Cubaâ��s totalitarian regime controls all aspects of life through the Communist Party (CP) and its affiliated mass organizations, the government bureaucracy and the Department of State Security. The latter is tasked with monitoring, infiltrating and tormenting the countryâ��s beleaguered human rights community. The government continues to commit serious abuses, and denies citizens the right to change their government.
The government incarcerates people for their peaceful political beliefs or activities. The total number of political prisoners and detainees is unknown, because the government does not disclose such information and keeps its prisons off-limits to human rights organizations. As of July 1, 2006, at least 316 Cubans were being held behind bars for political crimes, according to the independent Cuban Commission for Human Rights and National Reconciliation.
The government places severe limitations on freedom of speech and press. Reporters Without Borders calls Cuba the worldâ��s second biggest jailer of journalists. The constitution provides for freedom of speech and press insofar as they "conform to the aims of a socialist society." The government considers the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and foreign mainstream magazines and newspapers to be enemy propaganda. Access to the Internet is strictly controlled and given only to those deemed ideologically trustworthy.
Freedom of assembly is not a right in todayâ��s Cuba. The law punishes any unauthorized assembly of more than three persons. The government also restricts freedom of movement and prevents some citizens from emigrating because of their political views. Cubans need explicit "exit permission" from their government to leave their country, and many people are effectively held hostage by the Cuban government, despite the fact that they have received travel documents issued by other countries.
The government does not tolerate dissent. It targets dissenters by directing militants from the CP, the Communist Youth League, Committees for the Defense of the Revolution, the Federation of Cuban Women, the Association of Veterans of the Cuban Revolution, and other groups to stage a public protest against the dissenter, usually in front of his/her house. These protests, called "acts of repudiation," involve the shouting of insults and the occasional use of violence. The events generate intense fear and are aimed at ostracizing and intimidating those who question the governmentâ��s policies.
Prison conditions are harsh and life-threatening. Although physical torture is rare, cruel treatment of prisoners â�� particularly political prisoners and detainees â�� is common. Prison authorities frequently beat, neglect, isolate and deny medical treatment to inmates. Authorities often deny family visits, adequate nutrition, exposure to sunshine, and pay for work. Overcrowding is rife. Inmates friendly with prison guards often receive preferential treatment. This leads to abuse, whereby connected inmates assault others with impunity. Desperation inside the countryâ��s estimated 200 prisons and work camps is at high levels and suicides and acts of self-mutilation occur. Thousands of Cubans are currently imprisoned for "dangerousness," in the absence of any crime.
Worker rights are largely denied. The law does not allow Cuban workers to form and join unions of their choice. The government-approved unions do not act as trade unions, promote worker rights or protect the right to strike; rather, they are geared toward ensuring that production goals are met. Some workers lose their jobs because of their political beliefs. Salaries are not high enough to meet food and clothing costs; consequently, many Cubans are forced into small-scale embezzlement or pilfering from their employers.
Good information that no one can disagree with. If I can make a suggestion, I would delete this thread and turn what you wrote here into a hub. It would make a good hub.
I can disagree with it ! I is a tissue of lies.
No one is saying Cuba is the perfect country and I am not a huge fan of their civil rights though they are not as bad as they are made to sound (having lived there for 6 years.) But here are the facts: Since the revolution Cuba has gone up 63 places in the global GDP per-capita comparison. Cuba now has the best GINI index in the world, meaning their economic equality is the best in the world. Cuba has a longer life expectancy than the US. Cuba has absolute free healthcare. Cuba has absolute free Education including university/college. Cuba has a lower infant mortality rate than the US (significantly). Cuban socialists removed a fascist government that killed 30 000 of it's own citizens the year before the revolution. Cuba is now a true independent state rather than an american puppet state as it was before the revolution. All this is done on less than one eighth of the GDP per capita of the US can you imagine what could be accomplished with eight times their money? Can you imagine what would have been acomplished without the US embargo?
Really you provided the answer to your own question in the title SOCIALIST jewel yes and socialism is a purely economic ideology, we don't approve of their human rights abuses but we do use Cuba as evidence that socialist economies can thrive and succeed and it is that though our ideal state I think would not engage in such human rights abuses.
Josac, don't you just hate it when people catch you out on your lies? I realize that's not going to stop you from spreading them, I just wanted to know.
"Cuba has a lower infant mortality rate than the US (significantly)"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co … ality_rate
Cuba: 6.95 per 1000 recorded births.
USA: 7.07 per. The very next nation on the list down from Cuber, in fact.
THEN we have look at how America and Cuba determine a "live" birth.
Cuba does not register births under 1000g. In fact, this is precisely what the World Health Organization itself recommends. For official record keeping purposes, only live births of greater than 1,000g should be included. Nor does Cuba count a baby as "alive" if it dies within the first 24 hours of birth.
The United States has the most intensive system of emergency intervention to keep low birth weight and premature infants alive, in the world. The United States is also one of only a handful countries which keeps detailed statistics on early fetal mortality — the survival rate of infants who are born as early as the 20th week of gestation.
In the United States, if an infant is born weighing only 400 grams and not breathing, a doctor will likely spend lot of time and money trying to revive that infant. If the infant does not survive — and the mortality rate for such infants is in excess of 50 percent — that sequence of events will be recorded as a live birth and then a death.
