Fidel Castro - We should stop looking at him as a good perso

[Hayduke]

Fidel Castro knows about che-lives. First I was kind of stuned and quite happy, but I tought this over.

He goes against what I'm fighting for. Pure democracy. The elections that are held, are in his favour and will always be, when he leads te regime.

But no elections, basically means dictator ship and that doesnt make him any different from other dictators. We should never forget that what the people want, should always be done.

Inform the people about the changes when Castro is gone and America is coming back. Then just let them deciate how to go on with Cuba. Dont deciate for them .

The people are the heart of your country, let them deciate!

[Zombie]

America isn't better, Bush is the biggest cheater of all. I'd prefer having a smart ass like Castro ;) than a biggot like Dubya for leader/ruler.

(Edited by Zombie at 1:48 am on June 4, 2003)

[synthesis]

Fidel Castro wasn't elected by his people. Big fucking news, the majority of the country still supports him!

http://www.marxmail.org/facts/cuba_gallup.htm

The popular vote is in his favor, which is more than we can say about Dubya at the time of his election.

[Loknar]

he is a popular man indeed but he loves his power too much to give it up.

[Bianconero]

I guess that if people in Europe would stop being brainwashed cowards and would stop excluding Cuba from world market, the country would be wealthier than it is now. On the other hand, it would be stupid of the ruling class to help Cuba knowing that a socialist country can only harm their class interests.

"Fidel Castro knows about che-lives"

What do you mean?

[Sensitive]

Fidel Castro is a great leader. We should not waste time criticizing him because he is not perfect. All criticism should be directed at our class enemy and its fascist defenders.

I want the bourgeois class to be wiped off the face of the Earth!

[Urban Rubble]

"All criticism should be directed at our class enemy and its fascist defenders"

That's bullshit, why shouldn't you be allowed constructively critisize someone ?

Castro has his problems, but he is still a good leader, he's done a great job.

"I want the bourgeois class to be wiped off the face of the Earth"

O.K Pol Pot, good to know. What, are you going to send them to work camps ?

Will someone ban this guy ?

[Sensitive]

Quote: from Urban Rubble on 3:43 am on June 4, 2003
"
O.K Pol Pot, good to know. What, are you going to send them to work camps ?

Will someone ban this guy ?LOL, Pol Pot? Do you even know what he did? He was not a communist, and he murdered city-dwellers.

The bourgeois class will be eliminated, it will cease to exist and cease to have political power, hence eliminated. I'm not sure why you assumed they would be killed though. Funny how people make strange assumptions like that.

Perhaps you should be banned for calling someone you know nothing about "Pol Pot".

And yes, segments of the left spend far too much time criticizing leaders, like Castro, and less time trying to overthrow the capitalist system itself.

[革命者]

Quote: from D DAY on 7:39 am on June 4, 2003
Fidel Castro knows about che-lives. First I was kind of stuned and quite happy, but I tought this over.

He goes against what I'm fighting for. Pure democracy. The elections that are held, are in his favour and will always be, when he leads te regime.

But no elections, basically means dictator ship and that doesnt make him any different from other dictators. We should never forget that what the people want, should always be done.

Inform the people about the changes when Castro is gone and America is coming back. Then just let them deciate how to go on with Cuba. Dont deciate for them .

The people are the heart of your country, let them deciate!
Quite frankly, Bas, i think the democratic government in Cuba is the closed we can get to having a ultimate democratic state(more de-centalized and anarchist) at the moment-- they have a popular vote with quite deep roots/links into society, but they also have a less reactionary assembly of leaders, where Castro is the head chair-man and (thereby) president of the country(he's also the president of the NAPP).

[Sabocat]

Fidel's biggest fault if you can call it that, is his zealous defense of the revolution and socialism and love for his people and country.

I think he is more like a father, making sure his children don't get into trouble and get hurt. With the U$ constantly knocking on that door, how can you blame him?

[El Che]

DDay I agree with you and I`m glad to see some people aren`t afraid to think for them selves, regardless. I expressed my views here (http://www.che-lives.com/cgi/community/topic.pl?forum=11&topic=3746&start=50). Most people ignored me, others flamed me.

The way I see it, it`s personality cult. Fidel is a celebrity, he`s cool. But he`s just a man, just like Che was just a man.

