Maduro has allowed the opposition to present a candidate for the July elections, which is almost synonymous with the Venezuelan dictatorship being about to fall. The question is, why would someone like Maduro allow something like that? “The name Edmundo González Urrutia is already popular.” “He is the candidate of the Venezuelan opposition’s unified platform.
” “We already have a candidate who has been supported by everyone.” His name is Edmundo González and he is… “The next president of the Republic.” I’m not the one saying it. ALL the polls say so… “Between 45 and 50% of the vote intention, while Maduro hovers between 18 and 34%.
” For months, the Maduro dictatorship has tried everything possible to avoid free elections. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_Oa8lJpFcI&t=130s Min 1.25 The establishment and operation of social organizations with political aims is prohibited. However, now they are going to allow free elections where they have no chance of repeating themselves. “We all hope that this country will move forward.
” The question is… Why would Maduro be willing to resign from power? “He is the fourth oil minister indicted for corruption in Venezuela.” “The advantage for China is that it has managed to extract Venezuelan oil at a symbolic monetary value.” “ I have to take care of myself.” “You have to take care of me.
” The moment has arrived: the Maduro dictatorship is about to end. In this video, I’ll tell you why. I know what many of you are thinking: Fonseca! Is n’t it a bit risky to say that the Maduro dictatorship is about to fall? After all… Nicolás Maduro is still in power. And yes, okay, it’s true that he allowed Mr.
Edmundo González to run in the elections… a man who, until a month ago, was only known at home at mealtimes. But Venezuelans watching this video know this well: right now, even this merchandising mug would have a better chance of winning than Maduro. At this point, I don’t think even Maduro is going to vote for himself.
And some will say: What’s stopping the regime from cheating? If there’s one thing Chavistas know, it’s how to rig elections. And… yes, you’re right. There’s no Nothing prevents Maduro from prohibiting Edmundo from running… as he has already done with all the other candidates. However… What if I told you that Maduro is the one most interested in leaving power? I’ll go even further… What if I told you that Maduro might be negotiating his exit from power? What if that were the key to his physical survival? Why are we going to see the end of the Chavista dictatorship this year? Today
we’re going to answer these questions, but first… let’s look at a bit of history. I’m Fonseca. Welcome to my channel. INTRO BY FONSECA ONLY. Venezuela is a poor country despite having the largest oil reserves in the world. And everyone knows who is responsible.
Now then, can it really be said that Venezuela is a dictatorship, like Russia or North Korea? Um… yes. Absolutely. And I can even tell you the exact year in which they abandoned any semblance of democracy: 2017. Until then, Venezuela was the classic “democracy.” It’s true that its elections were increasingly resembling this. Get ready! But at least there was an opposition that could run in elections… and even reach parliament.
However, it was a disorganized opposition that paled in comparison to Chavismo, which was hyper-popular… until the Venezuelan crisis hit . In just a few years, the Maduro government transformed the richest country in Latin America… into a place where you had to stand in line for hours to get a roll of toilet paper. So, in 2015, the opposition won the legislative elections with 56%.
THAT is the moment when Maduro began his first steps toward becoming a dictator. And this process ended in 2017… Specifically, at THIS moment. I convene the original constituent power so that the working class and the people, in a popular process, can… constituent… “I convene the constituent power!” “Get out of this body, evil spirit!” I know, it sounds more like an exorcism than anything else… but what can I say? This is the rhetoric of Chavismo.
But why do I say that THIS was the moment when Venezuela became an unmitigated dictatorship ? Well, because under the pretext of creating a new Constitution, Maduro created a parallel parliament: the Constituent Assembly. That is, he annulled the parliament that had emerged from the ballot box and pulled this other one out of thin air, where— surprise!—his party holds ALL the seats.
Literally: out of 545 seats, 503 are occupied by the so-called “Patriotic Pole” and 42 are empty. Since then, this parliament has passed all the classic laws of a dictatorship: censorship, repression of the opposition, and… come on! Everything you would expect from a traditional dictatorship… what he put In many trouble, all of Maduro’s propagandists.
Because don’t forget that, for many years, Chavismo had armies of propagandists abroad. For example, in Spain we had people saying things like this: “Because Venezuela and Latin America and their example are going to be increasingly necessary in this process that we have underway in Europe.” And then, suddenly, they changed their talking points to say things like this: “It strikes me that you don’t know the name of the president of Portugal, who is right next door… with whom we share the longest border.
