I frequently complain about the industry myself in this space, but not this week, because I spent much of it in Havana … which basically felt like a picturesque disaster area, still under the thumb of oppressive one-party rule. It’s hard not to strongly approve of capitalism and free markets, for all of their flaws when left unchecked, after you see people excitedly queueing to buy tomatoes on one of the world’s most fertile islands.
Says it all, really. To those who would fete Fidel Castro and his vile regime, that sums up everything – and that’s even if we ignore el paredón (which I don’t). Communism didn’t lift Cubans out of poverty, it kept them there for the past five decades. Now that the old scrote is dead and his brother is of a similar age, maybe, just maybe, Cuba will improve for the ordinary people. Sooner or later, the communist regime will go the way of its forebears in Europe and collapse to be replaced by something more liberal and economically literate. In the meantime, Fidel Castro is not someone to celebrate and he was not a great man. He was a tyrant who kept the populace under the boot of oppression. A mass murderer who should have been punished for his crimes.
“Sooner or later, the communist regime will go the way of its forebears in Europe and collapse to be replaced by something more liberal and economically literate. “
Or they could join the EU?
Despite my contempt for the EU, at least they don’t execute political dissidents and we don’t have to queue for basic commodities.
Dear Mr Longrider
Yet.
DP
And let’s remember that liberalism is destroyed what little is left of our own once great country.
“We don’t have to queue for basic commodities” Really? Not in the UK maybe but in the eastern EU it still happens.
And let’s remember that in Cuba under Batista, the ordinary peasant starved. Cuba doesn’t hand out cash benefits like us to spend on fags and beer – their system hands out food paid for by the state instead. You could argue that that’s a better way when you take a look at ‘Benefits Street – life on the dole’ currently on TV and see what the claimants in the UK piss the cash up the wall on…
Those EU states that experience such deprivations are still dragging themselves out of seven decades of communism.
It’s not liberalism that is eating away at our country but something entirely different.
You seem obsessed with Communist to the exclusion of all else..?
Obsessed? No. It is a misanthropic, totalitarian ideology that is responsible for the deaths of millions, so, no, I don’t like it, just as I dislike all totalitarian ideologies.
To be fair, I don’t believe it likely. The EU consists of nominally liberal democracies and shooting dissidents simply doesn’t fit with the political ethos – besides, the death penalty is against EU rules.
As you know, I do not share your rather singular view
https://dioclese.wordpress.com/2016/11/29/castroballs/
It’s not a singular view, it’s a balanced one based upon evidence from a range of sources. The killings are a matter of historical record.
Sources that include several not entirely unbiased American ones. We should remember that what really wrecked the Cuban economy and forced them to turn to the USSR for help was the Bay of Pigs invasion and a five decade blockade by the USA.
“The killings are a matter of historical record – ask yourself who wrote that record. You couldn’t get the last word on this topic at my place or force me to agree with you, so you carry it on over here. You have not moved a single millimetre on your views on a country that you’ve never even been to. I’d call that not just singular but blinkered.
10/10 for persistence though. Almost as persistent as our friend Rickie…
So, are you suggesting that the killings didn’t happen? Perhaps those images I linked to were photo-shopped, eh? Fakes, the lot of them. Really? Evidence, please? And your anti-Americanism doesn’t count. The historical record comes from a range of sources, including survivors.
If you accept that killings did occur, please enlighten me, how many deaths separate a murderous dictator from a “great man”? I’d love to know.
BTW, that’s another little logical fallacy for you – poisoning the well.
No, I provided you with a consistent, logical argument. One you have failed to rebut. You have merely bombarded me with logical fallacies and personal attacks.
I wasn’t forcing you to do anything at all. I merely disagreed with you and you responded with bad temper and not for the first time lately. Something I have not done with you.
And if you are going to accuse me of trolling, I suggest a good hard look at your original polemic and ridiculous logical fallacies that followed. Is that why you fell out with the Farquar crowd?
I returned to this purely because of the link over at Tim’s – sums up Communist states perfectly. If you choose to take it personally, that’s your problem.
Who accused you of trolling? Not me! Where did that come from?
.
Now you’re accusing me of bad temper? What bad temper? You seem to be the one getting aeriated. I just provided – in your words – a consistent and logical argument
And as for my falling out with the ‘Farquhar crowd’ that would explain why their admin now runs ISAC with me and bought me a beer when we met up last month. Bought me two in fact.
Attack me if you like but don’t piss down my back and then tell me it’s raining. Bloody glad I quit Scriblerus if this sort of abuse is what good blogging is all about.
I used to respect your blogging.
You likened me to Rickie – that was below the belt and an insinuation that I am applying his tactics. I am not.
I’m pleased that you’ve made up with the Farquar guys, but I recalled a falling out and if this discussion is anything to go by, I begin to understand why.
