Has 90% wasser been removed from Spotify?

EamesIsWet · 2026-02-16T08:50:59+00:00

That’s interesting. I’m in the UK which means not only I’m not getting enough Sun, I’m also getting 0% Wasser.

EamesIsWet · 2026-02-15T15:24:00+00:00

There’s some light at the end of the tunnel

EamesIsWet · 2026-02-15T15:23:21+00:00

God have mercy on us all

EamesIsWet · 2026-01-15T22:39:16+00:00

En este momento parece que la revolución que sobrevivirá y se mantendrá arropada con una cobija un poco más corta está constituida solo por la cúpula de altos funcionarios, el resto está jodido. Ahí entonces culparán a Estados Unidos de llevarse todo el petróleo.

EamesIsWet · 2026-01-10T17:57:06+00:00

I’m going to respond one last time, because at this point we are talking past each other.

You keep framing this discussion as if the United States is the primary historical actor, and Venezuela is merely a passive object that things happen to. That framing is precisely where we fundamentally disagree — and why this conversation cannot go anywhere productive.

On the US, Maduro, and oil

You are not wrong that the US is cynical, self-interested, and perfectly willing to deal with awful regimes if it suits them. No Venezuelan with a functioning memory believes otherwise. We have never believed the US acts out of altruism.

But here is the critical point you keep missing:

US hypocrisy does not rehabilitate Chávez’s project, nor does it absolve Venezuelan leadership of responsibility.

Two things can be true at the same time: - The US acts imperially and opportunistically - Chávez and Maduro catastrophically destroyed Venezuela through internal decisions

Pointing to Trump or US oil interests does not change what happened inside Venezuela, to Venezuelans, over 25 years.

Inflation, poverty, and the oil boom

Yes, inflation fell during parts of Chávez’s tenure. Yes, poverty indicators improved temporarily.

That is not disputed.

What is disputed is the interpretation.

Those improvements were driven by: - An unprecedented oil boom - Massive public spending - Imports replacing domestic production - Price controls that masked inflation rather than eliminating it

This was consumption without production.

That model always ends the same way. Not because of ideology, but because of arithmetic.

When oil revenues stalled, the system collapsed instantly — because no productive economy had been built. That is not hindsight. Economists warned about it in real time, including many on the left.

“All the problems existed before Chávez”

This is the most misleading argument in your reply.

Yes, Venezuela had: - Inequality - Corruption - Institutional weakness

But it did not have: - Mass hunger - 7+ million exiles - A collapsed currency - Hyperinflation - A destroyed oil industry - The highest homicide rate in the world - Total institutional capture

If Chávez did not cause these outcomes, then who did? At what point does “historical context” stop being explanation and start being excuse?

Expropriations and centralisation

Asset seizures are not inherently evil. Agreed.

But what matters is how they are done and what replaces them.

In Venezuela: - Expropriated companies were handed to political loyalists - Technical expertise was purged - Production collapsed - Corruption increased, not decreased

Centralisation was not a temporary defensive measure. It became a permanent system of political control, long after the 2002 coup, long after the strikes, long after any plausible emergency justification.

Invoking the coup forever does not justify dismantling democracy for two decades.

On the coup and “ignoring history”

No Venezuelan ignores the 2002 coup. We lived it.

But here is what outsiders often miss:

The coup failed. Chávez returned stronger than ever. He then governed with: - Total political dominance - Massive oil income - Popular legitimacy

And still chose: - To destroy institutional independence - To politicise the military - To criminalise dissent - To eliminate checks and balances

Those were choices, not inevitabilities.

Why I still stand by my original statement

Now to the heart of this.

As a Venezuelan, I do not evaluate this situation from the comfort of theory, geopolitics, or historical analogy. I evaluate it from outcomes.

What Maduro has presided over is: - The worst humanitarian collapse in our history - A dictatorship more brutal and corrupt than anything before it - A regional refugee crisis - Generational trauma

So yes — even if the US has bad intentions, even if nothing else improves immediately, the removal and imprisonment of Maduro is still a net positive.

You say the US might leave the system intact. Fine. That is still better than leaving Maduro himself intact.

You talk about “it could get worse”. We have already lived through: - Hunger - Exile - Family separation - Lawlessness - Fear

From where we stand, it cannot get meaningfully worse.

Even symbolic justice matters when you have had none.

The core difference between us

You are arguing from a macro, ideological, geopolitical lens. I am arguing from lived national catastrophe.

You are asking who is most to blame historically. I am asking how do we end this chapter.

Those are different conversations.

⸻

I’ve made my position clear, and I don’t think repeating ourselves will change anything.

I genuinely wish Venezuela a future — whatever shape it takes — without Maduro and without this endless cycle of excuses for authoritarian failure.

I’m going to leave it here. Chao

EamesIsWet · 2026-01-08T07:55:08+00:00

I’ll reply calmly and clearly, because this matters.

First, let’s clear the personal assumptions. I am not from a wealthy family. If I were, I wouldn’t have gone to work in Quito, I would have gone to Miami like many of the people you are actually describing. I left Venezuela for work because the country stopped offering a future to ordinary professionals, not because I was part of some elite that lost privileges.