” Ignoring that, you pay attention to Venezuela or Iran.” Poor Juan Carlos Monedero! Something tells me that in the coming months he’s going to have to come out and explain that what happened in Venezuela “wasn’t authentic socialism”… because there are few failures in history as clear as Chavismo.
We’re not just talking about an economic failure, but a political one as well. What began as an attempt to combine democracy with socialism has ended up becoming the North Korea of Latin America… and now it ’s about to fall in the most humiliating way possible. Because if any Chavista is watching this video, I’m sorry to be the one to deliver the “bad news,” but… THIS IS OVER! And it’s over under its own weight.
What’s more, and I say this with all seriousness: it’s likely that people inside the Maduro regime are watching this video. If so, let me give you some advice, my Bolivarian friend: start looking for a way out NOW. For your own survival. And pay attention to everything I say in this video… because it might save your life. Our story begins on February 24, 2022.
What happened that day? Exactly! THE WAR IN UKRAINE CHANGED EVERYTHING ! Before we continue, let me remind you that on this channel, Solo Fonseca, we release new videos every week. So, you know: if you’re interested in politics seasoned with a touch of dark humor, this is the place for you.
Subscribe and hit the bell so you don’t miss any updates! We’re about to reach 500,000 subscribers! But now, let’s get on with today’s story. On February 24, 2022, Russia sent tanks to Ukraine. As a consequence, the United States and Europe imposed sanctions against Russia. Sanctions that directly affected Russian oil.
And Now, think of it this way: the dinosaur juice market has many suppliers, but not as many as it might seem. First came the sanctions against Iranian crude because of its nuclear program. Then the sanctions on Venezuelan crude because it had become a dictatorship. And now come the sanctions against Russian crude because of the war… Come on, all that’s missing is for someone to get a little fussy about Saudi Arabia and we’ll end up filling the car’s tank… I don’t know, maybe with beer? “One for you, one for me… one for you, one for me.
” And, let’s be clear: Venezuela can be as authoritarian as you want. But, compared to Iran or Russia, it has a huge advantage: it does n’t cause problems. I mean, it doesn’t have the muscle to finance terrorist groups, nor the money to acquire nuclear bombs, nor can it invade countries. Conclusion? “The White House announced on Monday that a US delegation held talks over the weekend with the government of President Nicolás Maduro.
” The energy issue was on the table… Basically, the United States proposed the following to Maduro: we will buy your oil again in exchange for you releasing the American prisoners you have in jail AND calling free elections. And that is how presidential elections were scheduled for July 24, 2024.
And you might say… That’s it? Is it really that easy? Suddenly Maduro agrees to dismantle his dictatorship for a few dollars? Obviously not! Maduro was convinced he could outmaneuver Biden. After all… the world needs Venezuelan oil more than ever. And besides… Have you ever seen the Venezuelan opposition? For years, Chavismo has been dismantling any opposition movement.
An opposition that was traditionally divided into a bunch of mini-parties and factions. Come on, it seemed easy to rig the elections enough for Maduro to return To go out… And then the unthinkable happened. “Former congresswoman Maria Corina Machado triumphs in the opposition primaries held this Sunday in Venezuela.
” Suddenly, the Venezuelan opposition organized primary elections where more than 2 MILLION Venezuelans voted. Consider that this occurred in a country of 28 million inhabitants, where almost 8 million have already left and there is brutal repression against the opposition. That is to say, despite having everything against them, Venezuelans went out to vote in these primaries and agreed to elect a leader to represent them.
Maria Corina Machado won these primaries with 92.35% of the votes. And, unlike previous opponents of Maduro, she doesn’t mince words. “The only way is by opening the markets to private investment, both national and international.” Venezuela has enough oil for the next 4000 years.
Do you know what that is? At this rate of production: but oil won’t last for the next 50 years. So what do we do? “Do we leave it underground or do we take advantage of it?” To give you an idea, saying this in Venezuela is like saying drugs are bad at a rave. And, as expected, Maduro banned this woman from running in the elections.
End of the opposition? Not at all! This is where what we could call… began. You know that game where you have to whack moles with a hammer? THIS. Well, basically, the Venezuelan opposition has been playing this game with Maduro. “ You ban this candidate from running? Do n’t worry, another candidate supported by Maria Corina Machado will come along. And then, Maduro bans her from running.