[Hayduke]

DyerMaker , if Fidel Castro would have won anyway then why werent there any elections ?

And please dont talk about the people in Cuba referring to children being taken care of by their father. There human beings as well and quite capable of thinking for themselfes, no man should do that for other people unless he's chosen to do it.

Fidel Castro isnt.

Hold democratic elections and if its true that the majority of the people is still in favour of keeping Castro as there leader, Bush will have no choice to quit the embargo. That was the deal the U.S.A made a while ago. If there would be fair democratic elections, the embargo would be canceld.

Beat them at there own game.

[Hayduke]

Quote: from El Che on 5:39 pm on June 4, 2003
DDay I agree with you and I`m glad to see some people aren`t afraid to think for them selves, regardless. I expressed my views here (http://www.che-lives.com/cgi/community/topic.pl?forum=11&topic=3746&start=50). Most people ignored me, others flamed me.

The way I see it, it`s personality cult. Fidel is a celebrity, he`s cool. But he`s just a man, just like Che was just a man.


My toughts exactly El che,

Every socialist/communist that is in favour of a dictator ship, should really consider on what side he's on. Cause its certaintly not the describition of the left.

[Sensitive]

What do you mean by "fair democratic elections"? You mean the kind we have here in the US? The kind where there are two capitalist candidates on the ballot which receive all of the (capitalist) media attention? The US has some of the most restrictive ballot access laws in the world for minor parties. Remember Florida 2000? Was that a "fair democratic election"?

If there were "fair democratic elections" in Cuba (according to the US ruling class' terms), Fidel Castro's name would not even be on the ballot. There would be Capitalist A, and Capitalist B. Maybe people could write in Fidel's name though. Damn, American "democracy" is so wonderful, isn't it?

The reason a one party system in Cuba is essential is that if there was another party the US would immediately begin pouring in millions of dollars of support. The extremely tiny country-revolutionary minority would brainwash countless followers with their propaganda and lies. That is not democratic...

Furthermore, what is the need for having a capitalist party in a socialist country? That seems ridiculous! Should capitalist countries be required to have a monarchist party in their country?

[Hayduke]

Quote: from Sensitive on 5:58 pm on June 4, 2003
What do you mean by "fair democratic elections"? You mean the kind we have here in the US? The kind where there are two capitalist candidates on the ballot which receive all of the (capitalist) media attention? The US has some of the most restrictive ballot access laws in the world for minor parties. Remember Florida 2000? Was that a "fair democratic election"?

If there were "fair democratic elections" in Cuba (according to the US ruling class' terms), Fidel Castro's name would not even be on the ballot. There would be Capitalist A, and Capitalist B. Maybe people could write in Fidel's name though. Damn, American "democracy" is so wonderful, isn't it?

The reason a one party system in Cuba is essential is that if there was another party the US would immediately begin pouring in millions of dollars of support. The extremely tiny country-revolutionary minority would brainwash countless followers with their propaganda and lies. That is not democratic...

Furthermore, what is the need for having a capitalist party in a socialist country? That seems ridiculous! Should capitalist countries be required to have a monarchist party in their country?

No with fair elections im not referring to the famous " who ever got the most money wins " elections in America. Im referring to normal democratic elections, were everybody is able to begin a party with every idea they want to come out for.

Do you really believe that in a country like Cuba, were the communist party is in charge, there will be money transfers to the local parties ? The United States has nothing to in Cuba any more, and financal support would be automatically be reported in the newspapers, wich will show that America is trying to control the Cuban elections. That reaction with have the opposite response, people will vote socialist.

And if the people deciate that a capitalist system is better then the current Cuban gonverment, then so be it.

The people will always have to deciate whats better for them, even when you and I know that it will destroy the health, education systems and everything Cuba has built up.

The people will always have the final decision. Thats the basic rule for every socialist country .

[Loknar]

Quote: from Bianconero on 9:17 am on June 4, 2003
I guess that if people in Europe would stop being brainwashed cowards and would stop excluding Cuba from world market, the country would be wealthier than it is now. On the other hand, it would be stupid of the ruling class to help Cuba knowing that a socialist country can only harm their class interests.

"Fidel Castro knows about che-lives"

What do you mean?



