|
On April 29 2019 08:41 JimmiC wrote:
I believe you believe that. My inbox says different. I think you should take the feedback you are getting politely on the US pol thread to heart. I think you have the opportunity to be one of the most liked posters if you do.
But for example right now you have a point that you think is more interesting than what BS and kwark are discussing. That doesn't mean it is to them. They clearly want to finish this. How would you feel if someone kept interjecting some random point semi related that they thought was more interesting and demanded immediate response and said as much? I would suggest you wouldn't like it. You need to somehow gain the ability to understand that what you think is not right it is a opinion and others have them as well. And that your opinion is not automatically the best.
Happens quite frequently but that's why I'm no longer trying to help them resolve the conflicting views.
|
|
|
Increasing violence against indigenous people in Brazil has led to indigenous women taking a principal role in opposition to Bolsonaro (supported by the US) and his pledge to open up the Amazon for destruction/profit
'Now belongs to us': Women take lead in Brazil's indigenous fight
Escalation of violence against indigenous groups in Brazil pushes growing number of native women to lead the movement.
Last year was one of the bloodiest years on record for indigenous communities in Brazil. The Indigenous Missionary Council, a religious organisation fighting for indigenous rights, recorded at least 110 murders of indigenous individuals in 2017.
Rights groups fear the violence will only get worse under far-right President Jair Bolsonaro, who took office in January.
"Even if you don't go to the fight, the fight comes to you," Xakriaba told Al Jazeera.
Since coming to power, Bolsonaro has pledged to open the Amazon to foreign prospectors, and has repeatedly said he would not "demarcate one centimetre of indigenous land".
Nara Bare, leader of the Coordination of the Indigenous Organizations of the Brazilian Amazon (COIAB), said the increase in violence, as well as the implementation of public policies that favour the interests of the farming industry, have pushed many women to join the traditionally male-dominated movement.
"Before, we didn't have the necessity to be part of the movement, but now, because of the total disrespect for our peoples, for our lives, we feel the need to join our warriors, our men, to walk this journey together," she told Al Jazeera.
In 2017, Bare was the first woman to be elected as the leader of COIAB, the biggest indigenous organisation in the country.
But women still face many challenges. The country has the fifth-highest femicide rate in the world, according to Article 19, a UK-based rights group. The yearly homicide and suicide rates were twice as high than those of non-indigenous women between 2003 and 2013, according to the World Bank. And only 77 of the 513 deputies in Brazil's lower house of congress are women.
Samantha Tsitsina is part of the indigenous movement in Mato Grosso do Sul, the state with the highest number of killings of individuals people. She said women also face other types of "non-explicit" violence, including prejudice and racism.
"In my village, people constantly judge that I am 34 years old with no husband or children," she told Al Jazeera.
"If I go out of my village the looks are instantly different. When I go to the supermarket, the security guard starts following me. This is prejudice, institutionalised racism," Tsitsina said.
"I questioned and confronted [the security guard] because I had the opportunity to go to the university and education is a means to be informed about our rights and how to defend them", she said, adding that many women, who haven't had access to education, suffer the abuse in silence.
