|
Victory Position posted:what's better than another cold war? THS posted:it’s not in their “best interests” but every year this seems to escalate and get worse I should have been clearer: I think American elites are right now collectively Dumb as poo poo and do not have any idea of what constitutes their own best interests for evidence your honor I submit the covid thread, the doomsday economics thread, the climate change thread, the cool zone thread, the democratic party thread, and the liberals loving suck thread
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2021 06:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 23:08 |
|
|
in order to secure access to the semiconductor fabs in east asia the US will destroy all the infrastructure in the territories that operate semiconductor fabs in east asia
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2021 06:42
|
|
|
somewhere in langley there's a bunch of dudes who have already convinced themselves that china's response to covid means they're too cucked to do a second strike
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2021 06:43
|
|
|
BrutalistMcDonalds posted:well, if a third of america is extremely brainwashed (i think the number is a lot higher actually) then that seems to be evidence that brainwashing... erm, well those people have been continuously indoctrinated from birth, idk how a two year stint building reservoirs in central California or Arizona is gonna compete with that
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2021 06:48
|
|
"re-education"
|
indigi posted:Germans honestly suck poo poo is this the weird problematic sex I keep hearing about 
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2021 07:48
|
|
|
dead gay comedy forums posted:I should have been clearer: I think American elites are right now collectively Dumb as poo poo and do not have any idea of what constitutes their own best interests the interest here would be as to how far these lunkheads want to assert themselves and prove that America's back to normal by posturing on the world stage versus the very cozy donor and technocratic side of it doing a spit-take and seeing that no, not even they can pay their way out of something like this, they're going to have to do something else
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2021 07:54
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:he was no Babeuf Especially contested was Marechal’s “Let the arts perish, if need be, as long as real equality remains.” hardcore
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2021 11:06
|
|
|
Doctor Jeep posted:Especially contested was Marechal’s “Let the arts perish, if need be, as long as real equality remains.” a bold demand from a frenchman
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2021 12:25
|
|
|
ToxicAcne posted:Edit: I seriously don't understand taking hard line positions on which Bolshevik was right in TYOOL 2021. If you want to read Trotsky or whatever, you should do so understanding his circumstances and biases. Take what's relevant and critique what isn't. Identifying as a Trotskyist or Stalinist post Soviet Union is insane. yeah
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2021 13:04
|
|
|
didn't Cuba have a re-education program? or was it just that their literacy campaign also taught ppl to read while imprisoned
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2021 15:28
|
|
|
In Training posted:didn't Cuba have a re-education program? or was it just that their literacy campaign also taught ppl to read while imprisoned two different things. IIRC the literacy program developed in Cuba was the most successful one in history (considering time taken in proportion to the population), building from what was learned and done in the USSR and China, which informed its reeducation program About that, though... eh. Some good hits like overhauling penal labor into a mix of proper work/schooling into socially useful tasks, having powerful reformative effects. Then there are the very bad misses like homossexuality being regarded as a bourgeois illness in the 70s and having queers imprisoned for "rehabilitation", basically asylum punishment To elaborate on that for the sake of the example, Fidel himself later on took responsibility for that, admitting it was a loving huge error and a failure to Cuban queer comrades, besides failing the basic principle of universal solidarity. So in the early 2000s onwards they went for full reform on that matter and in 2019, they are one of the few countries in the world where lgbtq+ marriage and constitution of family are constitutionally recognized and protected
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2021 16:48
|
|
|
Doctor Jeep posted:Especially contested was Marechal’s “Let the arts perish, if need be, as long as real equality remains.” let all knowledge pass away if I do not know love
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2021 17:45
|
|
|
Victory Position posted:let all knowledge pass away if I do not know love the incel doomer credo
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2021 20:27
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:Endless Frontier Act is way too on the nose lmao
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2021 22:35
|
|
|
BrutalistMcDonalds posted:i, on the contrary, New thread title
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2021 23:21
|
|
|
dead gay comedy forums posted:... This is somewhat inaccurate, gay men were excluded from the military, and so were sent to labor camps as a substitute for what would have been mandatory army duty, along with other groups that were considered unfit. That is of course unjustifiable discrimination, and those work camps did end up being abusive in practice, though they were not intended to be punitive, which is why Fidel abolished them, but it was a far cry from institutionalization and conversion therapy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2021 04:00
