‘We will coup whoever we want’: Elon Musk sparks online riot with quip about overthrow of Bolivia’s Evo Morales

submitted by fschmidt from rt.com

all 23 comments
sorted by:
new (suggested)
topinsightfulfun

[–]seyda 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Preventing Latin Americans from electing another disastrous socialist is one of the less evil things the elites have done in a long time.

[–]fschmidt[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Evo Morales wasn't disastrous. I don't think he has much in common with the western Left. Latin America seems different where it is often (but not always) the Right that is the more oppressive.

[–]proc0 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (20 children)

Evo got couped because he wants to be dictator like Chavez, but since the media is communist now, they won't tell people that of course. Imagine siding with a dictator because you believe everything you read. (not to mention obviously Elon was joking, if it was true he wouldn't say it, again sheeple gonna sheep).

[–]Node 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

What if you side with a dictator because their vision of how things should be is the same as yours?

This is obviously not a characteristic of all dictators, but it is for some of them.

[–]proc0 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

Then you're part of the problem that enables corruption to take hold, ensuring millions of people will die. If you then justify the deaths, you're no better than the dictator himself.

[–]Node 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

ensuring millions of people will die.

Every single person who has ever been born is going to die. But the reference to "the problem that enables corruption to take hold" is disparaging preferences?

Perhaps weak leaders who are the opposite of dictators are the real problem. As we've seen, they're typically being operated as puppets for the real powers behind the political facade.

A legitimate dictator holds absolute power over a country, although power is relative in an age of global hegemony.

[–]proc0 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

You're arguing semantics. I don't care what it's called, when people follow someone that wants unchecked, perpetual power, that someone will abuse it. UNCHECKED. PERPETUAL. POWER. I guess if you like having a king, like a medieval peasant, then yeah.

Every single person who has ever been born is going to die

So you're ok with the holocaust then, I take it. What is your point in defending this?

[–]Node 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

So you're ok with the holocaust then,

That was as real as the covidhoax is now. But given the years of unprovoked attacks on Germans by the jews, the Germans waited entirely too long to wake up and attempt to correct the situation. Look what the jews have done since then... The evilness of their tribe has been confirmed on countless occasions by the jews themselves.

I guess if you like having a king,

Would you prefer to be ruled by a king, or a cabal of evil puppeteers pulling the strings behind the scenes? The latter is what we have now, and we know their ethnicity.

As for kings, there have been benevolent kings who ruled their countries as if the people were their own family.

[–]proc0 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Hmm, what about all the other examples of mass murder by one dictator/king/etc? All hoaxes? Or all justified?

The problem is centralized power and authority, especially in institutions or entities that outlive a single individual. So you'll have one benevolent dude for a few decades but sure enough hundreds of evil people are secretely plotting how to take over, and so it becomes inevitable. Then it's a horror show every time, and that is why history has progressed in the direction it has progressed, less centralization of power because it's so risky.

Again, it's the position itself, and the dictators of the 20th century did something even more evil, which is take over democracies, which were meant as decentralization of power. They take over and not only abuse power, but are setting things up for the next evil guy, unless of course war happens.

A king or an evil cabal of puppeteers, is the same -- centralized power. We need to decentralize power as much as possible. What I think has happened is that power is no longer effectively decentralized by our institutions after *[[computers and]] the Internent... coincidentally arriving at the end of WW2. Before the Internet, communication was sloooww and therefore you could still decentralize authority to a great extent. After the Internet, nobody knows WTF is happening, and why people get so easily manipulated, and OF COURSE the bad actors have taken advantage of this, and the result is a regression and decrease back into centralized power.

I don't know where things need to go from here, but it's certainly not more centralized authority of any kind. We probably need to leverage the Internet and go FULL decentralized government, I mean FULL, no one in Washington anymore, just the People and the Constitution (which btw is a huge milestone for decentralizing power), a military that mostly protects, and the Internet.

*:correction, we got computers after WW2, setting things up for the Internet, but this affected all other forms of communication, the idea here is that the world started getting fully connected, and "globalists" I guess are trying to centralize this power.

[–]Node 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Looks like I deleted the paragraph where I invoked both /u/fschmidt and our dear Uncle Ted, and pointed out how correct they are/were about the effects of technology on 'modern' society. Although the former seems to want to keep 'some' technologies. The internet in particular has made control through mass brainwashing easier than ever before, while increasing human separation from nature and reality.