www.aljazeera.com
|
On April 28 2019 22:22 JimmiC wrote:Sorry if you read what I said 3 million are living in tents. I said 3 million fleed many are living in tents. And I asked if any romanians are. I suspect that answer is zero or almost 0 showing that your example is flawed. I was not trying to get you emotional I was showing the stark difference between your examples. Secondly unless it is not true Romania is a democracy so when you don't like your government you have the opportunity to vote a new one in. According to the democracy index Romania is ( http://www.eiu.com/Handlers/WhitepaperHandler.ashx?fi=Democracy_Index_2018.pdf&mode=wp&campaignid=Democracy2018 ) Venezuela on the other hand is not even a hybrid regime, it is Authoritarian. And if the Freedom report is at all accurate they will score even lower when the 2019 report comes out. https://freedomhouse.org/sites/default/files/Feb2019_FH_FITW_2019_Report_ForWeb-compressed.pdfWhat you are saying about yhe fleeing is not all wrong. It is just leaving out the major points of mismanagement, (oil production is below ww2 levels and that had almost nothing to so with production) corruption, the gangs controlling much to ensure loyalty, authoratarianism, so on. But the factors you point out are there as well. Many oil based economies are struggling, none like this. Ive seen mthat video before and read many articles on the downfall. Also talk to many Venezuelans about it. You really are just looking for things to prove your point imstead of looking for answers. And that my friend is called confirmation bias. Yes Im also worried about the poor people that support Maduro. They are buying his BS that he isnt the reason they are starving. They will do just as much better when he is gone. I am not worried about those few but powerful living the highlife off corruption amd niether should you. The differnce between us is you are making assumptions based off generalities. Im trying to discuss what is actually happening. well there probably are romanians living in tents, the ethnic-romas. i'm fairly positive you could find some somewhere(they bulldozed a roma camp in France last year if i remember correctly) but it wasn't my intention to assert that romanian expats are worse or in the same boat, just that numbers are relative and 3 mil doesn't warrant starting a war over(nor your reaction on this topic for that matter); so to clear any lingering confusions: the people leaving Venezuela are worse, much worse now.
i'm not trying to prove anyones' point, just trying to remove the emotional baggage and propaganda out of the argument as much as possible.
Maduro looks like someone that is just perpetuating the inherited status quo(or making it worse) but ...
i'll try to catch up on your progress with GH, if any, and add some words later. you started to look reasonable/able to accept inputs(to me at least) now. + Show Spoiler +...beginning with a deconstruction of the construct into a comprehensive set of basic component processes, followed by a complementary reconstruction from which a scientifically tractable concept of theory of mind could be recovered; i'd say we're(i'm including your arguments with GH here too) in the second phase
|
|
|
While the US/Europe are attempting to increase Venezuela's (Brazil's, and others too) carbon output, increasing the rate of climate change, China has picked up the US's slack and is working to build/finance the largest solar farm in South America.
In an arid, lunar-like landscape in the sunny highlands of northern Argentina, South America’s largest solar farm is rising, powered by funding and technology from China.
Local officials said they had sought help at home, the United States and Europe without success. Potential lenders and partners, they said, were spooked by the project’s size and the fiscal woes of Jujuy province, one of the poorest in the country.
The Import-Export Bank of China saw it differently. The state-funded institution financed 85 percent of the project’s nearly $400-million pricetag. At 3 percent annual interest over 15 years, it is “cheap money” for Jujuy, a person familiar with the terms said.
Those companies include Huawei Technologies, the Chinese telecom giant under fire from U.S. President Donald Trump. Some in his administration have concluded, without presenting evidence, that Huawei’s equipment provides the Chinese military with a “backdoor” to spy on users or cripple their networks. In Jujuy, the company is supplying inverters, technology that turns power from solar panels into useable current and serves as a critical gateway to the electrical grid.
The project, known as Cauchari, is a testament to the rising clout of Beijing as a backer of big projects in cash-strapped emerging markets. And it is helping China cement its standing as the world’s leader in clean-energy technology.
At a time when Trump is doubling down on fossil fuels and withdrawing the United States from global partnerships, Chinese President Xi Jinping’s sprawling “Belt and Road” initiative aims to put Chinese companies and innovation at the center of infrastructure development worldwide, including next-generation power sources.
The trend is rattling Trump administration officials.
But in hardscrabble Jujuy province, home to around 750,000 people, officials are in no mood for a scolding. Argentina has set ambitious renewable energy targets. It is China, they say, not the United States, that is stepping up with money and technology to assist them.
China has been the largest investor in clean energy globally for nine straight years, according to the Chinese embassy in Buenos Aires.
