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
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