In many countries, however, (including Glorious Cuba) such severe medical intervention would not be attempted and, moreover, regardless of whether or not it was, this would be recorded as a fetal death rather than a live birth. That unfortunate infant would never show up in infant mortality statistics.
So not only are you lying about the statistics, the statistics you're lying about are lies, themselves. Created by a socialist agenda which uses Hate for America as its century old rallying cry.
Sorry, my little communist acquaintance. Your side has a history of loss and failure, because there will always be men who see through ever smoke and mirrors trick your kind tries to pull.
Funny, the site you cite actually gives Cuba as 5.82 and the US as 6.26, and whilst not wishing to appear boastful, the UK 4.85!
You didn't look at the final column, John. The final aggregate of the last three periods.
And once more, you've failed to read everything I wrote. England doesn't count babies born alive the way America does. Most of Europe is on the "less than 1000 grams, less than 24 hours old, less than 30 cm long and it was a dead baby" criteria. England included.
SO you took one of my comments a tiny part of my statement said it was slightly less true than I was presenting then you went on to state a difference in the stats but showed no way to prove any difference (such as stats with with this difference removed)very well made point
Now according to the World Bank the closest nation to Cuba in regards to GDP per capita is Azerbaijan in Azerbaijan the average infant mortality rate is 50 per 1000 compared to less than 7 in Cuba...
None of this goes any way towards proving my statement wrong.
Most socialists will tell you Cuba isn't Socialist. There are production quotas set by the government, who in essence acts like the executive of a corporation, and inequality of incomes scattered throughout. They also tend to repress free speech. State capitalism is a better characterization. Power is centralized at the top.
Most socialists will tell you the German Workers National Socialist (NAZI) Party wasn't Socialist, either.
I've stopped believe what the enemy tells me.
You can read what socialists actually write, or you can crawl in a hole and stick your fingers in your ears and believe what you want. I can't control you, but having read a little bit about socialism, Cuba, Russia, nor Germany was socialist. It's more like state capitalism, without civil rights, such as freedom of speech or religion.
I wouldn't bother some people don't have the brains to differentiate between fascism and socialism or left and right, let alone the major differences between communism and socialism. They just aren't educated enough, it's a lost cause especially since their minds are closed around that ignorance.
I'm your Huckleberry! I am educated. They both suck!
Jos? If my educators are all of a particular bent, and require that I parrot their political views or I don't get the grades, have I been Educated, or Indoctrinated?
I've a respectable number of sheepskins littering my walls, and Real World experiences you're not even qualified to guess at. When I call you a Communist, it isn't because you have it anywhere on your profile, or that I'm just guessing so as to make a point. Nor is it a title I bandy about with any sort of abandon.
Your Words define you, Jos. Your willingness to denigrate and impugn the intellect or education of anyone who challenges you, as a knee-jerk, speaks to your pretentious pomposity. A quality invariably found in the Elitist Mentality of the deeply indoctrinated.
I mean, how could ANYONE, whose opinions differ from your own, have the slightest CLUE as to the subtle nuances involved in the intricacies of the Politics of Meaning?
Call yourself what you want, Josak. That won't change the facts. Nor will it make your arguments any more valid.
I have no issue with people who believe different things on the political spectrum, people who are factually incorrect and ignorant are another thing entirely, I do believe in the responsibility of a man to educate himself on a subject before he decides to discuss it, unfortunately you have not done so, it's not my side has a monopoly on good education or anything it's simply that you lack it.
You seem to believe the UK is socialist though it has a conservative government.
You did not understand the force of taxation for force in potentia, basic stuff in the study of economy and politics.
You do not understand the difference between fascism and socialism (which people who do know about politics will tell you are actually on almost opposite ends of the left right political spectrum).
You are obviously unaware of the multiple axis political spectrum.
So no it's not just me or my side that can understand the nuances of politics it's just that unfortunately you don't. As for being a communist nope I am a socialist but of course you are probably pretty oblivious to the difference.
Have you the faintest idea what it is to be a communist ? Do you think it's like the scouts? It is an upward climb whereby people with left-wing persuasions become educated through their own reasoning and see the light! See the injustices of this society and see what it is to be a Socialist then hopefully aspire to something much higher.
Firstly Hitler was not a socialist.
more importantly socialism and communism are purely economic systems, you can have democratic socialism and communism (indeed several countries do) if say George Bush had nuked his own citizens because he went mad would you blame it on capitalism? I wouldn't because it's not the fault of the economic system but rather the mental instability of the leader, to suggest otherwise is foolish.
As a side note from a historical perspective Genghis Khan killed far more people than either of the three. Lack of knowledge as usual.
That is a very weak argument, the basic tenants of both socialism and communism require the mass murder of any who resist their injustice. And they have to be murdered if the so called "economic system" is to work.
When the percentages of people who fail to produce outnumber those who put into the economy, they must be disposed of in order to maintain the desired equal quality of life. That is the precise reason that such an enormous number of people have been murdered by communist and socialist dictators.
Another who totally fails to understand socialism and attributes to it many aspects of the very worst kinds of capitalism.
It is not a basic tenet of socialism or communism that require the mass murder of those who resist.
It is only under capitalism where none productive members of society must be put to one side, under socialism there is work for all.
Your so called socialist and communist dictators were actually dyed in the wool capitalists.
I would try to disassociate my party with the slew of mass murderers who make up it up as well if I were promoting a failed "economic system" like communism or socialism.