China is the world’s largest manufacturer of solar panels and inverters, dominance that has seen European and U.S. producers struggle to compete. The Trump administration last year slapped steep tariffs on imported panels, citing unfair competition. But many renewable energy experts credit falling prices for speeding global adoption of solar.
Jujuy’s pivot to China underscores the challenge for the United States, whose warnings about the pitfalls of Chinese backing are no match for Beijing’s outreach and resources.
graphics.reuters.com
|
|
|
On April 30 2019 02:33 JimmiC wrote:
How are the US/europe attempting to increase carbon in Venezueala? I think you mean Russia and China who keep imvesting billions in their oil industry. Currently the US and Europe are sanctioning the oil not encouraging.
But you know this, stop with US is root of evil crap. Or at least try to find actual examples of it. There are lots of them.
The article answers your question.
At a time when Trump is doubling down on fossil fuels and withdrawing the United States from global partnerships, Chinese President Xi Jinping’s sprawling “Belt and Road” initiative aims to put Chinese companies and innovation at the center of infrastructure development worldwide, including next-generation power sources.
The trend is rattling Trump administration officials.
China has been the largest investor in clean energy globally for nine straight years
|
|
|
On April 30 2019 05:31 JimmiC wrote:
No it doesn't at all. It shows China making a investment in Argentina and make a general comment about the Donald loving his fossil fuels.
I asked about your claim that US/Europe are attempting to increase Venezuela carbon input. And I pointed out that they are actually sanctioning the Oil right now and trying to make it so they can make and sell no oil. And it is Russia and China making huge investments in the Oil industry their, in the billions in fact.
I would also say that Europe is doing a far better job when it comes to climate change than China and happy to discuss with you why that is.
But it does amaze me how you are able to crowbar the "evil US" into everything even when the complete opposite is happening. You should look for real things where the US is going horrible for things for climate because they are easy to find. The US has a atrocious track record on the environment. I'm not sure if they are as bad as Russia, Or China for that matter but it is not good. And China making good investments are great, now if they can deal with their plants horrible emissions, lack of environmental controls on dumping, burning of plastic and so on we will really have something.
I posted a recent example of the US supporting the destruction of the Amazon for mining and oil production as well as unrest among indigenous people of the region in response to increased privatization and destruction of natural resources (carbon based primarily). This also includes the increase in carbon that results from deforestation.
The Reuters article cited summarized that as a global strategy the stark contrast is clear and startling.
What you've done is taken a snapshot in isolation and inexplicably taken the position that the US doesn't want to increase Venezuelan oil production despite the clear conflict that presents with your previous positions and the stated objectives from the National Security Advisor of the United States John Bolton.
|
|
|
On April 30 2019 06:06 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2019 05:54 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 30 2019 05:31 JimmiC wrote:
No it doesn't at all. It shows China making a investment in Argentina and make a general comment about the Donald loving his fossil fuels.
I asked about your claim that US/Europe are attempting to increase Venezuela carbon input. And I pointed out that they are actually sanctioning the Oil right now and trying to make it so they can make and sell no oil. And it is Russia and China making huge investments in the Oil industry their, in the billions in fact.
I would also say that Europe is doing a far better job when it comes to climate change than China and happy to discuss with you why that is.
But it does amaze me how you are able to crowbar the "evil US" into everything even when the complete opposite is happening. You should look for real things where the US is going horrible for things for climate because they are easy to find. The US has a atrocious track record on the environment. I'm not sure if they are as bad as Russia, Or China for that matter but it is not good. And China making good investments are great, now if they can deal with their plants horrible emissions, lack of environmental controls on dumping, burning of plastic and so on we will really have something. I posted a recent example of the US supporting the destruction of the Amazon for mining and oil production as well as unrest among indigenous people of the region in response to increased privatization and destruction of natural resources (carbon based primarily). This also includes the increase in carbon that results from deforestation. The Reuters article cited summarized that as a global strategy the stark contrast is clear and startling. What you've done is taken a snapshot in isolation and inexplicably taken the position that the US doesn't want to increase Venezuelan oil production despite the clear conflict that presents with your previous positions and the stated objectives from the National Security Advisor of the United States John Bolton. Back up the truck big boy.
please stop with this childish stuff.