And then another candidate comes along. And so on until, finally, Maduro brought out the famous anti-fascist law. “The presentation against the law against fascism, neo-fascism and similar expressions.” The old trick of “anyone who doesn’t think like…” “I… is Hitler.” Between one thing and another, Chavismo has taken it upon itself to eliminate any opposition movement that could overshadow it. And that includes anyone… no matter where they come from.
Including… These! The Communist Party of Venezuela joins the list of parties taken over by the Supreme Court of Justice. Key Transparency August 2023 And, suddenly, when we could consider everything lost… the unthinkable happens. “The honorable designation of myself as the presidential candidate of all those who want change in our country is a responsibility that I humbly accept.
” The Venezuelan opposition chooses yet another candidate. But, this time, Maduro lets him run. Even, for the first time in decades, they allow him to give an interview on television that all Venezuelans can see. And, according to the polls we have, letting this man run is almost the same as saying that Maduro is going to Losing. Look.
62% of the vote intention versus 20% for Maduro. It’s not that I trust polls much in Venezuela. In fact, I’m surprised that there are still 20% of Venezuelans who are going to vote for Maduro. And you’ll say, “Why?” I mean, until now, it seemed that Maduro was willing to eliminate any candidate.
He even just passed this “anti-fascist law” to do it more quickly. Why are they making an exception for this man? Is it because he’s a puppet of Maduro, put in place to go through the motions? Or perhaps there’s something more? Well… my Bolivarian friend, here comes the part of the video that interests you.
Pay attention because it might save your life! Listen up! THE REAL COLLAPSE OF CHAVISMO If there’s one thing I’ve learned studying the history of Venezuela, it’s that dictatorships are much more resilient than they seem. It doesn’t matter that The economy is in utter collapse, and the vast majority want regime change. It doesn’t matter if they protest.
It doesn’t matter if the international community isolates the country… as long as the dictator in power controls the weapons, he will control the country. “Power is power.” And you might ask… But who pays for all those weapons? Well, here come the usual suspects: Russia and China. Russia provided the weapons, and China provided the money. But let’s focus on the more important of the two: CHINA.
Why did China support Venezuela? Is it for ideological reasons? (LAUGHTER) Please! Those of you who have followed me for a while already know China’s favorite diplomatic strategy: “sugar daddy diplomacy.” And under this logic, Venezuela is the perfect sugar baby. It has everything! Oil, gold mines, and on top of that, it’s in a desperate situation.
Everything necessary to become the country of Latin America which has received the MOST money in the Belt and Road Initiative. We’re talking about more than $50 billion in loans. And you might ask, “Is that a lot? Is it a little?” Well, for comparison, the US military aid package to Ukraine is $61 billion. And now consider that these loans are from 2018, when inflation hadn’t yet risen so much.
That, and the fact that Venezuela isn’t at war with any of China’s enemies. In short, we can say that China has been the lifeline Maduro needed. And you might ask, “But what’s the point of lending money to a country in crisis? How is it going to pay back those yuan?” Easy! Textbook sugar daddy strategy: “Can’t pay me with money? Pay me in kind.” And Venezuela has plenty of oil to offer.
Makes sense , right? What Xi Jinping didn’t count on was the “21st-century socialism” factor. Churchill said that “if you put communists in charge of the Sahara Desert, in five years they will have run out of sand.” And that is exactly what has happened when you put 21st-century socialists in charge of Venezuela’s oil. Take a look at this graph.
As you can see, it didn’t take many sanctions to destroy the Venezuelan economy: they are perfectly capable of doing it themselves. The country with the most dinosaur juice on the planet now produces less than 700,000 barrels a day. Even its neighbor Guyana produces more. And you might ask… Why is this happening? Well, because of things like this. An explosion paralyzes Venezuela’s main refinery in Amuay ( BBC, August 25, 2012).
This is just one more example. Keep in mind that the Venezuelan state oil company, PDVSA, is a complete mess. For years, Chavismo used this company to shower all its allies with money. We’ll talk Corruption, mismanagement, and everything else you can imagine. Conclusion? The maintenance of the facilities is appalling.
So most of the oil extraction and refining plants are kaput. They can’t produce barrels. And this is where the sanctions HAVE worked. Because Venezuela needs US companies to come and repair these plants. Keep in mind that oil extraction technology is no joke. And all of this technology, in one way or another, goes through US companies. So, without Uncle Sam’s help, Venezuela can’t extract oil.
