3 ms·

This is a bit of an aside, but as a geopolitical news junkie, what I keep searching on Google News is: Venezuela election Lula How his government reacts is goi

This is a bit of an aside, but as a geopolitical news junkie, what I keep searching on Google News is: Venezuela election Lula How his government reacts is going to be a major factor. Given Lula's past dedication to Chavezism, his post-election reaction has made me hopeful for change in Venezuela. What is directly related to TFA is that both the USA and Brazil want to see the voting data. https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/biden-lula-discuss-venezuela-election-tuesday-sources-say-2024-07-30/ https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/biden-lula-discuss-ve...

alephnerd 2y ago
> Given Lula's past dedication to (sic) Chavezism Brazil has quasi-presidential system, but it's Chamber of Deputies has the actual power. In the 2000s, Lula's PT was the largest party (usually around 20-25% of the total seats) and could as such strongarm smaller leftist parties into a governing coalition with an absolute majority. Lula won the presidential election in 2022, but his party PT was the 3rd largest, and center-right parties have created a vote sharing agreement with his party. The anti-Bolsonaro center-right parties have 172 seats in the Chamber, Lula's governing coalition has 226. You need 257 to have a majority. This means Lula has to severely tone down his rhetoric otherwise a subset of the independent parties would defect to Bolsonaro's coalition. > but as a geopolitical news junkie As someone who worked in the space, stop. It's a waste of time as you're not in a position to make changes, nor are you reading primary or peer reviewed secondary sources. If you insist on continuing, use a mix of - Academic books (generally HUP, OUP, UCUP though the occasion PUP is alright) - White Papers from top tier think tanks (use the UPenn Rankings [0]) - Axios and Politico - their target readership is aimed directly at those working on the Hill or Hill adjacent Just sticking with these 3 types of resources should be enough. Also, IGNORE anything on Twitter, Reddit, or HN (ironic ik). The lesswrong/credibledefense/zeihan types are all idiots ime. Using an "objective" tone doesn't make rubbish "objective" [0] - https://www.bruegel.org/sites/default/files/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/2020-Global-Go-To-Think-Tank-Index-Report-Bruegel.pdf https://www.bruegel.org/sites/default/files/wp-content/uploa...
- shufflerofrocks 2y ago
  >Also, IGNORE anything on Twitter, Reddit, or HN (ironic ik). The lesswrong/credibledefense/zeihan types are all idiots ime. Using an "objective" tone doesn't make rubbish "objective" Not to mention these sites are FILLED to the brim with bots. Eg. In 2013, the most "reddit-addicted" area was Eglin Air Force Base in Florida, with largest amount of activity [0]. Eglin was one of the few places used in a study for testing social media manipulation by Pentagon [1] And not to mention the Russian/Chinese/Indian bots [0] https://www.reddit.com/r/Blackout2015/comments/4ylml3/reddit_has_removed_their_blog_post_identifying/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Blackout2015/comments/4ylml3/reddit... [1] http://arxiv.org/pdf/1402.5644 http://arxiv.org/pdf/1402.5644
- NikolaNovak 2y ago
  Axios is easy, butdo you mind expanding the acronyms to true newbs in the field? :) BTW, how truly bad is Stratfor really these days?I had a subscription more than a decade ago and appreciated their geopolitical analysis essay format which provided the history, background, big picture, then detail and their forecast. Never cared much if their forecast was on the money, it was the human readable background which I found interesting :)
  - alephnerd 2y ago
    I never actually used Stratfor. They aren't well regarded. The acronyms were University Presses/Publishers - they tend to publish academic books and have higher standards of factualness.
- worstspotgain 2y ago
  > As someone who worked in the space, stop. It's a waste of time as you're not in a position to make changes We need people in the top 25% of the clued range to speak up. Otherwise the loud morons in the bottom 25% are at risk of being taken seriously by the middle 50%. Arguments don't need to be peer-review-quality every time someone speaks.
  - TimedToasts 2y ago
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

alephnerd 2y ago

> Given Lula's past dedication to (sic) Chavezism Brazil has quasi-presidential system, but it's Chamber of Deputies has the actual power. In the 2000s, Lula's PT was the largest party (usually around 20-25% of the total seats) and could as such strongarm smaller leftist parties into a governing coalition with an absolute majority. Lula won the presidential election in 2022, but his party PT was the 3rd largest, and center-right parties have created a vote sharing agreement with his party. The anti-Bolsonaro center-right parties have 172 seats in the Chamber, Lula's governing coalition has 226. You need 257 to have a majority. This means Lula has to severely tone down his rhetoric otherwise a subset of the independent parties would defect to Bolsonaro's coalition. > but as a geopolitical news junkie As someone who worked in the space, stop. It's a waste of time as you're not in a position to make changes, nor are you reading primary or peer reviewed secondary sources. If you insist on continuing, use a mix of - Academic books (generally HUP, OUP, UCUP though the occasion PUP is alright) - White Papers from top tier think tanks (use the UPenn Rankings [0]) - Axios and Politico - their target readership is aimed directly at those working on the Hill or Hill adjacent Just sticking with these 3 types of resources should be enough. Also, IGNORE anything on Twitter, Reddit, or HN (ironic ik). The lesswrong/credibledefense/zeihan types are all idiots ime. Using an "objective" tone doesn't make rubbish "objective" [0] - https://www.bruegel.org/sites/default/files/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/2020-Global-Go-To-Think-Tank-Index-Report-Bruegel.pdf https://www.bruegel.org/sites/default/files/wp-content/uploa...

shufflerofrocks 2y ago
>Also, IGNORE anything on Twitter, Reddit, or HN (ironic ik). The lesswrong/credibledefense/zeihan types are all idiots ime. Using an "objective" tone doesn't make rubbish "objective" Not to mention these sites are FILLED to the brim with bots. Eg. In 2013, the most "reddit-addicted" area was Eglin Air Force Base in Florida, with largest amount of activity [0]. Eglin was one of the few places used in a study for testing social media manipulation by Pentagon [1] And not to mention the Russian/Chinese/Indian bots [0] https://www.reddit.com/r/Blackout2015/comments/4ylml3/reddit_has_removed_their_blog_post_identifying/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Blackout2015/comments/4ylml3/reddit... [1] http://arxiv.org/pdf/1402.5644 http://arxiv.org/pdf/1402.5644
NikolaNovak 2y ago
Axios is easy, butdo you mind expanding the acronyms to true newbs in the field? :) BTW, how truly bad is Stratfor really these days?I had a subscription more than a decade ago and appreciated their geopolitical analysis essay format which provided the history, background, big picture, then detail and their forecast. Never cared much if their forecast was on the money, it was the human readable background which I found interesting :)
- alephnerd 2y ago
  I never actually used Stratfor. They aren't well regarded. The acronyms were University Presses/Publishers - they tend to publish academic books and have higher standards of factualness.
worstspotgain 2y ago
> As someone who worked in the space, stop. It's a waste of time as you're not in a position to make changes We need people in the top 25% of the clued range to speak up. Otherwise the loud morons in the bottom 25% are at risk of being taken seriously by the middle 50%. Arguments don't need to be peer-review-quality every time someone speaks.
- TimedToasts 2y ago

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]