Fidel Castro Dead at 90

[Ben No.3]

Fidel Castro...

 

Pros:

-communist

-he overthrew a puppet of te US and the mafia

-he drastically lowered the rates of death births

-he drastically increased the populations education, by now everyone can read and write in Cuba (don't forget that Cuba is definitely not a first world country)

-introduced goverment health care

 

Cons:

-communist

-got to power hungry (Cuba needs democracy)

-failed to manage economy

-heavy censorship

-sort of poor on some human rights aspects, such as killings without trial, unfair trials, as mentioned lack of free speech and democracy

Edited November 26, 2016 by Ben No.3

[BruceVC]

Surprised at the amount of salt here.

 

Castro is one of the most remarkable politicians and leaders of the 20th century. 

 

He turned Cuba from a US gambling den and whorehouse into a country with one of the best healthcare systems in the world (relative to what can be had for what is essentially a very poor country) and very good free education. The price was the centralization of political power and a cult of personality.

Poverty too, but then Cuba is never going to be an economic powerhouse.

 

But, so what. 

 

To achieve that, while defying the worlds largest power at their own doorstep - that is something no one in Latin America can claim. 

 

In fact - no leader in Europe post WW2 can claim a comparative demonstration of political independence and sheer willpower. Even de Gaulle caved in eventually - Castro never did.

 

 

With him die the great politics of the 20th century, and even though they brought a lot of misery as well as progress, its still sad to witness the end of an era.

 "  Castro is one of the most remarkable politicians and leaders of the 20th century  "       ....dude you at least consistent with your criticism of the West, that's all I ask people like Zora. There is nothing wrong with having issues with the West, everyone is perfectly entitled to there opinion. Its irrelevant, inaccurate but understandable in your example 

 

 

But the depths of hyperbole ....Putin would be at least believable ?

[Ben No.3]

If we compare Castro to our first world western democracies then yes obviously he is not holding up.

 

If we compare him to comparable countries, take for example some of the African dictators (from what I hear they are far worse, but I call upon Bruce for information), he's probably one of the more goodish leaders.

[BruceVC]

If we compare Castro to our first world western democracies then yes obviously he is not holding up.

 

If we compare him to comparable countries, take for example some of the African dictators (from what I hear they are far worse, but I call upon Bruce for information), he's probably one of the more goodish leaders.

Yes Africa has had its share of terrible leaders and brutal dictators that were much worse than Castro...we have had leaders in Africa that literally committed every possible war crime known to the Geneva Convention 

 

But nowadays we only have one real war criminal left, Al-Bashir from Sudan

 

The ME  currently holds the worst leaders at the moment, Assad must be top of the list ?

[ShadySands]

Miami gets it.

 

snip

INB4 liberals start making quips about the Trump sign.

Not surprising though

[Rosbjerg]

 

I chuckled..

[Orogun01]

 

 

Hasnt Raul been running the show for a few years now anyway? Now all thats left to do is build a statue of Fidel, pointing out to the sea or something, and call it a day.

Nope, international heroes status point out towards the sea; to their land of birth. National heroes point towards inland.

 

 @ Baro, Namutree and others

 

Can I ask you guys a serious question because I may be misunderstanding something

 

When you guys talk about Cuba being a success why would you suggest that when the Cold War ended the ideological conflict of Capitalism vs Communism?  The West won .....so surly that would indicate the ultimate failure of the Cuba social experiment ?

"The West won"...says the SJW, marxist, socialist person that believes himself a humanist.

 

 

 

Would you prefer I lied and said   " Communism prevailed as it was stronger ideology  " 

 

 

And I have never claimed to be a SJW  because that word gets abused...I am definitely not a Marxist

 

I do believe in a form of socialism like our friends in Scandinavia and I am a humanist ...ask volo, he will confirm this 

 

Liberals have exchanged humanism with socialism and would have you believe that to be moral is to engage in economical socialism (e.g. Welfare programs and such) if you're against those the please do say so. The fact is that most of modern liberals can trace their ideology to the counter culture movement  of the 60's and 70's which were infiltrated by KGB in order to create dissent in the US and do the same thing they did to Afghanistan. Yet that ideology remains ignorant of its communist ties, and even more ignorant of how they aid the establishment. 

