what went right?
What went right?
Jason Nguyen
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
vngiapaganda.wordpress.com
rhizzone.net
liberationnews.org
theduran.com
38north.org
cuba-solidarity.org.uk
youtu.be
latinamericanstudies.org
revolucionobrera.com
pukainti.blogspot.com
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
William Hill
Everything.
David Foster
Although it adopted revisionist USSR policies (as they had not other option) they tried to mantain a socialist line always, with Che being a hardline antirevisionist (thats why he left Cuba), and Catro although a more moderate one also trying to oppose it.
They also rectified and accepted their errors (similarly to Mao self-citizising line), such as suppressing homosexuals.
Inverted in social plans such as helthcare, or housing for all, instead of a huge army (although this was due to the fact that the USSR protected them).
They were flexible in their policies (and this might look in contadiction with the first phrase),but with the disolution of the USSR insteda of going fullcapitalist they intoduced a series of reforms that saved the country but always with socialism as their goal(See video below)
But most importantly they have a socialist democracy, so most of the Cubans are happy as they are working for them and no for some capitalist, helping their people and workers all around the globe.
Watch this video to understand some of the points.
youtube.com
Jaxson Russell
Fidel opposed many of the revisionist policies as well. He just had to play coy because as you said, he was reliant on the USSR. But what an irony, little Cuba is still arround and the USSR collapsed.
Matthew Gonzalez
Oh and by the way, many of the achievements of Cuba can be applied to North Korea as well. It's just that Koreans are no fun allowed people while Latinos are chill.
Luis Carter
i'm this poster and I agree that Korea has made also some achievements.
But they have a too authoritarian line, are more unflexible (they seem a bit autistic in some of their foreing policies).
And I don't now to what extent they are a democracy (I've lived one year in Cuba so I now they are indeed more democratic than most western countries).
Could you give a quick rundown (maybe a video or text) on why NK is not as bad as it sounds.
Thanks comerade
Austin Torres
USSR collapsed and it went to shit because the US kept embargoing them
Camden Hughes
stories
David Gray
the ruling party is aligned with his beliefs
that's it
Justin Perez
LITERALLY NOTHING CASTRO TOOK AWAY MUH SLAVES AND PRIVATE BUSINESS HE WAS A RACIST TERRORIST EVIL HOMOPHOBE WHO STARVED AND IMPOVERISHED HIS PEOPLE WHILE LIVING IN HIS 100 GORILLION DOLLAR HOUSE THE HOSPITALS ARE SHIT THEREFORE THE HEALTHCARE IS SHIT THEY INDOCTRINATE THE CHILDREN VIVA LA CIA JFK WAS A COMMIE
Henry Young
vngiapaganda.wordpress.com
rhizzone.net
liberationnews.org
theduran.com
38north.org
Just some accumulated links that have been posted here before. Last one is an American Think Tank so it can't be accused of propaganda. You asked a pretty broad question so I'm quite unsure how to answer it.
True, but is the US line against North Korea not even more autistic? I feel like these weird mannerisms they have (leader worship, etc) is more of a result of the isolation which was articifically forced upon them.
Adrian Cooper
Anyway, Castro was probably one of the very few cases of being a humanitarian dictator, and, despite being ruthless, surprisingly and ironically didn't seem to come off as a crazy sociopath like Stalin, and even allowed for some direct democracy after the USSR instead of selling out like Pizza Hut Man. He did a lot of good and very impressive things for his people. It's also surprising how Cuba is still going pretty strong, despite the embargo and its internal contradictions.
Leo Nelson
Dude, Cuba as a vivid grassroot democracy
cuba-solidarity.org.uk
Landon Diaz
Jeremiah Kelly
Nothing. Cuba is a revisionist country in which the 'revolutionaries' """"adapted"""" Marxism AFTER the revolution which deposed Batista, and then played up to the USSR in slightly hidden capitalism, then being in ruins after it fell because it didn't industrialize. The state also persecuted Marxists, and support some supposed 'peace', abandoning any pretense that a revolution is needed. That country needs an actual proletarian revolution, not a petit bourgeois one.
Grayson Sullivan
He did
Chase Thompson
There were shortages, sure, mainly because of the lack of fertilizers and pestizides which were imported from the USSR. But they've completely overcame that, and they are still around and kicking. You are being way too harsh on them.
Grayson Hill
But it is not socialist: that's the first problem.
Brayden Martinez
Elaborate your position?
John Peterson
As I was mentioning, Fidel Castro took up Marxism only after deposing Batista's tyranny. It was a petit bourgeois revolution aimed at taking its part of the capitalist cake which was for the biggest part taken by American imperialists.
Here for example, the character of the revolution is in plain sight: latinamericanstudies.org
Socialism or communism figure nowhere in the document, the army is taken as if separated from the State, and it mentions indemnifying the previous landowners.
I'm going to extract a bit from a document written by the Partido Comunista de Colombia Marxista-Leninista which critiques Cuba, from 1967, translated by myself:
Aligning itself with the Russians from that epoch against the many parties that were communist, not the revisionist garbage that was already prevalent at the time after Stalin's death.
Demanding that the aforementioned party stop its ideological struggle against revisionism to be supported by the Cuban Communist Party.
The persecution of Marxist-Leninists and their ideology, instead teaching revisionism.
Erasing the ML parties attending the Tricontinental Conference. Using this very thing in the most opportunistic manner to attack Mao and China, siding with the Soviet Union against it.
Supporting anti-Marxist groups in Latin America.
Claiming that is not necessary to have a Marxist Leninist party to have a revolution, denying the role of the proletariat. This is also evidenced by Castro's declarations on Brazil like: "Yo solo, soy capaz de ha-
cer la revolución en el Brasil" "Only I am capable of doing the revolution in Brazil".
Attributing the leading role of the revolution to the petit-bourgeoisie and farmers.
I'm going to leave this document written by the Colombian Unión Obrera Comunista here, but it's in Spanish: revolucionobrera.com
And this document written by an Ecuatorian MLM group: pukainti.blogspot.com
Julian Ramirez
That's some good information to consider. Thank you comrade. I still believe that economically, Cuba hasn't really been that revisionist, but I'm definitely putting some research into the direction of the links you posted.
Bentley Adams
No problem, comrade.
Christopher Taylor
2/3 of those images are computer renderings
Anthony Carter
They are from CNN/Reuters and shit, why would they try to make the DPRK look good?
Julian Wood
Fidel was a fucking great human being, one of the few examples of a benevolent dictator I could point to. Also, he allowed for local democracy and worker empowerment. Of course, the subsidies from the USSR helped, but I think it's telling that Cuba ultimately lasted longer. Of course, it's not all of the solution, but I think Cuba is a great example of what leadership should be in the immediate post revolutionary period.
Ryder Jenkins
All this means is that a petit-bourgeois revolution transformed into a communist revolution, just like USSR. We WANT this to happen.
Landon Brooks
But it didn't. I'm supposing you read nothing beyond the first paragraph.
Ian White