Well it's a one party dictatorship, and even though the sanctions at first might not have been for a good reason, the responsibility lies on the Cuban leadership.
So Cuba should dissolve a government widely approved of by the people and return to client state gang run institutions for the ability to receive food? You're a fucking idiot. Calling people sith lords, please learn to engage in world politics by using meaningful vocabulary instead of trying to equate everything to your favorite work of fiction
No, you see, Display name@feddit.nu is the one true interpreter of the desires of all people. We should just let them pick every government since clearly they know best.
Hard to tell how popular the government is if you get jailed for voicing disagreement now isn’t it?
[citation needed]
What I’ve seen about the demand for the sanctions to be lifted it’s granting the population human rights regarding political freedoms. Would that mean the dissolvement of the government?
You've been given a link to a declassified CIA document in which they admit that the true objective of the sanctions is to have the Cuben government overthrown, did you read anything any of us have given you?
Meh, can you really say that it's the proletarian dictatorship anymore when Cuba now has a privileged elite defending it's grip on power against the poor majority?
It's more like they have become the bourgeoisie.
Ah okey ^^ but that's my point. The revolution abolished the then existing classes but now the party has cemented into the now ruling class. They enjoy the privileges and aggregate all the power to themselves where the now again born under class can't do anything. I understand what you mean but I think we have to see Cuba for the state its in, not the promise of what it would become.
No, clearly you don't understand what they meant, nor how Cuba's political system works. Please educate yourself before confidently calling dictatorship a country who's political system you couldn't explain the most basics of.
im sorry, but you have been propagandized. the things you said are nothing but mere repetitions of cia lies about cuba, parroted since the 60s. please try learning about the actual conditions in cuba before and after the revolution before giving any statements.
Well I'm not going to travel to Cuba for the sake of an internet discussion xD
But it is true that political opposition is forbidden and the only allowed party is the communist, right?
Well I’m not going to travel to Cuba for the sake of an internet discussion
You don't need to, it's very easy to find documentation on the subject for free online if you are just willing to actually learn about it.
But it is true that political opposition is forbidden and the only allowed party is the communist, right?
No it's not, not only are other parties and independent candidates allowed, but the communist party isn't allowed to present their candidates to the elections because candidates to the elections are not nominated by their party but by the peoples of their community, the communist party do end up having their members picked for the elections because the party is overwhelmingly popular but there is nothing to guaranty that any of them will get in.
opposition to progressive ideas must necessarily be reactionary. the liberal multy party system is a scam and was rightfully replaced by the democratic centralism of the communist party. all decisions are made by the workers through democratic processes.
But how democratic is the process really if there's no platform to voice different opinions (not saying that once a decision is reach not everyone should adhere it) and to form an independent opinion?
It's agree with us or else.
I can't say I know how many of the Cubans are party members but I guess it's not a majority of the population? And that's what I mean when I say that the political power is aggregated to the party. Even if there was a free debate inside the party they still don't allow competition for the power, just like the income or wealth limitations functioned to keep the proletariat away from power in the early days of democracy.
Different opinions can be voiced in the party itself, democratic centralism is summarized as "diversity in opinions, unity in actions" ideas can be freely discussed, debated, voted, compromised on, etc but once the party reach a democratic consensus the party as a whole must go through with the decision unless the party as a whole change it's mind democratically.
But it is true that political opposition is forbidden and the only allowed party is the communist, right?
Calling for the overthrow of the entire government apparatus is forbidden there, as it is everywhere, but opposing particular policies and platforms is normal.
I've read the thread. You have no source and you have not even tried to educate yourself on the basics of the Cuban government. You invented an accusation out of thin air and are somehow surprised people don't uncritically believe it.
Cuba now has a privileged elite defending it's grip on power against the poor majority
Source this.
You have done zero investigation into how well off Cuban leaders are compared to the average Cuban. You have done zero investigation into how this compares to peer countries.
You just made it up because it sounds like a Bad Country thing, someone told you once that Cuba is a Bad Country, and you never bothered to learn about the place yourself.
Ok, so the communist party says who can be in the Nation Assembly. The communist party sits on all the political power just by having the power over appointment.
