Venezuela and Nicaragua

[Alexander Hamilton]

So people in nations with long histories of a very small number of haves and a very large number of have-nots, with improved methods of assuring an accurate ballot count, are voting for the far left.

Good for them.

Sort of like the benefits of capitalism (hussle, drive, ambition being rewarded) with the spreading around of the wealth. At least this is the anticipation of the people, who may have it better in such situations than let's say under Samosa or Batista.

Because Nicaragua rejected socialism when forced on them and are ready for some verson of it when voted for, (I don't care if any of the commies like how I'm phrasing this, words are for everyone, not just the radical left's view of words.) are there any commies out there with the gut to discuss how this might deal the commie movement a serious blow.


A. Hamilton

[colonelguppy]

communisms already been permanently set back.

[KC]

It doesn't?

[encephalon]

this question makes little sense. Could you perhaps rephrase it? How is this a setback?

And the contras were a minority, backed by the US state. The difference between then and now is that the US is too busy with Iraq to prevent the advance of socialism in the south.

[jlovato]

I think one of the biggest problems that communism faces is in the name and image of what the majority of people recognize as communism. Most Americans, at least, relate it to the former Soviet Union or China today and don't understand what communism is supposed to be. And when asked to back this ideology and revolt against corporations, they'll choose their current middle class existence over waiting in line for hours for toilet paper and bread. Seeing refugees flee Cuba by the hundreds isn't helping the cause either.

Former botched attempts have really trounced the name of communism. Will be difficult to gain credibility again.

[Faceless]

Because Nicaragua rejected socialism when forced on them and are ready for some verson of it when voted for, (I don't care if any of the commies like how I'm phrasing this, words are for everyone, not just the radical left's view of words.) are there any commies out there with the gut to discuss how this might deal the commie movement a serious blow.
I'm not entirely sure what you are trying to suggest when you say that socialism was forced upon the people of Nicaragua. I can only assume by this that you mean it wasn't voted upon, inspite of the fact that the FSLN won elections in 1984, which were recognised by international observers to be free and fair. The FSLN would not have even come to power if they did not have a mass base, and had the urban workers not responded to their calls for a general strike.

Do you not think that the bloody war with the (US backed) Contras might have had something to do with the demoralisation of the Nicaraguan people and the eventual victory of the counter-revolution? The idea that socialism was forced upon the Nicaraguan people is absurd, as it was only by the active participation of Nicaraguan peasants and workers in the revolution that brought the FSLN to victory. A second cause for the defeat of the sandinistas was that they failed to complete the revolution; only nationalising the property of the Somoza dictatorship, which although it constituted a large proportion of the Nicaraguan economy, was not enough.

and as a commie, I don't really care what words you use, its the total lack of content of your post which really concerns me.

I don't see as the rise of the Left in Latin America deals a blow to communism. In fact it is a great boon for communists. :D

[Alexander Hamilton]

encephalon:

That is a totally absurd view of things. Because the Sandanistas were military, they were met with a military response of the support of the Contras. (Eventually, that support became officially illegal, as Congress would no longer allow $ for their support. What the Reagan Administration eventually did was very ineffective, as their covert support couldn't even keep the Contras in shoes. The Nicaraguan People themselves got rid of the Sandanistas at the polls.

To suggest that we would be down in Venezuela and Nicaragua, fighting wars against these elected presidents is typical of how the world communist view cannot move on from the days of Eisenhower or, in lesser cases, Nixon. We have left that behind, even in the present state of Iraq.

You can use Iraq as whatever example you want, but, unlike many of the documents and studies written by the far right that argues to "reshape" the Middle East, there is no discussion by the far right, or anyone else, for the U.S. to move its military into Cuba, Venezuela, or Nicaragua.

If I didn't make myself clear, let's set aside the "enevitability" concept for a moment, and take my view that Marxism will not occur through revolution unless there is real exploitation, and not merely the kind you have to explain by reading, but the kind that people can see every day.

If these countris reshape themselves into a poor version of Sweden, and give people the benefit of the use of the resources without revolution, is that not a step backward for socialist REVOLUTION? I guess that was my point.


jlovato:

Of corse you've hit it right on the head. There is no way to think of ANY dictatorship as being "cool" and acceptable to the common U.S. taxpayer. Not only do most of us have thoughts that communism = death, but that any dictatorship, or absense of voting, is a bad thing that will eventually lead to one's harm of one's people.

We can understand democratic socialism (the non-Marxist kind) where there is freedom and a democratically chosen large social safety net, like Sweden or Germany. Bringing that kind of thing to Central and South America doesn't bother the man in the street. We are no longer running around looking for commies to kill. The truth is, we couldn't care less.

You saw the world reaction to our going in and ousting a murderous regime. Now imagine our trying to oust a democratically elected executive. We may pull some monkey business with backing one candidate v. another, or playing shady games with 2 bit countries like Haiti, but an outright invasion of either Nicaragua or Venezuela aint gonna fly no more. And wouldn't even do so if there were no Iraq. Christ, you got Jimmy Carter down there saying the elections are genuine, and you also know in your heart that the platforms Chavez and Ortega (finally!) are running on are more aligned with the will of the people than their opponents are/were.

[What Would Durruti Do?]

The day reformism actually gives birth to real communism which even revolution has failed to produce thus far except for a few cases, then THAT will be a blow to revolutionary leftism.

[SouthernBelle82]

I think one of the biggest problems that communism faces is in the name and image of what the majority of people recognize as communism. Most Americans, at least, relate it to the former Soviet Union or China today and don't understand what communism is supposed to be. And when asked to back this ideology and revolt against corporations, they'll choose their current middle class existence over waiting in line for hours for toilet paper and bread. Seeing refugees flee Cuba by the hundreds isn't helping the cause either.

Former botched attempts have really trounced the name of communism. Will be difficult to gain credibility again.

So true. All they know is propaganda and they aren't interested in educating themselves on it. Especially from a communist.

[Jazzratt]

Fucking hell. That's some god damn necromancy.

Locked.