If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Global Geopolitics)   Fidel Castro pulls yet another shock confession out of his cold soul and admits his economic system failed, preference for smoked brains over pickled   (glblgeopolitics.wordpress.com) divider line 88
    More: Interesting, Fidel Castro, economy, Jeffrey Goldberg, certitude, Ahmadinejad  
•       •       •

1636 clicks; posted to Politics » on 09 Sep 2013 at 1:40 PM (49 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



88 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-09-09 01:36:41 PM
Once propped up by the Soviet Union, Cuba's lifeline is now cheap oil from Venezuela, where President Hugo Chávez considers Fidel a mentor.

Apparently Chávez learned undeath from Castro, so I guess this makes sense.
 
2013-09-09 01:41:49 PM
Old news is exciting.
 
2013-09-09 01:43:32 PM

BKITU: Once propped up by the Soviet Union, Cuba's lifeline is now cheap oil from Venezuela, where President Hugo Chávez considers Fidel a mentor.

Apparently Chávez learned undeath from Castro, so I guess this makes sense.


It's a mistake to put your phylactery in a cigar though.  Everything is liable to go up in a puff of smoke.
 
2013-09-09 01:45:45 PM
Does this mean we will end the embargo?
 
2013-09-09 01:46:45 PM

neversubmit: Does this mean we will end the embargo?


But we still haven't gotten a satisfactory sense of revenge for perceived slights against America's imperial power.
 
2013-09-09 01:50:44 PM
Much like Snake Plissken I thought Castro was dead.
 
2013-09-09 01:52:43 PM

ikanreed: neversubmit: Does this mean we will end the embargo?

But we still haven't gotten a satisfactory sense of revenge for perceived slights against America's imperial power.


As long as a major constituency in a swing state hates the Cuban government, we will embargo Cuba.
 
2013-09-09 01:54:08 PM

ikanreed: neversubmit: Does this mean we will end the embargo?

But we still haven't gotten a satisfactory sense of revenge for perceived slights against America's imperial power.


Who the hell was this Fidel guy to lead a popular uprising against a brutal dictator and corporate puppet, and survive over 200 assassination attempts from the country that economically pillaged it?  WTF is this guy's problem?

/Fidel is, obviously, far from perfect
//But our reaction to him was way over the line
//MONGOOSE
 
2013-09-09 01:56:49 PM

cgraves67: ikanreed: neversubmit: Does this mean we will end the embargo?

But we still haven't gotten a satisfactory sense of revenge for perceived slights against America's imperial power.

As long as a major constituency in a swing state hates the Cuban government, we will embargo Cuba.


Good. It's nice to have a sunny vacay destination where one can actually get near the buffet table.
 
2013-09-09 01:58:32 PM

cgraves67: ikanreed: neversubmit: Does this mean we will end the embargo?

But we still haven't gotten a satisfactory sense of revenge for perceived slights against America's imperial power.

As long as a major constituency in a swing state hates the Cuban government, we will embargo Cuba.


The old Batista supporters are dying off. Give it time.
 
2013-09-09 01:59:02 PM
As soon as Castro dies, that island will be overrun with plasticine, soul-rending commercial capitalism out the wazzoo.  They won't know what hit them.
 
2013-09-09 01:59:54 PM
So he's more capable of critical self-reflection than Reagan ever could have been, then?
 
2013-09-09 02:00:56 PM
This is based on an article from The Guardian in 2010.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/sep/09/fidel-castro-cuba-econo mi c-model
 
2013-09-09 02:11:29 PM

phaseolus: So he's more capable of critical self-reflection than Reagan ever could have been, then?


It's hard to be critical of your reflection when you can't remember who that person is.
 
2013-09-09 02:12:11 PM

Fart_Machine: Much like Snake Plissken I thought Castro was dead.


I also expected Fidel to be taller.
 
2013-09-09 02:12:17 PM
He already admitted that in the nineties, shortly before he stole a trillion dollars from a wealthy industrialist and his employee.
 
2013-09-09 02:14:09 PM

asspennies: This is based on an article from The Guardian in 2010.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/sep/09/fidel-castro-cuba-econo mi c-model



and a 1998 simpsons episode.
 
2013-09-09 02:26:32 PM
I wouldn't get too down on yourself zombie Fidel, your nation has one of the highest GDPs of all those caribbean nations when  you account for population.
 
2013-09-09 02:27:36 PM

Saiga410: Fart_Machine: Much like Snake Plissken I thought Castro was dead.

I also expected Fidel to be taller.


he also wishes he was a baller
 
2013-09-09 02:29:10 PM
Of course it fails when you're neighbors with a hostile capitalist giant.
 
