MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
After the megalomaniac years of Chavez Venezuela is ready for a sober Maduro
By R. Viswanathan (*) - The election of Nicolas Maduro, the chosen heir of Chavez, in last Sunday’s election, is good news for the peaceful and orderly transition of Venezuela after the abnormal, autocratic and quixotic rule of Chavez in the last fourteen years. If Capriles had won, the change would have been abrupt and traumatic for the Chavistas who might not have given up power so easily without some messy fight. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesWhat this writer is saying is, “ Maduro is no Chavez. He will need to very carefully walk the tightrope as he cannot afford one mis-step with the military eager to oust an unpopular, president, without the support or charisma that Chavez had. A strong opposition will build popularity to become the majority if Maduro initiates anything unpopular. It is inevitable, his days are numbered”.
Apr 18th, 2013 - 12:09 am - Link - Report abuse 0Chavez' supporters are no longer. Cuba's Castro brothers will be gone soon, and their economy will look to the US and China for investment and trade.
Argentina'a economy is shattered and a shaky, desperate ,CFK will look for other friends when there is no oil forthcoming from Maduro. Mercosur will fall apart as Argentina gets more protectionist, Uruguay drifts away, and Brazil rejects it, altogether.
And then, all of the sudden, you wake up...
Apr 18th, 2013 - 12:19 am - Link - Report abuse 0It is an interesting piece and probably what will happen.
Apr 18th, 2013 - 12:30 am - Link - Report abuse 0@2 Stevie
Apr 18th, 2013 - 04:33 am - Link - Report abuse 0What do you predict ?
Are we are talking of the same bloke, the one that talked to the plastic bird sitting on his straw hat!
Apr 18th, 2013 - 07:06 am - Link - Report abuse 0I am still going for the brutal way of control: the bus driver never showed any statesmanship throughout the whole campaign.
Apr 18th, 2013 - 02:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Wishful thinking from a knowledgeable outsider.
'Maduro’s lousy start - A narrow, tainted election victory is a fitting epitaph for his rotten predecessor. But Venezuela is on the brink'
Apr 18th, 2013 - 05:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21576399-narrow-tainted-election-victory-fitting-epitaph-his-rotten-predecessor-venezuela
7 Steve-33-uk
Apr 18th, 2013 - 06:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I think this article is nearer the truth of the matter.
Interesting choice of words from the Economist. Very unusual, they always manage to keep their masks on else...
Apr 18th, 2013 - 08:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0They must be very upset, I bet they were already doing another type of math.
Hahahaha
9 Stevie
Apr 18th, 2013 - 09:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Well, you are as you say, not Guzz.
Guzz was training to be a Marine Engineer and understood what mathematics is, unlike you. Still haven’t answered the question, have you?
And yes, The Economist (I used to have a subscription) does understand mathematics also.
Never mind little one, someone, somewhere, might love you one day.
But I wouldn’t hold my breath if I were you.
10
Apr 18th, 2013 - 09:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0You and your talk about this Guzz character.
Well, he isn't here, I am, and I know all the math I need in order to deal with you lot.
What happened to your Guzz, anyway?
11 Stevie
Apr 19th, 2013 - 05:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0He moved more and more to the left and became more and more frenetic in defence of AR so I think he must have disappeared up his cuelo.
So if I were you (thank God I am not, from an atheist) I would be careful how fast I turned round.
As regards mathematics you have still to answer the question: mmm does this mean you do NOT know the answer? I bet it does.
LOLs
What question Chris?
Apr 19th, 2013 - 05:29 pm - Link - Report abuse 0How can I, again, be of assistance to your personal development?
Tell me, Chris.
13 Stevie
Apr 20th, 2013 - 12:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Given that you appear not to know the basics of mathematics (clue: not arithmetic) and you are a full-on leftie with delusions of a politically united SA in spite of the evidence to the contrary: not a damn thing.
No doubt, as usual, there will be a smart arse reply. Go ahead.
Hearsays and desperate Brits isn't evidence of anything Chris.
Apr 20th, 2013 - 12:23 pm - Link - Report abuse 0A mate told me to tell you to check out the branch in mathematics called order theory, that would clear your thoughts according to him. I wouldn't know...
@15 Stevie
Apr 20th, 2013 - 04:28 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Ah! Good old ‘Order Theory’. I shall enjoy this.
Your fluid friend Mate (did you see what I did there?) needed to qualify his comment with ‘as long as he can accept that some of it ends in contradiction’.
Basically he is using binary relationships. I won’t go into detail for fear of boring those with a brain to death – so no fear of that for you.
One of the interesting features of this branch of mathematics is the ‘Axiom of choice’ which to the beginner can seem to be the intuitive way to go, until they come to the ‘Banach-Tarski paradox’.
In essence it proves that a solid ball in three dimensional space can be split into a finite number of non-overlapping pieces which can then be reassembled in a different manner to produce two IDENTICAL COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL SPHERE!
I am not 100% sure but I think the theory ignores the fact that ALL solid objects are, in reality, nothing of the sort and are mainly composed of ‘nothing’. Ask your Mate about that one.
He says that in set theory you'll find even more questions, as to how you can divide an amount into an infinite amount of subsets. But he doesn't agree with the theorem, because of the fact that the subsets, in the original theory, aren't solids as your inicial materia. Furthermore, he says, the mostely vague proof requires a condition that leaves a desire for a more general explaination.
Apr 20th, 2013 - 06:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Me, I don't know what you are talking about...
17 Stevie
Apr 21st, 2013 - 03:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Well you may not but your mate certainly seems to, that is why I deride the whole thing.
No need for derison.
Apr 21st, 2013 - 05:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I think he means that the Axiom can only be proven within the scope of finity and thus can not be applied when proving the theorem, but has to be invoked as you divide a finite amount into infinite amount of smaller pieces.
He furthermore understands the validity of the Axiom, but in this particular case, he disagrees with you, as it, as you say, results in a paradox.
What ARE you guys talking about???
18 ChrisR
Apr 21st, 2013 - 06:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I am an engineer used to designing things such as structures, domestic gas equipment, agricultural machinery, oil terminal equipment and that is without power electrics and electronic designs.
If I had the laxity in my designs as CAN exist in Order Theory I may end up seriously hurting or even killing people. That is why I deride the theorem.
I could use one of you...
Apr 21st, 2013 - 08:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0;)
Troy what I find that will be an interesting scenario is that all off Venezuela's economy is based on oil. With the downward projection of prices over the longterm period, that does not hold well for Maduro. How is he continue to support the Bolivarian communist nations and Cuba while at the same time provide token handouts to the populace and make minute infrastructure improvements during declining oil prices? I think Maduro will be flapping in the wind with more fury than the national ensign.
Apr 22nd, 2013 - 03:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!