And if they can’t extract oil… how are they going to pay China? Oh! And I remind you that today’s Xi Jinping is no longer the generous sugar daddy he once was. Now he needs to get back what he ‘s lent. And he’s not willing to play games… China pays less for Venezuelan oil after the US reimposes sanctions.
Bloomberg April 25, 2024. So Maduro finds himself in a dilemma: on the one hand, he needs to negotiate with the United States to be able to pay what he owes China. But on the other hand, giving in to their demands means the end of his regime. That’s where we were at the end of 2023. Maduro had no way out and took a different approach.
“A dramatic move by Nicolás Maduro.” Venezuela voted this Sunday in favor of annexing the Essequibo region in neighboring oil-rich Guyana. I told you at the time: the only reason to explain this move was desperation. At a time when there was no other way out, Maduro wanted to stir up national fervor.
The problem? The problem is that invading Guyana is unthinkable. Not only does Venezuela lack military strength, but Guyana is also the least invadable country in the world right now : both the United States and China have just made multimillion-dollar investments there .
And remember when I said that Venezuela is a dictatorship that doesn’t bother anyone? Well… you see, now it does bother people. And it bothers everyone: the Americans and the Chinese alike. Conclusion? All those negotiations to lift the sanctions on Venezuela have been frozen. And, as you can imagine, China is furious. They have completely extinguished any desire to continue helping Maduro. Think of it this way: China likes sugar babies, yes.
But Venezuela has become a microwave country: it heats up but doesn’t cook. It promises a lot of oil but can’t produce it. Meanwhile, look at these statements from the opposition candidate. “And what kind of relationships should the country have?” “First, our natural geographic space : Latin America, with our key partners: the US, Europe, China, Japan…” That inclusion of China is not by chance.
And now, put it this way: Who does China prefer to support ? To Maduro, who KNOWS he won’t be able to repay his debts? Or… to another candidate who might, might not? Furthermore, Mr. Edmundo González knows how to play his cards. The question is… Why does Maduro accept this man if he knows he’s going to overthrow him? Well… pay attention.
THE PRISONER’S DILEMMA Dictatorships can last as long as their ammunition lasts. But at the same time, being a dictator is a risky profession. In a democracy, if a politician loses the elections, he can reinvent himself. I don’t know, maybe write a book, give talks, or… even open a bar! “Former Podemos leader Pablo Iglesias has opened a bar. It’s not even 6 p.m.
on a Tuesday and the cozy establishment, located at 8 Ave María Street in the legendary Lavapiés neighborhood, is overflowing with customers.” However… a former dictator opening bars is a bit more unusual. And many end their careers feet first. There are examples like Gaddafi, Mussolini, or Ceaușescu.
And you might ask, “Are you really suggesting that a violent mob of opposition members could kill Maduro?” No! In politics, as you know, there are friends, enemies, and party members. And what Maduro should fear most are… his own people. This is a textbook case of the so-called “Prisoner’s Dilemma”. Everyone knows that the regime is collapsing. The one who negotiates first with the opposition has the best chance of keeping his head.
Even if you don’t want to betray your own… you probably want to because you’re afraid someone else will do it before you. In other words: Maduro is starting to look like Ceaușescu. And it has every chance of ending the same way: the regime is internationally isolated and without money. Furthermore, the opposition is well organized.
And, as if all this weren’t enough… we have to bring the drug traffickers into the equation. Because some of the friends who have supported the regime during these years have been drug cartels that have found in Venezuela the perfect place to operate with impunity. And you know what they say: he who sleeps with drug traffickers wakes up without a head.
And you might ask, “Do I really have proof that this is happening?” Well yes! I have tons of examples, but here I’m going to give you the most significant one of all: TARECK EL AISSAMI. I know, with that name you’d think he was a politician from the Middle East.
But the only thing it has in common with petro-monarchies is oil. Tareck El Aissami was Maduro’s right-hand man for years. He became the Vice President of Venezuela and the Minister of Petroleum. Come on: it was everything. However, one day in 2023… it disappeared! So. That’s all . He stopped giving any signs of life. And finally, in April 2024, this news came out.