|
|
|
Pomeroy posted:This is somewhat inaccurate, gay men were excluded from the military, and so were sent to labor camps as a substitute for what would have been mandatory army duty, along with other groups that were considered unfit. That is of course unjustifiable discrimination, and those work camps did end up being abusive in practice, though they were not intended to be punitive, which is why Fidel abolished them, but it was a far cry from institutionalization and conversion therapy. Gonna re-check my sources, because you made me curious about whether or not there was a concern for treatment back then. I sent a msg to an Argentinian colleague about it who lived there for a few years and was involved in the lgbtq+ movement of the country and should've been clearer: because homossexuality was indeed considered by psychiatry at large in the 70s as a disorder, "hospitalization" between quotes was considered an appropriate measure, especially as the very unfortunate reactionary lapse from the socialist countries of letting that ignorance and misunderstanding fester as something ideological, "bourgeois degeneration" and as such had to be treated as criminal anti-revolutionary behavior. I should have elaborated better: it wasn't about doing conversion therapies or anything of the sort, it was hospitalization as prison due to the "disorder" being judged in ideological grounds (thus a crime) rather than something psychiatric. Cuba wasn't doing anything particularly different than other socialist countries at the time. Fortunately, this was something that got addressed quick in the 70s, because queer communist representation in East Germany started to tell everyone to stop being loving idiots and their medical establishment supported them to the Party Being queer myself, while I do think that while Fidel hosed up at the time, it was a circumstance of the culture and period he was in. As his understanding of the question evolved, he recognized his mistakes and he did put the work in to rectify that, laying the groundwork for a constitution more progressive than most in the planet in that sense
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2021 15:21
|
|
|
on the one hand, he punitively institutionalized the homophobia of the era in law and practice, on the other hand, he was extremely daddy bearish, i.e. hot in the end I can only feel deep ambivalence
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2021 15:31
|
|
|
the leading figure on lgbtq rights in cuba is mariela castro, rauls daughter. there was absolutely discrimination against lgbtq people previously but has changed a lot over the last few decades. however its telling that mariela is basically the one who is the lead on this issue and when a ban on gender discrimination was passed in 2014, she voted against it because it didnt go far enough. thats not necessarily remarkable except it was the first time in cubas legislative history since the revolution that a legislator voted no on an issue. so from 1976-2014 not a single legislator had voted against a piece of legislation. it doesnt really speak to any kind of healthy democratic process. some people might say thats what democratic centralism looks like but no it isnt. the revolution imo was a bonapartist one. castro and the 26th of july won, took control of the country and more or less ran a benevolent dictatorship for decades but it was never really a working class revolutionary movement. there were aspects of that within the DRE which but it also had a lot of liberal elements as well being a mass formation, although the 26th of july was also ideologically diverse and more nationalist politically with some of the leading members being anti-communists like cienfuegos and matos. cuba imo is complex. the society has certainly benefited materially in ways that it certainly wouldnt have if it had stayed under US domination, can compare it to the rest of the caribbean on that front and its head and shoulders above. but the method and form of the 26th of july, the revolution, and the political leadership afterwards dont really provide any kind of model for marxists imo. it was a small guerrila movement which really kind of stumbled into success and didnt really have any kind of party or working class organization behind it until after the revolution which it had to improvise.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2021 16:12
|
|
|
Looking at the leper's colony it is good to know that CSPAM will do its part in upholding american hegemony lmao.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2021 16:15
|
|
|
still waiting to be informed of the mod line in our democratic centralism forum model
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2021 16:21
|
|
|
apropos to nothing posted:the leading figure on lgbtq rights in cuba is mariela castro, rauls daughter. there was absolutely discrimination against lgbtq people previously but has changed a lot over the last few decades. however its telling that mariela is basically the one who is the lead on this issue and when a ban on gender discrimination was passed in 2014, she voted against it because it didnt go far enough. thats not necessarily remarkable except it was the first time in cubas legislative history since the revolution that a legislator voted no on an issue. so from 1976-2014 not a single legislator had voted against a piece of legislation. it doesnt really speak to any kind of healthy democratic process. some people might say thats what democratic centralism looks like but no it isnt. i'm all for critically examining actually-existing socialism, but dismissing the cuban revolution as basically a bonapartist coup is deeply misguided imo
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2021 16:22
|
|