2013-09-09 02:36:06 PM

Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: As soon as Castro dies, that island will be overrun with plasticine, soul-rending commercial capitalism out the wazzoo.  They won't know what hit them.


Doubtful.
His brother and the henchmen in charge aren't interested in reforming a state where they control everything.

I'd say its going to take a full rotation in heads of state, and the loss of Venezuelan life support, before anyone considers an alternative.
 
2013-09-09 02:42:59 PM

Saiga410: Fart_Machine: Much like Snake Plissken I thought Castro was dead.

I also expected Fidel to be taller.


That's because of the pictures of him next to 5'3" Nikita Khrushchev.
 
2013-09-09 02:51:40 PM

Snatch Bandergrip: ikanreed: neversubmit: Does this mean we will end the embargo?

But we still haven't gotten a satisfactory sense of revenge for perceived slights against America's imperial power.

Who the hell was this Fidel guy to lead a popular uprising against a brutal dictator and corporate puppet, and survive over 200 assassination attempts from the country that economically pillaged it?  WTF is this guy's problem?

/Fidel is, obviously, far from perfect
//But our reaction to him was way over the line
//MONGOOSE


Yeah, who cares that he allowed the Soviet Union to place troops and nukes on his land which almost resulted in a nuclear war when they shot down an American U2.
 
2013-09-09 02:55:02 PM

I alone am best: Yeah, who cares that he allowed the Soviet Union to place troops and nukes on his land which almost resulted in a nuclear war when they shot down an American U2.


Now why would the USSR want to put nukes near the US? Could it be because the US was putting nukes around the USSR? NAHHHHH
 
2013-09-09 03:17:26 PM
From everything I've read, Castro has always seemed to be a rather thoughtful guy. He genuinely believed in what he said, and tried his hardest to make it work. It didn't help that he was captaining a small island up against a giant country that was completely hostile to him. He relies on all of these suspect characters - the USSR, Iran, North Korea once upon a time - for help and gives them help because he kind-of has to. He's keenly aware that Cuba can't survive completely isolated, and the US won't help him so long as he's in power.

He's one of those guys who would be *fascinating* to have dinner with, I imagine.
 
2013-09-09 03:23:19 PM

I alone am best: Snatch Bandergrip: ikanreed: neversubmit: Does this mean we will end the embargo?

But we still haven't gotten a satisfactory sense of revenge for perceived slights against America's imperial power.

Who the hell was this Fidel guy to lead a popular uprising against a brutal dictator and corporate puppet, and survive over 200 assassination attempts from the country that economically pillaged it?  WTF is this guy's problem?

/Fidel is, obviously, far from perfect
//But our reaction to him was way over the line
//MONGOOSE

Yeah, who cares that he allowed the Soviet Union to place troops and nukes on his land which almost resulted in a nuclear war when they shot down an American U2.


How dare they have allies and defend their airspace?
 
2013-09-09 03:28:38 PM

Ned Stark: I alone am best: Snatch Bandergrip: ikanreed: neversubmit: Does this mean we will end the embargo?

But we still haven't gotten a satisfactory sense of revenge for perceived slights against America's imperial power.

Who the hell was this Fidel guy to lead a popular uprising against a brutal dictator and corporate puppet, and survive over 200 assassination attempts from the country that economically pillaged it?  WTF is this guy's problem?

/Fidel is, obviously, far from perfect
//But our reaction to him was way over the line
//MONGOOSE

Yeah, who cares that he allowed the Soviet Union to place troops and nukes on his land which almost resulted in a nuclear war when they shot down an American U2.

How dare they have allies and defend their airspace?


The russians shot down the plane not the cubans. Lucky for every soul on the face of the earth Kennedy decided to call Kruschev before we attacked them because it turned out it wasnt authorized by the USSR.
 
2013-09-09 03:28:42 PM

FarkedOver: I alone am best: Yeah, who cares that he allowed the Soviet Union to place troops and nukes on his land which almost resulted in a nuclear war when they shot down an American U2.

Now why would the USSR want to put nukes near the US? Could it be because the US was putting nukes around the USSR? NAHHHHH


You have to admit that when it comes to the aggressive positioning of nuclear weapons, the USA started that fight.
 
2013-09-09 03:29:10 PM
Well, that's just because he didn't implement it properly.
 
2013-09-09 03:36:44 PM

FarkedOver: Of course it fails when you're neighbors with a hostile capitalist giant.



It always fails, pal.
 
2013-09-09 03:37:53 PM

Poopy MacPoop: He already admitted that in the nineties, shortly before he stole a trillion dollars from a wealthy industrialist and his employee.



Heh.
 
2013-09-09 03:41:07 PM
Fidel Castro is 87, not 84 as the column states, This is 3 years old. Old news is so exciting.
 