[Ben No.3]

And communist governments remain ignorant of communism. Castro might have been the closets we've seen to an actual communist society, and even he did not get there.

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

Hasnt Raul been running the show for a few years now anyway? Now all thats left to do is build a statue of Fidel, pointing out to the sea or something, and call it a day.

Nope, international heroes status point out towards the sea; to their land of birth. National heroes point towards inland.

 

 @ Baro, Namutree and others

 

Can I ask you guys a serious question because I may be misunderstanding something

 

When you guys talk about Cuba being a success why would you suggest that when the Cold War ended the ideological conflict of Capitalism vs Communism?  The West won .....so surly that would indicate the ultimate failure of the Cuba social experiment ?

"The West won"...says the SJW, marxist, socialist person that believes himself a humanist.

 

 

 

Would you prefer I lied and said   " Communism prevailed as it was stronger ideology  " 

 

 

And I have never claimed to be a SJW  because that word gets abused...I am definitely not a Marxist

 

I do believe in a form of socialism like our friends in Scandinavia and I am a humanist ...ask volo, he will confirm this 

 

Liberals have exchanged humanism with socialism and would have you believe that to be moral is to engage in economical socialism (e.g. Welfare programs and such) if you're against those the please do say so. The fact is that most of modern liberals can trace their ideology to the counter culture movement  of the 60's and 70's which were infiltrated by KGB in order to create dissent in the US and do the same thing they did to Afghanistan. Yet that ideology remains ignorant of its communist ties, and even more ignorant of how they aid the establishment. 

 

Some of what you say about is correct, for example 

 

• I looked up the word humanism and Im glad I did because I misunderstood its meaning...yes I believe in that 
• I also believe not everyone will be part of the economic transformation so welfare programs are necessary for some
• I believe economic growth needs to be driven by the private sector but government has the right to intervene in certain cases of gross mismanagement like in 2008
• All male citizens need to do 1 year compulsory military service, this doesnt mean marines or hardcore infantry units.You could join logistics...but this would be seen as a form of patriosm 

[Drowsy Emperor]

 

In fact - no leader in Europe post WW2 can claim a comparative demonstration of political independence and sheer willpower. Even de Gaulle caved in eventually - Castro never did.

 

There was also play piece states in Europe during cold war that successfully kept their indecency and do much better economically. And some of them even have free education and free healthcare systems that are accounted to being some of the best in the world. Those states also had strong willed governance but they succeed not making enemies from either USA or USSR. But of course it is hard to say if what they did was similar, better or lesser demonstration of political independence and sheer willpower, but at end they left their countries in better economical and political positions in the world, which of course don't mean that they necessary did better job.

 

 

And most of them were either former colonial powers with massive accumulated wealth or in the the protected back of Europe with someone else banking their defense costs ... and no one attempting to kill their leaders or invade them.

[Drowsy Emperor]

 

Surprised at the amount of salt here.

 

The US hates being baulked, and Castro did it for 49 years, including through the 90s when he was supposed to go the way of Ceacescu etc. That a lot of people in the US take it personally is no real surprise.

 

In fact - no leader in Europe post WW2 can claim a comparative demonstration of political independence and sheer willpower. Even de Gaulle caved in eventually - Castro never did.

Would have said that Tito could, but you'd know more about that than I. And for most of his time Castro was nor genuinely politically independent as he was solidly USSR sphere, albeit more by necessity than outright desire- it was only the last 15 years of his rulership where he was independent.

 

 

Such irony that I forgot about Tito.

 

Yeah his political acumen was second to none. I just have a general distaste for the way nation politics were handled within former Yugoslavia so I sometimes tend to overlook his objectively impressive achievements.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Well I guess Fidel survived more assassination attempts than Tito, so that's something.

[Drowsy Emperor]

"He turned Cuba from a US gambling den and whorehouse into a country with one of the best healthcare systems in the world (relative to what can be had for what is essentially a very poor country) and very good free education. The price was the centralization of political power and a cult of personality.

Poverty too, but then Cuba is never going to be an economic powerhouse.

 

But, so what. "

 

Let's ignore all the fact he mass murdering of his fellow Cubans just so he can keep power, live in style while his little ones were kept in poverty, we have such a swell humanitarian 'fighting the good fight'. LMAO

 

Mass murdering is an extreme exaggeration. All revolutions are filled with misdeeds, and all governments eventually devolve into an oligarchy.

 

Those two truisms aside he could have held onto power without giving the people anything and behaving in the exact same manner as Batista before him.

 

Yet he chose not to do that, built a healthcare and education system out of nothing, supported several national liberation struggles that were probably done at a greater cost than profit, managed to defeat a foreign invasion, managed to keep a superpower at bay, made it state policy to send Cuban doctors pro bono to help Latin american countries, supported the independence of other nations and a whole lot of other remarkable things.

 

The man is an icon of freedom the world over, barring anglo-saxon countries and non-state satellites like Canada. So, the overwhelming majority of the world.

 

Ask yourself why he used to get a roaring applause prior to opening his mouth at the UN as opposed to any other politican, including those from your own country.

[Ben No.3]

@bruce

Hmm... Ill do a more specific analysis of that, but... What is there to get wrong about humanism? Isn't it just putting the human and human rights into the centre of thought?

Edited November 26, 2016 by Ben No.3

[BruceVC]

@bruce

Hmm... Ill do a more specific analysis of that, but... What is there to get wrong about humanism? Isn't it just putting the human and human rights into the centre of thought?

Check this definition 

 

http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/humanism

[Drowsy Emperor]

 

Politics level over 9000

[Ben No.3]

<p>

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hasnt Raul been running the show for a few years now anyway? Now all thats left to do is build a statue of Fidel, pointing out to the sea or something, and call it a day.

Nope, international heroes status point out towards the sea; to their land of birth. National heroes point towards inland.

@ Baro, Namutree and others

 

Can I ask you guys a serious question because I may be misunderstanding something

 

When you guys talk about Cuba being a success why would you suggest that when the Cold War ended the ideological conflict of Capitalism vs Communism? The West won .....so surly that would indicate the ultimate failure of the Cuba social experiment ?

"The West won"...says the SJW, marxist, socialist person that believes himself a humanist.

 

Would you prefer I lied and said " Communism prevailed as it was stronger ideology "

 

 

And I have never claimed to be a SJW because that word gets abused...I am definitely not a Marxist

 

I do believe in a form of socialism like our friends in Scandinavia and I am a humanist ...ask volo, he will confirm this

Liberals have exchanged humanism with socialism and would have you believe that to be moral is to engage in economical socialism (e.g. Welfare programs and such) if you're against those the please do say so. The fact is that most of modern liberals can trace their ideology to the counter culture movement of the 60's and 70's which were infiltrated by KGB in order to create dissent in the US and do the same thing they did to Afghanistan. Yet that ideology remains ignorant of its communist ties, and even more ignorant of how they aid the establishment.

Some of what you say about is correct, for example

• I looked up the word humanism and Im glad I did because I misunderstood its meaning...yes I believe in that
• I also believe not everyone will be part of the economic transformation so welfare programs are necessary for some
• I believe economic growth needs to be driven by the private sector but government has the right to intervene in certain cases of gross mismanagement like in 2008
• All male citizens need to do 1 year compulsory military service, this doesnt mean marines or hardcore infantry units.You could join logistics...but this would be seen as a form of patriosm

1. Humanism is great, I agree. It goes well with my personal existentialist and general politically left views, but it really should be the foundation of any society. About Marxism... Well I think if Marx was alive today he'd be pretty satisfied with Germany's state, communism is a extrem idea born out of extrem circumstances and shouldn't be directly applied. but I do think his criticism of capitalism is quite perspective and should be much more talked about. But if you ask me, I'm a social democrat.

 

2. Agreed, but I'd go even further. I support the idea of basic unconditional income for all, regardless of age, job and so on.... I quite like and support the idea.

 

3. I think the goverment shouldn't need to react, the regulations should already be there. A very important regulation in my opinion would be to force banks and firms that are considered "to big to fail" to split up.

 

4. I don't like patriotism. Never did. If my country has my respect them because it earned it. And with 2017 elections, it might loose it again, who knows.

Anyway, I do not support the idea of making that year compulsory. Rather, to strengthen the military sector I support alliances between states in a sense that a single army is created (such as the idea of a EU army). This not only strengthens the military, but it also makes war between the members much more unlikely and, since the governments need to agree with each other to do something, makes war on other countries less likely as well.

But I don't think young people should be force d to do a year in the army. Give them a choice between army and social services.

[Hurlshort]

 

The man is an icon of freedom the world over, barring anglo-saxon countries and non-state satellites like Canada. So, the overwhelming majority of the world.

 

Ask yourself why he used to get a roaring applause prior to opening his mouth at the UN as opposed to any other politican, including those from your own country.

 

 

Every Cuban I've ever met has a serious issue with Castro.  I take their word over anything else.  

[ShadySands]

I'd assume the ones that like him stayed in Cuba though

 

 

 

 

PS I lived in Miami for a time and yes, much Castro hate

Edited November 26, 2016 by ShadySands

[BruceVC]

 

<p>

 

 

 

Hasnt Raul been running the show for a few years now anyway? Now all thats left to do is build a statue of Fidel, pointing out to the sea or something, and call it a day.

Nope, international heroes status point out towards the sea; to their land of birth. National heroes point towards inland.

@ Baro, Namutree and others

 

Can I ask you guys a serious question because I may be misunderstanding something

 

When you guys talk about Cuba being a success why would you suggest that when the Cold War ended the ideological conflict of Capitalism vs Communism? The West won .....so surly that would indicate the ultimate failure of the Cuba social experiment ?

"The West won"...says the SJW, marxist, socialist person that believes himself a humanist.

 

Would you prefer I lied and said " Communism prevailed as it was stronger ideology "

 

 

And I have never claimed to be a SJW because that word gets abused...I am definitely not a Marxist

 

I do believe in a form of socialism like our friends in Scandinavia and I am a humanist ...ask volo, he will confirm this

Liberals have exchanged humanism with socialism and would have you believe that to be moral is to engage in economical socialism (e.g. Welfare programs and such) if you're against those the please do say so. The fact is that most of modern liberals can trace their ideology to the counter culture movement of the 60's and 70's which were infiltrated by KGB in order to create dissent in the US and do the same thing they did to Afghanistan. Yet that ideology remains ignorant of its communist ties, and even more ignorant of how they aid the establishment.

Some of what you say about is correct, for example

• I looked up the word humanism and Im glad I did because I misunderstood its meaning...yes I believe in that
• I also believe not everyone will be part of the economic transformation so welfare programs are necessary for some
• I believe economic growth needs to be driven by the private sector but government has the right to intervene in certain cases of gross mismanagement like in 2008
• All male citizens need to do 1 year compulsory military service, this doesnt mean marines or hardcore infantry units.You could join logistics...but this would be seen as a form of patriosm

1. Humanism is great, I agree. It goes well with my personal existentialist and general politically left views, but it really should be the foundation of any society. About Marxism... Well I think if Marx was alive today he'd be pretty satisfied with Germany's state, communism is a extrem idea born out of extrem circumstances and shouldn't be directly applied. but I do think his criticism of capitalism is quite perspective and should be much more talked about. But if you ask me, I'm a social democrat.

 

2. Agreed, but I'd go even further. I support the idea of basic unconditional income for all, regardless of age, job and so on.... I quite like and support the idea.

 

3. I think the goverment shouldn't need to react, the regulations should already be there. A very important regulation in my opinion would be to force banks and firms that are considered "to big to fail" to split up.

 

4. I don't like patriotism. Never did. If my country has my respect them because it earned it. And with 2017 elections, it might loose it again, who knows.

Anyway, I do not support the idea of making that year compulsory. Rather, to strengthen the military sector I support alliances between states in a sense that a single army is created (such as the idea of a EU army). This not only strengthens the military, but it also makes war between the members much more unlikely and, since the governments need to agree with each other to do something, makes war on other countries less likely as well.

But I don't think young people should be force d to do a year in the army. Give them a choice between army and social services.

 

Bennie you make some good points 

 

Government needs to have institutions like SEC in the USA  to ensure regulation in the financial sector. Until 2008 I was opposed to this but i realize it needed. There is no country left in the world that allows its financial sector to be unregulated anymore

 

Arent you loyal to Germany? Dont you feel proud of being German.....thats patriotism

 

What do you mean by social services?

[Ben No.3]

Well social services would be helping out in a hospital, kindergarden, stuff like that.