The Chavista justice system formally accused Tareck El Aissami of “conspiring” with the Venezuelan opposition and the United States. InfoBAE 30-04-2024 And now… put yourselves in Maduro’s shoes for a moment. I know, it’s difficult to try to empathize with a dictator. But let’s make the effort: if even your former right-hand man is selling you out, who else isn’t conspiring behind your back? And watch out! Because we’re not talking about you losing power, or your money, or your pride… No! What’s at stake right now is YOUR head. Literally. And you have
two options before you: a) You continue to repress the opposition to maintain power. In this case, someone else might negotiate with them before you and deal you an internal blow. A blow where it’s very easy to end up without a head.
Option B) You negotiate with the opposition and lose your position but not your head. You negotiate a peaceful transition that guarantees you a golden retirement in any other country that grants you asylum. And you’ll have plenty of time to give lectures here and there, or even write a book about how you lost the election after 11 years in power.
Who doesn’t lose an election after being in government for so long? It could happen to anyone! You’ve been a politician like any other . It wasn’t a regime collapse, no matter how much the fascists insist otherwise! Hey! And besides… we’re only talking about holding free elections! Nobody says you can’t win them! (LAUGHTER) Well, and if none of these options convince you, you can always go to Pablo Iglesias’s Bar and cook some fantastic Venezuelan arepas.
And I know what you’re all thinking right now… But is it really possible that the opposition would accept something like this? Well… I certainly think it’s possible! Look at Edmund. The transition is a product of reconciliation. A transition where we all fit. Where no one is excluded. That is the transition we aspire to.
If you win the presidency, will you call President Maduro? Why not? And will there be understanding? We aspire. We don’t know if we will reach an understanding, but why not a willingness to engage in dialogue ? Dialogue is the essence of politics. Let those who have ears , hear.
And I know what many of you are thinking: especially in Venezuela, is this a betrayal of the opposition? At this point, nobody wants Nicolás Maduro to end up in a golden retirement after everything he has done. And… yes, you’re right. But politics is the art of the possible. And, for the moment, this is the most likely option to achieve change in Venezuela. We have never been so close to this country having a democratic transition.
There will be time to make judgments when the time comes. In fact, even for Nicolás Maduro, the trial option is better than the death option. So, for the first time in Venezuela’s history, everyone has the incentive to do the right thing. So, my dear Bolivarian friend: I hope you understood the message.
Wherever you are… to the extent of your ability, don’t put up obstacles. As strange as it may seem, this is your best alternative. I know you’ll feel strange during these weeks . The norm was to trip up the opposition: to prevent people from voting normally. Trying to manipulate the statistics.
If you happen to be at the polling station, you’ll feel tempted to put ballots in the ballot boxes. And you’ll probably have many party colleagues willing to help you. And you’ll think that will give you points to advance within the system. That’s how things used to work. But not anymore . You probably don’t know it, but many of your colleagues are ALREADY preparing for the day after the polls.
And don’t doubt for a moment that, when the time comes, those same people will be happy to sell to you. So, for your own good… abandon ship. And now , let’s move on to your favorite section of the channel. Let’s go with Only Fons. (((INTRO ONLY FONS))) Welcome to OnlyFons, the section where I give channel news, correct errors, and answer the most interesting questions you leave in the comments. And today I have this.
Question: How easy and legal is it to carry a gun in that country? (Slovakia) @Manguitou.u Very good question, Manguito! To give some context, this question refers to the previous video where I talked about the attack against the Prime Minister of Slovakia.
Look, I don’t know what the law is like in Slovakia, but I can tell you how it works in the Czech Republic, which is where I live. Weapons are allowed here. You can even have an AK-47 if you want. You do need to get a license, though. In fact, if you ever decide to visit Prague, you can book a tour package that includes shooting guns. You only need to be of legal age and present your ID card or passport.
All of this, of course, with an instructor present. Many people think that the United States is the only country where you can carry weapons, but that is not the case. Countries like Switzerland or the Czech Republic have very liberal legislation regarding weapons. And… there are no crime problems here.
That leads me to think that the violence problems they have in the USA are not solely due to the 2nd Amendment. There are other economic and cultural factors that we need to take into account. If you’re interested, there’s a video by Johnny Harris comparing gun culture in Switzerland versus the United States.
Very interesting! Also, Johnny Harris is one of my favorite YouTubers and he has a very original style. I’ll leave it in the description because it’s worth it. And now it’s your turn. Do you think that, at some point, Maduro will change his mind and prohibit Edmundo from running in the elections? Will Maduro make it to these elections alive? Or perhaps you think he’s going to win them democratically? You can leave your answer in the comments.