There are no free candidacy for the national assembly, effectively aggregating all power to themselves making them the de facto ruling class. See the issue?
how does any of that make them "bourgeoisie" or the "privileged elite"? Nations have different political systems, you shouldn't expect them all to be organized like the corrupt American system unless you are an imperialist. And it's particularly offensive to want to impose American political values on Cuba, a former American colony who righteously broke free of those chains.
The people in powerful positions in the Communist Party got there because people voted them in. What’s hard to understand here?
You know who is the ruling class in capitalist countries, right? It’s the capitalists. It doesn’t matter how egalitarian the political system appears on paper, because de-facto the capitalist class rules.
well, every state is authoritarian. thats part of the self preservation of any governance, be it progressive or reactionary. if you wanna abolish states alltogether ask the anarchists, since i am an ml and think that authoritarian measures are good for the liberation of mankind.
Haha yeah in a sense maybe. But the authoritarian meaning is that there's no free or equal competition for the power so I mean there's quite a difference between states where there are authoritan and democratic countries.
Show me any state where there is an "equal competition for power" in any general sense. The Democrats and Republicans having similar degrees of power means nothing but a duopoly if they each exist above democracy as private entities (and they do) and there is no "equal" competition with more progressive groups.
Please cite me where I state that I support this policy?
You excused it by blaming it on Cuba. There's no meaningful difference between that and support. Any worthwhile take on the embargo starts with ending it immediately, and you can't even manage that.
And sure, I would support sanctions against Nazi Germany. But until Cuba turns fascist, invades its neighbors, and starts a genocide, it's nowhere near a situation where sanctions are appropriate.
Well, if your horrible, uneducated, moronic, murderous political ideas didn't already tell me that you have the mental capacity of someone who derives their political opinions from children's media...There it is.
Sanctions are always meant as collective punishment, it's a siege warfare tactic. The goal is to torture innocent Cuban people for not overthrowing their government, starve them until they have no choice but to destroy the revolution. America has even directly admitted it:
That is not entirely true. It depends on the kinds of sanctions. This is why modern sanctions have shifted from punishing the citizens in hope of them rising against the regime to pin targeting the leaders and the ruling class.
The catastrophe and starvation in Iraq (I think it was Iraq) changed how sanctions were used.
I guess you could call george floyd or la riots stomping a terrorist act
but for real, islands can't survive on their own, if tomorrow uk stopped all trade, it will start starving in 2 months. usa sanctions are extra cruel with both finance and shipping conditions
cuba and korea are already democratic, as in the sense of true democracy, workplace democracy. liberal "democracy" is nothing more than a cover for the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie and foreign imperialists. just look at cuba and korea under their respective american and japanese occupations. thats what the liberal west wants to return them to.
Well "true" democracy is a rather open definition lol. With a minimalist definition enough even North Korea is a democracy based on them holding elections but I mean that is obviously not the case.
Liberal democracy is just electoral democracy+ rule of law. You can have liberal democracy without capitalism and the bourgeoisie, just look at the Scandinavian countries before the neoliberalists took hold.
?
The current Nordic model is hardly socialist, just a welfare model. But in the 60's it was on its way to eradicate the bourgeoisie and lift the under class in its entirety?
But in the 60’s it was on its way to eradicate the bourgeoisie and lift the under class in its entirety?
No, it was just a welfare state back then too, they just had more concessions at the time because there was the Soviet Unions just next door with guarantied employment, free healthcare and housing, etc, and were getting so riled up over it that the bourgeoisie was getting really scared of potentially having a revolution and decided that temporarily giving these concessions was better than loosing everything.
Oh you mean like that! Yes that is a good point. Can it be considered democratic if you have a hegemony ruling for lengthy periods of time with no shift in power even though there is free and equal competition by the opposition. I think 2012 was the last time an oppositional party held power.
How can it be equal, if every layer of government is held by one party? (that's ignoring our typical commie gripes that ldp was showered by cia money till the 70s)
but i mean your initial point (the leadership should submit if they care about people) is exact same point made during any siege in all of the history. While premise for that siege (something that makes it palatable for the people) is comparatively pitiful: its not supported by un (overwhelmingly), one party states an dictatorships are routinely supported by usa, cuba is not prosecuting minorities over sexual/racial differences, so what exactly is usa problem you think?
