refineries and even desalination plants.
Venezuela wouldn't be easy to invade if it was invaded and the army chose to fight, but Trump doesn't have the balls to invade anywhere and otoh the Venezuelan army is corrupt so it might not choose to fight if he does.
But what it could do, if it's invaded or especially if it's just bombed like Iran is, is simply blow up its oil wells. And maybe Guyana's too. Not only does that destroy much of its value as a target, but it also potentially causes the worst environmental disaster in American history.
You might ask how Venezuela is supposed to survive then? The same could be asked of a nuclear attack. The point is that you're facing an existential threat anyway, so you show your enemy that you WILL do the crazy thing if they don't stop. They can even do only a couple of wells first, as a warning, similar to a limited nuclear attack. Threaten to blow the rest.
Venezuela's oil industry is a mess anyway. Instead it can afterward turn towards exactly what Trump keeps accusing it of doing as the basis of its economy - drugs. Take a leaf out of the Taliban book - turn your nation into a proper full-fledged narco state and carry on.
Old_Wallaby_7461@reddit
Why would they do this when they can just sell the oil and make money?
Chavismo is not like Shi'ite Islam. It is a dead ideology, like Soviet communism in 1990. Nobody believes in it anymore because of how dramatically it has failed, nobody wants to die for it.
sivvon@reddit
It doesn't work because of sanctions. Just like in Iran, crippling sanctions led to protests. Let's not bullshit now.
Old_Wallaby_7461@reddit
The Venezuelan economy was collapsing before any sanctions were levelled. It was a function of idiots being promoted into leadership because they were someone's friend.
BendicantMias@reddit
Cos THEY won't be making any money. They're being threatened with either being dead or thrown into jail. They aren't doing it for an ideology, they'd be doing it for their own lives. You're the one thinking ideologically.
Old_Wallaby_7461@reddit
No, the deal is plata o plomo. If they continue to do as instructed they'll make a fat profit from oil sales and then maybe retire to Dubai or Russia in a few years. If they don't, it's the federal pen.
It was an Edward Teller thought experiment that was never even seriously contemplated, let alone built.
You did not understand the comparison made. Embarrassing
Mando177@reddit
The article in question talks about Delcy’s supporters getting lucrative contracts and assumedly being part of the new economic elite, so they’ll definitely be making money personally
BendicantMias@reddit
That's for cooperating. I already addressed that in my other comment. This is about if the US decides to take them out and they don't feel like quietly going along with that.
Shawnj2@reddit
Why would any leader of any country in their right mind do this
BendicantMias@reddit
Ask your own own country. They've toyed with such ideas as well - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sundial_(weapon) Sundial wasn't a portable bomb to be dropped on the enemy, it was a bomb to be exploded on US territory itself - theoretically big enough to plunge the whole planet into a nuclear winter.
Hell MAD doctrine is already based on this, it's just that in that case you expect the enemy to kill you instead of you doing it yourself. Technically in this case it's actually more like MAD since Venezuela would still be alive afterwards, unlike the US in the case of Sundial, it's just that the US would probably destroy it after.
DancingDumpling@reddit
I love that the article you linked makes absolutely no mention of any sort of intentions to detonate that hypothetical bomb on the US mainland
Shawnj2@reddit
Sundial was cancelled well before it got to any degree of feasibility because nearly everyone who heard of it thought it was insane. Regular MAD doctrine is about making the idea of invading or attacking so scary that no one would try.
When it came to the Maduro operation 1. No one gives a shit about the current or previous leadership and 2. The US already invaded overnight and took over. Delcy Rodriguez had basically no leverage because the US already took over lol
meeeeeeeehhhhhhhhh@reddit
Yes the most logical response to a threat is to shoot yourself in the head. Peak strategy right here. Only islamists are this dumb.
RisingDeadMan0@reddit
Idk, if my dad was tortured to death by the US state. Probably wouldn't be keen to play ball so easily.
Professional-Syrup-0@reddit
But people are not all the same, context and the situation matter.
Maybe she had a bad relationship with her father and that’s why it’s not a factor.
Maybe she simply realises if she opposes the US she might end up getting abducted there just as it happened with Maduro.
The later makes it way more rational for her to play along for her own survivals sake, and most people are rational actors.
While the “They killed my father, I will fight them to death!” take might good maerial for an action revenge movie, but pulling that through in reality is much harder when it’s not a movie where you have Hollywood writers give you plot armor.
RisingDeadMan0@reddit
fight them to death, and bend over backwards to the orange clown is two different things, NY Times doing journalism here or echoing CIA talking points?
joecitizen79@reddit
If international law h0ad teeth, one sovereign nation wouldn't be allowed to just kidnap or assassinate other countries leaders
HzPips@reddit
Paris is well worth a mass. I am not inclined to believe that the woman responsible for the constitution that empowered maduro to be a dictator is very principled.
ObjectiveObserver420@reddit
They must have calculated that this is the best path forward for them because of their proximity to North America and the lack of power projection of their BRICS partners
Old_Wallaby_7461@reddit
BRICS isn't real. There's some chance that NATO isn't real anymore because Trump probably hates the Europeans so much that he wouldn't fight for them, but that was always the condition of BRICS.
FormerLawfulness6@reddit
BRICS is not a military alliance. It never has been and has no intention of becoming one. It is pretty much exclusively economic allowing countries to trade with alternatives to the dollar reserve and funding of development projects.
The only speculation about BRICS countries getting involved is to prevent the US effort to dismantle an alternative by systematically going after their members, but there is no mutual defense pact as there is with NATO.
