The reason why a vast majority of Venezuelans will be voting for González is that this will be the only way they can get the U.S. Government’s virtual blockade of sanctions against their country lifted so that maybe the enormous mass poverty that those sanctions imposed upon them will likewise end. However, that favorable outcome for the poor of Venezuela won’t happen, and here is why: 

González is secretly committed to privatizing Venezuela’s gas, oil, and other resources, as well as a “broad program of privatization of companies and public assets,” including the currently entirely free-to-the-public educational system and pension system, all of the Government’s assets to be auctioned off to investors from throughout the world so as to produce profits from the poor to increase the wealth of investors throughout the world, and, so to increase yet further the economic-inequality indexes throughout the world. The ideology that ‘justifies’ this is “libertarianism” synonymously “neoliberalism” but by either name referring to the extension of the economic theory known as “capitalism” as being the foundation of the political theory of “libertarianism” synonymously “neoliberalism.” It is designed to increase liberty for the rich at the expense of the poor, and to impose a model of ‘human rights’ in which those ‘rights’ depend entirely upon two things: how much wealth the individual owns, and how much charity will be given to that person by others (obviously, especially by the rich, who have plenty of money they can give to individuals who please them). 

The first practitioners of this political theory, as heads-of-state, were Benito Mussolini and then Adolf Hitler, both of whom were the first two to auction-off public assets in order to fund armaments build-ups so as to grow their respective empires by invasions so as to pillage foreign nations. This “libertarianism” synonymously “neoliberalism” was originally called “Fascism” by Mussolini, and “Nazism” by Hitler. In the United States itself, it has been called both “neoliberalism” as pertaining to domestic policies, and “neoconservatism” as pertaining to international policies.

---

SIDEBAR

---

---

The Real Story of Venezuela's Economic Crisis with Ben Norton & Chris Jeffries | HR CLIPS
Feb 21, 2024 #venezuela #caracas #155
Ben Norton attributes Venezuela's economic crisis to the US-imposed economic embargo, which prevented the country from producing and exporting its crucially important oil resource. This embargo, coupled with the Dutch disease resulting from Venezuela's reliance on oil and unequal distribution of wealth before Hugo Chavez's presidency, created a dependency on natural resources and hindered the development of other industries. During Chavez's Bolivarian Revolution, oil wealth was used to fund social programs, creating housing units, healthcare, and education for millions. However, when the US imposed sanctions in the late 2010s, the heavy reliance on oil and technology from US companies caused significant problems. While socialist policies were implemented, the crisis was not caused by socialism, and the economic decline served as a warning about the potential dangers of dedollarization, or selling oil in a currency other than the US dollar.

---

this acquaintance of his, from the time when he was the Ambassador to France. As Robert F. Haggard said, in concluding his December 2009 “The Politics of Friendship: Du Pont, Jefferson, Madison, and the Physiocratic Dream for the New World”: “Despite his own best efforts, Du Pont became in America what he had long been in the land of his birth: an anachronism, a voice crying in the wilderness, and a prophet preaching the tenets of a dead religion.” Yet, physiocracy itself lived on, within the DuPont family and others among the American aristocracy, until this laissez-faire belief came ultimately to be called “libertarianism” after WW2 and “fascism” was in need of a name-change. And, so, even after WW2, it won a public following in America among conservative fools who fancied themselves to be aristocrats, as well. Such “tenets of a dead religion” are now the neoliberal-neoconservative orthodoxy, just as they were in King Louis XIV’s time, and in Adam Smith’s, and in Milton Friedman’s, and now. Perhaps Venezuela will soon have its own Pinochet.

Robespierres have become increasingly unfashionable. Throughout the collective West, at least, the aristocracy again rule virtually without challenge.