What are you talking about? Europe is a Socialist community.

Also you got to hand it Castro, despite the sanctions he has maintained Cube quite well.

[Sabocat]

Quote: from D DAY on 5:42 pm on June 4, 2003
DyerMaker , if Fidel Castro would have won anyway then why werent there any elections ?

And please dont talk about the people in Cuba referring to children being taken care of by their father. There human beings as well and quite capable of thinking for themselfes, no man should do that for other people unless he's chosen to do it.

Fidel Castro isnt.

Hold democratic elections and if its true that the majority of the people is still in favour of keeping Castro as there leader, Bush will have no choice to quit the embargo. That was the deal the U.S.A made a while ago. If there would be fair democratic elections, the embargo would be canceld.

Beat them at there own game.



I seriously don't believe that "open fair elections" would end the embargo. So if Cuba had open free elections and the Cuban people voted and chose Raul Castro lets say, you're trying to tell me that the embargo would end? LOL. The embargo happened in part after the nationalization of American assets in Cuba. The oil companies refineries for example when they refused to refine the cheaper Russian oil.

The only way that embargo will be lifted by the U$ is if the Cubans allow a puppet regime to be placed and it goes back to being the "colony" of the U$ that it was before.

I was speaking metaphorically when I referred to Cubans as Fidel's children. I didn't mean it in a literal sense. I think that's the affection he has for them.

[革命者]

how bigger the masses how childisher they become.

a mass of indifferent ppl are like 8yr old childs.

what to do about the indifference?: change.

can change occur with these "bureaucratic" and always corrupted party elections?: NO!

will an 8yr old choose wisely?: NO!

"Do you really believe that in a country like Cuba, were the communist party is in charge, there will be money transfers to the local parties ?"
of course there will be, and about which "newspapers" are you talking??-- the few bought by the CIA or the ones started by the CIA?? :) get what i mean?

Scotty

ps. @Bianconero: an respected comrade on this board has attended a meeting with Castro in Buenos Aires and has given the address to one of the escorting state employees.

[redstar2000]

Thorny problem.

From a standpoint of fact (as I think Larissa pointed out some time ago), the president in Cuba is elected by the National Assembly, not by a direct popular vote.

So presumably the "free election" that D Day is speaking of would be multi-party elections to the National Assembly, followed by a fresh vote of that body for the presidency.

While it's certainly possible that the CIA would funnel money into Cuba, the vast bulk of campaign funds for pro-capitalist candidates would certainly come from wealthy Cuban exiles in Miami, much it "cleaned" by being funneled through relatives still in Cuba. This is, I believe, the way the Sandinistas were defeated in Nicaragua.

I think it is romantic and unrealistic to suggest that large sums of money will not influence, perhaps decisively, the outcome of a democratic election in a poor country...how much, after all, would it take to bribe a few hundred vote tabulators whose average income is less than $100 a month? It's not as if they're going to install "tamper-proof" electronic balloting prior to the election.

In Nicaraguan elections these days, candidates campaign by giving away rolls of toilet paper...get the picture?

From the standpoint of material conditions, Cuba "ought to be" a poor, exploited colony of the United States...like the rest of the Caribbean and Central America. The economic development to support any kind of genuine socialism there simply doesn't exist. Perhaps in another century...

So we have a historical anomaly...a "socialist" country that really isn't, but that has some of the "secondary" features that one would expect to find in a socialist country...more, in fact, than any place else that I'm aware of.

In a real socialist/communist country, power is directly in the hands of the working class...and that is not the case in Cuba or anywhere.

So how should we regard Cuba? I am in favor of solidarity.

Why? Because there is one feature of the Cuban Revolution that seems undeniable to me: its anti-imperialist core. Given the constraints under which the Cubans have operated, they have outperformed every other country in the world except Vietnam in effective resistance to U.S. imperialism.

That doesn't mean we have to be "Fidel-groupies" who must swoon in admiration over his every brain-fart. But it means we give credit where credit is due.

Cuba may be, in fact, very distant from real socialism/communism...they're just closer than anybody else. Until we do better--and in time we will--I think revolutionary solidarity with the Cuban Revolution is the only reasonable communist position.

