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.
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
deleted by creator