Fidel Castro dies at 90

Firing squads.

13 de Marzo massacre.

People trying to flee Cuba on rafts made out of garbage.

Political prisoners.

Interamerican Commission for Human Rights extimated up to 30'000 citizens interned in forced labour camps.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Cuba

 

 

Noble peace prize posthumously I'd say.

@ Paladin

I suppose that's par for the course considering the ongoing war on any kind of complex analysis.

And there are certainly some who agree with you partying down in Miami.

Ehttps://www.washingtonpost.com/world/in-wake-of-castros-death-cuban-exil...

Given the circumstances he had to deal with, and what he managed to accomplish I rank him far above par, despite his many shortcomings.

For one thing, the fact that they aren't partying in Havana - and I seriously doubt that is because anyone has a gun to their head -  should tell you something.

 

Many obits and articles will be written about Comandante Fidel. The few I've seen put at the top of the list his stunning and, let's say, unsurpassed anti-imperialist credentials. He was an inspiration for millions, even billions. He fought Yankee imperialism - which tried with might and main to kill him on over 600 different ocassions and failed - and whupped them. That is a very small club.

Fidel falls into the same category as Karl Marx,  Simon Bolivar, or, in his own beloved Cuba, Jose Marti and Ernesto "Che" Guevara.

His name will live through the ages.

Paladin, I'm well aware of the negatives in Cuba, but I think you are deliberately darkening the picture. Cuba is not North Korea, or the Soviet Union in the years of the Great Purges. And they have corrected some bad things they did at one point, such as discrimination against LGBT people and people with AIDS. There is a lot of open criticism of the government and society there nowadays.

There would be far more refugees on unseaworthy vessels if Haitians were allowed to stay in the US if they arrived there without a visa or immigrant status.

I've only found gusano sources for the alleged 13 de marzo massacre. The Wikipedia article calls it the name given by Cuban Americans to the incident. The Cuban government has denied responsibility and said it was an accident. You said above boats made of garbage - this was a tugboat, but certainly not designed to carry a group of people who weren't mariners over open seas. We know that many, many people trying to leave their native lands for a variety of reasons have met their deaths at sea in recent years.

Perhaps you recall that the Cuban Revolution did not overthrow a democratic government, but the dictatorial and deeply corrupt Batista régime, when Cuba was the "brothel of the US". Trump is doubtless having wet dreams over the prospects.

Quote:

From the International Committee for Peace, Justice and Dignity:

“On the occasion of the demise of the Commander in Chief of the Cuban Revolution, Fidel Castro Ruz, the Council of State of the Republic of Cuba declares nine days of National Mourning, as from the 06:00 hrs. of November 26 th, until the 12:00 hrs. of December 4th, 2016. For as long as the National Mourning is in place, public activities and shows shall not be held, the national flag shall be flown at half-staff in public buildings and military facilities. The radio and television shall broadcast informative, patriotic and historic programs.”

—Council of State of the Republic of Cuba 

Statement from the Council of State, etc.

6079_Smith_W wrote:

@ Paladin

I suppose that's par for the course considering the ongoing war on any kind of complex analysis.

And there are certainly some who agree with you partying down in Miami.

Ehttps://www.washingtonpost.com/world/in-wake-of-castros-death-cuban-exil...

Given the circumstances he had to deal with, and what he managed to accomplish I rank him far above par, despite his many shortcomings.

For one thing, the fact that they aren't partying in Havana - and I seriously doubt that is because anyone has a gun to their head -  should tell you something.

That's fair Smith.  I'm not above giving credit where it's due. I think it's awesome he quite successfully gave the finger to the US for half a century.  I'm just don't turn a blind eye to the shitty stuff people like this do too, like murder.

 

lagatta wrote:

Paladin, I'm well aware of the negatives in Cuba, but I think you are deliberately darkening the picture.

 

I think the human rights abuse and murders paint their own picture. I'm just offering a counter POV to some who may want to practically canonize him.

His resistance against the US does make for a great debate and example, no disagreement here.

 

My boats made of garbage comment was in the context of just people trying to escape paradise cuba.  I do remember the Batista being a puppy US government. Castro hardly holds a candle to the crimes committed by the US government. The US government had a plan to kill their own citizens in order to drum up support against Cuba.