 

Hm, about that patriotism... No, I'm happy that the German people are reasonable enough to elect some good politicians and that our country has some good systems in place. And I respect that we have come this far. But I am not proud... That's ridiculous. I didn't do anything to set up the system, so how could I be proud of it? It's just seems... Illogical and unreasonable to me to be proud of your birthplace, something you have absolutely no control over. I'm thankful. But not proud.

 

I also feel like patriotism and nationalism are dangerously close, and I am very supportive of international mindedness. EU state and all of that.

 

And I'm not loyal to Germany. I support a system I believe in. Of the system changes in a way I oppose, I will do everything in my power to oppose that system (in a legal way...). But again... Why would I be loyal to Germany for the sake of being loyal to Germany? It's not very logical, is it?

 

Let me give you an example: Goethe is a fantastic poet and I highly respect his work. But am I proud that I share his nationality? No, why would I? I did not choose to be German, so how can I be proud of something I had no control over? The only thing to be proud of is personal archivements.

Edited November 27, 2016 by Ben No.3

[Drowsy Emperor]

 

 

The man is an icon of freedom the world over, barring anglo-saxon countries and non-state satellites like Canada. So, the overwhelming majority of the world.

 

Ask yourself why he used to get a roaring applause prior to opening his mouth at the UN as opposed to any other politican, including those from your own country.

 

 

Every Cuban I've ever met has a serious issue with Castro.  I take their word over anything else.  

 

 

I'm hoping that you know even the basics of Cuban history. If you do you should be well aware that the opinions of Cubans living in the US are, at best, a one sided view of those affairs.

 

But do feel free to ignore fifty years of established international politics and world history for someone's bitter anecdotal evidence.

 

By the way, shouldn't you, as a teacher, be dealing primarily with facts? 

Edited November 27, 2016 by Drowsy Emperor

[Ben No.3]

 

 

 

 

 

The man is an icon of freedom the world over, barring anglo-saxon countries and non-state satellites like Canada. So, the overwhelming majority of the world.

 

Ask yourself why he used to get a roaring applause prior to opening his mouth at the UN as opposed to any other politican, including those from your own country.

 

Every Cuban I've ever met has a serious issue with Castro. I take their word over anything else.

I'm hoping that you know even the basics of Cuban history. If you do you should be well aware that the opinions of Cubans living in the US are, at best, a one sided view of those affairs.

 

But do feel free to ignore fifty years of established international politics and world history for someone's bitter anecdotal evidence.

 

By the way, shouldn't you, as a teacher, be dealing primarily with facts?

Funny

Teachers teach what they are being told to teach. In many cases like the sciences, that is obviously teaching facts. But there is no uktimalye truths when it comes to politics. Or rather, there is, but people (especially in America) want their children to support their country. So everything is taught in a way that supports the US. Now, obviously there are exceptions, but this is the general consensus. And obviously this is true for basically every school system ever-if children are taught politics, they are usually also taught underlaying principles. And in the case of the US those are democracy, capitalism and (to a greater or lesser extend) patriotism. In some parts also religion.

 

But history and especially politics is always taught an talked about at an angle. Always!

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

The man is an icon of freedom the world over, barring anglo-saxon countries and non-state satellites like Canada. So, the overwhelming majority of the world.

 

Ask yourself why he used to get a roaring applause prior to opening his mouth at the UN as opposed to any other politican, including those from your own country.

 

 

Every Cuban I've ever met has a serious issue with Castro.  I take their word over anything else.  

 

 

I'm hoping that you know even the basics of Cuban history. If you do you should be well aware that the opinions of Cubans living in the US are, at best, a one sided view of those affairs.

 

But do feel free to ignore fifty years of established international politics and world history for someone's bitter anecdotal evidence.

 

By the way, shouldn't you, as a teacher, be dealing primarily with facts? 

 

 

Drowsy come on.,...the irony with you suggesting Hurlshot needs to focus on facts must be a joke ?

 

You have made several  comments  like " Castro is one of the greatest leaders the world has ever seen " and " Castro is a better leader than any EU leader "....and the concern is I think you actually believe this 

[Ben No.3]

But do people agree with me when I say that there are no great countries, only good or bad systems?

 

In my view patriotism has always this element of ignorance towards your country's problems. And there are few things I can't stand like ignorance.

Edited November 27, 2016 by Ben No.3