But by all means lets try it again and see how many millions of people are killed through false famines, droughts, or genocides.
And what party would that be? I have no party as there are no mainstream left wing parties left in the UK, it doesn't matter who you vote for, the right wing gets in.
Tell me where, apart from maybe Cuba, an economic system like socialism or communism has been tried? I hear some south American countries are doing all right with socialism.
If you want to insist that socialism is responsible for many millions of deaths, why don't we count up the many millions that have been killed, and are still being killed, by capitalism?
I hear that our right wing government wants to ease controls on the disposal of deadly types of asbestos! They also want to ease controls that stop employers from killing their employees!
Still, I suppose you'll have a good excuse for all the millions killed by capitalism, I can't wait to hear it.
Capitalists don't erect gulags, and concentration camps. They promote individual freedom and wealth creation. They have never forced anyone to work for them. Socialism and communism is purely about oppression and slavery, they are anti religion, and they are murderers. They promote conscience violation, they suppress ideology, they have historically spread lies and invented their own government ran media in order to keep their people in the dark.
Capitalist societies invent things like the bill of rights, and a successful middle class.
Have you ever read the Chinese bill of rights?
The first concentration camps were set up by the Russian royalty in the 18th century when there wasn't a communist in sight. And then there were the concentration camps set up by the early Americans for Native Americans.
Then there were concentration camps set up by the Spanish Military in Cuba in 1868-1878. They were closely followed by camps set up by the USA during the Philippine–American War 1899-1902.
The British operated concentration camps during the Boer War.
All those then by your reckoning were not capitalists!
Capitalists send women and children down mines and to work in dangerous conditions, they put many millions into slavery.
And capitalists routinely tell lies in their capitalist run media.
An interesting comment on the USA bill of rights.
Nice article from the economic planners who brought you the single child rule.
In a planned system we cannot confine collective action to the tasks on which we agree, but are forced to produce on everything in order that any action can be taken at all. The more the state plans the more difficult the planning comes for the individual. And the more the planners fail the more they plan.
Yeah Hitler was a mass murderer who exterminated the Jews, he rounded them up into concentration camps in other socialist countries like Poland and began one of the worst genocides in socialist history. Oh right the German socialist party wasn't your brand of socialism so it wasn't true socialism, so it doesn't count.
That's right Germany's National Socialist Party wasn't remotely socialist as the word is commonly used and defined in economics and political science textbooks.
So you either didn't read or chose to ignore my potted history of capitalist concentration camps then!
Oh, and Hitler wasn't a socialist, anybody with even the slightest bit of understanding would know that. He hated socialists!
Remember, the Jews weren't the first inhabitants of the concentration camps, the communists were there before them.
It was a truckload of crap. The US constitution is the standard by which freedom is derived in the world. I'm not going to spend my time with that kind of propaganda, especially from some communist Chinese newspaper.
There's only one place where that stack of garbage should be properly filed. The round file.
"The US constitution is the standard by which freedom is derived in the world" AHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH No, You havn't traveled much have you.
What Chinese newspaper? The potted history of concentration camps didn't come from any newspaper, Chinese or otherwise!
It's easily available information, school boy stuff to some of us with basic education.
So what the "China daily" is doing in their article is typical critical theory which is the product of cultural Marxism. The entire purpose of critical theory is simply to point out every injustice that has ever happened in the world and attach it to western society, (despite the fact that it has happened all over the world for centuries), particularly to the one country that has been at the forefront of battling these cultural inadequacies, the United States.
Stalin himself said; “America is like a healthy body and its resistance is three fold: its patriotism, its morality, and its spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas, America will collapse from within.”
That is the entire premise of that pathetic article you showed me. To give some unique application to the injustices which have occurred in the United States despite the fact that worse calamities have occurred in China, Russia, Cuba, North Korea, and all the other countries that wish to press their module of economic planning down their citizen's throats, and continue to deny basic human rights to their own people to this day.
Come on Man, what is your comment on concentration camps?
Stop evading the question by arguing about whether some people don't see the US in quite the same light as you do and answer it.
I already told you about concentration camps. See Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and democrats. All left wing socialists.
Lol... I never take anyone seriously who considers the Nazi's socialists...just because it's in the name doesn't make it true... That makes me not take anything a person says seriously. You can't rewrite the facts. And just because you can find a video on YouTube doesn't make it true.
At least have the guts to admit that fascists are right wingers when you see them. Franco had concentrations camps too, so did many other right wing governments.
Democrats are not even close to being socialists.
Stalin and Mao were dictators and communists and no one in their right mind sees them as heroes of any kind.
Likewise I find it interesting that liberals will always come to the defense of socialists.
that's partially true, UW...
after all, you can't spell Conservative without 'Con'
No, later than that, when I listed for you the history of concentration camps and concentration camps not operated by the left or socialists, indeed some of them predate socialism.
Now stop ducking the question.
Here, read this with your mind and your eyes open-
Very diluted. Here's an eye opener for you.
Basically Hitler wasn't a right winger because he did the same as other right wing leaders! Fine.
Hitler wasn't a socialist, it doesn't matter what Fox News says.
BTW, concentration camps?
So, are you afraid to answer my point about concentration camps pre-dating Hitler , in fact originating with the US and UK?