Quote:

Can someone please decode Tom Mulcair's twitter comment on Casto's death. To me it looks indistinguishable from Rona Ambrose's comment

Well, here's what I could find on CBC:

Quote:

"My thoughts and prayers are with the people of Cuba who continue to endure his long and oppressive regime, even after his death," she (Ambrose) wrote.

NDP Leader Tom Mulcair shared a similar message on Twitter. "Upon the passing of Fidel Castro let us think of the lives impacted by his actions and be hopeful for the future of the Cuban people."

I don't think Ambrose's comment needs any unpacking.  Admittedly, Tom's (or at least the sentence above) is ambiguous.

So I suppose we could imagine him saying either of the following:

1. "Upon the passing of Fidel Castro let us think of the lives [negatively] impacted by his actions and be hopeful for the future of the Cuban people [after he screwed everything up for them]."

2. "Upon the passing of Fidel Castro let us think of the lives [positively] impacted by his actions and be hopeful for the future of the Cuban people [without his leadership]."

My guess, personally:  #2.

ed'd to add:  Here's Barack Obama:

Quote:

"At this time of Fidel Castro's passing, we extend a hand of friendship to the Cuban people," he said in a statement, noting his administration had "worked hard to put the past behind us."

As for Castro's legacy, he said "history will record and judge the enormous impact of this singular figure on the people and world around him."

And that, my friends, is how you do "ambiguous".  That's ambiguous taken to the point of diplomatic.

And just to be fair, here's President-elect Donald Trump:

Quote:

Fidel Castro is dead!

Already a statesman.

 

 

Fuck off Ambrose. We're still shaking off your party's oppression. Mulcair's response was not surprising. Very diplomatic. Trump? What a fuckin' buffoon.

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:

Socialism requires democracy and in that crucial respect Casto falls short.

Utopian Socialism surely requires democracy.  But historically, state socialism doesn't really seem to have had much interest in it.  From state socialism's point of view, giving people a genuine choice means taking the chance that they won't choose state socialism.

To be fair, Cuba does allow the people to choose which representative from the Communist Party they prefer.  But do you come to bury Castro, or to praise him?

I do neither but I do express disappointment in the lack of democracy. That doesn't excuse the Americans either and their idiotic embargo.

ygtbk wrote:

All of us who happened to live through the Cuban missile crisis will always remember Fidel.

That was a reaction to the Bay of Pigs. The Cubans were trying to prevent another invasion.

I have always had qualified respect for Castro, and great concern over how the LGBT communities were treated in Cuba. I have nothing but contempt for the right-wing figures in the United States and Canada who are bringing this up today to condemn him (Castro). Especially in the aftermath of the most recent American election with not a single exception that comes to my mind, the Republicans seeking the nomination and the movers and shakers within the party establishment were falling over themselves to court and seek endorsement from the Christian religious fanatics who want to roll back such rights as do exist in the U.S. for the LGBT communities. Their hypocrisy is making me gag.

Castro, at least, evolved and ultimately held himself responsible for the injustices inflicted on the LGBT communities. I recall no such "on the Road to Damascus" revelations striking, say, Harper or Thatcher or Reagan or any other darlings of the Right.

Personally, I have no problem with Trudeau the lesser's expression of sorrow (on behalf of Canadians) at the death of Castro. When I compare it to the rantings of Kellie Leitch or Ben Harper my opinion of Trudeau actually improves a bit (a hard task).

bagkitty wrote:

Castro, at least, evolved and ultimately held himself responsible for the injustices inflicted on the LGBT communities. I recall no such "on the Road to Damascus" revelations striking, say, Harper or Thatcher or Reagan or any other darlings of the Right.

Personally, I have no problem with Trudeau the lesser's expression of sorrow (on behalf of Canadians) at the death of Castro. When I compare it to the rantings of Kellie Leitch or Ben Harper my opinion of Trudeau actually improves a bit (a hard task).

I actually liked his statement and it is the first time in a long time that anything coming out of his mouth didn't sound like it was written by a spindoctor. 

Quote:

In most ridings in Canada the only viable choices are the Liberal Tory same old story. That is not democracy that is a dog and pony show. 

Here is an article with a different take on the Cuban electoral system that you dismiss as inferior to our system that gives us Harper and then Trudeau. A change of the waterboy but no change in the controlling hand.

My understanding of the Cuban electoral system is that there is only one official party.  Is that correct?

