I agree Maduro is essentially a despot and is creating more harm than good for the people of Venezuela, but this act and the mindset of Trump puts him in the same category of Madura as being a dictator and a thug. Big oil in this country should focus on the developing alternative fuels including fusion !! We should not be war mongering like Putin !
There is a particular honesty in your refusal to dress power up as principle. You stay with the record long enough for it to speak, and what it says is not complicated, only uncomfortable: language shrinks until profit can pass through it unchallenged.
What I appreciate is the way you let continuity do the work. This does not read as an aberration or a scandal; it reads as habit, as inheritance. The oil is less the object than the excuse, a familiar grammar through which force remembers itself.
You carefully trace continuity rather than spectacle, this doesn’t read as outrage-first, but rather as a slow unmasking of how language, law, and force keep sliding into each other. I’m left thinking less about Trump as anomaly and more about how easily “corporate loss” keeps reappearing as “national grievance” once memory thins and power concentrates. The piece leave a residue: a question about how long consent can be assumed when the pretense finally drops.
I agree Maduro is essentially a despot and is creating more harm than good for the people of Venezuela, but this act and the mindset of Trump puts him in the same category of Madura as being a dictator and a thug. Big oil in this country should focus on the developing alternative fuels including fusion !! We should not be war mongering like Putin !
History has set a presidence for taking lands, breaking treatise especially in non white nations
There is a particular honesty in your refusal to dress power up as principle. You stay with the record long enough for it to speak, and what it says is not complicated, only uncomfortable: language shrinks until profit can pass through it unchallenged.
What I appreciate is the way you let continuity do the work. This does not read as an aberration or a scandal; it reads as habit, as inheritance. The oil is less the object than the excuse, a familiar grammar through which force remembers itself.
You carefully trace continuity rather than spectacle, this doesn’t read as outrage-first, but rather as a slow unmasking of how language, law, and force keep sliding into each other. I’m left thinking less about Trump as anomaly and more about how easily “corporate loss” keeps reappearing as “national grievance” once memory thins and power concentrates. The piece leave a residue: a question about how long consent can be assumed when the pretense finally drops.
Interesting !