As always, don’t forget that here at Solo Fonseca I release new videos every week, so subscribe to this channel and hit the bell so you don’t miss any of my updates. If you liked this video, give it a LIKE and we’ll see you in the next one. Thank you for being there and see you soon.
QQ4 Bob Dylan and Keith Richards have been close friends for nearly 40 years. The friendship began on a live television program in November of 1986 in the 11 seconds after Bob Dylan called Keith Richards music derivative on camera. Keith Richard’s response to that assessment, one sentence said without anger, without performance, with the specific directness of a man who has nothing to prove and knows it made Bob Dylan laugh.
Then made Bob Dylan go quiet. then made Bob Dylan say two words that people who know Bob Dylan say he almost never said to anyone. This is the story of those 11 seconds and the 40 years that followed them. The program was a live music interview special broadcast on an American network on the evening of November 3rd, 1986. The format was simple.
Two musicians, a host, an hour of conversation about music and the state of it. The producers had assembled the pairing of Bob Dylan and Keith Richards with the specific calculation of television producers who understand that two people with equally strong and potentially incompatible views about what music is and what it should do will produce better television than two people who agree about everything.
The calculation was correct, though not in the way the producers had anticipated. Bob Dylan was 45 years old in November of 1986. Bob Dylan had released Empire Burlesque the previous year and had been on the road for most of the intervening period as part of the True Confessions tour with Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers.
Bob Dylan was in November of 1986 in one of the most prolific and restless phases of a career that had consisted almost entirely of prolific and restless phases. A career that had moved through folk, rock, country, gospel, and back again, that had been declared finished at least six times by the music press, and at each time continued with the serene indifference of a river to the opinions of people standing on its banks.
Bob Dylan had been redefining what music could be. Since 1962, Bob Dylan had invented and reinvented himself so many times that reinvention had become his defining characteristic, not in the superficial sense of a performer changing costumes, but in the deeper sense of a musician who had never allowed his work to settle into a form that could be anticipated or categorized from the outside.
Bob Dylan understood influence and originality and the relationship between them better than almost anyone alive in 1986. Bob Dylan had spent 24 years thinking carefully and specifically about where music came from and where music was going and what it meant that those two things were always in constant conversation with each other.
Keith Richards was 42 years old in November of 1986. Keith Richards had been playing guitar professionally since 1962. Keith Richards had built a career on a foundation of American blues and rhythm and blues. A foundation that Keith Richards had studied with the systematic devotion of someone who understood that the tradition he was building on was not incidental to the music he was making, but essential to it.
that you could not understand what Keith Richards did without understanding where Keith Richards had come from and what Keith Richards had been listening to since he was a teenager in Dartford with American Import Records and a secondhand guitar and no teacher except the recordings themselves. Keith Richards had never pretended otherwise. Keith Richards had in fact spent considerable energy across his career making the lineage explicit, naming the artists, citing the recordings, insisting on the acknowledgement of influence that the mainstream music
industry had a long history of suppressing or ignoring or crediting to the wrong people. If anything, Keith Richards was more transparent about his sources than most musicians of his generation. Keith Richards had always said openly that the Rolling Stones came directly from the blues, that Muddy Waters and Robert Johnson and the specific tradition of the Mississippi Delta were not background influences, but foundational ones.
The music Keith Richards made was in direct and sustained conversation with that tradition, something Keith Richards considered not a limitation, but a responsibility and a form of respect. The interview had been running for 8 minutes when the host asked Bob Dylan about the current state of rock and roll.
Bob Dylan answered with the density and the indirection that characterized Bob Dylan’s responses to direct questions, turning the question over, approaching it from an unexpected angle, finding his way to what he actually thought through a series of observations that moved like a river rather than a road. Bob Dylan was not a straightforward interview subject.
Bob Dylan had been asked about rock and roll in hundreds of interviews across 24 years and had developed the habit of treating the question as an invitation to think out loud rather than a request for a prepared position. The producer Gerald Sherman said afterward that in the first 8 minutes of the interview, he had been slightly anxious, not because anything was going wrong, but because nothing was going anywhere in particular yet.
The interview had the feeling of two conversations happening simultaneously. Bob Dylan’s internal one and the external one visible to the cameras. And Gerald Sherman was not certain in those first eight minutes that the two conversations would converge into something. Bob Dylan talked about influence. Bob Dylan talked about originality.
