The US has reimposed economic sanctions against a Venezuelan state-owned mining company and says it could go on to reimpose further sanctions on the country’s oil and gas sector after Venezuela’s Supreme Court barred main opposition candidate Maria Corina Machado from running for president last week.

The US Treasury on Monday revoked General License 43, which had authorized dealings with mining conglomerate CVG-Minerven. The Treasury said US companies have until February 13 to wind down transactions that were previously authorized by that license.

While US economic sanctions against the mining company are unlikely to cause significant damage to the Venezuelan economy, the US State Department has crucially signaled it intends to renew oil and gas sanctions from April 18, if there’s no progress between Venezuela’s authoritarian president Nicolas Maduro and the opposition “particularly on allowing all presidential candidates to compete in this year’s elections,” it said in a statement.

      • eskimofry@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        10 months ago

        And that includes upholding the constitution. Not helping poor people kind of violates that in spirit right?

        • bluGill@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          10 months ago

          Many believe that your so called help for the poor makes things worse for the poor in the long run. You don’t have to agree with their position, but you need to accept that they are reasonable people looking at facts and coming up with a different interpretation.

          • matcha_addict@lemy.lol
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            10 months ago

            helping the poor actually harms the poor

            That’s supposed to be a reasonable argument worth entertaining? By that logic, trump violated the Constitution to protect! Do we have to accept that as a reasonable position too, even if we don’t agree?

      • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        10 months ago

        Ok. So here’s the situation then. In the US, a person that shouldn’t be eligible for candidacy is not only running, but leading the Republican primary. In Venezuela, a person that would similarly harm their country is banned from running.

        • No_Ones_Slick_Like_Gaston@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          22
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          She is barred from office because the Venezuelan supreme court is the legal arm of Nicolas Maduro’s Regime. On the other side IQ45 attempted a coup and that makes him ineligible to hold office.

            • No_Ones_Slick_Like_Gaston@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              10 months ago

              We can’t fix for what we can’t vote in either country. Neither Venezuela or the US of A has a method, limits or guardrails to what these people could do. Also, not a fan of this concept where if the US fix the Supreme Court can meddle anywhere in the world, that view is colonialist AF.

              • Shyfer@ttrpg.network
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                10 months ago

                Now they’re going to make Venezuela people poorer for not fixing problems we can’t even fix in our damn country? It seems hypocritical. Hell, people should sanction us for allowing a fascist insirrectiomist run for President against the law ofnour Constitution. That’s way worse for the world.

          • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            I’m not saying I support Moduro, only that I think this is a decision that will protect the most vulnerable people from aggressive and brutal privatization. There are some pretty good parties in the opposition, but Come Venezuela should not be allowed. It would be disastrous for an already struggling country.

    • Wodge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      10 months ago

      Well not only does he have shitty policies, he did also attempt a coup. Which is why he should be barred from running.

      Stop attempting the false equivalence, it’s not working.

      • Shyfer@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Her party tried to rob a military arsenal, she was charged with a conspiracy and corruption, and so she can’t run. It went through their courts. It all seems legal, considering people in the US can’t run for similar reasons. It might be corrupt, idk, but the US doesn’t have a leg to stand on with corrupt courts. Why sanction other countries, which always affects the regular citizens, for this stuff we can’t even figure out ourselves?

    • NovaPrime@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      Yes, because he’s a traitor, fraud, and criminal. Your question is not quite the gotcha you think it is.

      • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        It wasn’t intended as a gotcha. I wanted a baseline to know whether the conversation was worth continuing.

    • gedaliyah@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      Yes, because he has been impeached and indicted multiple times for charges related to violations of the oath of office of the presidency.

      What are Machado’s crimes that she should be barred?

      • Shyfer@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        From what I can tell, conspiracy (against the government), inciting violent protests, and corruption. It’s weird they don’t say it in the article. But she says the protests were supposed to be peaceful and some of the conspiracy evidence was faked, which it might be, idk, I wasn’t in the court room.

        But considering the US is still doing shit like this, I could see why they have to be paranoid.

      • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        10 months ago

        I don’t think a democratic process should be limited to only banning people that broke the law. Someone that intentionally wants to harm people through excessive austerity like Machado and Milei shouldn’t be able to run.

        Remember, Hitler was elected. If a democratic process can’t stop a person like that from running, then the democratic process is failed.

        • NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          This all sounds nice until you realize that a system like this would be easily abused. “I’m sorry, but the one candidate that actually stands a chance against me is banned because the courts full of judges I appointed has determined that their policies are harmful.”

          Who gets to be the arbiter of what policies are acceptable and what are not? Let the voters decide for themselves.

          • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            10 months ago

            The system can be made robust though. Implementation is also important, and I’m just one person so I’m not going create that framework for an Internet discussion. The question that the framework should rely on power: is the candidate advocating for a distribution of power, or a centralization of power? Privatization seeks to centralize power, for example.

            • NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              10 months ago

              State capitalism also centralizes power. It’s just centralized with the government instead of a monied class. I don’t think that’s necessarily a problem if there is a robust electoral system and a low level of corruption but I feel based upon everything I’ve read about Venezuela that they’re lacking in both.

              • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                10 months ago

                The conversation drifted to theory rather than current conditions, so I chose to go in the direction of my idealized version of what this framework would look like. You’re right, as an ML nation there is still a centralization of power in Venezuela. I don’t have the answers for Venezuela, only the people of Venezuela do. However, I think the court made the right decision on behalf of the people, even if I disagree with the undemocratic nature of their courts.

          • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            10 months ago

            I can make reductionist arguments too:

            Okay, so you believe it was a good thing that Hitler was elected.