Second page III

Resentment is something very tight to our society over these years. The kind I'm bringing it up is the immigrant kind. Those who left the country are in its majority resentful on anything related somehow to the government and, based on what it's missing in them, they do have point. We’re here because we lost something. I just wonder if there might be a chance that some of such resentment may have been taken from the media's deconstruction, and I wonder about it because it is a bit hard for me to be convinced that a huge group of people can have the same opinion over the same thing embracing the same feeling. I mean, a way for that, it occurs to me, such a thing get to happen; is through indoctrination, but the point is that most people feel it is spontaneous, and with that inside your head, it is hard to break it down. Every argument that is swallowed entirely leads to a conviction that takes you to a fanatic state. I was thinking about those famous "two minutes of hate". I see  this resentment of ours  to a certain point, that way. I mean, media brought these thesis to, let's say, justify, in a way, that what took the country to the crisis, and what forced so many people to leave, might hold several people accountable. Media needs to sell a narrative convincing enough to their consumers, that they can understand it as a political problem, and, very important,  that it could have been prevented by choosing different when it came to vote. Politicians need believers and, a way to preserve them, is through blame. Whatever happened must be someone’s fault. Social media brought up these theories then: one of those was, that people then got tired of the political establishment before Chavez's era; and therefore pushed for this change that ended up in a disaster, phrasing it in a way, that those who once believed in the dictator, couldn't see what was coming with such political turn. The other one was more like a segregate type. The other one went on stating that ignorant people,  and by ignorant they meant the poor and the uneducated; and by uneducated they mean those who did not go to college; blinded by their alleged resentment (not the same resentment from the present days, and that is interesting too) instead of keeping up with the political establishment,  went and voted for Chávez. Both theories shows a reality where regular people had some power, indeed, of setting the path for the future of the country, and by choosing wrong (understanding wrong as Chavez's movement) such a promising future allegedly heading with the former political crew, lost its chance of achievement.
 
Many people bought those theories at their own  convenience.  Those who once believed in Chávez support this argument in which they were promised something it did not become true. It is more like they were scammed. If we think about it, it is so interesting and intriguing realizing that there are in fact people out there convinced that they could have done it otherwise but they were fooled by the political power, or worse; by a politician. I suppose that those are the same people who think that taking basic English classes will make recruiters consider them for high position roles. Now the others are something else. First, we can't know that for sure, but assuming they stand from a position of truth,  these ones have always claimed they never voted for Chávez; and that they never believed in him, which is something that, judging by how everything ended up, they were right from their angle,  so they have been taking pride ever since to a point that they see themselves elevated, or distinguished, from the ignorant kind (which means everyone else) and of course; those were mostly who started leaving the country. That sort of dichotomy was well sold. Some people feel regret from what I think it is an induced guilt, and some others stick with their anger as pride.
 
As time went by those arguments became pretty much the only logical explanation for understanding the disaster.  The deconstruction was total. But what if we take a few more glances, I mean. We can allow ourselves to wonder, for instance, who paid for Chávez appearances on national TV? Who paid for all those trips to Cuba? He started campaigning not so long after he was discharged from prison. All the media who interviewed him when he was in jail, I mean. Do you guys really think that voting had something to do with it? Do you think it ever mattered whether you believed in him or not?  Chávez held meetings with almost every single important ruler of his time: from Bill Clinton to Saddam Hussein. From the Queen of England to Fidel Castro and so on. Was it there any important protest from the media, or those who didn't believe in him then, when he reformed the constitution? Chávez arose because Real Power wanted him there. Wherever such real power comes from, which is not my intention to talk about. Power is power, Cercei would say. The thing is that these arguments won't cover all the doubts but people agreed with them only because of the social media rephrase, and while one group points out at the other for their self glorification, the obvious consensus should be that we're all to blame but not for any choosing, but for thinking that it has been an actual cause of it. It seems only a minority is willing to accept it. In the meantime,  every new immigrant must adapt his story to one of these thesis. Every immigrant who might have agreed with any project of Chávez, regardless how quickly that person stopped it,  or came around, must, either deny it like he never did it, or carry with such a burden and acknowledge his regret. We are going to hear a lot about it until the deconstruction turns these conceptions into a new gate of perception. Just like they've been doing within the music business. 