2013-09-09 03:45:06 PM

The_Sponge: FarkedOver: Of course it fails when you're neighbors with a hostile capitalist giant.


It always fails, pal.


Yep, when you're constantly under the threat of invasion and sanctions by bourgeois regimes it will fail every time.
 
2013-09-09 03:49:09 PM
Who really cares about Cuba anymore? The only politicians I ever see rattling their sabers about it are those with Cuban ties or really old people who seem to think the gelded Castro regime is capable of any sort of threat against us.

And the Cuban nationalists are dying off and their kids who are around my age really don't give a fark about Cuba. Lift the embargo and leave them the fark alone. This isn't the 1960's.
 
2013-09-09 03:49:59 PM
To be fair... the article shows up as published in "3 days ago" under Google.


i.imgur.com
 
2013-09-09 03:58:03 PM

Poopy MacPoop: trillion


i.imgur.com

speakerboner.com

I know, but we knew from day one this mumbo jumbo wouldn't fly.
 
2013-09-09 03:59:38 PM
I was musing over the non-annexation outcomes of the Mexican - American war and the Spanish - American war and the answer hit me like a dope slap: racism! Mexico was full of brown people and free blacks, and the Cuban revolution was dominated by blacks and no one in the south wanted more blacks in the united states. If Cuba had been annexed as a state they probably would have sent black men to congress, which no one wanted.
 
2013-09-09 04:04:05 PM

wildcardjack: I was musing over the non-annexation outcomes of the Mexican - American war and the Spanish - American war and the answer hit me like a dope slap: racism! Mexico was full of brown people and free blacks, and the Cuban revolution was dominated by blacks and no one in the south wanted more blacks in the united states. If Cuba had been annexed as a state they probably would have sent black men to congress, which no one wanted.


Of course, you'd also be crying racism if America had annexed those two countries, so it's all really irrelevant.
 
2013-09-09 04:04:44 PM

Weatherkiss: Who really cares about Cuba anymore? The only politicians I ever see rattling their sabers about it are those with Cuban ties or really old people who seem to think the gelded Castro regime is capable of any sort of threat against us.

And the Cuban nationalists are dying off and their kids who are around my age really don't give a fark about Cuba. Lift the embargo and leave them the fark alone. This isn't the 1960's.


See, but the cheap as chips sugar would flood onto the US market and food manufactures would use it instead of HFCS. Wont someone think of the poor corn farmers?
 
2013-09-09 04:09:50 PM

Ned Stark: Weatherkiss: Who really cares about Cuba anymore? The only politicians I ever see rattling their sabers about it are those with Cuban ties or really old people who seem to think the gelded Castro regime is capable of any sort of threat against us.

And the Cuban nationalists are dying off and their kids who are around my age really don't give a fark about Cuba. Lift the embargo and leave them the fark alone. This isn't the 1960's.

See, but the cheap as chips sugar would flood onto the US market and food manufactures would use it instead of HFCS. Wont someone think of the poor corn farmers?


They'll have to be content with high prices due to ethanol and federal farm subsidies.
 
2013-09-09 04:30:41 PM

FarkedOver: The_Sponge: FarkedOver: Of course it fails when you're neighbors with a hostile capitalist giant.


It always fails, pal.

Yep, when you're constantly under the threat of invasion and sanctions by bourgeois regimes it will fail every time.


So if capitalism and liberal democracy had failed as miserably as communism has, would that be the excuse? We couldn't possible sustain such a robust economic model when those evil communist regimes kept being mean to us for so long!
 
2013-09-09 04:32:15 PM
I loved him in The Naked Gun.
 
2013-09-09 04:35:39 PM

jigger: So if capitalism and liberal democracy had failed as miserably as communism has, would that be the excuse? We couldn't possible sustain such a robust economic model when those evil communist regimes kept being mean to us for so long!


Maybe, just maybe if the working class wasn't shut down at every turn in industrialized nations, socialist revolutions would have occurred there too, but as it is every socialist revolution has occurred in un-industrialized, poor, former imperialist nations.  THEN when workers of these nations assert themselves, capitalist nations start oppressing them.  It has happened every single time there has been a popular power worker movement throughout history.
 
2013-09-09 04:35:54 PM
Well, I guess that leaves Kim Jong Un and some farklibs as the only people still stupid enough to think communism isn't a complete disaster.
 
2013-09-09 04:36:34 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: Well, I guess that leaves Kim Jong Un and some farklibs as the only people still stupid enough to think communism isn't a complete disaster.


North Korea does not subscribe to Marxism or Communism.  They practice Juche.
 