If so, how is having two (actually, nearly twenty) parties to choose from LESS democratic than having only the one?

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Mr. Magoo wrote:

My understanding of the Cuban electoral system is that there is only one official party.  Is that correct?

If so, how is having two (actually, nearly twenty) parties to choose from LESS democratic than having only the one?

See post #24 above and many other sources that actually explain the system. Of course you could just read American reports condemning it instead. When ones mindset is stuck in their own worldview it's hard sometimes to understand that other people do things differently.

From talking to many people who have spent considerable time in Cuba outside of the resort hotels I believe that the government has the support of the majority of a well educated population. Personally I prefer to go with their judgement.

I have no doubt that the government in Cuba has mass support. However, to have two brothers run the country with no method to affirm them in their position. Also, restrictions on foreign traveland the press also are also something I disagree with. Canada has an all powerful PMO, false majorities, corporate control of the media so Canada has its flaws to say the least.

NDPP wrote:

'Dogs Dancing on a Lion's Grave...'

https://www.rt.com/op-edge/368331-those-dancing-on-fidels-grave/

 

Those dancing on Fidel’s grave may soon be disappointed

Like their boy Donald Trump?

Yes. I don't think it is wrong to speak out against human rights abuses in Cuba or anywhere, but not only in Standing Rock but also in Val d'Or, there are gross human rights violations. And since the Trump election, there has been a great legitimization of the most gross racist, misogynist and other exclusionary language - and subsequent acts.

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Am I the only one pissed off about the media handwringing about "human rights" in Cuba while as we speak protesters at Standing Rock are meeting violent police resistance?

 

The people who own the media were told to find other stories to report on. That's why we're blasted with earth-shattering stories about Kanye west's latest fucking drama while a militarized police force are assaulting civilians.

People in Miami didn't vote for him and there are many other places where the Trudeau-Grégoire family can take a winter sun holiday. Though don't they sometimes prefer a winter ski holiday in BC, where his maternal family lives?

I don't even think most of the younger generation of Cuban-Americans give a flying fig about the revanchist grandstanding of their silly elders. They made fools enough of themselves over Elian.

Quote:

See post #24 above and many other sources that actually explain the system.

None of them seem to answer my question as to whether Cuba is a genuine one-party system, except for Wikipedia:

Quote:

Since Cuba became a one-party republic and the Communist party became the official political party, the Cuban political system has been condemned by some opposition groups, human rights groups, and foreign Western governments. Many governments and international groups have also praised the democratic nature of the Cuban political system.

They said it plainly, just like you could have.

Anyway, I'm really not here to disrupt Castro's eulogy thread, but if it's not the time for me to play critic of the Cuban system then it's probably not the time for you to play fanboy for it, either.

Ah, OK.  So Cuban dissidents were simply told "you have a right to your opinion, and a right to state it"?

Also, do I smell revisionism in the air?

I think some people are missing the inherent levity of the situation.

https://twitter.com/hashtag/trudeaueulogies?src=hash

Outside of human rights questions, Castro did accomplish something: he built a health care system which delivers results as good as that in the U.S., far more equitably distributed, on a lower percentage of GDP spent in an economy with a small fraction of the U.S. GDP per capita:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/nov/27/castros-legacy-and-the-env...

On the other hand he and his party didn't come to grips with Cuba's food production problem and the country's lack of food independence until their backs were against the wall after the end of subsidies from the collapsed USSR. Until then they tried to copy the failed Soviet agricultural system. This should tell us something about Marxism-Leninism and its disciples' grip on reality. Of course the Cubans' ability to follow an independent line of "Communism" was limited if they wanted any support from the USSR, and some support seemed essential in the face of American hostility. The Cubans found out the hard way what level of allegiance the USSR required when then started making admiring noises about Mao's China.

I know it is a little odd to quote and respond to yourself, but I think it is justified in this case.

bagkitty wrote:

[...]

Personally, I have no problem with Trudeau the lesser's expression of sorrow (on behalf of Canadians) at the death of Castro. When I compare it to the rantings of Kellie Leitch or Ben Harper my opinion of Trudeau actually improves a bit (a hard task).

[emphasis added]

And now it is announced that he won't be attending the state funeral. Equilibrium is restored - and my view of Trudeau the Lesser returns to its default setting.

Eduardo Galeano en Francais wrote:

Ses ennemis disent qu’il a été un roi sans couronne et qu’il confondait l’unité avec l’unanimité.

Et en cela ses ennemis ont raison.

Ses ennemis disent que si Napoléon avait eu un quotidien comme le « granmma », aucun français n’aurait appris la débâcle de Waterloo.

Et en cela ses ennemis ont raison.

Ses ennemis disent qu’il a exercé le pouvoir en parlant beaucoup et en écoutant peu, parce qu’il était plus habitué aux échos qu’aux voix.

Et en cela ses ennemis ont raison.

Mais ses ennemis ne disent pas que ce fut pas pour poser pour l’Histoire qu’il a offert la poitrail aux balles quand est survenue l’invasion, qu’il a affronté les ouragans d’égal à égal, d’ouragan à ouragan, qu’il a survécu à 637 attentats, que son énergie contagieuse a été décisive pour transformer une colonie en patrie, et que cela ne fut pas par la sorcellerie de Mandinga ni par un miracle de Dieu que cette nouvelle patrie a pu survivre à 10 présidents des États-Unis, dont le couvert était mis pour le déjeuner.

Et ses ennemis ne disent pas que Cuba est un des rares pays qui ne participe pas la coupe mondiale du paillasson.

Et voilà qu’ils ne disent pas que cette révolution, qui a grandi dans le châtiment, est ce qu’elle a pu être et non ce qu’elle a voulu être. Ni ne disent qu’en grande partie le mur entre le désir et la réalité est devenu plus haut et plus large à cause du blocus impérial, qui a noyé le développement d’une démocratie à la Cubaine, qui a obligé à la militarisation de la société et a octroyé à la bureaucratie, qui pour chaque solution a un problème, l’alibi dont elle a besoin pour se justifier et pour se perpétuer.

Et voilà qu’ils ne disent pas que malgré tous les chagrins, malgré les agressions venant de dehors et les décisions arbitraires de dedans, cette île en souffrance mais obstinément joyeuse a généré la société latinoaméricaine la moins injuste.

Et ses ennemis ne disent pas que cet exploit fut l’œuvre du sacrifice de son peuple, mais aussi l’œuvre de la volonté têtue et de l’antique sens de l’honneur de ce caballero qui s’est toujours battu pour les perdants, comme son fameux collègue des champs de Castilla.

Extrait Du livre « Espejos. Una historia casi universal » , 2008.
[« Miroirs. Une histoire presque universelle ». Non traduit en français et c’est dommage.]

en Anglais ...

Eduardo Galeano wrote:

His enemies say he was a king without a crown and that he confused unity with unanimity.

And in this his enemies are right.

His enemies say that if Napoleon had a daily like the "Granmma", no Frenchman would have learned the debacle of Waterloo.

And in this his enemies are right.

His enemies say he exercised power by talking a lot and listening little, because he was more accustomed to echoes than to voices.

And in this his enemies are right.

But his enemies do not say it was not to pose for history that he offered his chest to the bullets when the invasion took place, that he faced hurricanes equally, from hurricane to hurricane , That he survived 637 attacks, that his contagious energy was decisive to transform a colony into a homeland, and that it was not by the witchcraft of Mandinga nor by a miracle of God that this new country was able to survive 10 Presidents of the United States, whose cover was set for lunch.

And his enemies do not say that Cuba is one of the few countries that does not participate in the world cup of the doormat.

And yet they do not say that this revolution, which has grown in chastisement, is what it may have been and not what it wanted to be. Nor do they say that much of the wall between desire and reality has become higher and wider due to the imperial blockade, which has drowned the development of a Cuban democracy, which has forced the militarization of Society and has given the bureaucracy, which for each solution has a problem, the alibi that it needs to justify itself and to perpetuate itself.

And yet they do not say that despite all the sorrows, despite the aggressions coming from outside and arbitrary decisions from within, this island in suffering but obstinately joyous has generated the least unjust Latin American society.

And his enemies do not say that this exploit was the work of the sacrifice of his people but also the work of the stubborn will and the ancient sense of honor of this caballero who has always fought for the losers , Like his famous colleague of the fields of Castilla.

Long live the memory of this great Don Quixote, this caballero of the Cuban fields, who always fought for the losers, and won, and because he was one of us.