As for giving the capitalists a chance to buy their way back into power, forget about it. If the U.S. wants Cuba back, it will have to conquer it militarily...and we should do whatever we can to help the Cubans resist, as they have resisted for more than four decades, the main enemy of the peoples of the whole world...U.S. imperialism!

For Solidarity With Cuba Against U.S. Imperialism!

:cool:

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

I agree that there should be no personality cult with Fidel, but I think you are mistaken about the source of peoples' admiration for the man. As revolutionary communists, we should do eveything that we can to further the cause. In doing that, we cannot sympathise with imperialistic demands. We must support Castro and his revolutionary regime, we must fight to maintain any system that can operate without giving in to American imperialism. Allowing the bourgeoisie to expand into Cuba will not further the cause! Yes, DDay, we must do all we can for the working class, but we would be letting them down if we were to invite capitalism into Cuba. We must resist U$ imperialism for the woking class.

(Edited by Victorcommie at 11:38 am on June 4, 2003)

[Hayduke]

Please people, dont forget my opion that Fidel Castro is a good leader, he made the life of the cuban people liveable aigan by overthrowing Batista.

But there's something that should never be done. Silece the voice of the people. And that's done here and the choice is as little as the bush and gore elections.

[Cassius Clay]

D-Day you seem to have this romantic image of 'Free-elections' as one has allready pointed out look at Niguragiua in 1990, that was a farce. The CIA and their lackeys would put in place a puppet government so fast that you wont be able to say 'Revolution'.

Would you also like to tell me where Castro has silenced 'the voice of the people'?

There are many problems in Cuba and Castro has made many mistakes and on many points he and the Cuban government deserved to be criticised. As Marxists it is our job to criticise, to point out mistakes and to make sure the people's voice is allways heard and come up with a alternative. Yet I haven't seen any of that in this thread, just a vague criticism and a romantic idealism for western style 'Democracy'.

So where has Cuba gone wrong. Well for starters managers have the right to 'hire and fire', this is not a good thing since it creates a beuracratic almost 'Capitalist' elite and it's clear the workers are not in control over production. The economy first became far to dependent on Soviet Social-Imperialsm that when the USSR collapsed in 1991 Cuba faced crisis, now it cosies up to the Euro and is dependent on tourism. Fact is with tourism comes Capitalism. True there's a difference between a guy selling cigars on a street corner and a big multi national company setting up shop, but that line is very thin sometimes.

So your right to say Castro should be criticised and the serious flaws in Cuban society need to be made apparent. We must support the Cuban people to make sure a new bourgesie does raise it's head and make sure what power they do have is kept by them. We must also applaud both the Cuban people and Castro for building a society which is a stark posisitive contrast to the rest of third world and keep up the fight against U$ Imperialism.

[Sandanista]

Quote: from DyerMaker on 6:58 am on June 4, 2003
Fidel Castro wasn't elected by his people. Big fucking news, the majority of the country still supports him!

http://www.marxmail.org/facts/cuba_gallup.htm

The popular vote is in his favor, which is more than we can say about Dubya at the time of his election.


Well in Cuba they are made to smile when the cameras are there, when they go away its guns in the back time

[Lardlad95]

Quote: from D DAY on 6:39 am on June 4, 2003
Fidel Castro knows about che-lives. First I was kind of stuned and quite happy, but I tought this over.

He goes against what I'm fighting for. Pure democracy. The elections that are held, are in his favour and will always be, when he leads te regime.

But no elections, basically means dictator ship and that doesnt make him any different from other dictators. We should never forget that what the people want, should always be done.

Inform the people about the changes when Castro is gone and America is coming back. Then just let them deciate how to go on with Cuba. Dont deciate for them .

The people are the heart of your country, let them deciate!


i too am all about true democracy, hence me being a democratic socialist

however i like castro because he is brave enough to openly defy the us instead of backing down with his beliefs like other nations aswell as some americans

[Pete]

Well in Cuba they are made to smile when the cameras are there, when they go away its guns in the back time

I can't believe you said that! Have you ever been to Cuba, or even talked to some one who was in Cuba? This statement is baseless and holds no worth.

[Bianconero]

"The economy first became far to dependent on Soviet Social-Imperialsm that when the USSR collapsed in 1991 Cuba faced crisis"

Where was their choice I ask. Capitalist countries (or to be more precise: the ruling class of capitalist countries) would not help them in any way (which is quite a natural thing, as it' simply not their class interest to help a socialist country like Cuba) so they had to turn to the Soviet Union.

