Venezuela Needs A Pinochet

[Wartron]

Many illegals that the Democrats allow to pour across the southern border are. That's simply a fact.

You say it's "simply a fact" that many illegal immigrants are rapists and murderers. What is your source for this fact?

You desperately hope so because all of you have lost the argument.

I wouldn't say there is a serious argument in this thread... So far it's been your opinion, and then insults directed against anyone who disagrees. It's par for the course for the internet to be sure, but it's not an attempt to have a constructive discussion about opposing ideas (which is what putting forth an argument should be). If you want to have an actual discussion, you could try again without the insults and with some supporting evidence.

 

[Kyriakos]

So, what kind of a world are you imagining for humanity in general?

In general, or in general Pinochet?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

You say it's "simply a fact" that many illegal immigrants are rapists and murderers. What is your source for this fact?



I wouldn't say there is a serious argument in this thread... So far it's been your opinion, and then insults directed against anyone who disagrees. It's par for the course for the internet to be sure, but it's not an attempt to have a constructive discussion about opposing ideas (which is what putting forth an argument should be). If you want to have an actual discussion, you could try again without the insults and with some supporting evidence.

And we have a winner in the "biggest if" category.

 

[Perfection]

"a person who comes to a country to take up permanent residence."

If you are in violation of the country's immigration laws, in which you are residing, and are subject to deportation, you are not a permanent resident.

The point is intent. If the person intends to stay their indefinitely then they're an immigrant in my book.

Only citizens are permanent residents.

What about green card holders?

It's really straight forward and I'm tired of having to talk to liberals like they're children and explain basic grammar. Just stop molesting the English language and everyone can put this sort of nonsense behind them.

We're debating semantics (the meanings of words) not grammar (the structure of language). But no, I'm the uneducated child here.

Back to Venezuela. It's looking like they're on the path to having a coup, or civil war; all thanks to the socialist party's dangerous extremism and complete disregard for the welfare of it's citizens.

I hate the Maduro regime as much as any sane person does. But I think using this as an opportunity to slag the left is highly distasteful. Everyone should be opposed to Maduro.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Everyone should be opposed to Maduro.

This seems simple enough, but when you are trying to explain it to an open supporter of fascism in a thread dedicated to glorifying a brutal dictator it becomes really complicated.

 

[RomanKing]

You say it's "simply a fact" that many illegal immigrants are rapists and murderers. What is your source for this fact?

There is a massive amount of reports about illegal aliens being convicted of rape, murder, child molestation, drug trafficking, gang activity (MS-13 specifically), and the fact that anyone who has crossed the border illegally is a criminal.

I can very easily show you several stories just from the past week, but if you wish to discuss illegal aliens that is for another thread and I can certainly supply plenty of evidence.

I wouldn't say there is a serious argument in this thread... So far it's been your opinion, and then insults directed against anyone who disagrees. It's par for the course for the internet to be sure, but it's not an attempt to have a constructive discussion about opposing ideas (which is what putting forth an argument should be). If you want to have an actual discussion, you could try again without the insults and with some supporting evidence.

If you are so interested in conversation may I suggest that you review several of the graphs, statistics, and articles that I have provided in this thread (please see below). I also suggest sticking to making posts that are on topic, that is, if conversation is your objective; not attacking the thread, or it's creator while disingenuously asking for a discussion while making off-topic remarks.

The jury is in and the results are clear - Socialism/Communism has failed Latin America.

https://panampost.com/rafael-ruiz-velasco/2016/05/19/21st-century-socialism-has-failed/

Just comparing Chile to Cuba, Chile is far better off economically, it is a much freer society, and far less died under Pincohet's government than under the Castro Regime, which was backing the failed Allende government in Chile and the communist guerillas throughout Latin America.

History is perfectly clear as to who the real butchers were.

The majority of Latin America lived below the poverty line in the 70's and much of it still does, although Chile has absolutely prospered with their free markets and the return of representative democracy under Pinochet where he held a referendum for free election then peacefully transferred power to a new government. Poverty in Chile also went from 50% in 1975 to 11% (2013).

The failed Allende Regime had collapsed Chile's economy. Pinochet restore the economy and Chile has had economic growth ever since and has been an extremely productive country in Latin America in terms of GDP.

The predictable end result of socialism.

I await your on-topic posts in the interest of constructive conversation.

 

[Hygro]

This seems simple enough, but when you are trying to explain it to an open supporter of fascism in a thread dedicated to glorifying a brutal dictator it becomes really complicated.

That's really all it is.
"Maduro sucks!" - OP
"Yaaaay!" everyone but Reindeer cheers in agreement
"Therefore Pinochet rules!"
"Booo!" everyone including Reindeer
"Satiate my fascism boner!"
<People start throwing old tomatoes.>

 

[jackelgull]

I can agree Maduro sucks, but you'd need to have some pretty terrible options to convince me that a Pinochet is Venezuela's best choice.

 

[Wartron]

There is a massive amount of reports about illegal aliens being convicted of rape, murder, child molestation, drug trafficking, gang activity (MS-13 specifically), and the fact that anyone who has crossed the border illegally is a criminal.

I can very easily show you several stories just from the past week, but if you wish to discuss illegal aliens that is for another thread and I can certainly supply plenty of evidence.