The British built concentration camps during the Boer war in 1900, and there were internment camps in America that displaced about 100,000 Asian people, but they were nothing like the extermination camps built by Hitler or the gulags built by the communists. The scale of flat out murder and forced starvation on their part was unfathomably worse. 100 million dead people at the hands of communist dictators, in only a few short decades, your comparison is pathetic to say the least. America and Britain are free states and all the communist countries are behind an iron curtain of isolation, and oppression at the hands of elitists.
I wouldn't call native Americans Asians, but then with your strange thinking, I'll allow it!
So Hitler was a communist now was he!
Shall we talk about all the dead that have died as a result of capitalism? A good few of those are elitist you know.
dig deep enough, and everyone can be accused of being a communist..
I never said Hitler was a communist. And we can talk about the treatment of Native Americans as though the United States had some sort of unique claim to one group taking another groups land, but I think if you look in the history books you will find that it happened in other places as well. In fact I'd say, it happened just about everywhere in the world.
What you will not find with the other countries however, is that they pale in comparison to the United States which has risen to become one of the greatest nations the world has ever seen militarily, technologically, economically, and culturally.
Militarily, yes. The rest just followed. Rather after a particular time it was mostly militarily.
Having said that, I must also add, that, to the people of the third-world, America is not the country of the 'fire-brand Americans', but those 'citizens of the world' who have epitomized a culture of freedom, challenging the status-quo and identifying themselves with the under-dogs of all society. It is American women who have told the rest of the world that 'we own half the world'.
Please do not ascribe these to the merits of the Capitalist, imperialist governments of USA!
"We own half the world"? I think not. Culturally America, the great melting pot, has superseded tolerance between races and sexes over that of any other country. But the basic family unit is the foundation of all societies, and the fact that so many Americans are now stepping away from that reality through liberalism and feminism will be a cultural as well as economic downfall in the long run.
I am not really the kind of 1800 or so 'feminism' reeking kind of woman. Frankly, there is hardly any of the feminism or feminist left so late in 2011! However this forum was for something else, so I would not go into a detailed discussion here. But are you not being really off your rocker (or naive) in suggesting that feminism is the reason of "economic downfall"?!
It's true, the more mothers that decide to go out into the workforce, the more children we have that loose their core values. When a mother stays home with the children they are much better off as they make better decisions based on the values that have been cultivated through a full time stay at home mom.
People who have to make the choice to put their kids in daycare are letting other people insert their values into their kids at a very early age, and over time that will be damaging to the children.
It's very unfortunate and some people have no alternative I realize, but there are those who opt not to go down this path simply because they want more money, and more comforts in life.
feminism also killed chivalry, and other complimentary things that men used to do out of respect for the fairer sex. Women have to be guaranteed jobs that they just aren't physically fit to do, and the result is that the men have to pick up the slack.
They want women to fight on the front lines in war against other people who are completely astounded at the sight of a female combatant. This compromises the morality of many cultures, and causes a person to choose to go against their own moral guidelines. It's just like when our soldiers saw little kids carrying a basket full of grenades in Vietnam. What do you do? And if you decided to shoot that kid it would most likely scar you for the rest of your life.
And lets not forget that you aren't a true woman's liberationalist unless you are in favor of the murdering of unborn babies. The ever popular argument is that women want the government to stay out of their bodies yet they want the tax payers to foot the bill for their abortions. Now that's irony.
What's the difference between a tub of yogurt and America: if you leave a tub of yogurt for 200+ years it will develop a culture.
No but seriously there have been hundreds of not thousands of countries that have risen to and beyond the heights of the US in their time and lasted for much longer to suggest that atrocities committed by the US are justified because it has been successful is ridiculous.
Coming from a country where 50 000 people were tortured and killed in ways so cruel you can't imagine for the crime of being suspected of harboring socialist thought allow me to tell you that cruelty and murder are in no way the monopoly of communism, allow me to further add that the government that committed these same atrocities was not only capitalist but backed by the USA (they even sent specialist CIA torturers to help exterminate the political left) why did the US back them and aid them in their massacre? Because the wanted to stop the rest of the world turning communist, because freedom! :p
"100 million dead people at the hands of communist dictators,"
Sure read like it to me!
The specific subject was concentration camps and whilst many nations have stolen the land of others they haven't placed the disposed in concentration camps.
And if it makes you comfortable to dream that the US is the greatest in everything, dream on.
Land of the free, home of the brave. Nobody ever wants to escape the US, we build fences to keep people out, communists and socialists build walls to keep people in, so they can starve their own people to death. If it happened two hundred years ago in the US, it happens to this day in communist/socialist countries. Embracing that is pure lunacy.
You are just being silly, I've never built a wall to keep anybody in and I never want to.
Why all ways pick on the very worst of those erroneously calling themselves communists and socialists and ascribe that to every socialist.
It is no better than me claiming that because some capitalists kept slaves and sent little boys up chimneys every capitalist wants to keep slaves and send little boys up chimneys.
Because it is an abridgment of basic human rights, it is against private ownership of land, it is modern day slavery to government, you loose all of your freedoms, they have no rights to defend themselves, or to freely exercise their religion, or to choose their own destiny, and it's an unacceptable culture of enslavement.
What, keeping slaves and sending little boys up chimneys!
We agree at last.
Yes slavery is bad and that is why communism and socialism should be banned across the globe.
So there is no restraint on exploiting people?
You really ought to throw out all the biased information that you have ever been fed and do a bit of research for yourself instead of constantly making a fool of yourself arguing black is white.