|
its not a dismissal, or a moral judgement, its a descriptive term for what happened. a revolutionary military leadership took control of the country. up until very recently the leaders of the country were in power chiefly because of their military victory over the previous administration, there was not a civilian political leadership that came to power after the revolution. and again, if you study the 26th of july movement, it was very much a nationalist movement first and foremost. there were marxists in it like guevarra and raul castro, but other like matos and cienfuegos were anti-communist. theres a lot of evidence that castro himself wanted to maintain good relations with the US but that in doing so it would have meant a lot of the social democratic policies and nationalizations they wanted to implement would not have been possible. without the support and patronage of the US, it helped lead to the communist/soviet aligned faction within the 26th of july to gain prominence because it was the height of the cold war and to maintain their independence they would either need the patronage of the US or USSR.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2021 16:28
|
|
|
wasn't castro also denied a diplomatic meeting with the US president not long after the revolution because his secretary had ties to united fruit or something? I vaguely remember hearing some story as to that being a precipitating cause of Castro going to the Soviets for support but in my brain that is A. half remembered and B. likely half-remembered from an apocryphal source
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2021 16:34
|
|
|
apropos to nothing posted:its not a dismissal, or a moral judgement, its a descriptive term for what happened. a revolutionary military leadership took control of the country. up until very recently the leaders of the country were in power chiefly because of their military victory over the previous administration, there was not a civilian political leadership that came to power after the revolution. and again, if you study the 26th of july movement, it was very much a nationalist movement first and foremost. there were marxists in it like guevarra and raul castro, but other like matos and cienfuegos were anti-communist. theres a lot of evidence that castro himself wanted to maintain good relations with the US but that in doing so it would have meant a lot of the social democratic policies and nationalizations they wanted to implement would not have been possible. without the support and patronage of the US, it helped lead to the communist/soviet aligned faction within the 26th of july to gain prominence because it was the height of the cold war and to maintain their independence they would either need the patronage of the US or USSR. but this is not what bonaparte did, so why are you calling it bonapartism
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2021 16:35
|
|
|
like, bonaparte seized power when his government lost legitimacy by virtue of commanding a serious military force and having earned respect as an effective leader through martial exploits. he was framed as a continuation of revolutionary ideals, but without the chaos and excesses - an 'ok this democracy jig doesn't seem to work, let's start being serious about running a country' castro et al were an armed nucleus of irregular warriors making themselves the face of opposition to a decrepit gangster regime and took over when that regime collapsed. it's a very different situation and the different actors have radically different power bases. i'll accept that the cuban mass movement was relatively weak (though i do think you're overstating that weakness as well), but bonapartism this was not
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2021 16:41
|
|
|
I think a really good source to read if you can find a copy is revolution in cuba by herbert matthews. matthews was the journalist who helped make the 26th of july and the revolution more generally famous worldwide by interviewing castro while he was in the sierra maestra and during a time when the batista regime was declaring him and the 26th of july dead and defeated. he was later accused of being a communist and hiding castros politics but that was a consequence of the times imo especially because matthews had been labeled every kind of unpopular political stripe during his time as a journalist. it was written in 75 so a while after the revolution but gives a lot of details about the political situation from an eye witness that reflect the attitudes and understanding of the political situation at that time. its often easy to look back and ascribe beliefs or ideas to someone or something in the future based on how events unfold but reading him and other contemporary sources from the time of the revolution i very much fall into the camp of castro (fidel anyway) was not a convinced communist until after the revolution and in large part from necessity. its a matter of historical debate so could be wrong but based on what ive read thats the conclusion i draw. and yeah to mr lobe castro came to the us following the revolution and during it as well as throughout the revolution itself he presented himself as very keen in continuing to be allies with and cordial with the US. US public perception was also very pro-castro/anti-batista until cuba aligned with the soviets if you read a lot of contemporary sources too. a lot of the reason the falling out occurred was because even if he wasnt a communist of conviction, castro and the rest of the 26th of july were nationalists and started taking measures to eliminate a lot of the US corporate and mafia domination of the island which meant nationalizations and other actions hostile to us corporations. additionally, because up until the batista regime fell into crisis cuba was viewed as basically a US colony, the US diplomatic core in cuba were basically incompetents who were placed there due to personal connections and favors. earl smith was the ambassador to cuba during the revoltuon and he had literally 0 diplomatic experience and did not speak a word of spanish, was just a rich business man. because the diplomats were so incompetent and in with the batista regime, they basically viewed the movements against batista as anti-US. elements of them were but that wasnt really their character. some similarities to the situation of the US diplomats in the mexican revolution where they basically acted on their own and against US interests although difference was in the case of mexican revolution it was calculated and in cuba it was just blind incompetence.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2021 16:50