2013-09-09 04:39:39 PM

FarkedOver: Debeo Summa Credo: Well, I guess that leaves Kim Jong Un and some farklibs as the only people still stupid enough to think communism isn't a complete disaster.

North Korea does not subscribe to Marxism or Communism.  They practice Juche.


Oh, I stand corrected. Then I guess that leaves only farklibs as dumb enough to defend communism.
 
2013-09-09 04:41:25 PM
After that shiat in Cleveland all I can say is fark the damn workers' revolution.
 
2013-09-09 04:42:32 PM

FarkedOver: jigger: So if capitalism and liberal democracy had failed as miserably as communism has, would that be the excuse? We couldn't possible sustain such a robust economic model when those evil communist regimes kept being mean to us for so long!

Maybe, just maybe if the working class wasn't shut down at every turn in industrialized nations, socialist revolutions would have occurred there too, but as it is every socialist revolution has occurred in un-industrialized, poor, former imperialist nations.  THEN when workers of these nations assert themselves, capitalist nations start oppressing them.  It has happened every single time there has been a popular power worker movement throughout history.


So capitalism has to make a country rich before communism can work? Communism will never work as long as capitalism exists? Is that what you're saying?

Let me ask you this. Does communism make people richer or poorer in general?
 
2013-09-09 04:43:49 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: Oh, I stand corrected. Then I guess that leaves only farklibs as dumb enough to defend communism.


As a Marxist, I have only one issue with you, and that's being called a lib.
 
2013-09-09 04:44:31 PM

jigger: So capitalism has to make a country rich before communism can work? Communism will never work as long as capitalism exists? Is that what you're saying?


Yes.  You are finally understanding Marxism. Good job man!
 
2013-09-09 04:44:48 PM

FarkedOver: Debeo Summa Credo: Oh, I stand corrected. Then I guess that leaves only farklibs as dumb enough to defend communism.

As a Marxist, I have only one issue with you, and that's being called a lib.


Communism is anything but liberal, that's for sure.
 
2013-09-09 04:45:19 PM

FarkedOver: The_Sponge: FarkedOver: Of course it fails when you're neighbors with a hostile capitalist giant.


It always fails, pal.

Yep, when you're constantly under the threat of invasion and sanctions by bourgeois regimes it will fail every time.



Fine....then show me a country where such a system has worked.
 
2013-09-09 04:46:08 PM

jigger: FarkedOver: jigger: So if capitalism and liberal democracy had failed as miserably as communism has, would that be the excuse? We couldn't possible sustain such a robust economic model when those evil communist regimes kept being mean to us for so long!

Maybe, just maybe if the working class wasn't shut down at every turn in industrialized nations, socialist revolutions would have occurred there too, but as it is every socialist revolution has occurred in un-industrialized, poor, former imperialist nations.  THEN when workers of these nations assert themselves, capitalist nations start oppressing them.  It has happened every single time there has been a popular power worker movement throughout history.

So capitalism has to make a country rich before communism can work? Communism will never work as long as capitalism exists? Is that what you're saying?

Let me ask you this. Does communism make people richer or poorer in general?


His argument is that Marx said that capitalism has to precede communism for communism to work. In other words, capitalists have to build and create industry and other stuff first for communists to steal in order for communism to work.
 
2013-09-09 04:46:10 PM

FarkedOver: jigger: So capitalism has to make a country rich before communism can work? Communism will never work as long as capitalism exists? Is that what you're saying?

Yes.  You are finally understanding Marxism. Good job man!


Ok, so the USSR and China both made the same HUGE mistake because they didn't allow capitalism to make them rich first. You have to do that before you use communism to bring you back to grinding, miserable poverty.
 
2013-09-09 04:47:54 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: In other words, capitalists have to build and create industry and other stuff first for communists to steal in order for communism to work.


....and they will still screw it up.
 
2013-09-09 04:49:15 PM
Equal sharing of miseries (unless you work for the government) vs. unequal sharing of joys.

Communism's shiatty.  It doesn't work.  Neither does unfettered capitalism.

Most libs on Fark feel, however, that America should be more towards the communism side of the spectrum than the libertarian side.  Most of the debate on fark is over how dark the shade of gray should be.

No one's ready to give up their iPhones for the glory of the party.  At least directly.
 
2013-09-09 04:50:35 PM

jigger: FarkedOver: jigger: So if capitalism and liberal democracy had failed as miserably as communism has, would that be the excuse? We couldn't possible sustain such a robust economic model when those evil communist regimes kept being mean to us for so long!

Maybe, just maybe if the working class wasn't shut down at every turn in industrialized nations, socialist revolutions would have occurred there too, but as it is every socialist revolution has occurred in un-industrialized, poor, former imperialist nations.  THEN when workers of these nations assert themselves, capitalist nations start oppressing them.  It has happened every single time there has been a popular power worker movement throughout history.