Second page II

 

A thought as a puzzle, as a piece of a puzzle. It doesn't need to be. However, it could be for further intentions. What about those thoughts linked to a feeling. such as Nostalgia? Saudade, like the Portuguese. What about them? They could turn into data as well and therefore they can get deconstructed.  Get, yes, always get. Interesting word. We might guess then that if any of the feelings we have linked to a thought can rephrase its essence, Morality itself can be turned as wanted. These are times when Morality can be reshaped, so do beliefs. And I'm still trying to inhale my smoke Faith and exhale my smoke will with this breath I can't catch but I never stop chasing, because I know that despite of the smoke, my faith and my will somehow flow within.

 

Four years have gone by. We decided it after the big power outage in March of 2019. We should have done it earlier but that's never been us; Venezuelans were used to stay together with their families but even family can be broken down from the power. The government,  the Venezuelan government. It's hard to explain it given the differences with other countries'. In 1999 the constitution was changed; a new way of democracy has risen. A democracy where the president has more power than any other institution.  Of course: how could such a thing have been done? By elections.  Elections are the weapon that threatens free will. Ironic,  right? One of the first thing that the new constitution brought was the new distribution of Power. The election office was, let's say, elevated to a State Power. You see. I read once that in some other countries this division is not called power but administration,  or public administration. In Venezuela the word it was always used is Power, so the Power, formerly divided in three, got then divided by five, and the elections office was named then The Electoral Power. I'm not going to say that this was the cause of the crisis. It had something to do, of course, but a lot of things happened and there are a lot of information better exposed  and explained about it. I just want to show this as an example of deconstruction. Elections are worldwide known (or shown) as one pillar of democracy, or so we thought before the disaster.  Now Venezuelans have a different approach.  The opposition and government acolytes started breaking down several definitions so people's perception could  rephrase their understanding, all these through Social media; forth generation war, they called it. There were intense moments, along with a waterfall of decisions made in order to undermine whatever concept of freedom we had, and always in the name of democracy. One of the most important TV  Channels was shut down from national broadcasting. On one side we talked about a shut down and on the other they claimed it was a no renewal of the contract.  You see: concepts and broken down definitions.

 

Years before that, the government released this plan called Exchange Control, in which every foreign currency exchange must be done through the government's administration.  People got used to two exchange rates: the official one and the black market one. This economic plan took the country to one of the biggest depression ever, forcing people to rethink their lives. Politicians from both sides took advantage of this, of course. An advantage that went for a division. They got what they wanted: thousands of people fighting each other over their political beliefs. Yes, this big rephrase made people see this as a political belief! Society got divided in Chavistas and Opositores. The first ones supported the government and the second ones, the opposition.  As the crisis rises, people started moving out. For those who stayed, they stood for smoke faith and smoke will on politicians, I presume.  A lot has been said about everyone but the thing is that those who left, have left something that social media hasn't yet defined but that I’m thinking about it, it may not go by any sort of definition. Perhaps it’s more like a cheap trick of misdirection. We, specially the Generation X ones, got, with the assistance of time, and so many personal problems, that beliefs has more to do with power than culture. Social media has set several paths, I want to mention two: the path of the resentment and the path of the new hope. From the resentment, the idea that has been sold is that every single men from the government must pay back, and with that wave of anger, poor people too. Anyone who ever supported the dictator must pay debt somehow because of the suffering of the now immigrants.  From the new hope path, there is this other side trying to sell that people are struggling so hard to get through, and they deserve appreciation.  One side celebrates any sort of punishment,  and the other  celebrates any attempt of support for those who stay and work hard in the country. Working hard has been deconstructed too, from the way I see it. For instance when is Working not hard, I wonder?