(executive, legislature, judicial, local governments) as a career politician entering japan politics, where would you go based on your comprehension of history?
But they aren't free to trade, because the usa may sanction banks engaged with trading with cuba and any ship visiting cuba can't then anchor in usa on the same trip. This all makes trading with cuba highly hazardous (expensive) enterprise for big economies and companies, forcing them to form split entities for trade with cuba, and lack of choice makes cuban produce cheaper to acquire for foreign traders.
Is the juridical system in Japan dependant of the ruling power? That does indeed sound authoritarian. Controlling the legislative and executive power isn't unequal in itself, if it was achieved by free and fair elections with the possibility of being shifted in the next election.
Indeed. But they can very well still do so if they want. Being sanctioned in return by the US would probably prove disastrous to anyone doing so, but enough went together and did they could challenge the US hegemony. United are we strong!
This shifts the question of responsibility the rest of the world instead.
I think they are elected by ruling party to supreme court for 10 (?) years which in turn selects/confirms lower ones, but i might be wrong tbh. The possibility of being shifted is rather theoretical one, don't you think?
If only workers nations of the world united, huh. The moral responsibility lies solely on usa, the rest are honorary cowards. And its not like cuba doesn't have trade, but they are getting shafted on both prices of their exports and following ability to buy stuff. Thats even ignoring that paragon of democratic islands nearby (dominican republic) isn't that richer, and not sanctioned
No that sounds reasonable. I know that there are plenty of states that have the president/government appoint judges to the high court. It can definitely pose a democratic problem but not necessarily. Do you know if the ruling party can dismiss them or replace them at will?
I do agree that the original idea behind the sanctions are despicable but if another country would impose sanctions based on the current reasoning, it's a sound reason. I wholedhartly agree with the rest of the world being honorary cowards though, it's extremely apparent when viewed in the light of Israel's genocide against the Palestinians.
But herein lies the rub: at the start of the thread you said "okay they deserved this over arrests of protestors". Can you link your comment were you advocated for sanctions against usa over arrests of protestors before this?
Passive "both sides are bad" when one side is already sanctioned (and apparently so bad they don't get enough food) and the other is helping perpetrate genocide, arrests protestors just the same and is not sanctioned is not equal enlightened view. I assume whatever your country is, you can't vote for a representative who will sanction usa trade. So you have active positive acceptance of cuba sanctions and silence on sanctions on israel/usa whatever. usa is perfectly happy with your position, its exactly theirs
Yes they can easily have the sanctions lifted by betraying the people of Cuba and allowing Global North neocolonizers to resume their pillaging of the nation.
However what is important to remember is that the sanctions are imposed based on the regimes actions against it's population
I don't know every single sanction against the DPRK, but over the last 40 years the sanctions have all been in connection to nuclear development and things like that. Also, it's rich that you talk about communists being hypocrites while you take western powers at their word for why they are imposing sanctions that starve people by your own admission. The US has done and is doing much crueler things to the people of these states than the states themselves have ever done in any but the most unhinged fantasies.
Very true, it seemed like bad faith arguments. But I've learnt quite a lot from the answers to that user's asinine questions, and I'm sure I'm not the only one
The communist party in Cuba (like every other party) can't "advertise" itself, it's in the constitution ffs. If you wanted to pick a socialist country to portray as a "one party scary dictatorship" Cuba is the least fit. Cuba is a zero-party democracy in a way.
Obvious troll is obvious. If the overwhelming number of Cuban people really and truly didn't support socialism. Then they would have taken over in a new revolution as they did getting rid of the US puppet state the last time. They have stood firm despite the literal attempts of US lead colour revolutions and refuse to be forced to bow to the self-appointed global police state that is the US. They aren't the ones that should change to serve the rich fucks that steal from nations across the world. It is those rich fucks that should be put in the dirt so that peoples across the world could live their lives without fear.
Most countries are actually fine with political parties on the ballot receiving funding, material/technical support, and terrorist attacks from a foreign power, it's just the perfidious Cubans banning other parties that do this!
Well it's a one party dictatorship, and even though the sanctions at first might not have been for a good reason, the responsibility lies on the Cuban leadership.