Bob Dylan talked about the difference between music that absorbed a tradition and transformed it and music that absorbed a tradition and reproduced it. And then Bob Dylan made his assessment. And then Bob Dylan said with the precision of a man making a musical assessment rather than a personal judgment that the Rolling Stones work, and Bob Dylan was specific, naming Keith Richards as the guitarist whose approach he was discussing was derivative in a way that Bob Dylan found limiting.
Bob Dylan said it without hostility. Bob Dylan said it as a technical observation about the relationship between source material and the work that came from it. Bob Dylan said that Keith Richards played the blues the way the blues had already been played, rather than using the blues as a starting point for something that had not yet been played.
Keith Richards had been listening to this with the specific attention Keith Richards gave to things being said about music by people who knew music. Keith Richards did not interrupt. Keith Richards did not shift in his chair or display any of the visible signals of a person preparing a defensive response. Keith Richards listened to Bob Dylan’s complete observation all the way to its conclusion without interrupting and without displaying any visible signal of preparing a response.
Then Keith Richards said one sentence. The sentence was not a rebuttal. The sentence did not defend Keith Richards music or argue for its originality or challenge Bob Dylan’s characterization of what the blues meant in the context of rock and roll. The sentence was something else entirely, something that required a specific kind of confidence to say.
The confidence of a person who has spent long enough thinking about the same things as the person they are talking to that they can locate the exact point where their thinking diverges and say something useful about that point rather than simply defending their own position. The sentence acknowledged everything Bob Dylan had said, the assessment, the distinction Bob Dylan was drawing, the specific musical concern underlying the observation, and then turned it 90°.
Keith Richards took Bob Dylan’s own framework, the one Bob Dylan had used to analyze Keith Richards relationship to the blues tradition, and applied it back to Bob Dylan’s work with the same precision Bob Dylan had used to apply it to Keith Richards. Spare aimed. The sentence asked Bob Dylan something about Bob Dylan’s own music, about the relationship between Bob Dylan’s sources and Bob Dylan’s output that Bob Dylan had not been asked on television before.
The sentence did not attack. The sentence illuminated. Bob Dylan laughed. The laugh was not the polite laugh of someone responding to a joke. The laugh was the involuntary laugh of someone who has been genuinely surprised. The specific kind of surprise that a person of exceptional intelligence experiences when someone else’s intelligence exceeds their expectations.
Bob Dylan laughed for 4 seconds. Then Bob Dylan stopped laughing. Then Bob Dylan was quiet for 3 seconds in the way that Bob Dylan was quiet when Bob Dylan was thinking rather than performing thought. Then Bob Dylan said, “You’re right.” The producer in the booth, a man named Gerald Sherman, who had been working in television for 14 years, said afterward that in 14 years of live television production, he had never heard Bob Dylan say those two words in a public forum.
Gerald Sherman said he had worked with Bob Dylan on two previous occasions and had observed Bob Dylan in numerous other contexts and that you’re right was not a phrase that Bob Dylan deployed easily or often because Bob Dylan had spent 24 years being right about music in ways that other people eventually caught up with. And the experience of being right ahead of everyone else does not generally produce a man who says you’re right readily when someone else makes a point.
The host of the program, a journalist named Patricia Wells, who had been interviewing musicians for 12 years, said afterward that the 11 seconds between Bob Dylan’s assessment and Bob Dylan saying, “You’re right,” were the most extraordinary 11 seconds of television she had been present for. Patricia Wells said that what she witnessed in those 11 seconds was not a debate or a confrontation or a celebrity exchange of competing opinions.
Patricia Wells said what she witnessed was one musician recognizing another musician as an equal, which was in the specific context of Bob Dylan in 1986, not something that happened in public very often. The interview continued for another 42 minutes after those 11 seconds. The conversation between Bob Dylan and Keith Richards in the remaining 42 minutes was described by everyone who watched it as fundamentally different from the first 8 minutes.
The host, Patricia Wells, who had been conducting music interviews for 12 years and understood the difference between the performance of conversation and actual conversation, said that at approximately the 9-minute mark, something shifted in the studio. That the formal interview, architecture dissolved, and what replaced it was something less structured and more genuine.
Bob Dylan and Keith Richards talked about influence and originality and the blues and what it meant to build on a tradition without being consumed by it. They talked about specific recordings and specific musicians with the specificity of two people who had spent their entire adult lives thinking about these things and rarely found another person who had thought about them with equivalent care.
