Democracy in Cuba

[Ned]

Originally posted by Sava
I agree Shi... freedom of information is vital. I wish Cuba was a free society, but I don't understand the hypocrisy from Cuba bashers, especially when the same people are watching Stalinist supporting Fox News and shopping at Stalinist supporting Walmart.

And in the grand scheme of things, Castro is harmless compared to the oppressive regimes of our "allies" in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and other members of the "coalition of the willing" like Uzbekistan, etc...

If you are going to have outrage against authoritarian regimes, be consistent and attack everyone... not just the ones who don't cooperate with US foreign policy.

Sava, stop justifying Castro and communism by diverting attention.

[Shi Huangdi]

I agree Shi... freedom of information is vital. I wish Cuba was a free society, but I don't understand the hypocrisy from Cuba bashers, especially when the same people are watching Stalinist supporting Fox News and shopping at Stalinist supporting Walmart.

It would be very difficult in the USA if one wanted to stop buying from Companies that do business in China, much less all Authoritarian regimes.

If you are going to have outrage against authoritarian regimes, be consistent and attack everyone... not just the ones who don't cooperate with US foreign policy.

Foreign policy often nessecitates hypocrisy. You would not get very far in international relations if you only cooperated with states that have similar forms of government.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Sava


if you think this, then you don't have a clue to what communism is... go to your library and read... educate yourself

One has books and theories. One has practice. Which is a better teacher?

[SlowwHand]

I still find it odd the proponents of a system don't just go to the system, rather than hanging around the vast majority who find them silly.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Spiffor
It is obvious Castro is an authoritarian ******* with quite some blood on his hands. It's obvious he wants to limit the access to world wide web, and prefers the Cubans to have as limited access to non-controlled sites as possible.

Now, he's one of the least despicable authoritarian *******s in the area (for some strange reason, I never see any right winger cringe at all these other nice regimes in the caribbean; maybe that means they are oh so perfectly fine)

Spiffor, you are the first "honest" Marxist I have ever had the privilege to "meet." But even you must be concerned that all exercises in Marxism end in the same suppression of essential liberties by the people.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Ned


Sava, stop justifying Castro and communism by diverting attention.

you really have some sort of information processing disorder... quote one statement where I have "justified" castro or communism...

yes, I am trying to divert your attention... TO REAL ISSUES. I'm trying to get you to understand what Communism is because you don't have a clue what it is. This is evident in your posts.

I have some a task for you Ned:

Quote a piece of Marx's writings that state government control of the media is necessary.

In fact, there is no government or institutional "state" in Communism. It's a moral code and cultural blueprint much the way Christianity is. You are SOOOOO offbase when it comes to your view on what Communism is. A simple trip to your library or college course on Communism would cure this.

You are embarassing yourself Ned. I want to help you.

And don't ever accuse me of trying to justify Stalinism (which is what teh Soviet Union was and Castro is). You don't know **** when it comes to Stalinsm or Communism. My family escape from the Soviets post WW2. Two of my grandmother's brothers were killed trying to fascilitate her escape.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Shi Huangdi
It would be very difficult in the USA if one wanted to stop buying from Companies that do business in China, much less all Authoritarian regimes.

difficult, but not impossible... we shouldn't compromise our morals for the sake of business...

Foreign policy often nessecitates hypocrisy. You would not get very far in international relations if you only cooperated with states that have similar forms of government.

yes, when trying to defeat a tyrant like Hitler perhaps... but we should not cater to such evil or compromise our principles for the sake or "international relations".

[Sava]

Originally posted by Ned


Spiffor, you are the first "honest" Marxist I have ever had the privilege to "meet." But even you must be concerned that all exercises in Marxism end in the same suppression of essential liberties by the people.

This is impossible because there have NEVER BEEN AN EXERCISE IN MARXISM. Marxism was an ideology HIJACKED to justify oppressive, authoritarian regimes' claim to power.

