The Washington Post sure knows how to very carefully nibble around the edges when it comes to criticizing the economic system that brought disaster to a country. In this case, the Post's editorial board managed to severely criticize Venezuela for being a complete economic failure despite have the largest known oil reserves of any nation in the world. It had to be an incredibly disastrous economic system to bring such a nation so low that now it is running out of food, toilet paper, and beer. So do you think the Washington Post editorial named that system? Nope. Instead they very carefully avoided any mention of that giant elephant in the room.
By most measures, Venezuela is already a failed state: Amid crippling shortages of food, medicine, power and water, every societal ailment is soaring. Inflation is headed toward 700 percent, and the murder rate is probably the world’s second-highest, after El Salvador’s. According to the New York Times, deaths of infants under a month old in public hospitals are 100 times more common than three years ago, while a coalition of nongovernmental organizations says at least 200,000 people with chronic illnesses lack the medications for them.
So, um, could you mention the economic system that destroyed Venezuela so other nations will know to avoid it like the plague?
The regime has refused to adopt measures that might stanch the economic hemorrhaging, such as adjusting an exchange rate system that values the dollar at a fraction of its market value.
Yeah, right. A small band aid such as adjusting the exchange rate system will make things feel so much better. Of course, God forbid we name the economic system that caused such an astounding collapse. Taboo! Taboo!
The United States and Venezuela’s neighbors should demand that Mr. Maduro seek humanitarian aid to address shortages of food and medicine — something it has senselessly refused to do...
Just as senseless as the Washington Post editorial board refusing to name the economic culprit. SOCIALISM. Say it! SAAAY IT!!!
Did not one person on their editorial board bring up the taboo word? If not, that would indicate the Washington Post is in desperate need of political diversity.
