You point to various wrongs committed elsewhere in the world when the discussion was about whether there is Authoritarian rule in Venezuela. I interpret the def

You point to various wrongs committed elsewhere in the world when the discussion was about whether there is Authoritarian rule in Venezuela. I interpret the deflection as a silent acknowledgement. You aren’t even attempting to convey any sense of non-authoritarian rule (freedom of press, independent judiciary, no demonizing of opposition, use of law by the executive, clear separation between executive and military etc). All you are doing is saying “yes but what about X”. Is there or is there not a reasonable independent media in Venezuela? It’s as a simple as that! If there is (including for foreign “imperialist” interests of course!) then I’d say the country is under authoritarian rule. Perhaps the world is being lied to and the smelly imperialist orgs like RSF make up these lies about disappearing journalists and suppressed opposition media? I think the key thing here is: non-authoritarianism would mean (for example) free press and of course opposition. That in turn obviously includes media and opposition pushing what can be seen as foreign interests (what you’d call imperialist). Taken together that means: Venezuela has two options: either thriving pro-US media and political organizations OR authoritarian and undemocratic rule. Which one is it?