You've done the thing where you replace my position/argument with one you prefer to argue that lacks context.
If your argument is that US isn't doubling down on oil production domestically, globally, and in Venezuela because for the last month or so they've sanctioned oil (that you say has had no significant impact on the reduced production of oil in Venezuela) that's your right but I think a bit ridiculous.
If your other point is that while also outpacing the wealthier US in global infrastructure and renewable energy in developing nations China and other developing nations are also still dependent on dirty energy I don't disagree.
You literally googled an article that supported my point that despite the US's wealth and allegedly great political/economic system it lags behind China in both results and potential seen by investors, albeit presented in a braggadocios way as you noted.
You did make a bold claim that the US isn't supportive of increasing oil production in Venezuela despite how ridiculous it sounds on it's face. Much of the issue is who profits from it.
|
|
|
On April 30 2019 06:52 JimmiC wrote:
I did not make the claim that the US isn't supportive of future oil production. I made the factual point that right now they are sanctioning it.
The rest of my points you got wrong as well. So let me be as simple as possible.
Explain how this sentence is related to the article about a solar farm in Argentina first. And then how that sentence is true. Please only use facts and things that are actually happening right now and not your aggressive headcannon on US's plans for the region.
While the US/Europe are attempting to increase Venezuela's (Brazil's, and others too) carbon output, increasing the rate of climate change
The US/European countries are backing Guaido (recognizes him as the interim president of Venezuela) who promises to (this is something you want) increase oil production. China is taking a very different approach (building the largest solar energy facility in South America and spending/attracting more investment than the wealthiest country on the planet). I really don't know where that loses you?
Not trying to be childish trying to keep it light.
Fine. Please stop.
Edit: I should add it's a "South America" thread so the interconnections between countries, particularly ones that border each other (Brazil and Venezuela + Argentina and Brazil for example) are going to come up frequently I'd imagine.
Should also note that the same Amazon being destroyed for investments in dirty energy (by everyone involved) also impacts Argentina.
|
|
|
|
|
On April 30 2019 07:18 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On April 30 2019 06:54 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 30 2019 06:52 JimmiC wrote:
I did not make the claim that the US isn't supportive of future oil production. I made the factual point that right now they are sanctioning it.
The rest of my points you got wrong as well. So let me be as simple as possible.
Explain how this sentence is related to the article about a solar farm in Argentina first. And then how that sentence is true. Please only use facts and things that are actually happening right now and not your aggressive headcannon on US's plans for the region.
While the US/Europe are attempting to increase Venezuela's (Brazil's, and others too) carbon output, increasing the rate of climate change
The US/European countries are backing Guaido (recognizes him as the interim president of Venezuela) who promises to (this is something you want) increase oil production. China is taking a very different approach (building the largest solar energy facility in South America and spending/attracting more investment than the wealthiest country on the planet). I really don't know where that loses you?
Not trying to be childish trying to keep it light. Fine. Please stop. Edit: I should add it's a "South America" thread so the interconnections between countries, particularly one that border each other (Brazil and Venezuela) are going to come up frequently I'd imagine. I am confused because your summary of a Chinese investment in solar power in Argentina was that the US and Europe were trying to increase carbon output in Venezuela. I can't keep up with the loose connections you treat as fact.
The largest solar project in South America that the US rejected and China is backing is being juxtaposed to the US's support of Bolsonaro, Guaido, Márquez, and their embrace of destroying indigenous peoples and lands for profit and carbon resources.
|
|
|
I'm unclear whether you've taken the position that VOA isn't US government sponsored propaganda or that it still has value despite that?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