If I'm not mistakening, Cuba for example hasn't got much oil, so where should they get it from if not from the SU?

[Ghost Writer]

Fidel Castro - we should work to find the bullet to the head that will render this man a corpse.

[Dirty Commie]

Quote: from Ghost Writer on 4:26 pm on June 4, 2003
Fidel Castro - we should work to find the bullet to the head that will render this man a corpse.

You bastard, grow up, see the truth, he is a better leader than most leaders. Yeah, he has made mistakes, but his country is not dependent on sweat shop labour in the rest of the world, even if it costs a few freedoms, it is worth it.

[El Che]

Cassius Clay makes it quite clear that we should criticise Cuba, and Castro, for everything except it`s Democratic shortcomings (to put it mildly). We have, of course, come to expect no better of him over time. But whats more appalling to me is how many on the Left, or pseudo Left, still disregard such important concepts as Democracy and Human Rights.

Their conception of Society, or rather of how Society should be, is truely medival. The enemy of my enemy is NOT, necessarily, my friend.

The Communist project to correct the very real and grave injustices that affect billions of people is not enough to achive a better world if you do not take on board other important Leftist insights such as tolerance (political and otherwise),respect for every person`s fundamental dignity and the rights that derive from the same. The right to free thought, free speech, freedom of movement, the right to privacy, the right assume one`s sexuality without fear of persecution, the right to have a say in all matters that concern and pertain to us, freedom to move freely, etc. These are all important things. Just because I support the removal of the right to exploit does not mean I support the removal of every other right in the book. Many of these gains are Libertarian, Humanist and Progressive ones and if you do not take them on board I say you are Stalinist, Fascist, right-wing scum.

To Redstar2000, that said Cuba is consistently aint-imperialist, while I do take your point on that I must also ask: what of the condictions on the ground?

What of the two Cubas, the Cuba of the turist and the dollar and the Cuban of poverty ridden Cubans? What of the misery, what of the Cubanswho sell themselves to prostitution for the foreigner`s coin. Is that not imperialism? I am not blaming these things on Castro, I`m just saying that if this is all he can do for those people then its not a heck of alot. What the Cubans need is for their lives to improve and not the empty rhetoric of the Marxist-Leninist.


(Edited by El Che at 9:39 pm on June 4, 2003)

[Ghost Writer]

Dirty Commie, you certainly live up to your name. You are a scum bag.

[Dirty Commie]

Whatever you say ghost wanker, coming from you it's gotta be gold.

Why are you even at che-lives?

[Cassius Clay]

Quote: from Bianconero on 9:25 pm on June 4, 2003
''Where was their choice I ask. Capitalist countries (or to be more precise: the ruling class of capitalist countries) would not help them in any way (which is quite a natural thing, as it' simply not their class interest to help a socialist country like Cuba) so they had to turn to the Soviet Union.

If I'm not mistakening, Cuba for example hasn't got much oil, so where should they get it from if not from the SU?


Yes you are right to say that Cuba faced little choice, but what may I ask is the difference in becoming dependent on the IMF or the USSR? Albania managed to survive for fourty years without becoming even slightly dependent on the USSR. Che often complained about the 'aid' sent by the USSR, it was third grade rubbish sent with the entire purpose of making Cuba dependent on the USSR. That's not aiding Socialism that's spreading Imperialism. Just like the USSR exploited the GDR to hilt and take the example of 'aid' to Albania from Khrushev's USSR. To make it dependent on the USSR and to follow the USSR unquestionably Khrushchev demanded that the Albania agree with the USSR over isolating China, if Albania didn't do this Khrushcev would refuse to hand over 75 million tons of grain which at that time the Albanians needed. In the end Khrushchev only sent through 25 million tons of grain and after that completly isolated it. Again then what is the difference in becoming in dect to the IMF or the USSR under Khrushchev?

[Moskitto]

I think Castro's heart is in the right place, but i would disagree with the way he's doing some things.

[Bianconero]

The question is: how where Cuba to solve the problem of not having oil ressources? (example)

Then, I'm not into the SU under Khrushchev. What I know is that the SU helped to keep US invaders where they belong: in the US.