|
|
|
What's the official mod position on the Kuriles and Sakhalin (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2021 16:50
|
|
|
bonapartist or bonapartism can be a general term used to describe the seizure of civilian power by a military leader. it can be described as left wing or right wing and its not the most precise term generally.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2021 16:57
|
|
|
For what it's worth I've read Samuel Farber's "Cuba Since the Revolution of 1959" and I can see where apropos is coming from
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2021 17:05
|
|
|
apropos to nothing posted:bonapartist or bonapartism can be a general term used to describe the seizure of civilian power by a military leader. it can be described as left wing or right wing and its not the most precise term generally. i've never seen it used as anything else than describing bonaparte's revolutionary coup and the succeeding french military-conservative ideology fwiw so that's where my reaction's coming from
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2021 18:04
|
|
|
apropos to nothing is doing a bonapartist coup to take over this thread
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2021 18:05
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) flabby eatass, go away
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2021 18:10
|
|
|
I am not all about criticizing actually-existing socialism.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2021 18:17
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:What's the official mod position on the Kuriles and Sakhalin As long as mods are reading this thread can we question the state department wrt Xinjiang if we also state in the same post that we call for nuking China?
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2021 18:26
|
|
|
apropos to nothing posted:the revolution imo was a bonapartist one. castro and the 26th of july won, took control of the country and more or less ran a benevolent dictatorship for decades but it was never really a working class revolutionary movement. there were aspects of that within the DRE which but it also had a lot of liberal elements as well being a mass formation, although the 26th of july was also ideologically diverse and more nationalist politically with some of the leading members being anti-communists like cienfuegos and matos. I wouldn't exactly say that Batista just rolled over and died like you mention, but he definitely did not put up as big of a fight as you would expect, he did just sort of hop on a plane and vanish as his control crumbled in his grasp
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2021 18:42
|
|
|
incredible forumZeno-25 posted:
Rated PG-34 posted:no really, post the source so I can be convinced or unconvinced Lostconfused posted:So are you just going to stay mad or will you finally post some more propaganda here?
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2021 19:07
|
|
|
quote:Congratulations, your genocide denial has earned you another ban! You're well on your way to a perma. I advise you to never discuss genocide here again.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2021 19:12
|
|
|
there will be no war with china. anyway here is why china is the equivalent of Nazi Germany, perhaps worse
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2021 19:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 23:08 |
|
|
apropos to nothing posted:its not a dismissal, or a moral judgement, its a descriptive term for what happened. a revolutionary military leadership took control of the country. up until very recently the leaders of the country were in power chiefly because of their military victory over the previous administration, there was not a civilian political leadership that came to power after the revolution. and again, if you study the 26th of july movement, it was very much a nationalist movement first and foremost. there were marxists in it like guevarra and raul castro, but other like matos and cienfuegos were anti-communist. theres a lot of evidence that castro himself wanted to maintain good relations with the US but that in doing so it would have meant a lot of the social democratic policies and nationalizations they wanted to implement would not have been possible. without the support and patronage of the US, it helped lead to the communist/soviet aligned faction within the 26th of july to gain prominence because it was the height of the cold war and to maintain their independence they would either need the patronage of the US or USSR. there is actually no contradiction between a nationalist movement and a socialist movement when the nation in question is subject to imperialism, and it's no accident that fight whose first objective was just independence from us control turned next to socialism. nothing else could have done it  from http://grassrootspolicy.org/wp-cont...eUbpml1PeUnxEDI Ferrinus fucked around with this message at 19:23 on Mar 12, 2021 |
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2021 19:21
|
|