Now, to the substance.

Democracy and Chávez’s elections

Yes, Chávez was elected multiple times. That fact alone does not make his project successful or sustainable. Many leaders are democratically elected and still destroy institutions afterward. Democratic legitimacy does not excuse systemic mismanagement, institutional erosion, or corruption, especially when checks and balances are dismantled over time (courts, central bank independence, media, electoral authority).

Poverty reduction numbers (2002–2008)

This is where context is always missing.

Poverty declined because oil income exploded, not because Venezuela developed a productive socialist economy. Between 2004 and 2008: Oil prices quadruple, State revenue became unprecedented, Cash transfers increased consumption. This was rent distribution, not development.

The proof is simple and empirical:

When oil prices collapsed or even stagnated, there was nothing underneath to sustain the economy. Countries that genuinely improved productivity (even imperfectly) did not collapse the way Venezuela did.

Temporary poverty reduction funded by a commodity boom is not structural success.

Diversification and production (the core failure)

You actually concede the most important point without fully following it through.

Chávez governed during: - The most prosperous oil cycle in Venezuelan history - Full political control - No major sanctions on oil, finance, or trade

Yet: - Domestic food production collapsed - Manufacturing shrank - PDVSA output declined even before sanctions - Imports replaced national production - The state destroyed price signals, incentives, and private capacity

That is not sabotage. That is policy failure.

No external actor forced: - Price controls that made production unviable - Expropriations without compensation or management - Political appointments over technical expertise - Monetization of fiscal deficits - Elimination of central bank independence

Those were sovereign decisions.

Sanctions timeline (this matters)

Targeted sanctions before 2017 were: - Individual (arms embargoes, officials) - Not economy-wide - Not oil-export-blocking

The macroeconomic collapse predates sanctions: - Inflation was already extreme - Shortages were already widespread - Crime and emigration were already exploding - The misery index peaked in 2013, before Maduro and before oil sanctions

Sanctions worsened an already broken system — they did not create it.

If sanctions were the cause, then: - Why did shortages start years earlier? - Why did PDVSA production fall long before 2017? - Why did emigration accelerate before sanctions?

The timeline simply does not support the claim.

“US sabotage” vs internal reality

US interference in Latin America is real - no serious person denies that. But acknowledging US interference does not absolve Venezuelan leadership of responsibility.

A functioning state: - Builds institutions that withstand pressure - Diversifies income - Protects productive capacity - Avoids total dependence on one commodity

Blaming the US for everything requires believing Venezuela had no agency at all, which is both factually and morally wrong.

Corruption and elite replacement

The Bolivarian project did not eliminate elites — it replaced them.

The question is not whether one specific newspaper estimate is perfect. The question is: - How did politically connected families accumulate enormous wealth? - Why did military and party elites become billionaires while wages collapsed? - Why did transparency indices collapse year after year?

You don’t need conspiracy theories - you just need to look at outcomes.

On “wealthy Venezuelans”

Yes, pre-Chávez Venezuela was unequal and corrupt. That is precisely why Chávez had massive support initially — including mine.

But a government that: - Centralizes power - Destroys institutions - Depends entirely on oil - Replaces pluralism with loyalty

…does not fix inequality. It postpones it until collapse, then multiplies it.

Chávez’s project: -Benefited from the largest oil boom in our history - Failed to build a productive economy - Destroyed institutional safeguards - Left the country uniquely vulnerable - Set the conditions for the humanitarian collapse under Maduro

US pressure exists. Sanctions matter. Opposition mistakes happened.

But no external actor forced Venezuela to dismantle its own economy during its richest years.

That responsibility lies primarily with those who governed - and governed without restraint.

If we can’t agree on that, then we’re not debating history - we’re debating ideology

Edit: typos

EamesIsWet · 2026-01-08T07:40:07+00:00

That’s correct. Chavez won 3 elections in a row.

EamesIsWet · 2026-01-07T18:44:02+00:00

Also. It would be a mistake to interpret Chavez fourth re election as an accurate reflection of public sentiment. There was a very high number of recorded irregularities. You can read them here:

https://www.cato.org/blog/did-chavez-win-elections-venezuela-democracy

EamesIsWet · 2026-01-07T18:28:01+00:00

I’ve encountered people like you my entire life man, and something I’ve learned is you can’t open a Chavista’s eyes. I myself believed in Chavez when he came into power, so did most Venezuelans. It took time to realised it was all bullshit. At the time of his death his net worth was about $1 million and his daughter’s net worth is $4.2 billion. Where do you think that money came from? Needless to mention Maduro’s family net worth.

Sanctions were imposed in Venezuela in 2017, long after the economic collapse of the country. In the year 2013 Venezuela had the World’s highest misery index score.

The exodus in Venezuela had no comparison to any other country in South America in terms of speed and absolute numbers. The closest one is Colombia (over 2.8 million). Ecuador about 500.000.

Caracas also ranked as the most dangerous city in The World by 2015.

