"...and those who demand instant perfection the day after the Revolution. They get up and say "Are there civil liberties for the fascists? Are they gonna be allowed to have their newspapers and their radio programs? Are they gonna be able to keep all their farms? The passion that some of our liberals feel the day after the Revolution; the passion and concern they feel for the fascists, the civil rights and civil liberties of those fascists, who were dumping and destroying and murdering people before. Now the revolution has got to be perfect it's got to be flawless.
Well that isn't my criteria. My criteria is what happens to those people who couldn't read? What happens to those babies that couldn't eat, that died of hunger? And there, that's why I support revolution. The revolution that feeds the children gets my support..."
I ended up listening to the entire speech. I had forgotten that this absolute gem was literally part of an off the cuff response to an audience question.
Someone asks basically "does it make sense for us in the US to look at the Soviet Union as a model to be followed", and he goes off on a 5 minute response encompassing 1) no, the soviet union is a very different place, very poor and destitute historically, so revolution wouldn't look the same in the prosperous US, and 2) he covers the implication about AES countries being poor with an absolutely iconic speech about comparing these countries not to the US or europe, but to what their conditions looked like before the revolution, with several detailed and exceedingly passionate examples. then 3) he gives the quote you posted about liberals demanding perfect liberty for the fascists, 4) he mentions not supporting revolutions completely unqualifiedly/uncritically, and fighting/not supporting the "reaganite" regimes that do the opposite. 5) he encourages everyone to learn more about the unique and innovative changes in political organization that come out of AES countries, and evaluate each on its own merits and choose which we might want to emulate vs which we don't want.
Quite the helpful and revealing diatribe for a very "bait"-y audience question.
Well that isn't my criteria. My criteria is what happens to those people who couldn't read? What happens to those babies that couldn't eat, that died of hunger? And there, that's why I support revolution. The revolution that feeds the children gets my support..."
Yellow Parenti stays winning.
Source+ a little more context for the unfamiliar: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROYzHJc_V9k
incredible speech
Thanks, thought about posting the link but forgot!
I ended up listening to the entire speech. I had forgotten that this absolute gem was literally part of an off the cuff response to an audience question.
Someone asks basically "does it make sense for us in the US to look at the Soviet Union as a model to be followed", and he goes off on a 5 minute response encompassing 1) no, the soviet union is a very different place, very poor and destitute historically, so revolution wouldn't look the same in the prosperous US, and 2) he covers the implication about AES countries being poor with an absolutely iconic speech about comparing these countries not to the US or europe, but to what their conditions looked like before the revolution, with several detailed and exceedingly passionate examples. then 3) he gives the quote you posted about liberals demanding perfect liberty for the fascists, 4) he mentions not supporting revolutions completely unqualifiedly/uncritically, and fighting/not supporting the "reaganite" regimes that do the opposite. 5) he encourages everyone to learn more about the unique and innovative changes in political organization that come out of AES countries, and evaluate each on its own merits and choose which we might want to emulate vs which we don't want.
Quite the helpful and revealing diatribe for a very "bait"-y audience question.
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy: