The Sandinista Revolution in 1979

[Brosa Luxemburg]

What are your views? I think it was a positive development. Even in the face of counter-revolutionaries, imperialist intervention, etc. the Sandinistas allowed free and fair elections, a genuine freedom of expression and of the press (that could exist in the unique situation anyway),etc. They worked, in my opinion, towards building true socialism.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

I think it was a progressive development in historical context, but one incapable of leading to socialism.

[marksist-leninist]

Sandinistas had a critically mistake that they permitted counter-revolutioner bourgeoisie by elections.

[marl]

It was nice until Ortega decided he was a social conservative.

[Ismail]

The rise of the FSLN was a progressive development, but at the same time it pursued an absolutely conciliatory stand towards right-wingers. Strikes were outlawed, various attempts were made at securing foreign investment from the West (sans the USA), they publicized their support for a "mixed economy," and after 1990 the FSLN became quite reactionary and corrupt, with Ortega nowadays working with ex-Contra men for electoral purposes. Not to mention that the ideology of Ortega and Co. was "Christian Socialism" both then and now.

There was a pro-Albanian party in Nicaragua known as the MAP-ML (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAP-ML), which was notable enough to have representation in the country's legislature. It spoke against the rightist positions of the FSLN, which were being encouraged by its Cuban and Soviet allies.