So Cuba should dissolve a government widely approved of by the people and return to client state gang run institutions for the ability to receive food? You're a fucking idiot. Calling people sith lords, please learn to engage in world politics by using meaningful vocabulary instead of trying to equate everything to your favorite work of fiction
Removed by mod
It shouldn't be hard to understand that what the US cares about are the rights of capital and of empire, not human rights
good thing that doesn't happen then, huh?
No, you see, Display name@feddit.nu is the one true interpreter of the desires of all people. We should just let them pick every government since clearly they know best.
[citation needed]
You've been given a link to a declassified CIA document in which they admit that the true objective of the sanctions is to have the Cuben government overthrown, did you read anything any of us have given you?
Lol, you know liberals choose not to read. I'd poke fun by saying they can't read, but that would be giving them too much credit.
when you definitely understand what the word dictatorship means 😂
i mean, cuba is a dictatorship of the proletariat. libs just think thats a bad thing.
well yeah because libs are just temporarily inconvenienced billionaires
deleted by creator
Meh, can you really say that it's the proletarian dictatorship anymore when Cuba now has a privileged elite defending it's grip on power against the poor majority? It's more like they have become the bourgeoisie.
cuba is literally the most egalitarian nation in the americas. what are you talking about?
How do you mean it is egalitarian?
in the sense of the abolishment of class oppression
Ah okey ^^ but that's my point. The revolution abolished the then existing classes but now the party has cemented into the now ruling class. They enjoy the privileges and aggregate all the power to themselves where the now again born under class can't do anything. I understand what you mean but I think we have to see Cuba for the state its in, not the promise of what it would become.
No, clearly you don't understand what they meant, nor how Cuba's political system works. Please educate yourself before confidently calling dictatorship a country who's political system you couldn't explain the most basics of.
Here are videos to help you:
We Asked Cuban Voters If They Live In A Democracy Or Dictatorship. Here's How They Responded.
how democracy works in Cuba
Also, please learn what a class is.
im sorry, but you have been propagandized. the things you said are nothing but mere repetitions of cia lies about cuba, parroted since the 60s. please try learning about the actual conditions in cuba before and after the revolution before giving any statements.
no investigation no right to speak
Well I'm not going to travel to Cuba for the sake of an internet discussion xD But it is true that political opposition is forbidden and the only allowed party is the communist, right?
You don't need to, it's very easy to find documentation on the subject for free online if you are just willing to actually learn about it.
No it's not, not only are other parties and independent candidates allowed, but the communist party isn't allowed to present their candidates to the elections because candidates to the elections are not nominated by their party but by the peoples of their community, the communist party do end up having their members picked for the elections because the party is overwhelmingly popular but there is nothing to guaranty that any of them will get in.
opposition to progressive ideas must necessarily be reactionary. the liberal multy party system is a scam and was rightfully replaced by the democratic centralism of the communist party. all decisions are made by the workers through democratic processes.
But how democratic is the process really if there's no platform to voice different opinions (not saying that once a decision is reach not everyone should adhere it) and to form an independent opinion? It's agree with us or else.
I can't say I know how many of the Cubans are party members but I guess it's not a majority of the population? And that's what I mean when I say that the political power is aggregated to the party. Even if there was a free debate inside the party they still don't allow competition for the power, just like the income or wealth limitations functioned to keep the proletariat away from power in the early days of democracy.
Different opinions can be voiced in the party itself, democratic centralism is summarized as "diversity in opinions, unity in actions" ideas can be freely discussed, debated, voted, compromised on, etc but once the party reach a democratic consensus the party as a whole must go through with the decision unless the party as a whole change it's mind democratically.
Calling for the overthrow of the entire government apparatus is forbidden there, as it is everywhere, but opposing particular policies and platforms is normal.
No youll just travel there for cheap top notch healthcare I'm sure
deleted by creator
I'm sure you have some kind of a source for such an outlandish claim. How much time do you spend looking at the compensation of Cuban politicians?
You could probably understand the reasoning if you read the rest of the thread. What kind of compensation do you have in mind?
I've read the thread. You have no source and you have not even tried to educate yourself on the basics of the Cuban government. You invented an accusation out of thin air and are somehow surprised people don't uncritically believe it.
