There has been some talk of Venezuela somehow posing a threat to the United States. This is part of a familiar pattern that we have witnessed in the past. It is being suggested that Regime Change is necessary.
For many months now, Venezuela has been in the midst of a horrific economic collapse. For those unfamiliar with the subject, the following Youtube video speaks volumes: (Contains violence)
It appears Venezuela poses no threat to anyone other than its own citizens and yet, Western leaders have already begun calling for “regime change” in the collapsing country.
It’s assumed to be necessary and in everyone’s best interest. Is such a thing really necessary? How has invading other countries and enacting regime change worked out in the past?
The right way to control others
A recent Bloomberg article makes a startling assumption that there exists “The right way to do regime change in Venezuela”.
The right way? There is a right way to overthrow an elected leader and direct the affairs of a foreign nation? How does this idea make any sense? Why does anyone need to enact regime change in Venezuela, or in any country for that matter?
Rhetorical questions aside, a very real and direct question must also be asked: why now? Months have gone by without anyone even caring that Venezuela exists.
People have been starving amidst anarchy-like conditions and now, all of the sudden, an impetus for regime change has arisen? What has sparked this great humanitarian urge?
Follow the money
As they say, when asking the question of who benefits, it’s wise to Follow The Money. The Wall Street Journal and others have reported that Venezuela plans to stop using the petrodollar system (the US dollar is the world's reserve currency and must be used by other nations to exchange for oil).
Given that Venezuela is a major oil-producing country, and the third largest exporter of oil to America, this is no small ordeal.
There have been other instances in recent history where Western forces have decided to enact “regime change.” Take the regimes of Hussein and Gadaffi, for example. What did they have in common? Hussein had begun selling oil without using the dollar as an intermediary.
Gadaffi was planning to launch a gold-backed Libyan Dinar currency that would be seen as very desirable, much more so than the dollar. Is there a similar motive behind the recent attitude toward Venezuela?
Again, follow the money – the petrodollar and central banking system. When viewed through this lens, geopolitical events of the 21st century come into focus much more clearly. Will NATO and America decide to invade Venezuela? Do the starving people need humanitarian regime change to save them from themselves? Only time will tell.