I can tell you that kids being stuffed into chimnys in the 1800's is not as tragic as the sweat shops that flourish in communist countries like China and Vietnam and other eastern European countries to this day. Commies and Socialists are hundreds of years behind the free world. It is socialists like Jeffery Sachs who went to Columbia university (no big surprise), that are the biggest proponents of those institutions.
You are being lied to by the left wingers.
I hate to dissolution you but there are sweat shops in the US too.
And who are these kids working in sweat shops being used by?
Notably, Apple which has accumulated $98 billion in cash which it doesn't know what to do with.
And with more than a little help from a British inventor
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article … money.html
That strikes me as a great injustice. Steve Jobs was a ruthless, driven character. You'd think they would have thrown Kramer a crumb ($million) or two.
So it's the capitalists fault that the socialists make their people work in sweatshops, and have no child labor laws.
More Marxist critical theory. Very weak.
So you're saying that because the state (note that well, the state)has not imposed any labour laws it's OK for capitalists to exploit children!
Gee I don't know. Is it ok for socialists to not have any labor laws?
Frankly, no, but what is your point? Capitalist who are totally anti-socialist should exploit children to teach their leaders a lesson?
So why don't socialists care about their own people then?
You are avoiding the point entirely.
Why are capitalists exploiting these children? They wouldn't (I hope) allow their own children to be misused in this way. And why are they supporting a regime that they claim is evil?
If those regimes aren't evil why do they force children to work in sweat shops? Why are you avoiding the question? If they care so much about their own people they wouldn't be doing that.
Who says they force children to work in sweat shops which aren't exclusive to communist countries. America used to have (and probably still has) plenty.
It was capitalists who exploited children in their own countries until governments stopped them.
In the case of third world countries it is probably a case of use children to get the mighty dollar or do without.
I'm sure anything is possible, the fact is in America sweat shops and child labor is illegal, where in socialist countries it is not, because they don't give a flying crap about their people. They are not charitable, they do not value human life, and they set out to encroach against the morality of their own people through their policies. They are inherently immoral.
"While Indonesia, China, and Vietnam all have minimum wage laws on the books, Nike had successfully appealed these wages with the governments of these countries year after year, allowing them to pay wages well below the minimum rate. Nike further circumvented wage laws by paying new employees an apprentice rate for several months into an employee's tenure. In April 1997, more than 10,000 workers from Nike's Indonesian factories went on strike to protest low and unpaid wages, while 1,300 workers in Vietnam went on strike hoping for a raise of one cent per hour. The next year, 3,000 Nike workers in China protested dangerous working conditions and low wages. All of these protests took place in spite of the fact that these sorts of worker strikes are illegal in these countries."
Read more: Facts About Nike Sweatshops | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/about_5485125_nike- … z1qAN7UBfI
Wow the people aren't even allowed to go on strike in those countries. And these are supposed to be good points on the part of socialism? Pathetic.
Which does tend to suggest that they aren't socialist!
But no comment on the lack of morals of your good capitalist buddies!
Nope, I think Nike is reprehensible for doing that, but the government that allows their own people to be exploited is even worse. More proof that socialists will not defend the God given rights of their own oppressed people.
Not all the countries involved even claim to be socialist.
Socialism, communism, it's all economic planning and it doesn't work.
Wait none of those countries are actually socialist, more importantly we are not supporting child labor at all, I think we can all agree it's terrible, many many capitalist countries still have it, some socialist/communist countries do also and it is inexcusable but it is not part of any socialist/communist doctrine and indeed children's rights and anti child labor stances were a prominent aspect of many socialist movements during the last century.
The US itself has been party to many child abuses in recent years (currently being ranked 23rd in the world for child protection, behind several socialist countries.) including a judge who was sentencing children to massive sentences or on no evidence in return for payment by the privately owned children's jail where they were being sent (The UN and Unicef criticized America for having privatized jails that lead to these abuses. Capitalism in action right?) and also almost half of the states in the US do not ban physical punishment on children at school by their teachers, something which the vast majority of even third world nations have banned.
In the 1990s every country in the world except for Somalia and the United States became a signatory to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, or CRC. Somalia eventually signed the convention in 2002; the delay of the signing was believed to been due to Somalia not having a government.
How is working for the state any different to working for a private employer, how does the guy in Cuba being paid by the state have a different situation to the civil servant in America being paid by the state? The difference is in a socialist state instead of most of the value of what you produce ending up in the hands of the guys at the top you receive most of it and what you don't receive goes to the state which int urn uses that money to provide basic food, shelter as well as free healthcare education etc etc. neither of these are slavery they are just people working for the state, socialism does not create slaves merely employees to the state the difference is a person working for a private person works for someone who has no responsibility to care for them, the person working for the state is working for someone with the responsibility to care for them.
Also are you calling China socialist? because it isn't and I would remind you that a minimum age for work was actually a socialist idea and it is one strictly enforced by socialist states like Cuba.
I do not understand. Is Glenn Beck being quoted as an authority on this question? And he talks of 'common assumption' as proof to equating Hitler and communist leaders! Lots of people think he is raving mad!
Fascism was (and remains) very different from Socialism, even if Hitler had called his state the Socialist state, his practices overwrote his intentions. To say Hitler was a Socialist is a cheap method to slur the political philosophy of Socialism-Communism; and like trying to rewrite history.