Alright, what do you request a source for? Can't say I'm surprised at others not agreeing in a discussion. Do you usually get surprised by that?
Source this.
You have done zero investigation into how well off Cuban leaders are compared to the average Cuban. You have done zero investigation into how this compares to peer countries.
You just made it up because it sounds like a Bad Country thing, someone told you once that Cuba is a Bad Country, and you never bothered to learn about the place yourself.
Ok, so the communist party says who can be in the Nation Assembly. The communist party sits on all the political power just by having the power over appointment. There are no free candidacy for the national assembly, effectively aggregating all power to themselves making them the de facto ruling class. See the issue?
Still no sources on anything, and you're not even staying on the topic at hand.
how does any of that make them "bourgeoisie" or the "privileged elite"? Nations have different political systems, you shouldn't expect them all to be organized like the corrupt American system unless you are an imperialist. And it's particularly offensive to want to impose American political values on Cuba, a former American colony who righteously broke free of those chains.
The people in powerful positions in the Communist Party got there because people voted them in. What’s hard to understand here?
You know who is the ruling class in capitalist countries, right? It’s the capitalists. It doesn’t matter how egalitarian the political system appears on paper, because de-facto the capitalist class rules.
Sorry, what? :P
you are being criticized for using the word "dictatorship" in a liberal sense, a sense that doesnt respect material reality due to being idealist.
Ah thanks. Maybe should have used the proper authoritarian. Dictatorship is just a much easier and more widely recognized term no?
well, every state is authoritarian. thats part of the self preservation of any governance, be it progressive or reactionary. if you wanna abolish states alltogether ask the anarchists, since i am an ml and think that authoritarian measures are good for the liberation of mankind.
Haha yeah in a sense maybe. But the authoritarian meaning is that there's no free or equal competition for the power so I mean there's quite a difference between states where there are authoritan and democratic countries.
Show me any state where there is an "equal competition for power" in any general sense. The Democrats and Republicans having similar degrees of power means nothing but a duopoly if they each exist above democracy as private entities (and they do) and there is no "equal" competition with more progressive groups.
Heidegger and Hannah Arendt will never answer for the crimes they have committed against your brainpan
:michael-laugh:
You're going to bat for the collective punishment of the Cuban people. When is the collective punishment of civilians appropriate in your mind?
You're also supporting a policy that has failed to achieve its stated result for 65 years. What other long-term policy failures do you support?
Can't say I would have objected against sanctions against Nazi Germany. Does that suffice?
Please cite me where I state that I support this policy?
You excused it by blaming it on Cuba. There's no meaningful difference between that and support. Any worthwhile take on the embargo starts with ending it immediately, and you can't even manage that.
And sure, I would support sanctions against Nazi Germany. But until Cuba turns fascist, invades its neighbors, and starts a genocide, it's nowhere near a situation where sanctions are appropriate.
Removed by mod
Use your words
If you think there's some meaningful difference, let's hear what it is. "I don't support this but it's totally their fault" is not convincing.
Of course there's a difference with seeing something from an objective viewpoint and agreeing or disagreeing with it?
"It's their fault" is not an objective viewpoint. You are assigning blame to Cuba and excusing the U.S.
Well, if your horrible, uneducated, moronic, murderous political ideas didn't already tell me that you have the mental capacity of someone who derives their political opinions from children's media...There it is.
I hate when people try to be slick, and it's even more annoying when they suck at it:
All this ignoring that you are misrepresenting both Cuba and the effect of the sanctions.
This obviously doesn't mean that I support the sanctions and you are intentionally misleading in saying so.
"It's a Bad Country and the actions taken against it by the US are the fault of the Bad Country's leadership, not the US"
"Oh, but I'm not supporting the US, merely absolving them of guilt"
Chickenshit nonsense
Reddit brain
Coward
You do realize that kind of sanctions affect the poor civilians far more than the elite, if it even affect the elite at all, right?
Exact same logic Israel uses to starve Gaza.
How so?
Sanctions are always meant as collective punishment, it's a siege warfare tactic. The goal is to torture innocent Cuban people for not overthrowing their government, starve them until they have no choice but to destroy the revolution. America has even directly admitted it:
This is the same policy as in Gaza, to starve the people until they turn their backs on the enemy.