So capitalism has to make a country rich before communism can work? Communism will never work as long as capitalism exists? Is that what you're saying?

Let me ask you this. Does communism make people richer or poorer in general?


"Capitalism has to make a country rich before communism can work" is pretty much a core principle of Marxism.
 
2013-09-09 04:56:00 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: His argument is that Marx said that capitalism has to precede communism for communism to work. In other words, capitalists have to build and create industry and other stuff first for communists to steal in order for communism to work.


Oh come now, you know the capitalists didn't pick up the tools to build shiat.
 
2013-09-09 04:57:22 PM

jigger: Ok, so the USSR and China both made the same HUGE mistake because they didn't allow capitalism to make them rich first. You have to do that before you use communism to bring you back to grinding, miserable poverty.


That is one of my criticism.  But they also did modernize their countries.  Ya take the good, ya take the bad, ya take 'em both and there you have the facts of life.

/the facts of life.
 
2013-09-09 05:01:48 PM

Ned Stark: "Capitalism has to make a country rich before communism can work" is pretty much a core principle of Marxism.


I know this. To most people this statement is retarded on its face. Just not to communists for some reason.

FarkedOver: jigger: Ok, so the USSR and China both made the same HUGE mistake because they didn't allow capitalism to make them rich first. You have to do that before you use communism to bring you back to grinding, miserable poverty.

That is one of my criticism.  But they also did modernize their countries.  Ya take the good, ya take the bad, ya take 'em both and there you have the facts of life.

/the facts of life.


China "modernized" and it only killed a few tens of millions of people.

What would have happened if those poor workers lived under capitalist oppression with with their fancy cars and blue jeans?
 
2013-09-09 05:02:22 PM

jigger: FarkedOver: jigger: So capitalism has to make a country rich before communism can work? Communism will never work as long as capitalism exists? Is that what you're saying?

Yes.  You are finally understanding Marxism. Good job man!

Ok, so the USSR and China both made the same HUGE mistake because they didn't allow capitalism to make them rich first. You have to do that before you use communism to bring you back to grinding, miserable poverty.


In he USSR and China commies went ahead and seized power with the intent of having the state act in the place of a capitalist class. Experimental evidence suggests this was a bad idea, yes.

Your assertion that communism causes poverty seems groundless though, both states ended up less poor than they were prerevolution even if they weren't keeping pace with the cappies.
 
2013-09-09 05:02:46 PM

jigger: China "modernized" and it only killed a few tens of millions of people.

What would have happened if those poor workers lived under capitalist oppression with with their fancy cars and blue jeans?


Every economic model has its growing pains.  You think capitalism has been a shining beacon of hope throughout the ages? Here's a hint no, it hasn't and it really still isn't.
 
2013-09-09 05:05:29 PM

FarkedOver: jigger: So if capitalism and liberal democracy had failed as miserably as communism has, would that be the excuse? We couldn't possible sustain such a robust economic model when those evil communist regimes kept being mean to us for so long!

Maybe, just maybe if the working class wasn't shut down at every turn in industrialized nations, socialist revolutions would have occurred there too, but as it is every socialist revolution has occurred in un-industrialized, poor, former imperialist nations.  THEN when workers of these nations assert themselves, capitalist nations start oppressing them.  It has happened every single time there has been a popular power worker movement throughout history.


I think you've got it backwards. The reason socialism failed in the US was because the workers got their way. Workers wanted better wages, better conditions, and fewer hours. In Russia and Cuba they didn't get that so a revolution occurred while in the US the factory owners caved and no revolution. The workers never really wanted to own the means of production, they just wanted modest pay increases.

I'd argue that socialist revolutions don't occur in industrialized nations because the workers have more power. Those in charge have to balance paying as little as they can with making sure their workers never get upset enough to revolt. Pay across the society never drops lower than the workers as a whole are willing to accept because a revolution, even a failed one, would destroy those who own the means of production. In non-industrial societies those who own the means are more willing to oppress because they have less capital invested and their workers unskilled. In an industrial society an individual or industry might have terrible pay or conditions but one man or even one group doesn't make a revolution. The workers across the whole of society have to be unhappy. Life for the working class might be shiat, but they never let it get bad enough to cause a revolt.
 
2013-09-09 05:08:36 PM

To The Escape Zeppelin!: I think you've got it backwards. The reason socialism failed in the US was because the workers got their way. Workers wanted better wages, better conditions, and fewer hours. In Russia and Cuba they didn't get that so a revolution occurred while in the US the factory owners caved and no revolution. The workers never really wanted to own the means of production, they just wanted modest pay increases.