Old_Wallaby_7461@reddit
BRICS is nothing, it isn't even an economic alliance. Virtually all of the economic ties are de facto bilateral ties between China and the other BRICS nations
BendicantMias@reddit
This isn't nothing - https://youtu.be/oOg7aYeV5eM?si=ah-Xmw10TFps2171
And neither is this - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Development_Bank
Nor this - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_Infrastructure_Investment_Bank
Etc.
Virtual-Pension-991@reddit
I mean, that only confirms the comment.
Although for most readers here who needs a simple generalization, the main point of BRICS really is to have an alternative system for transactions between countries who have serious issues with the West's US dominated market and policies.
I can't hate BRICS since all countries, even the US, could benefit from this by providing more methods of transactions.
BendicantMias@reddit
Whose comment? I was responding to the guy who said "BRICS is nothing", not the one he replied to who clarified that BRICS isn't a military alliance. It's pretty clearly not a military alliance, but that's not the same thing as being "nothing".
Virtual-Pension-991@reddit
As in "BRICS is nothing".
It's a fancy term for direct person-person/entity-entity business transaction.
FormerLawfulness6@reddit
I wouldn't say creating the means for countries to bypass a coercive economic system that has had the wprld in a chokehold for most of a century is "nothing". The ability to evade sanctions and subvert US economic warfare practices means quite a lot to the billions of people at risk.
Virtual-Pension-991@reddit
Well, to exxagerate less. Countries have long done such method to do exactly that.
FormerLawfulness6@reddit
While individuals can be sanctioned, economic sanctions on countries are designed to put pressure on the civilian population. Iran and Cuba are chief examples. The US has engineered a currency collapse in Iran that has effectively destroyed the middle class, driven much of the population into poverty andnmassively enriched the corrupt officials who can smuggle in black market goods.
BRICS systems allow countries to balance current account deficits and trade goods. It's not a personal bank. That does profit business owners and politicians, but that is necessarily true of every system that enables capital exchange so long as capital owners have a claim on the surplus value. It just prevents US financial systems from unilateral blocking transactions and from a cut.
The system will benefit people whose lives are improved by development projects, wider trade, and reduced risk of unlawful unilateral economic warfare.
Old_Wallaby_7461@reddit
This is just a Chinese mirroring of the existing institutions that the US leads. How do those work again?
Professional-Syrup-0@reddit
So first it’s NATO equivalent, then it’s nothing, and now it’s suddenly just China copying the U.S.?
How about you just write: “BRISCS countries bad and I hate them!”, as that seems to be the gist of your subject matter knowledge.
Old_Wallaby_7461@reddit
I compared it to NATO to show that BRICS wasn't real, correct
I said that most "BRICS" institutions are essentially unilateral tools of Chinese power in the same way that lots of other international organizations are essentially controlled by the US
That's correct, BRICS isn't real. India and China are directly opposed, Brazil and South Africa have no interests in common with Russia. Etc.
Riley_@reddit
China and Russia had arrangements to exploit Venezuela under Maduro, so they had a financial interest in keeping him in power. They seemingly calculated that they can't stop US expansion right now.
FormerLawfulness6@reddit
Or most countries are actually that interested in starting WW3, and US aggression is a much greater danger to the world than China.
Riley_@reddit
Imperialist countries will always end up going to war with each other. They just made the calculation that Russia is too tied up in Ukraine and China is too militarily behind right now.
lowrads@reddit
The EU didn't start out that way either. The Treaty of Paris only established the European Coal and Steel Union.
FormerLawfulness6@reddit
The EU is also a territorial system with pretty clear land and sea borders. Military entanglements are kind of a natural progression in that situation because they are already mutually interdependent for security by geography.
BRICS is not designed to be a territorial system. The participating states are scattered and don't really even share many security interests. It would be a much bigger reach to get them to agree on mutual defense because there are a whole mess of conflicting interests.
Most of the BRICS countries also don't have much history of military reach as opposed to the EU countries, several of which still have remnants of imperial interests to protect. Along with a political philosophy that hasn't really much beyond the liberal paternalism developed under empire.
leto78@reddit
Venezuela actual allies were Cuba, Iran, Russia and China. Maduro allowed a lot of military intelligence people set up spying stations in Venezuela to target the US. These were targeted when the US captured Maduro. The regime also issued thousands of Venezuelan passports to IRGC agents, so that they could travel to the US and places like Panama where there are plenty of American interests.
Lula used to support Maduro but he basically removed his support after the last fraudulent elections and the threat of military action against Guayana. The previous elections had been negotiated with Lula and Biden, in exchange of easing of sanctions. Of course, Maduro made a fool out of Lula and Biden.
BendicantMias@reddit
He was definitely sold out. Trump was crowing about how the US suffered no losses in the operation, but even for the US that's ridiculous. This wasn't a bombing or missile strike, it was a ground operation - in the capital. And one which happened while Rodriguez was conveniently out of the country. She was definitely onboard.
This also means that Maria Machado ain't never gonna get her shot at power in Venezuela, no matter how much she sucks up to Trump. The US had evidently already chosen Maduro's successor, and will only consider her if Delcy steps out of line. And of course Venezuela isn't gonna be a democracy either - it's gonna be a rerun of what Cuba was before Castro's revolution i.e. a US client state under its previous dictator Batista.
The only question is how much power she really has. If she's turning on her co-conspirators and going after the other power brokers of the regime to solidify power under her, they may very well turn against her before long..