That is not entirely true. It depends on the kinds of sanctions. This is why modern sanctions have shifted from punishing the citizens in hope of them rising against the regime to pin targeting the leaders and the ruling class.
The catastrophe and starvation in Iraq (I think it was Iraq) changed how sanctions were used.
Does that have fucking anything to do with Cuba?
Well you claimed that sanctions always are meant as a collective punishment?
Sanctions on economies are collective punishment.
You've sidestepped the problem, which is that there is a siege war being waged on Cuba and they've done nothing to deserve it.
Can you elaborate on how modern sanctions have materially changed from how they were pre-Iraq?
How is the US engaging in a blockade around a country with a popular government the fault of the Cuban leadership?
This might be the dumbest fucking thing I've read in awhile.
Yes, the dictatorship of the party of the working class, or in other words a proletarian democracy.
Meanwhile, whether one party or two or a hundred, we have a dictatorship of the capitalist class, or in other words a bourgeois democracy.
Yeah they should've had a dictatorship of two genocidal imperialist parties instead like the US
On being sanctioned as terrorist country? are you for fucking real?
I guess you could call stomping out peaceful protests with violence an act of terrorism? But that's not the entire reason lol
I guess you could call george floyd or la riots stomping a terrorist act
but for real, islands can't survive on their own, if tomorrow uk stopped all trade, it will start starving in 2 months. usa sanctions are extra cruel with both finance and shipping conditions
Removed by mod
cuba and korea are already democratic, as in the sense of true democracy, workplace democracy. liberal "democracy" is nothing more than a cover for the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie and foreign imperialists. just look at cuba and korea under their respective american and japanese occupations. thats what the liberal west wants to return them to.
Well "true" democracy is a rather open definition lol. With a minimalist definition enough even North Korea is a democracy based on them holding elections but I mean that is obviously not the case. Liberal democracy is just electoral democracy+ rule of law. You can have liberal democracy without capitalism and the bourgeoisie, just look at the Scandinavian countries before the neoliberalists took hold.
you unironically did the "socialism is when the nordic model" meme, lmaooo
sorry, i tried taking you seriously, but this is just too much
? The current Nordic model is hardly socialist, just a welfare model. But in the 60's it was on its way to eradicate the bourgeoisie and lift the under class in its entirety?
Didn't know it was a meme lol, what is it about?
no it wasnt. you should learn what words mean before talking about them.
Sure it was. It diverted after the 70's though. Any word in particular you think I don't get the meaning of?
No, it was just a welfare state back then too, they just had more concessions at the time because there was the Soviet Unions just next door with guarantied employment, free healthcare and housing, etc, and were getting so riled up over it that the bourgeoisie was getting really scared of potentially having a revolution and decided that temporarily giving these concessions was better than loosing everything.
This was true of, what? Denmark? But not the Nordic countries writ large.
Sorry but Scandinavian countries were still capitalist and still had a bourgeois class even before the neoliberals came around.
like how usa sanctions saudia arabia or uae or qatar or azerbaijan or japan over not moving towards democracy?
Removed by mod
Cause japan is one party state?
Submit or else, good to see gunboat diplomacy is a thing of the past
Oh you mean like that! Yes that is a good point. Can it be considered democratic if you have a hegemony ruling for lengthy periods of time with no shift in power even though there is free and equal competition by the opposition. I think 2012 was the last time an oppositional party held power.
How can it be equal, if every layer of government is held by one party? (that's ignoring our typical commie gripes that ldp was showered by cia money till the 70s)
but i mean your initial point (the leadership should submit if they care about people) is exact same point made during any siege in all of the history. While premise for that siege (something that makes it palatable for the people) is comparatively pitiful: its not supported by un (overwhelmingly), one party states an dictatorships are routinely supported by usa, cuba is not prosecuting minorities over sexual/racial differences, so what exactly is usa problem you think?
Removed by mod
(executive, legislature, judicial, local governments) as a career politician entering japan politics, where would you go based on your comprehension of history?