I don't think workers in the U.S. have ever gotten what they wanted.  They benefited from a post-war boom because there was no industrialized nation left to produce at the rate we could.  We got lucky.
 
2013-09-09 05:14:14 PM
I know this. To most people this statement is retarded on its face. Just not to communists for some reason.

Lets study this shiat out.

1. To grow industry concentrations of capital are needed
2. We regard the creation of concentrations of capital by siphoning value from workers to owners as wrong
3. Therefore under our economic system, there will be fewer concentrations of capital
4. Therefore, under our economic system growth will be slower
5. Therefore, our economic system is only suitable for economies that have already achieved a certain minimum level of delelopment.

Which in particular is retarded on its face(and not merely wrong)?
 
2013-09-09 05:17:35 PM
Communism works always*
*unless it doesn't work
 
2013-09-09 05:21:48 PM

Fart_Machine: Much like Snake Plissken I thought Castro was dead.


"I don't give a fark about your war... or your president"
 
2013-09-09 05:24:34 PM

jigger: So capitalism has to make a country rich before communism can work? Communism will never work as long as capitalism exists? Is that what you're saying?


I think capitalism is needed to create proletariat which then destroys capitalism
 
2013-09-09 05:27:57 PM

LewDux: jigger: So capitalism has to make a country rich before communism can work? Communism will never work as long as capitalism exists? Is that what you're saying?

I think capitalism is needed to create proletariat which then destroys capitalism


Thats A seperate assertion from needing capitalism for development.

/Experimentally disproven when commies shot the czar's dog.
 
2013-09-09 05:48:47 PM

LewDux: Communism works always*
*unless it doesn't work


For some definition of the word 'Work'

// Let's face it the party bosses always do well
 
2013-09-09 07:06:14 PM

FarkedOver: jigger: Ok, so the USSR and China both made the same HUGE mistake because they didn't allow capitalism to make them rich first. You have to do that before you use communism to bring you back to grinding, miserable poverty.

That is one of my criticism.  But they also did modernize their countries.  Ya take the good, ya take the bad, ya take 'em both and there you have the facts of life.

/the facts of life.


A quote from a French movie I can't name has stuck with me: In 1917 Russia had a 16th-century economy. Just four decades later they launched the world's first satellite into space.
 
2013-09-09 07:55:59 PM

FarkedOver: Debeo Summa Credo: Well, I guess that leaves Kim Jong Un and some farklibs as the only people still stupid enough to think communism isn't a complete disaster.

North Korea does not subscribe to Marxism or Communism.  They practice Juche.


Right on cue....
 
2013-09-09 08:50:04 PM

phaseolus:

So he's more capable of critical self-reflection than Reagan ever could have been, then?

Let's see...

Reagan's policies rescued the world's largest economy from Carteritis, cutting inflation by nearly two thirds, and slashing interest rates.

He also set in motion the escalation which ended up bringing down the U.S.S.R. without a shot being fired.

Meanwhile in Cuba, from TFA: "With infrastructure crumbling, food shortages acute and an average monthly salary of just $25 (£16), it has become apparent that near-total state control of the economy does not work."  So, it would seem that Castro has a lot more material for "critical self-reflection" than Reagan ever did.

 
2013-09-09 08:59:26 PM

ikanreed: neversubmit: Does this mean we will end the embargo?

But we still haven't gotten a satisfactory sense of revenge for perceived slights against America's imperial power.

private corporate economic interests.

Fixed for accuracy. Fidel's revolution stripped the casinos and resorts of their money and value which was being used to fuel corruption in the Battista regime.
Then when Fidel came crawling to America at the UN bldg in NY asking for official recognition and trade agreements, he was snubbed by then VP Dick Nixon (who didn't have the legal authority to snub Castro, just that Eisenhower was out of the country at the time).

Sure, the Cuban revolution was brutal and bloody. So was the American revolution. But snubbing Cuba turned into a terrible mistake, solely because of it's strategic location 90 miles from the US. Within a few years of Nixon's snubbing, the soviets were building secret ballistic missile installations.

Nixon should have been kicked out of government for making an enemy out of Cuba.
 
2013-09-09 09:58:20 PM

Headso: I wouldn't get too down on yourself zombie Fidel, your nation has one of the highest GDPs of all those caribbean nations when  you account for population.


That's like being the smartest retard on the bus.
 
2013-09-09 09:59:44 PM

way south: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: As soon as Castro dies, that island will be overrun with plasticine, soul-rending commercial capitalism out the wazzoo.  They won't know what hit them.

Doubtful.
His brother and the henchmen in charge aren't interested in reforming a state where they control everything.