I think the two systems slur themselves without the aid of Hitler, but please tell me which of his facts that he presented were untrue.
This discussion is pointless anyone who actually believes Hitler was a socialist is beyond hope, Hitler had the socialists in Germany killed and his strongest ally was the man the word fascism was invented to describe, Hitler was a fascist fascism is the complete opposite economic system to socialism, it's very simple.
Left to Right:
See Hitler was actually a fascist (Allied with Mussolini the word fascism was actually invented for Mussolini) Which puts him at the opposite end of the political spectrum, his party line was actually anti-communist.
"The streets of our country are in turmoil. The universities are filled with students rebelling and rioting. Communists are seeking to destroy our country. Russia is threatening us with her might, and the Republic is in danger. Yes - danger from within and without. We need law and order! Without it our nation cannot survive."
I know that for the more simple minded among us it may be hard to grasp the concept that they might not be socialist despite saying socialist in their name.
North Korea is called the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea, see labels aren't always correct
The only thing that quote shows is that Hitler was against Communism, not socialism. Fascism embraces the ideology of national identity through connections of ancestry, and culture and is promoted through indoctrination and eugenics, all of which conservative ideology is against and liberal policies are in favor of.
Liberals have always been at the forefront of segregation, multiculturalism, Jim crow laws, and denying women the right to vote. This is because they view the constitution and the declaration of independence (which defends life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness) very liberally. While conservatives hold it to a stricter definition.
You see it is a conservative view to say that life is guaranteed "upon creation", but liberals interpret that very liberally to allow babies to be denied life.
Conservatives see "liberty" as a guarantee to freedom and equality, but liberals interpreted it very liberally to allow slavery and segregation.
Conservatives see the "general welfare" clause as an obligation of the government to lay taxes for programs which benefit the entire general public. Liberals interpret it very liberally and use it to apply to special interest groups.
So you see, fascism is really much closer to communism and liberalism than it ever could be to conservatism.
Nothing really to say except that this post is so amusing that it deserves to be widely read.
I see when it suits you you are quite happy to lump socialism and communism together but when it suits you to regard them as different. . .
Please, just show me one bit of real evidence, beyond the name of his party, that Hitler was a socialist. It shouldn't be too hard as you are so convinced of the truth of that statement.
Your connection to facts and reality is non-existent.
WOW. So... America doesn't promote "Equality" as defined by a communist country, and a boat load of Leftist Lock-step Liberals in the Hubs. And that makes us BAD somehow?
Thank GOD we don't. No one is equal. No one is the same. No one has the same potential. Every one of us is an absolutely unique individual.
Ever heard of a political measurement called Gate Theory? Works this way:
Every sovereign nation on the planet has borders, most all roads crossing those borders have gates. You can tell how a country treats its people, and how the rest of the world's population ACTUALLY feels about it (not what the press or Pravda might have to say) by which way they go through, when those gates are opened.
East Germany had a fricken WALL to keep its population inside. Cubans send 1000 boats a year towards America, in the dark of night so their Government wont know.
America is still, despite the leftist stooge in the White House, the Land of Opportunity. EVERYONE wants to come to America, have their children educated in America, or take over America. Because We Treat People Far Better Here, than anyone treats anyone else, anywhere else in the world.
When our gates are opened, people FLOCK here. So take your communist position papers and hang them by your toilet. They might at least serve a genuine purpose, that way.
The tenets of socialism or communism say nothing about what should happen to people who resist a system. Nor do they have to be executed no one in Cuba has been executed in almost a decade and it has been almost 50 years since someone was executed for political reasons (treason) and they were also convicted of murder and torture. If say i decided taxation was unjust and resisted it I would be thrown in jail same thing with communism or socialism. Under communism and socialism everyone produces because everyone has a job, more people is always a good thing. Enormous numbers of people have been killed by dictators of every stripe, dictatorship leads to that sort of abuse and I do not support dictatorship (no dictatorship is also not part of communism or socialism there are plenty of democratic socialist nations) I could equally name lots of capitalist dictators and point out similar abuses. Pinochet, Manuel Noriega, Mussolini, Vargas, Videla and Dolffuss not to mention thousands in history that existed before either socialism or communism had been created it is not any economic system that leads to abuse of power it is merely power which is why most modern socialists believe in democratic socialism as seen throughout South America.
"Mongol campaigns MAY have resulted in the deaths of 40 million people."
Nice try, Josak.
Yet again, you call people stupid because they don't know the made up "facts" you like to use. And, on a psychological side note, we all know that no matter how often you're proven to be lying through your communist teeth, you will never stop.
Oh, I do like it when people resort to name calling.
"Hey, I realise that I have nothing sensible to say so I'll just call you some names"
I called him Josak. I showed where he lies.
Liberal is the banner you all fly with such pride.
Lemming is my assessment that you're all following each other over a cliff.
Lock-step can be demonstrated in the uniform turns the lot of you make, in the comment sections and forums. It's like watching a school of fish. I can predict your reactions to comments with greater and greater degrees of accuracy, based on simple observations of your past consistency; Hitler was a Righty, Limbaugh is a racist, Crunchy is sexist, American View is a doodyhead, Gitmo is a gulag, the Globe is Warming, Evolution is real(!!) cop killers should be set free and abortion isn't murder.
Because Pravda says so.