They talked about where music came from and where music was going and whether those two questions were actually one question or two. Patricia Wells said afterward that she had asked approximately four questions in the remaining 42 minutes because Bob Dylan and Keith Richards did not require questions. They required only a room and a camera and the shared understanding that what they were saying together was worth recording carefully.
She said it was the best interview she had ever conducted and that she had conducted the smallest part of it. After the program, Bob Dylan and Keith Richards were in the corridor outside the studio when the host Patricia Wells passed them. Patricia Wells said she did not stop because she did not want to interrupt.
She observed them for approximately 30 seconds from a distance. She said they were talking with the ease of people who had known each other for years rather than people who had met for the first time 2 hours earlier. She said that something had shifted between them during the broadcast that the broadcast had made permanent rather than temporary.
She continued down the corridor and did not look back. She said in her account of that evening that she had decided in that moment not to interrupt the conversation because some conversations are more valuable than any question a journalist might ask and that the conversation she had observed for 30 seconds in the corridor outside the studio was one of them.
She had been a music journalist for 12 years. She recognized the difference. Bob Dylan and Keith Richards have maintained their friendship across four decades. They have appeared together at various events, most significantly at the concert for the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 1995, where people who were present described them as inseparable for most of the evening, occupying the same corner of the backstage area and talking with the concentrated attention of people who only have a limited amount of time together and intend to use it
well. Bob Dylan has spoken about Keith Richards in interviews with the specific thoughtful care that Bob Dylan reserves for musicians whose work Bob Dylan considers genuinely important rather than merely culturally prominent. Keith Richards has spoken about Bob Dylan in similar terms with the specific respect of someone who recognizes in another person a commitment to music that goes deeper than career.
Neither Bob Dylan nor Keith Richards has made a public statement specifically about how the friendship began or about the November 1986 interview. Bob Dylan has not mentioned the 11 seconds. Keith Richards has not mentioned the sentence. The interview exists in the archive. The 11 seconds are there. The laugh is there. The two words are there.
What is also there for anyone who watches the interview from its beginning and pays attention to the shift that happens at the 9-minute mark is the specific moment when two people who thought they were appearing on a television program discovered they were actually talking to each other. What Keith Richards said in that one sentence has never been officially reported.
The people who were in the studio that evening, Gerald Sherman, Patricia Wells, the floor crew, the two camera operators, the makeup artist who was watching from the side of the set, have described the sentence in consistent terms. They have described its effect. They have described Bob Dylan’s laugh and Bob Dylan’s silence and Bob Dylan’s two words.
They have not repeated the sentence itself in the specific understanding that the sentence was said between two musicians on a television program and that its power resided in the specific context of that exchange and would not survive removal from it intact. What can be said is this. Keith Richards said something to Bob Dylan about Bob Dylan’s music that used Bob Dylan’s own observation about Keith Richards as its starting point and arrived somewhere that Bob Dylan had not anticipated.
Keith Richards turned Bob Dylan’s assessment 90° and showed Bob Dylan something about the music they had both spent their lives making that Bob Dylan recognized immediately as true. And Bob Dylan said, “You’re right.” Two words said by Bob Dylan in public on live television in 1986 to Keith Richards in response to a single sentence Keith Richards had said about music.
Two words that Gerald Sherman, who had worked with Bob Dylan on two previous occasions, said he had never heard Bob Dylan say in a public forum. Two words that Patricia Wells, who had been interviewing musicians for 12 years, said were the most significant two words she had heard in those 12 years. Not because of their content, but because of who said them and what it cost to say them and what it meant that Keith Richards had produced them in 11 seconds from a conversation that began with Bob Dylan calling Keith Richards’s music derivative. And Keith Richards and
Bob Dylan have been close friends for nearly 40 years. The sentence did its work in 11 seconds on the evening of November 3rd, 1986. The work has been ongoing ever since. If this story moved you, subscribe and leave a comment below. Have you ever said something to someone that turned a potential disagreement into an unexpected and lasting connection? Tell us about it in the comments below.
Share this with someone who needs to be reminded that the right sentence said at the right moment can completely change the entire direction of a relationship. Ring the notification bell for more untold stories about the extraordinary human beings behind music’s greatest legends.
Disclaimer : This content may be created by AI for entertainment purposes. Any resemblance to real persons, events, or places is coincidental.