I'd say its going to take a full rotation in heads of state, and the loss of Venezuelan life support, before anyone considers an alternative.


His brother has already allowed people to own their own businesses and property.
 
2013-09-09 10:01:32 PM

I alone am best: Snatch Bandergrip: ikanreed: neversubmit: Does this mean we will end the embargo?

But we still haven't gotten a satisfactory sense of revenge for perceived slights against America's imperial power.

Who the hell was this Fidel guy to lead a popular uprising against a brutal dictator and corporate puppet, and survive over 200 assassination attempts from the country that economically pillaged it?  WTF is this guy's problem?

/Fidel is, obviously, far from perfect
//But our reaction to him was way over the line
//MONGOOSE

Yeah, who cares that he allowed the Soviet Union to place troops and nukes on his land which almost resulted in a nuclear war when they shot down an American U2.


Well, in that case one would think an embargo of the Soviet Union would also have been appropriate would one not?
 
2013-09-09 10:21:33 PM

Debeo Summa Credo:

His argument is that Marx said that capitalism has to precede communism for communism to work. In other words, capitalists have to build and create industry and other stuff first for communists to steal in order for communism to work.

It also helps, as it did for the U.S.S.R., to have the West around to donate capital equipment.  When the Soviet Empire fell, Western businessmen flocked to Russia to help them get back on their feet, because the biggest country on Earth, filled with starving people and nuclear weapons, does NOT make for stability.  What they found shocked them: essentially ALL of the capital equipment (the equipment used to make other equipment) had been donated to the USSR by the West.  Factories and heavy machinery that had been donated, much of it from deals arranged by Armand Hammer, from as early as the 1920s.  There really isn't much evidence of the USSR producing anything that wasn't a more-or-less direct gift from the West.
 
2013-09-09 10:58:04 PM

FLMountainMan: wildcardjack: I was musing over the non-annexation outcomes of the Mexican - American war and the Spanish - American war and the answer hit me like a dope slap: racism! Mexico was full of brown people and free blacks, and the Cuban revolution was dominated by blacks and no one in the south wanted more blacks in the united states. If Cuba had been annexed as a state they probably would have sent black men to congress, which no one wanted.

Of course, you'd also be crying racism if America had annexed those two countries, so it's all really irrelevant.


Hmm, probably, but they'd have changed the course of American development. The same progressive movement that improved things for American minorities might have applied to meso-america and the caribbean. Or there would have been a straight up genocidal move against the colored.
 
2013-09-09 11:03:39 PM

FarkedOver:

jigger: So capitalism has to make a country rich before communism can work? Communism will never work as long as capitalism exists? Is that what you're saying?

Yes.  You are finally understanding Marxism. Good job man!

Yep.  Communism is like the flourish of mushrooms that live on a dead and decaying tree in the forest.  They continue to absorb the nutrients (wealth) accumulated by the tree during its life, and when they're done, there is nothing left but inedible refuse in a rather large pile.

As you say, given enough wealth (generated almost certainly by capitalism) in one spot, communism can get a foothold, and grow, and may in fact be what kills the capitalist society.  Then, communism can have its way, until all the wealth built up by the capitalists is gone.  Since it is a question of using wealth up, instead of creating it, the more slowly a communist society consumes wealth, the longer it can last.  That means a communist society has, as a fundamental principle, difficulty in distributing and obtaining the necessary supplies of life.  But, there was always a supply of bread and toilet paper, as long as you didn't mind waiting all afternoon to buy the ration of it you were allowed.

The best way to observe collectivism versus capitalism is to take one or more countries, arbitrarily divide them into collectivist and capitalist sides, and compare their results over time.  Fortunately for those studying, we have two examples of this: Germany after the war, and Korea.

Germany was split into West Germany and East Germany (the DDR) after WWII.  West Germany was capitalist, like other European countries, with more than a little of its structure obtained via the U.S.A.  It became a world industrial and financial power.  East Germany's government and economy were set up by the USSR, and it became a money-losing, grotesquely polluted, nearly-starving shiathole.  After reunification, almost the entire output of the West German economy was absorbed by the effort to clean up and restore East Germany into something it would be reasonable to call Germany.  Those efforts, while not as intense any more, continue to this day, and absorb a reasonable amount of the economic and industrial power Germany generates.

Korea was split, with North Korea being a communist Chinese vassal state with considerable autonomy.  South Korea was left on its own, with a capitalist economy and representative government.  South Korea went on to become a world power both industrially and financially, as West Germany had done.  North Korea slipped back a few centuries and is now another shiathole of starving, brainwashed peasants, all apparently compensating, as a country, for the exceptionally small penises of the ruling Kim family.