It's funny because you will find that we don't actually share these views, some of those are facts which you of course cannot accept since you have no understanding whatsoever of science or political science, such as evolution and Hitler being a "righty" also there is no doubt the globe is warming maybe what you meant to say is that there is a link between that and human activity on this I am unsure, I don't believe Gitmo is a Gulag just an abusive prison, people who murder policemen in my opinion deserve life in jail without parole (I am on the fence about capital punishment) I do not believe that abortion is ethical (I was a an adopted out child that was nearly aborted) so yeah your lock step was hardly on was it?
P.S. American View is not IMO a doodyhead we just disagree and you are not a doodyhead you just are very poorly educated which is not your fault furthermore i have no idea whether you are a sexist or not.
So lets see" Evolution yes, Hitler was a righty yes, Limbaugh I honestly don't know or care whether he is a racist. So I agreed with like less than half of your predictions?
Could I not give examples where I could show that the right was in lockstep? What you call lockstep is actually just similarities in opinion that construct a political party or ideology to begin with it's like me saying pro lifers are all so lockstep, they all believe abortion is wrong.
Also seriously you just distinguished earlier between socialism and communism so can you at least be factual in your insults and call them my "lying socialist teeth"? :p
"Gitmo is a gulag" Not at all really.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtrzcBMb … re=related
Well according the same site you use for evidence Stalin killed fewer than twenty million and according to you Genghis Khan killed around 45 million thus making it more than any of them so yes you were historically wrong. Also the other numbers were laughably wrong according to Wikipedia Hitler is 12 and Mao is not even a million I understand your figures are probably accounting for the people who starved under Mao but having a famine is hardly a crime now is it?
Firstly Hitler was not a socialist.
more importantly socialism and communism are purely economic systems, you can have democratic socialism and communism (indeed several countries do) if say George Bush had nuked his own citizens because he went mad would you blame it on capitalism? I wouldn't because it's not the fault of the economic system but rather the mental instability of the leader, to suggest otherwise is foolish.
As a side note from a historical perspective Genghis Khan killed far more people than either of the three. Lack of knowledge as usual.
And how many Socialists do you know ! Or! Is that just your considered opinion??
I love when conservatives lament the fact that cubans are not allowed to unionize while here in the US labor unions are blamed for every evil under the sun and there's no better victory for a conservative than breaking a union.
Just substitute America for Cuba and it makes about the same amount of sense!
By the way, I see that you did not credit the source of the article you C&Pd, why not?
Because I see plenty of human rights abuses in the US, Gitmo seems highly appropriate, especially as it is in the much criticised Cuba!
"Because I see plenty of human rights abuses in the US"
Tell us about one you Personally saw while you were here in the US.
Hey John, no doubt that the US is a work in progress. But Cuba, on the other hand, is destruction in progress. I should know this. I was born and raised there... sixteen years there/twenty years in the US. I still have family there. There is no way to compare these two countries. The US might violate human rights but in Cuba there are NO human rights at all. There is a big difference.
Your're beating a dead horse. Nobody but nobody is defending Cuba's economic and political system. Recently it's been improving as Fidel lets go. There's been a bit of creeping free enterprise lately from what I've been reading. The time is long overdue for the U.S. to end the embargo and establish cordial relations with Cuba. This has been obvious for a long time. Unfortunately, the problem is Florida politics where nobody in either party wants to endure the wrath of Cuban expatriate anti-Castro fanatics. Of course many of them have good reason to hate Castro. But the current situation isn't in the interest of the U.S. or Cuba. We have diplomatic and trade relations with many countries that are much worse than Cuba.
It should be recognized, moreover, that Cuba was not a democratic paradise under Batista where prostitution was rampant and gambling was controlled by the Mafia and Batista. Corruption ruled Cuba under Battista, and the law was a mad dog that bit only the poor. (Old Spanish expression: "La ley es un perro rabioso que no muerde sino los campesinos."
There you go Ralph. That's it in a nut shell. The ex-patriot Cubans are seriously "anti". There are those who believe that Castro had a hand in Kennedy's assasination, and they may be right for as much as we really know. They can have their bias. Castro is on the way out and Cuba will welcome them back.
It is time. We should do the responsible thing and not wait for Fidel to die before we make inroads on behalf of the people who are innocent of anything at all.
I am very skeptical he had anything to do with the assassination but even if he did that's no reason to hold a grudge is it? It's well on record that Kennedy tried hundreds if not thousands of times to assassinate Castro (there's even a book listing the ways they tried). Castro has his brother coming in and then a long line of party faithful waiting on the wings, I don't think ex-patriots will we welcomed any time soon besides many ex-patriots are very very bad people which is why some of them left in the first place, I am not sure it would be good for Cuba to take them back.
Cuba was under a tyrant before Castro, and even though there was a lot of poverty, the people still had a way to make an honest salary and bring food to the table. But after all these years of having no way out (except to flee if you have that opportunity) we're left with a country that has absolutely no morals and doesn't understand what it means to hold a job and work to earn your money. As you go through customs in the Cuban airport, the inspectors ask for a tip (not implying, but literally asking) and so does everyone else you encounter while visiting.