Your dream about decentralized government is a nice one, but you'd first need to do something about the quality levels we're seeing in our species. This is where the fundamental problem lies. To paraphrase a SovCit meme, 'How can a man rule another man?'

The answer is to rule the 'stupids', and to promote their level of malfunction so you have more people to rule. There's no solution to this problem while the 90-99% willingly, and with assistance, bow down to their superiors. Perhaps the scheduled end of this catastrophe cycle within the next 30 years will take us back to tribal life that will go much slower next time.

[–]proc0 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Yeah, even I think that's a long shot that will take an unprecedent event of some kind. I was outlining the ideal solution, but the more likely scenario is a huge catastrophe. Hell, the mainstream culture is uplifiting a cult of chaos and destruction, that only want tear things down, and destroy... if they succeed, they'll destroy, if they fail, it's because they had to be destroyed. Either way it's not looking pretty.

[–]Node 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Aside from the cause, it's looking pretty bleak for the next while. Not everyone believes in the earth catastrophe cycle that's 'theorized' to accompany the polar flip, but it's interesting that it's coinciding with human society going nuts. The 'cosmic disaster' playlist on that site explains the science, and where we are now. The poles had already been set adrift when the 1859 Carrington Event happened, and it made the north pole do an immediate 180 degree reversal of drift direction. If that happens again while our magnetic field is weak, it would wipe out electronics and electricity. There's your huge catastrophe, without needing the micronova and earth crust displacement.

Even if we don't get hit with a CME while our field is down, humans are trending towards an accelerating unraveling that needs no additional help. But there will be help, of course.

[–]fschmidt[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

There's no solution to this problem while the 90-99% willingly, and with assistance, bow down to their superiors.

We are entering a dark age that will last centuries. Religion is weak and culture is strongly dysgenic. Religion needs to recover and then impose eugenic cultural rules, and even then it will require many generations for human genetics to recover.

But there is a solution. Withdraw to some island of sanity like the Mennonite area in north Mexico. The Mennonites don't allow their children internet access, so they grow up sane. I hope to move there soon and then spend much more time on real life interactions, and much less time on the internet.

[–]Node 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I looked at that area and found some articles saying (some of) the Mennonites are fleeing due to cartel violence. I would hesitate to move to a country run by drug cartels, even if there were an island of relative safety and sanity. Although the appeal of that solution probably depends on where you live now.

[–]fschmidt[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Obviously you side with the globalists. Just take their vaccine and everything will be okay.

[–]proc0 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

You're projecting, that's exactly what you are, and what you are doing.

[–]fschmidt[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I assume you speak no Spanish and get all your info from the English-speaking corporate media of the USSA. That is the only explanation for your views that are basically the opposite of the truth.

[–]proc0 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I lived in Bolivia, many years. How about you?

[–]fschmidt[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Not me, but I know Mexico pretty well. What is your opinion of the Mexican president and how does he compare to Evo Morales? I assume they are similar and I support the current Mexican president. What I know about Bolivia is that Morales produced one of the fastest economic growth rates in Latin America and that he was democratically elected and had the election stolen from him. My impression is that the Bolivian elite stole the election with the help of the global elite, much like what happened in the last American election.

[–]proc0 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm not very familiar with Obrador. Economically, from what I've read, it sounds like he falls in the same category of people that want communism to take over in Latin America, but I'm not sure here.

Evo literally thinks he is an Incan emperor, and well, you can't have a democracy if you think you are an emperor. He is the longest sitting president Bolivia had, and was elected 2006... about 15 years, the previous record held by a dictator (Banzer in 1970s).

I'll add this however, I think the descendents of the Incan people need more leaders, and I have no doubt they will be democratically elected, if they show respect for the law and their constitution, instead of attempting to revive an empire. Bo. like many other Latin American nations, was born out of a revolution, and the revolutionary spirit is still there and there is no way that they would go back to any empire Spain or Incan, without bloodshed. Maybe Evo could have peacefully broken up Bolivia, and declared the eastern part as its own nation, or even do a merger with Peru, because that whole area has similar lineage, and then revive the Incan empire that way.