You should definitely start another thread on that topic. You should define what you mean by 'many' illegal immigrants being rapists and murderers, and have extensive evidence to back it up.

I also suggest sticking to making posts that are on topic, that is, if conversation is your objective; not attacking the thread, or it's creator while disingenuously asking for a discussion while making off-topic remarks.

Of course. Just as long as you do the same.

If you are so interested in conversation may I suggest that you review several of the graphs, statistics, and articles that I have provided in this thread (please see below).

I understand the premise here - "socialism" in Venezuela has failed, and the things you provided go towards showing that. What I mean by supporting evidence is something to back up the idea that Pinochet would be good for Venezuela. Are you arguing that Pinochet would be good for the economy, the political system, or both?

 

[RomanKing]

I understand the premise here - "socialism" in Venezuela has failed, and the things you provided go towards showing that. What I mean by supporting evidence is something to back up the idea that Pinochet would be good for Venezuela. Are you arguing that Pinochet would be good for the economy, the political system, or both?

Yes, Pinochet would be great; both for reviving the economy and in terms of stabilizing the political situation and preventing a full on civil war. He was able to accomplish both of these objectives in Chile with great success.

The contrast between Cuba (which strongly backed Allende and the communist guerrillas) and Chile is irrefutable, both in terms of economic growth and casualties.

 

[Wartron]

I do not think Pinochet would be great. There is substantial evidence of human rights abuses committed by Pinochet's regime. I believe that the likelihood of human rights abuses under Pinochet also creates a likelihood of continued instability, and those two likelihoods together outweigh any benefit he might bring to the economy. I concede that it would be a very time-consuming task to assemble all the evidence of wrongful acts committed during Pinochet's rule. Since you have previously expressed skepticism about the reliability of some of that evidence (for example, the basis for his arrest and detention in the UK), we could limit the evidence to the acts which you acknowledge he committed and believe he was justified in committing. Otherwise, I can tell you I'd look at the evidence used in the original decision by the U.K. to deny Pinochet's head-of-state immunity, as well as the evidence used in subsequent cases against Pinochet by Chile's own courts.

 

[RomanKing]

I believe that the likelihood of human rights abuses under Pinochet also creates a likelihood of continued instability, and those two likelihoods together outweigh any benefit he might bring to the economy.

There wasn't instability, however. Pinochet stabilized the country, revived the economy, removed the communist subversives and guerrillas, held a referendum for free elections, then peacefully transferred power to a newly elected government and Chile has been stable, free, and prosperous ever since. These are irrefutable facts.

 

[Wartron]

There wasn't instability, however. Pinochet stabilized the country, revived the economy, removed the communist subversives and guerrillas, held a referendum for free elections, then peacefully transferred power to a newly elected government and Chile has been stable, free, and prosperous ever since. These are irrefutable facts.

Respectfully, when you say he "stabilized the country" and "removed the communist subversives", those are arguable conclusions instead of irrefutable facts. There is no doubt economic revival happened, but whether it was due to Pinochet's ability as a ruler alone is debatable; there are other factors I'd want to know about (like the effect of the end of the U.S. embargo) before I'd agree with Pinochet being responsible for it. I agree that the occurrence of the referrendum and peaceful transfer are irrefutable facts. "Stable, free, and prosperous" ever since, that goes to the heart of the argument, whether or not it is an irrefutable fact: was that new prosperity due to Pinochet's actions?

 

[Wartron]

Let's talk about how Pinochet "removed the communist subversives and guerrillas". What do you mean by "removed"? What legal procedure was used? Were they arrested and given fair trials? If they were foreigners, were they deported? Did Chile attempt to bring claims in international courts against Cuba and any other sponsors of these guerrillas (as Nicaragua did against the United States)?

 

[Perfection]

There is a massive amount of reports about illegal aliens being convicted of rape, murder, child molestation, drug trafficking, gang activity (MS-13 specifically)

You will find ne'er-do-wells in any large group of people. What I haven't seen is any indication that this group is particularly worse than others.

, and the fact that anyone who has crossed the border illegally is a criminal.

Not all illegals crossed illegally (some overstayed their visas). However the wider point is that while you may choose to label them as criminals, you have not shown them to be socially malignant in the way criminals are typically regarded. I don't view that law-breaking in itself is substantial evidence for lack of moral character.

 

[JohannaK]

I find terribly hilarious that in the charts provided the economy only takes off spectacularly at around the time of Pinochet's fall from power.

 

[JollyRoger]

I guess you don't believe that patents, or trademarks are good things either.

No, I was just pointing out where your free market capitalist outlook surrenders to what you view as the broader common good. It's ok to have such a viewpoint, but please realize where you are losing your capitalist purity. A true capitalist would want the free market to decide where people live, not a bunch of statists.

 

[danjuno]

I find terribly hilarious that in the charts provided the economy only takes off spectacularly at around the time of Pinochet's fall from power.

Yes, Pinochet improved the Chilean economy by NOT BEING IN POWER ANYMORE.

 

[JollyRoger]

And given the sheer number of people that lived in his country that were not legal immigrants to the United states, he ruled over a bunch of rapists and murderers, so the logic goes.

 

[Broken_Erika]

He held on too long and gave his groupies a free hand.