Embed Notice

@larsfrommars tbh that reads like propaganda to me because it provides a lot of information but deliberately omits relevant context.

For example, it says that the opposition candidate Maria Corina Machado was banned from being nominated, but implies that it was just Maduro forcing her out because he's a dictator. It completely leaves out the fact that she has been involved in multiple US-backed coup attempts (both of Maduro's predecessor and him), orchestrating extremely violent protests that targeted students and union leaders, and has many times openly called for foreign invasion of Venezuela to oust Maduro, including a request for military intervention from Netanyahu.

The Venezuelan Supreme Court banned her from political nomination years ago because she spoke to the Organization of American States to request intervention in Venezuela as a representative of Panama, violating their laws about politicians acting as instruments of foreign countries.

It's just one example, but I see a lot of similar patterns in articles from the New York Times, CNN, Washington Post, Reuters, AP... And they all follow the same model where they repeat lies or dramatically misrepresented information that makes Maduro's regime look bad while leaving out the context that makes it obvious how much the US wants the socialists out and the far right in.

Another example is they'll wax poetic about the terrible economic conditions in the country and how so many leave Venezuela as a result but don't mention US and EU sanctions that have left the people starving. It's very similar to the embargo on Cuba. The US acts the same way because of a socialist revolution in the past that the US is committed to undermining.

I'm by no means an expert but the information I've been able to find is very telling and very difficult to come by due to the narratives being pushed by corporate media. Just my two cents.