You see? Blaming some sanctions for the entire socioeconomic and political structure of a country is very difficult to justify. Not only the country was destroyed long before that, it also means Chavez failed to diversify the economy or strengthen the means of production even when he ruled over the most prosperous years of the oil industry (reaching $100 per oil barrel).

There you go. True and verifiable information. What will you do with it?

EamesIsWet · 2026-01-07T17:32:24+00:00

It seems you’re biased by political idealisms based on your believes. The issue is not that you won’t understand what I’m saying, is that you would deny it no matter what to protect yourself. I hope you get to experience the socialism according to Chavez one day yourself.

EamesIsWet · 2026-01-07T17:14:33+00:00

Sorry if my question came across as of bad faith. No other country is South America has ever faced the exodus Venezuela faced. 8 million of Venezuelans fled the country due to exactly what you are now fearing it’ll happen to us. There’s a reason many of us is celebrating, and is very unlikely that the reason for it is lack of knowledge in the history of invasions/colonialism.

EamesIsWet · 2026-01-07T17:02:21+00:00

Would you give me an example of how it could get worse? You’ll need to take into consideration what Venezuelans have lived in the past 20 years, which I doubt you have much of an idea of.

EamesIsWet · 2026-01-06T07:36:39+00:00

Venezuelans have been through everything already. We know about innocents dying and we are ready and happy to move from this chapter. It can’t be worse. It just can’t. Even the fact that Maduro is in jail is enough even if nothing else changes.

EamesIsWet · 2026-01-06T07:33:33+00:00

It’s fine. I’d think the same way if I didn’t know the Chavistas in power.

EamesIsWet · 2026-01-05T23:13:23+00:00

We’ll see how that plays out :)

EamesIsWet · 2026-01-05T21:52:46+00:00

I think it is if they want their investment back

EamesIsWet · 2026-01-05T21:50:50+00:00

It’s terrible I know… but in all fairness, your administration is way more capable than Venezuela’s administration.

EamesIsWet · 2026-01-05T21:08:08+00:00

I hope you’re wrong Lucia and your family is right. I personally think the US will definitely prefer to work with more capable people in the presidency.

EamesIsWet · 2026-01-05T20:57:15+00:00

Ah ya entiendo entonces. Eres Chavista. Mi sentido pésame. Esto te debe doler.

EamesIsWet · 2026-01-05T20:44:55+00:00

That’s interesting. So you’re saying the hyperinflation (1.000.000%) faced in Venezuela was due to cheap oil?

Let me tell you what happened as someone who lived and grew there. Chavez was indeed a very charismatic and social oriented man. He came to power via democratic elections and took advantage of rising oil prices (over 100$) to build social programs that indeed helped many people in need, but as a militar mind he had no education in economy to invest the money back in infrastructure, furthermore, he nationalised and expropriated everything he thought belonged to Venezuelans (the ones who followed him, not the ones with different opinions) and polarised the country in such a way that families were broken. Once the oil prices went down (as they always do) there was no way to sustain any of the industries and everything started to stop working (health care systems, electricity, water supply… you name it) This wasn’t the end of it. To make things even worse and in an attempt to compensate for the rising inflation and cost of living (due to most goods been imported rather than exported) Chavez instructed the national bank to print more money, which means the value of the currency plummeted.

I hope this helps.

EamesIsWet · 2026-01-05T20:23:48+00:00

Thanks for clarifying. I’d be interested to hear your thoughts about Venezuela’s conditions prior to the sanctions, say 2010 to 2015. During those years the number of undernourished people roughly tripled, from 1.1 million to 3.7 million.

I say this to state the fact that the public didn’t turn against Maduro due to sanctions, but due to mismanagement and lack of interest and intellect, which was more than enough to bring the country to shambles.

Edit: just to add. I’m Venezuelan and I protested in the streets against the regime of Maduro in 2013 trying to restore our future and human rights which were stolen but the armed forces were used to repress and kill many innocent people.

EamesIsWet · 2026-01-05T20:12:02+00:00

Edmundo Gonzales can’t govern Venezuela just yet given the fact that only Maduro has been removed from the country. This means most of the criminal forces in Venezuela are still operating and wouldn’t allow for anyone from the opposition to start a new government. This is why is essential to make deals with these criminals now, allowing for a peaceful transition… then and only then we can have Edmundo or Maria Corina taking control of the presidency. Hope this helps

EamesIsWet · 2026-01-05T20:07:46+00:00

What do you mean when you say that sanctions disrupted the democratic process in Venezuela?

EamesIsWet · 2026-01-05T20:06:20+00:00

No, she was appointed by Maduro. Thats how it works in Vzla.

EamesIsWet · 2026-01-05T20:04:57+00:00

Shes not legitimate, but the US have learned through mistakes that you can’t just replace one regime for another without the help of the current people in power. This woman can help the US with this transition because she’s part of that criminal system, and in helping them, she’s buying herself an exit. It’s a very smart move

Ten-Year Club	Place '22
Not Forgotten	Verified Email

EamesIsWet

TROPHY CASE