Given the two examples we have, and that of the USSR collapsing of its own weight, I find it utterly astonishing that someone with access to the Internets can be so uninformed, politically entrenched, delusional, or some combination of those factors as to think that us taking the path of North Korea and East Germany is the correct thing to do.  Instead of being productive, we should be a saprophytic economic organism, eking by through sucking the remaining life out of the corpse of the U.S.A?   Seriously?  That sounds WAY too much like some dystopia pictured in a crappy, preachy Kevin Kostner movie.   And THIS is what Marxists want?   WTF is wrong with you?

 
2013-09-09 11:28:14 PM

kg2095: way south: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: As soon as Castro dies, that island will be overrun with plasticine, soul-rending commercial capitalism out the wazzoo.  They won't know what hit them.

Doubtful.
His brother and the henchmen in charge aren't interested in reforming a state where they control everything.

I'd say its going to take a full rotation in heads of state, and the loss of Venezuelan life support, before anyone considers an alternative.

His brother has already allowed people to own their own businesses and property.




A chosen few to create the appearance of reform. Most businesses, down to bars and hotels, are still state owned.
They aren't any closer to honest change now than they were in the Clinton era.
 
2013-09-09 11:32:03 PM

FarkedOver: Of course it fails when you're neighbors with a hostile capitalist giant.


the DR is close to that "Hostile capitalist giant" and their economy is one of the best in the Caribbean.

Just admit that socialism doesn't work and that Cuba, rather than being run as a workers paradise is a crony state where the party controls everything and those with access are put to the front of the line for what little resources are left to distribute.

revrendjim: A quote from a French movie I can't name has stuck with me: In 1917 Russia had a 16th-century economy. Just four decades later they launched the world's first satellite into space.


after invading their neighbors, turning their citizens into slaves, seizing the bounty of their labor to run research, starving the populace, and conscripting the scientists into producing rockets and nukes while their own people marched around barefoot, yes...Go them.
 
2013-09-10 04:54:11 AM

FarkedOver: Debeo Summa Credo: Oh, I stand corrected. Then I guess that leaves only farklibs as dumb enough to defend communism.

As a Marxist, I have only one issue with you, and that's being called a lib.


Can't set prices, can't reward ambission, can't get people to go into mines without violating a basic tenne of your philosiphy. Your system is perfect; perfectly dellusional.
 
2013-09-10 05:23:49 AM

o5iiawah: revrendjim: A quote from a French movie I can't name has stuck with me: In 1917 Russia had a 16th-century economy. Just four decades later they launched the world's first satellite into space.

after invading their neighbors, turning their citizens into slaves, seizing the bounty of their labor to run research, starving the populace, and conscripting the scientists into producing rockets and nukes while their own people marched around barefoot, yes...Go them.


Hey, at least trains ran on time. Also, you can't build workers paradise without breaking few dozen millions skulls
 
2013-09-10 08:17:27 AM

Fart_Machine: Much like Snake Plissken I thought

heard Castro was dead.
 
2013-09-10 11:05:06 AM

FarkedOver: jigger: So if capitalism and liberal democracy had failed as miserably as communism has, would that be the excuse? We couldn't possible sustain such a robust economic model when those evil communist regimes kept being mean to us for so long!

Maybe, just maybe if the working class wasn't shut down at every turn in industrialized nations, socialist revolutions would have occurred there too, but as it is every socialist revolution has occurred in un-industrialized, poor, former imperialist nations.  THEN when workers of these nations assert themselves, capitalist nations start oppressing them.  It has happened every single time there has been a popular power worker movement throughout history.


2/10

No one could really be that naive.
 
2013-09-10 01:51:10 PM

o5iiawah: FarkedOver: Of course it fails when you're neighbors with a hostile capitalist giant.

the DR is close to that "Hostile capitalist giant" and their economy is one of the best in the Caribbean.


Key word: "hostile." Since when has the USA been that hostile to the Dominican Republic, as it has been for ~½ a century to Cuba?
 
2013-09-10 08:51:58 PM

way south: kg2095: way south: Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: As soon as Castro dies, that island will be overrun with plasticine, soul-rending commercial capitalism out the wazzoo.  They won't know what hit them.

Doubtful.
His brother and the henchmen in charge aren't interested in reforming a state where they control everything.

I'd say its going to take a full rotation in heads of state, and the loss of Venezuelan life support, before anyone considers an alternative.

His brother has already allowed people to own their own businesses and property.

A chosen few to create the appearance of reform. Most businesses, down to bars and hotels, are still state owned.
They aren't any closer to honest change now than they were in the Clinton era.


I'm not so sure about that. What makes you think that is the case?

From the Financial Times...
 
Displayed 88 of 88 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report