Um… you used the tu quoque repeatedly. This is a logical fallacy. You have also used the poison well fallacy in an attempt to undermine evidence presented to you and finally, you used the ad hominem. So, no, not a logical argument. Sorry, but it ain’t.
I haven’t abused you or attacked you – you have attacked me. This started when it became obvious that I remained unconvinced by your fallacious arguments. I suggest you go back over the discussion. I have merely provided an argument to support my case. You are the one who decided to engage in ad hominems, not me.
Likewise. You have spent plenty of time attacking the politicians that make our lives a misery, then bizarrely give a free pass to someone who is worse than the lot of them put together. Merkel, Cameron et al have never put political opponents against a wall and had them shot.
And that is the single point you have consistently failed to address. That is why I haven’t budged. You’ve given me whataboutery and logical fallacy, but never addressed the one point I have repeatedly presented – even when I revisited it in the previous comment to this:
Did Castro execute political dissidents? Yes or no?
Simple point really. If yes, then my point stands; he does not deserve the accolade of “great man”. If no, then you should be able to point to evidence that the charges against him are false. I don’t expect you to, because those charges are true and we both know it.
You are clearly comfortable with moral relativism. I am not.
You seem completely incapable.of agreeing to differ. Did Castro execute dissidents? Honest answer? Who really knows. Does the CIA do the same? Who really knows. Did they kill their own president? Same answer…
Not all totalitarian regimes are communist or American. Is it OK to launch illegal wars to overthrow heads of foreign countries? Is that murder? Cuban revolution bad – Iraq war good?
Not quite so clear cut is it?
My reference to Rickie was to point out your dogmatic viewpoint. Your reference to Farquar was unnecessary, inaccurate and ill informed.
Oh, my word! Where to begin? Yes, we do know. There is evidence aplenty that Castro had political opponents executed. I have pointed you to that evidence. You really are trying to whitewash him aren’t you? I once said that was shameful – I repeat that statement. I remain baffled by it.
Of course I am aware that not all dictators are communist – Pinochet, for example, wasn’t. So what? It is irrelevant to the discussion. I am also aware that the CIA get up to dirty tricks – again, irrelevant as it is a tu quoque.
The Iraq war was a really bad idea, but it wasn’t illegal. Casualties of war are not the same thing as political murder. No matter how much people try to draw an equivalence. Again, it is a tu quoque. For simplicity – the Cuban revolution initially was reasonable as they wanted to overthrow a dictator. unfortunately, as with all revolutions, they replaced one despot with another, much like France and Russia. During the fighting, deaths would have been casualties of war. However, once the new regime was established, then further deaths were political murder. The Iraq war was bad from the off. So what? It doesn’t change my point – it’s merely whataboutery writ large.
Of course they fucking didn’t. That’s the stuff of idiotic conspiracy theories. Fuck me! You are scraping the barrel here.
My comment about Max Farquar was perfectly reasonable given my experience over the past few days, as they banned you and accused you of trolling – so I asked the question.
The only dogmatist here is you, as you are attempting to deny the available facts and persist in an untenable argument that is clearly unsupportable.
Again, the question; did Castro execute political opponents? It’s a simple question. One you are unprepared to acknowledge, because you will have no option but to concede the point and you have spent the past few days wriggling like buggery to avoid just that.
The man was a monster. That there are other monsters in the world doesn’t make it okay and it doesn’t make him a great man.
That you have chosen to behave like a spoiled child when challenged does you no service.
“I have pointed you to that evidence” – Just re-read everything you wrote. Can’t find it. I must be blind or stupid. Maybe both. Expect you’ll tell me which.
“The Iraq war was a really bad idea, but it wasn’t illegal” – Really? Sexed up dossiers. Chilcot (admittedly fudged). Considerations of prosecuting Blair – hastily dropped….
“the CIA get up to dirty tricks – again, irrelevant” – so OK when the Yanks murder people, perform extraordinary rendition, torture people, lock them up in Guatanemo without trial for years but not anyone else? And your defense of that is two wrongs don’t make a right so Castro was a monster – except that the ‘evidence’ comes mainly from American sources. Another dodgy dossier perhaps?
“Fuck me! You are scraping the barrel here” – hmmm…. Who’s losing their temper and getting personal? That’s way out of order.
“they banned you and accused you of trolling” – No they didn’t. News to me. Didn’t happen. About as accurate as your ‘facts’ on Cuba
“Again, the question; did Castro execute political opponents? It’s a simple question. One you are unprepared to acknowledge” – Er… read my previous comment. Oh – I’ll save you the bother : “Honest answer? Who really knows.” Maybe he did. Maybe he didn’t. I believe that was a direct answer?
“you will have no option but to concede the point and you have spent the past few days wriggling like buggery to avoid just that.” I don’t do wriggling. I’m perfectly prepared to accept people got killed. What I’m not prepared to do is close my eyes to the circumstances, numbers quoted and so called ‘evidence’. I don’t take everything I’m told or read at face value.
