All Hail the People's Revolution in Nepal!

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Freedom from want is a freedom. Freedom from homelessness, from unemployment, from not being able to get medical attention.

Sure, the so-called Communist countries weren't real good at delivering on the freedoms we in the West take for granted, but they were under a state of seige, which tends to cause states to act paranoid and repressive.

But in China (for example) they didnt deliver freedom from want. They had massive famines during the great leap forward. We just didnt here about them, because they were so good at denying teh"freedoms we in the West take for granted" "homelessness" was avoided in Russia by the expedient of having numerous families share tiny apartments, something not very different from what most poor families in the US do when they lose their homes. Of course here we have mentally ill on the streets, because we dont involuntarilly lock people up. Soviet medical care in the last years of the Brezhnevite regime were scandalous - poor quality clinics for some, elite hospitals for others (according to a book (forget the name) by a NYT reporter) Not much different from here, where poor get public health clinics. Communist regimes excel at making CLAIMS of excellent public services, which are difficult to check with the "bourgois" freedoms.

When FDR listed the 4 freedoms, it was no accident that freedom of speech went along with freedom from want. Real improvements in social services, social justice, are only possible when there is a free press and free speech to monitor whats going on. They dont guarantee social justice but they make it possible.

LOTM

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
Actually Cambodia fell before South VietNam.

They both fell in 1975, two years after the Americans were kicked out.

Laos had massive NVA intervention.

Which countered the massive US intervention.

Portugals revolution came precisely because the govt was mired in Angola and Mozambique.

But why did it happen then? Or even at all? There was a revolutionary wave of activity in the world. Portugal got caught up in it.

Portugal eventually avoided the Communist danger and made it to freedom. Something Angola and Mozambique are still in the process of doing.

Such a danger. The beiggest threat to democracy and stablity in the later two countries was the US sponsored terrorists of RENAMO and UNITA. Once South Africa finaly stopped backing them, Mozambique could finally have peace and begin rebuilding its country after losing over a million people. Unfortunately for Angola, Savimbi's thugs sat on a diamond mine, and were able to continue financing their war. Now that the butcher is dead, maybe peace can finally come to Angola.

As is Ethiopia, once it overthrew the dictatorship that came to power in the '70's.

I thought I mentioned that.

Nicaragua has become a free democratic state, in which the Sandinistas have to compete, and usually lose , AFAIK.

It became a free state in 1979. It had its first elections in 1986, in which the Sandinistas won hands down. Since then the US has poured massive amounts of money into Nicaragua to support the opposition to the Sandinistas. They only lost power in 1990 because the people of Nicaragua finally surrended to the US war against them. They Sandanista's may compete and lose, but it's hardly a fair competition with the US pouring in millions of dollars to the other side. Without that money, I doubt they'd do so well.

[lord of the mark]

I must add a point.

While I sympathize with the Nepali peoples struggle against would be Maoist despots, Im not sure it makes sense for the US to get involved there now. We have a lot on our plate already, and its not like a Maoist Nepal is a serious threat to any of its neighbors. If its a small scale supply of arms, ok, but i would be very wary of sending in trainers, advisors, etc. There is such a thing as strategic overstretch.

LOTM

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
But in China (for example) they didnt deliver freedom from want. They had massive famines during the great leap forward.

Tell me something I don't know. I've mentioned that frequently. However, aside from that one famine, China has delivered pretty well on those freedoms. Prior to the Communists taking power, China had a famine every other year. Nor was the famine of the Great Leap Forward the result of greed or war, like famines in the capitalist world, but of monumental miscalculation. Small comfort to the people who died, but it was still unintended.

When FDR listed the 4 freedoms, it was no accident that freedom of speech went along with freedom from want.

And then failed to deliver on it by arresting and trying members of the Communist Party and Socialist Workers Party in the early 1940s. That was followed by McCarthyism, which was followed by COINTELPRO, which was followed by TOPLEV. We have Freedom of Speech, except when it might actually be a threat.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
While I sympathize with the Nepali peoples struggle against would be Maoist despots,

You mean the aristocracy's struggle against Maoism. The Maoist insurgancy is rather popular.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
The Maoist insurgancy is rather popular.

Since when do popular causes feel the need to murder people who don't actively aid them?

[chequita guevara]

When you've got support, you think you can get away with that kinda sh*t. Ironic, isn't it.

[DinoDoc]

BTW, I forgot to say that Nepal is under a state of seige from the insurgents which doesn't lend itself to the development of democratic institutions.

[chequita guevara]

True.


But they moved too slowly to develop them, and didn't do enough to alievate the poverty of the people. The most dangerous time in a government's history is when a bad government tries to reform itself.

[Adam Smith]

And So, To Sum It Up

After two days and 130 or so posts we have:

On the one hand the evidence that the people of Nepal are attempting to work things out for themselves without the help of the Maoist rebels and their weapons.

On the other hand the circular argument that the existence of an armed rebellion is proof of its validity.

Repeat, repeat, repeat, as if sheer repetition will make the argument valid.

George Orwell would be proud, though in my view your credibility suffers with each repetition.



So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.
F. Scott Fitzgerald, The Great Gatsby

[chequita guevara]

Ah, I'll just build it back up some other way.

[Adam Smith]

Don't forget your Crealm Toothpaste.
A good smile helps make a good first impression.