Khrushchev helped the revolution to stay in power so he helped the revolution to help the poor. About Albania, I guess they might have had other preconditions than Cuba (more/other ressources ... ?).




(Edited by Bianconero at 10:00 pm on June 4, 2003)

[Som]

While i'm quite a bit more inclined to a more open political system then them, I agree with most of Cassius clay and redstars stance on things.

About Cuba's dependence on the USSR, it was more than just aid, Kruschev and Castro helped turn Cuba into nearly the same sort of colony as it was under us imperialism, just with a much nicer face. What happened was that Castro agreed to gear the entire economy towards sugar production, with what kruschev called 'socialist division of labor among nations' or some poor rhetorical crap like that. So instead of industrializing Cuba, or say growing... food, Cuba was again growing cash crops.
While this happened, western leaders that had previously bought cuban sugar, shifted it to other places, and Cuba become entirely dependent on trade with the Soviet Union and the Eastern bloc.
When the Soviet Union collapsed, Cuba lost something like 80% of its trade, and its main source of income became something that couldn't compete with a world market, forcing them to resort to tourism, and even legalization of the dollar.

Cuba definetly could and should improve in workplace democracy. This will only strengthen socialism on the island. Getting rid of centralized planners and coordinators in favor of decentralized local grassroots consumer councils, and federated worker organization.
As well as getting rid of the state managers and replacing them with workers councils, and syndicalist management. With this, I think it would be a much more accurate idea to move to the socialist cooperation like che advocated, instead of the more rightward swing of soviet socialism where there was often competition between industry.
Theres some vague sense of worker democracy though as it is though, theres often workers meetings to suggest ways to improve things, make things more effecient and so on, but its all nothing more than suggestions.

The dollar and minor privatizations also need to be dealt with, though i'm really not sure if theres a good way to do it. I know Cubas trade union advocates making it illegal again. The dollarization has made it so there are wealth inequalities as bad as america.

I do think Castro needs to weaken the grasp of the communist parties power, and at the very least, allow multi-party elections between mulitple socialist parties. The laws that allow arrest of dissidents essentially at the governments whims need to be discarded. Having 'disrespect' illegal is just completely ridiculous, as well as disgracing a national symbol and another incredibly vague law against 'counter-revolutionary propaganda' or some garbage like that. Cage up James Carson in the U.S. interests section and be done with him as well.
A multi-party democracy is needed to keep the power of government weakened, unfortunately it might be necesary to ban capitalist parties, and of course foreign funds must be banned.

The whole system could be a lot more open and democratic without losing its tenous grasp on holding the monetary interests back.

With all this, 'supporting' Castro would seem a bit far, but solidarity is a good notion, showing the acheivements of an at least somewhat socialist system, even under hard circumstances.


(Edited by Som at 2:46 am on June 5, 2003)

[redstar2000]

What of the two Cubas, the Cuba of the tourist and the dollar and the Cuba of poverty ridden Cubans? What of the misery, what of the Cubans who sell themselves to prostitution for the foreigner's coin.

No argument here; in fact, late last year in one of the endless "what happens after Fidel" threads, I posted my concerns on the "two-tier" economy developing in Cuba.

The situation there, as I understand it, is that if you have access to "hard currencies" (either directly from tourists or from remittances sent to you by relatives abroad), you can live in Cuba at a reasonable approximation of first world standards. If you lack access, then even basic necessities (toilet paper, for example) may be unavailable in the state stores and you will have to do without.

Creating this material division clearly results in a political division; a growing number of Cubans will not be sorry at all and many would privately welcome the return of U.S. imperialism...as the road to their personal prosperity.

I personally think it is a cancer growing within the Cuban Revolution. If Fidel asked my opinion (:biggrin:), I would say that some method has to be devised to get most of that foreign currency out of the hands of the newly emerging elite and into the hands of the general population...otherwise disaster--counter-revolution--draws closer with every passing day.

But then you have to ask yourself, what incentive does the "party elite" (who also have access to all the goodies that hard currency can buy) have to rectify this injustice? The elite knows they will do "ok" even if there is a counter-revolution...look at how many ex-"communists" are found today in prominent places in Russia and Eastern Europe. So, self-preservation is not a viable motive.