GET THAT THROUGH YOUR HEAD NED

[Hueij]

Originally posted by Sava


This is impossible because there have NEVER BEEN AN EXERCISE IN MARXISM. Marxism was an ideology HIJACKED to justify oppressive, authoritarian regimes' claim to power.

GET THAT THROUGH YOUR HEAD NED

Careful now Sava. Ned could try to get you banned for shouting at him...

[Ned]

Originally posted by Sava
you really have some sort of information processing disorder... quote one statement where I have "justified" castro or communism...

yes, I am trying to divert your attention... TO REAL ISSUES. I'm trying to get you to understand what Communism is because you don't have a clue what it is. This is evident in your posts.

I have some a task for you Ned:

Quote a piece of Marx's writings that state government control of the media is necessary.

In fact, there is no government or institutional "state" in Communism. It's a moral code and cultural blueprint much the way Christianity is. You are SOOOOO offbase when it comes to your view on what Communism is. A simple trip to your library or college course on Communism would cure this.

You are embarassing yourself Ned. I want to help you.

And don't ever accuse me of trying to justify Stalinism (which is what teh Soviet Union was and Castro is). You don't know **** when it comes to Stalinsm or Communism. My family escape from the Soviets post WW2. Two of my grandmother's brothers were killed trying to fascilitate her escape.

Sava, since your family is a victim of communism, I find it very strange that you would defend it in any way. But you do so by denying that Castro and Stalin were/are Marxist. Marxism appears to rely on totalitarianism as a core principle - single party, total control of society by the government. Thus that all Marxist states are totalitarian seems inherent. There is no Democracy in Communism.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Ned


One has books and theories. One has practice. Which is a better teacher?

The entire "communist education" thread, or at least the middle of it, already told you what you needed to know- go back and reread the posts there.

[Sava]

btw Ned, sorry for shouting, I get frustrated easily

Ned, I'm not defending Communism. I'm trying to make the point that Stalinism is what you are talking about. Communism is a flawed ideology that is not practical and won't work. But it should not get blamed for the evils of dictatorial regimes that have simply hijacked the name.

Do we blame the "Republic" system of government for the actions of the "People's Republic of China"? Do we blame Democracy for the evils in the "Democratic Republic of the Congo"?

Absolutely not. And that's the point I'm trying to make.

There can be Democracy in Communist cultures (because Democracy is a system of government, Communism is a way of life). But this discussion is irrelevant because Communism cannot work with human beings. I suppose someone could write some sort of fictional work of such a society, but it wouldn't translate well.

The closest thing to Communism that I could direct your attention to would be the world in Star Trek. But that sort of fantasy world won't ever exist. I hope this clears things somewhat.

[Ned]

GePap, I understand the ultimate goal of Communism is to increase productivity to a level where the cost of things is low - so low that things and property are essentially free.

But, we then switch to the other aspect of Communism - how to get there.

The remedy is a worker takeover in the form of socialism that prescribes two essential features: ownership of the means of production by the state and single-party control of the state by the communist party.

But Marxists would appear to be saying that Marxism is not totalitarianism -- pointing to the ultimate goal to say this -- but in the same breath advocating for the likes of the United States state ownership of the means of production and single-party control of the state by the communist party.

Who is kidding whom?

[Ned]

Sava, go ahead and shout all you want. I like that about you. The people here like to call you the Democrat Ned. And vis-a-versa.

But just let must understand your point. Are you saying that state ownerhip of the means and production and a single-party control of the government by the "party" is not a feature of Marxism?

[Sava]

Are you saying that state ownerhip of the means and production and a single-party control of the government by the "party" is not a feature of Marxism?

Yes... because the "State" doesn't exist.... nor are there such things as political parties in Communism. In Communism, there no such thing as property. It is "communal" ownership. Much the way the air we breath belongs to no one. It is just there.

It's philosophies like that that make Communism a fool's errand. Human beings have developed concepts of ownership. Any cultural or political system must be compatible with basic human concepts. Communism isn't.