Human Rights vs. Accomplishments?

[Yogurt Addict]

Hi,

Recently I have become more involved with the Communist Party of Canada and my membership application is being processed, however there are some concerns I wanted to discuss with those more familiar with Marxist theories and the struggles of the working class than I am.

Whenever I read the program outlines and articles of various communist parties, whether the Communist Party of Canada to those in Australia, U.K., U.S.A., and beyond, I hear a lot about the accomplishments of such countries as Cuba and the former Soviet Union, as well as leaders like Hugo Chavez in Venezuela and Mao in China. The same is true with such struggles as the FARC in Colombia.

However, what I am confused about is the human rights, economic, and political issues of these movements and nations that I read online which seem to contradict what I am told from those in the Communist Party or read in Marxist articles, like the Party’s People’s Voice newspaper.

For example, I read about Cuba’s model accomplishments with universal healthcare, the economy, rights and freedoms, and overall of being a socialist nation. When I search Wikipedia, I read this…


The Cuban government has been accused of numerous human rights abuses, including torture, arbitrary imprisonment, unfair trials, and extrajudicial executions (a.k.a. "El Paredón"). Human Rights Watch reports that the regime represses nearly all forms of political dissent. There are many restrictions on leaving the country.

Also I read about how so many Cubans flee Cuba for the U.S.A.?

Or about the FARC, I read in People’s Voice that they’re fighting for workers’ freedom, but then on the Internet I read about extortion, kidnappings, slaughtering civilians, drug dealing, etc.

So I am confused. I don’t know which information is telling the truth. Two different perspectives and I am not sure which to believe? :confused:

Thanks!

[MustCrushCapitalism]

What are "human rights" and where do they come from? Assuming they have a worldly origin (eg the UN Declaration of Universal Human Rights) then here's the issue - the declaration includes the right to private property... etc.

Cuba isn't socialist, I would argue, but really not all that different from any European liberal welfare state. A few would disagree with me. The idea that they "repress all forms of political dissent" is imperialist propaganda and bullshit. People are leaving the country because the imperialist US embargo has made conditions pretty bad.

And FARC aren't fighting for workers' freedom, they're fighting for their leadership's cocaine profits.

[Eagle_Syr]

Human rights are intrinsic.

To address your issue, however, you must understand that the people who seek to unfairly criticize the USSR and Cuba, for example, are usually hypocrites who never seem to criticize the abuses committed by the United States under Batista, or in Bolivia, or all over the world.

Do you think the US doesn't abuse human rights?

That is not to say that human rights have not been abused by the countries you listed, but rather, that abuses under capitalism are worse, and capitalists like to do everything in their power to sabotage workers' liberation

[Prometeo liberado]

The so called Human Rights is a term invented by the bourgeois. It is hypocritical at best, taking two opposing views and holding them both as truths. Take the migration of of Cubans to the U.S. If we are to believe what they tell us than why are we not as appalled by the many more Mexicans, Hondurans,and Guatemalans who "flee" to the U.,S. seeking asylum for many of the same reasons? Answer is because either the human Rights or terrorist tag was omitted for the illegal/migrant worker tag. And we on the left are not immune from being used by this nonsense whenever it helps a narrow take on a situation, such as using a very black and white analysis to describe FARC as merely drug dealers. We still assume that Cuba is a police state, though many here discount those who have been there and say otherwise because we have been indoctinated by the Holy use of the term Human Rights. The term Human Rights performed an amazing coup in Allende's Chile, allowing the physical coup to go unfettered. Human Rights? Which humans and whose rights?

[Ose]

The 'human rights abuses' you mention take place in just about every country, even (perhaps especially) those which claim to be bastions of freedom and godly goodness. It's also kind of funny how allowing citizens to go without food, shelter and healthcare is not considered to be a massive human rights violation. What constitutes human rights is has been made up to suit the ruling class. Just because you've heard two sides to the story doesn't mean either of them has to be correct.


Human rights are intrinsic.

Dude, no. Intrinsic to what?