Only those Cubans who still take communism seriously can be expected to attempt to resolve the "two-tier" economy problem...and how many of them there are and how strong they are, I simply have no idea.

:cool:

(Edited by redstar2000 at 8:23 pm on June 4, 2003)

[synthesis]

Quote: from Ghost Writer on 9:26 pm on June 4, 2003
Fidel Castro - we should work to find the bullet to the head that will render this man a corpse.
Why?

[Palmares]

Castro undemocratic? Are we referring to true democracy, or REPRESENTATIVE democracy? Only one is truely possible (the latter), and is the western style (the exception being ancient Greece, etc - where a small population could sustain it).

Castro is a dictator. Hitler was democratically elected...

Things aren't always so black and white, so don't treat them that way. Castro is very mcuh wrong in his strict censorship and autocratic rule, but he has done much that is good for the people that many 'democratic' rulers haven't.

Criticism is good, and should always be there, but we shouldn't waste so much time with misdirected contempt/hate (not sure if that is the correct term to use, but you know what I mean).

We should support Castro where we can (but not without criticism), and be in solidarity our comrades against our true enemy... the FASCISTS and CAPITALISTS

BTW, having any heroes is foolish, be an individual (i.e. not following the cult of someone). I only have my avatar coz it looks cool.

(Edited by Cthenthar at 2:12 pm on June 5, 2003)


(Edited by Cthenthar at 2:14 pm on June 5, 2003)

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

Fidel Castro may be an execively authoritarian leader, but when fighting for the working class, it is important to do everything possible to destroy capitalism, and castro is on our side when it comes to destroying capitalism. We must suppirt him and his fight agaisnt imperialism! I strongly diasagree with many of the things he does, but he is nonetheless my comrade.

[革命者]

in June 2002 almost 9 million ppl signed a petition to keep the cuban constitution in reaction to a petition send to the National Assembly to propose for change in the constitution.

[kylie]

Quote: from D DAY on 6:39 am on June 4, 2003
Fidel Castro knows about che-lives. First I was kind of stuned and quite happy, but I tought this over.

He goes against what I'm fighting for. Pure democracy. The elections that are held, are in his favour and will always be, when he leads te regime.

But no elections, basically means dictator ship and that doesnt make him any different from other dictators. We should never forget that what the people want, should always be done.

Inform the people about the changes when Castro is gone and America is coming back. Then just let them deciate how to go on with Cuba. Dont deciate for them .

The people are the heart of your country, let them deciate!

Why should there be elections? Elections are used to create the illusion of freedom in capitalist countries, and seeing as how Cuba is not capitalist(or not completely capitalist, at least), they are obselete. All that can be gained from elections is a legal way of counter-revolution, as it is inevitable that among those who would try to get elected, would be a right wing group.

I do think Castro needs to weaken the grasp of the communist parties power, and at the very least, allow multi-party elections between mulitple socialist parties. The laws that allow arrest of dissidents essentially at the governments whims need to be discarded. Having 'disrespect' illegal is just completely ridiculous, as well as disgracing a national symbol and another incredibly vague law against 'counter-revolutionary propaganda' or some garbage like that. Cage up James Carson in the U.S. interests section and be done with him as well.
A multi-party democracy is needed to keep the power of government weakened, unfortunately it might be necesary to ban capitalist parties, and of course foreign funds must be banned.

These suggestions would mean the work of the revolution in Cuba being undone, and the country becoming much less left-wing. Why would it do this, when it is in its interest, as well as the people of Cubas interest, to stay as far left as possible?

[Sandanista]

Quote: from Dirty Commie on 9:33 pm on June 4, 2003

Quote: from Ghost Writer on 4:26 pm on June 4, 2003
Fidel Castro - we should work to find the bullet to the head that will render this man a corpse.

You bastard, grow up, see the truth, he is a better leader than most leaders. Yeah, he has made mistakes, but his country is not dependent on sweat shop labour in the rest of the world, even if it costs a few freedoms, it is worth it.


Erm actually many Cubans live on less than $10 a month, i know ppl who have been to Cuba and they say the tourist spots are amazing, but the ppl places are a complete dump.

