Government by Adverse Possession
Deepstate is trying a new trick in Venezuela. Normally we go in and bomb a country down to bedrock, then install our own puppet to preside over the chaos, then keep pouring in troops to expand the chaos.

This time we're using the old Common Law trick of Adverse Possession.

Traditionally** adverse possession works like this: The real owner has left a property vacant for a long time. Squatters occupy the house and start acting like permanent residents. They repair the house, shovel the snow, respect the neighbors, pay the utilities, obey all laws except for the possession itself. After seven years the squatters are then entitled to claim legal possession.

In Venezuela we started by ASSERTING that the actual current government is now the "former" government. We then ASSERTED that Soros loyalist Guaido is the "interim president" of Venezuela, even though he has no legal claim to the title. Then we began transferring the country's foreign assets (which we had previously STOLEN by refusing to let Maduro repossess them) to Guaido. Then we promoted Guaido from "interim president" to "president" without any change in his actual and totally illegitimate status.

It's nowhere near as honest or benign as the traditional version, but at least it doesn't start with bombs.

= = = = =

Later convective thought: Maduro is all-around stupid, but his worst mistake was FAILING TO ACQUIRE NUKES. Countries with even a few nukes are immune from USA conquest. Castro was smart in all the ways that count. (1) He served his poor people well, preserving natural support. (2) He broke Graybill. He used our blockades and sanctions to develop special skills and industries. (3) He connected with Russia, acquiring vicarious nukes. Maduro failed on all three points.

= = = = =

** Footnote: Small-scale adverse possession is almost universal, and generally happens without any legalistic process. If I accidentally build my fence two feet into your property, and the fence remains without any problems or objections, it's effectively mine. You can legally expect me to maintain the strip of land, and I can't legally expect you to maintain it.

Labels: Answered better than asked

  ¶ 10:00 AM