But they aren't free to trade, because the usa may sanction banks engaged with trading with cuba and any ship visiting cuba can't then anchor in usa on the same trip. This all makes trading with cuba highly hazardous (expensive) enterprise for big economies and companies, forcing them to form split entities for trade with cuba, and lack of choice makes cuban produce cheaper to acquire for foreign traders.
Is the juridical system in Japan dependant of the ruling power? That does indeed sound authoritarian. Controlling the legislative and executive power isn't unequal in itself, if it was achieved by free and fair elections with the possibility of being shifted in the next election.
Indeed. But they can very well still do so if they want. Being sanctioned in return by the US would probably prove disastrous to anyone doing so, but enough went together and did they could challenge the US hegemony. United are we strong! This shifts the question of responsibility the rest of the world instead.
I think they are elected by ruling party to supreme court for 10 (?) years which in turn selects/confirms lower ones, but i might be wrong tbh. The possibility of being shifted is rather theoretical one, don't you think?
If only
workersnations of the world united, huh. The moral responsibility lies solely on usa, the rest are honorary cowards. And its not like cuba doesn't have trade, but they are getting shafted on both prices of their exports and following ability to buy stuff. Thats even ignoring that paragon of democratic islands nearby (dominican republic) isn't that richer, and not sanctionedNo that sounds reasonable. I know that there are plenty of states that have the president/government appoint judges to the high court. It can definitely pose a democratic problem but not necessarily. Do you know if the ruling party can dismiss them or replace them at will?
I do agree that the original idea behind the sanctions are despicable but if another country would impose sanctions based on the current reasoning, it's a sound reason. I wholedhartly agree with the rest of the world being honorary cowards though, it's extremely apparent when viewed in the light of Israel's genocide against the Palestinians.
Should usa be sanctioned for jailing jan 6 movement?
countries all over the world arrest "peaceful protestors" but in cuba its undemocratic, in civilized white world its law and order
Jan 6 movement is the coup attempt right?
That is a view I disagre with. Arresting peaceful protestors is always undemocratic.
But herein lies the rub: at the start of the thread you said "okay they deserved this over arrests of protestors". Can you link your comment were you advocated for sanctions against usa over arrests of protestors before this?
Passive "both sides are bad" when one side is already sanctioned (and apparently so bad they don't get enough food) and the other is helping perpetrate genocide, arrests protestors just the same and is not sanctioned is not equal enlightened view. I assume whatever your country is, you can't vote for a representative who will sanction usa trade. So you have active positive acceptance of cuba sanctions and silence on sanctions on israel/usa whatever. usa is perfectly happy with your position, its exactly theirs
Yes they can easily have the sanctions lifted by betraying the people of Cuba and allowing Global North neocolonizers to resume their pillaging of the nation.
What a dumbass turbolib.
I don't know every single sanction against the DPRK, but over the last 40 years the sanctions have all been in connection to nuclear development and things like that. Also, it's rich that you talk about communists being hypocrites while you take western powers at their word for why they are imposing sanctions that starve people by your own admission. The US has done and is doing much crueler things to the people of these states than the states themselves have ever done in any but the most unhinged fantasies.
Literally the only answer this one deserved.
Very true, it seemed like bad faith arguments. But I've learnt quite a lot from the answers to that user's asinine questions, and I'm sure I'm not the only one
For sure. It can be useful for others, even if the person you're interacting with has a rock for a brain.
The communist party in Cuba (like every other party) can't "advertise" itself, it's in the constitution ffs. If you wanted to pick a socialist country to portray as a "one party scary dictatorship" Cuba is the least fit. Cuba is a zero-party democracy in a way.
Obvious troll is obvious. If the overwhelming number of Cuban people really and truly didn't support socialism. Then they would have taken over in a new revolution as they did getting rid of the US puppet state the last time. They have stood firm despite the literal attempts of US lead colour revolutions and refuse to be forced to bow to the self-appointed global police state that is the US. They aren't the ones that should change to serve the rich fucks that steal from nations across the world. It is those rich fucks that should be put in the dirt so that peoples across the world could live their lives without fear.
Most countries are actually fine with political parties on the ballot receiving funding, material/technical support, and terrorist attacks from a foreign power, it's just the perfidious Cubans banning other parties that do this!