[Soul Rebel]

not true actually- i have been to cuba. its the total opposite of what you hear. yes some places are in bad condition- but that is found in any country, even the us. and there really is no need to make more than $10 a month- you get free health care, education, etc. you are very well taken care of under the cuban government. all the essentials for living are given to the cuban people.

[the SovieT]

Fidel was once more reelected by the politburo to be the chairman...

the politburo have decided..
and you will now all shut up...

being able to decide 1 out of 5 bourgeouse isnt democracy.. its bourgeouse parlamentarism..

its pure BS...

[Som]

Why should there be elections? Elections are used to create the illusion of freedom in capitalist countries, and seeing as how Cuba is not capitalist(or not completely capitalist, at least), they are obselete. All that can be gained from elections is a legal way of counter-revolution, as it is inevitable that among those who would try to get elected, would be a right wing group.

In a state of siege in a poor country, making capitalist parties legal would likely not be included. Aren't there more policies of a government then the vaguest concept of the economy? What if the Cuban people would like a much less authoritarian government? If they want a liberal socialist party, a syndicalist worker's democracy movement, a green socialist party, maoists, trots, stalinists, council communists, libertarian socialists, so on and so forth. Shouldn't they have this choice? and if the communist party makes a right-ward swing, a Cuban deng or gorbachev comes to power, Wouldn't it be in the interests of socialism for the people to be able to discard the communist party, in favor of another socialist party?


These suggestions would mean the work of the revolution in Cuba being undone, and the country becoming much less left-wing. Why would it do this, when it is in its interest, as well as the people of Cubas interest, to stay as far left as possible?

I think the revolution can function without the government being able to arbitrarily arrest, jail, and execute it citizens, without any just cause beyond something as meaningless as 'disrespect' or some other meaningless label they attribute to dissent.

How would choosing between multiple SOCIALIST parties be less 'left-wing'?

Fidel was once more reelected by the politburo to be the chairman...

the politburo have decided..
and you will now all shut up...

being able to decide 1 out of 5 bourgeouse isnt democracy.. its bourgeouse parlamentarism..

its pure BS...

and being able to decide of 1 out of 1 party members isn't democracy, its an oligarchy.

Showing the obvious shortcomings in so called capitalist democracy doesn't make fidel any more democratic.

[革命者]

Quote: from the SovieT on 6:26 pm on June 5, 2003
Fidel was once more reelected by the politburo to be the chairman...

the politburo have decided..
and you will now all shut up...

being able to decide 1 out of 5 bourgeouse isnt democracy.. its bourgeouse parlamentarism..

its pure BS...



SovieT.... you can't just decide whether you are alowed to say fuck you on che-lives or not.. if you don't want it on ISF i can see your point, but fuck was never a commonly used word on che-lives and please keep it for the "rant"-threads, like the one in Websites, thank you.

don't start hating or flaming ppl if they say what they haven't said before just out of respect and to avoid sectarianism with fellow comrades like you....

don't hate D DAY for being against the creation of this "stalinist" ISF forum.

if you (maybe only partially) support Trotsky(hence the capital T??-- just a thought, right now) your overall opinions can't be that different from D DAY's, i am sure.

I know that Trotsky was for a one party government, so you may differ on this point, but you must understand D DAY is doing great things for the socialist party in Holland, which, can only be functional when elected through this "bourgeouse parlamentarism" of yours.

we all do what we can and this, frankly, in Holland is the only way forward for now.

[El Che]

Maybe something can still be done to turn the situation in Cuba around but to honest I doubt it. I think everything that Cuba trying to achive is going to crumble, I think the situation is desperate as it is and what Socialist elements there are in Cuban goverment are going to lose their power.

I don`t forget that everything was done by Imperialist forces to make the Cuban revolution fail, as is always the case, but I have to criticise Castro for not doing more. To start with, as Som said, there should be at least room for Socialist opposition to Castro. If at every turn Castro makes the decisions, if he makes the wrong ones, there is noone to point this out and suggest another route. The people, the workers need to have a say.

What poor countries desperatly need is to get out from under the yoke of International Capital, Neo-Liberalism and US Imperialism. If in most of these countries the forces of the Left aren`t strong enough to directly challenge these titans, in Cuba what efforts were made have gone sour. Add this to everything else that the Cuban regime lacks and it`s hard to see how we should continue to support it. There needs to be change.