“That you have chosen to behave like a spoiled child when challenged does you no service” – Pot, kettle, black? And to that personal attack frankly there is only one reply : bollocks!
I’m not replying to any more of your nonsense on this topic or your personal attacks or insults. It’s like trying to teach a pig to sing (sic)…
Wow! That really was a little temper tantrum, wasn’t it? Again, masses of logical fallacies and certainly not worth responding to in detail as I’ve already answered most of the points you make. As I’ve mentioned repeatedly, the evidence comes from a range of sources – including those directly affected. I gave you those details. What I am not prepared to do is blindly accept anecdote from someone who went there on holiday. I give their testimony and photographic evidence rather more weight than your anti-American prejudices. And if you cannot follow hyperlinks, that’s not my problem.
That said: Cuba Archive – lists those killed or missing.
Amnesty International
The firing squads.
Human Rights Watch
I could go on – but your suggestion that this is all some sort of American propaganda is patently absurd and I treat it with the contempt it deserves..
Your reaction to someone challenging your prejudices really was enlightening. Although, your hissy fit over the Martin Scriblerous thing should have given me a heads-up. Your behaviour towards people then was inexcusable.
The only one engaging in personal attacks here was you. No one else. The observations regarding your behaviour were merely that; objective observations. You have, indeed, behaved like a spoiled child.
Oh, really?
I refer you to your own site Here.
And further down the comments of that thread:
And here, too.
That’s the problem with trying to wriggle out of things you said on the interwebs… Your lies catch you out.
So your claim that I was inaccurate about this would be a lie, then…
And, finally, you are going to fuck off! Jolly good. Don’t let the door hit you on the way out. If this is how you behave when you are challenged, you won’t be missed.
“If this is how you behave when you are challenged, you won’t be missed” What a hypocrite you are! You cannot bear people not agreeing with you.
Adults who fail to agree during a debate usually agree to differ. I’ve offered and tried to do this, but clearly you are incapable of such behaviour and prefer to resort to personal insults and attacks.
I was temporarily moderated on MF for two reasons : (1) I was impersonated (2) One of the other commenters waged a personal vendetta every time I said anything.
For a time, any comment I posted was censored before being posted on the site. In the end it was resolved amicably.
I have no intention of going through that again with you. It’s just not that important. The door is shut, but I don’t expect that you’ll let me get the last word so feel free to fill your boots.
And please don’t send me any more private emails or leave comments on my blog.
Good Lord! You still here? The only hypocrite here is you.
Er, there are plenty of comments on this site that disagree with me. I haven’t insulted the people making them.
I have been remarkably patient with your nonsense and allowed you to comment freely. Your reaction to this has been increasingly bad tempered insults. If you have something constructive to say that doesn’t involve insulting me, logical fallacies, prejudices and outright lies, then fine – although I have already told you that I will no longer be commenting over at yours several days ago. I expect hosts to behave better, frankly.
Oh, please, do grow the fuck up. Free speech my arse! As long as I don’t dare to challenge your deeply held prejudices, eh?
Now, please do as you promised and bugger off, there’s a good chap. Toodle pip.
As long as I don’t dare to challenge your deeply held prejudices, eh?
Classic…
You really should go now, you’re embarrassing yourself.
“I don’t expect that you’ll let me get the last word“
This really is getting tiresome. You don’t want me to comment at yours and I haven’t since I said I would cease. Now kindly return the favour and go before I force you to.
—-
Edited to add:
You really are a nasty piece of work, aren’t you? Having spent several days indulging in a public meltdown where you insult me; despite saying you will call it a day, you persist in trying to leave comments in an attempt to get the last word in. It’s a long time since I found myself having to delete comments and ban someone and I do so here with a degree of sadness, but you leave me with no choice. Now, please, just go and don’t come back.
Wow. Oh, just “Wow!”
LR, you could teach Logic in any University.
A magnificent display of cerebral viirtuosity.
Double ‘i’.
Bugger.
Thankyou. I was rather engaging in a battle of wits with an unarmed man…
He is currently engaging in a character assassination over at his place in an attempt to lick his wounds. His upset really was that he was unprepared for someone to challenge his unsubstantiated assertions and logical fallacies. The “agree to disagree” trope was merely an attempt to end the conversation while giving his assertions some degree of legitimacy. He had comprehensively lost the argument and simply couldn’t accept it and I wasn’t playing that game.
I noted that a couple of his equally buffoonish sycophants made a great deal of my claim that he had lost the plot. When I wrote that, it was merely an expression of incredulity that anyone could seriously argue that Castro was a great man, in direct contradiction of the evidence.
As time went on, it seems that my opening statement to Dioclese was remarkably prescient. Ah well, teaching pigs to sing and all that…