Prostitution is a way of life, and it includes minors and young men - whole families that are in it for the money - and what makes it worst is that what used to be taboo it's now seen as a normal thing. Everything is sold through sex. A friend of mine that just came back from Havana a week ago told me that he was walking through a small market where people were selling crafts and such for tourists, and a young female street vendor whow was trying to sell old furniture was singing: "Table, Chairs, Sofa for sale! If you buy it all I add the bed for free!" Seriously! That's what communism has done for Cuba and the embargo (blocked or opened) won't make a difference because the items are only going to be consumed by Castro's people and available to tourists. The only way the Cuban people will get to see anything imported from foreign countries is through prostitution.
Never mind, it wasn't hard to find.
"Cuba: Foreign Policy & Government Guide, Volume 1
By USA International Business Publications"
Nice none partisan publication, I'll be bound.
I assume that neither the original writer of the rant, nor the person plagiarising it for this forum, have ever visited Cuba.
I've been there three times, and am planning to go back and stay with friends in Santiago de Cuba, with whom I stayed part of the last time I was there.
My experience has been vastly different. It includes one trip where a group of us sung in the streets in various towns around Cuba, spontaneously and without having asked permission from anyone. As a result, we had the opportunity to talk with ordinary people we met like that, as well as with the students, hospital workers, teachers and others we had arranged to meet with and sing for in advance of going out there. I found about 99% or more of the people we spoke to were very aware of what was going on in their country, and just who was to blame.
Did you get a tour of any prisons, Write?
Years ago, as part of an outreach program sponsored by my home church in Seattle, I visited a number of WA. State Institutions to teach inmates written communications skills. The inmates were getting better healthcare than I was.
That is more a condemnation of the society that you live in than of the prison service, which incidentally locks up more of the population than any other country in the World!
And perhaps they should just let criminals walk the street.
Does it not concern you that your society has more criminals per head of population than anywhere else in the world?
No, what concerns me is that other societies around the world do not lock up the criminals they have. They let them run loose. But I guess that does not happen, in your eyes only the US has criminals.
How sad! supposed to be helping but just resentful,
Ah jandee. Sometimes you're so cute, I just want to pinch you.
The sad part here is how you chose to interpret my tone. There is no resentment in my statement. Just the observation that the prisoners were being treated so well that they had better healthcare than I had for myself, at the time.
I am pleased you had a great time in Cuba and plan to go back. But to deny what occurs there is like to deny we have slums in this country. While I have not been there I am good friends with someone who grew up there. He has a much different story than the one you post. The actor Andy Garcia talked openly about the actions of the army and police he saw first hand. I some how think the residents in Miami that came from Cuba, those that escaped political persecution would think that Cuba is a great place to live.
Hmmm, I ran a google search on the article you cite and here is what I got:
" Your search - "Cuba: Foreign Policy & Government Guide, Volume 1By USA International Business ... - did not match any documents.
Could just be a google thing, but what I found interesting was you did not cite the report from Human Rights Watch.
Just to provide a bit of balance
http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/ … ochure.pdf
"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?"
I found the source quickly and easily just by copying a section of the text into Google and it came up as the first result. For ease, the section of text I googled was
"The government incarcerates people for their peaceful political beliefs or activities. The total number of political prisoners and detainees is unknown,"
In that I myself did the C&P, in response to a few of the DemoLibtard comments I'd read concerning the wondrous life and superior Healthcare available in the Island Paradise known a Cuber, please allow me to post the source I pulled from.
Please forgive me that the Preview had none of the code errors the ultimate posting is filled with.
LOL, my browser put up a message to say that the site was not safe!
Still you really would expect a conservative site to have lots of good things to say about socialism . . .wouldn't you?
Given the propensity of Left leaning "journalists" being spat out by our liberal centers of higher indoctrination, it is refreshing to find a Right leaning source for your information.
Or don't you think a balance to the untold thousands of liberal websites is Fair?
Just to provide a bit of balance"
Yet you did not provide the link to your claim
Cuba: Foreign Policy & Government Guide, Volume 1By USA International Business
And yet is does not exist. I put the sentence in you claim you used, which I find interesting as how you would know what sentence is in a report to search when you have not read it yet, and it has one result, It takes you back to this thread so the report must not exist.
Here is what google shows, This is a copy and paste of the search result. This is the only result that it shows.
Did you mean: Cuban: Foreign Policy & Government Guide, Volume 1 By USA International Business
Oh Grand and Glorious Cuba, Crown Jewel of Socialist Utopias!
hubpages.com › All Forums › Politics and Social Issues
Your search - "Cuba: Foreign Policy & Government Guide, Volume 1By USA International Business ...
You visited this page on 3/11/12.
I picked a sentence at random and it came up with
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=i5Ph … mp;f=false
I had actually read it in the OP, a copy and paste job.
So this article is just what Striped posted, What is your issue? The fact it is accurate about Cuba?
No, the fact that it comes from a biased source, or doesn't that bother you at all?
Evidently my biased source went to an entirely Unbiased source, for the data I posted. It seems to be an International business guide, updated annually with data gathered from "government agencies and international organizations."
So, the whole world is out to lie about Cuber?
I think it very unlikely that your government would say "actually we were wrong about Cuba, here are the real facts" y'now, government sources, and international business!
And the You Tube vid I posted of the "political" Cuban prisoner, who was recently released to America, for HEALTH REASONS.
You didn't listen to HIS opinion of the country he grew up in, it's governance, why and with whom he was incarcerated, who ACTUALLY fought for his released and the condition he was in when he got on the plane?
America's EVIL Guantanamo Bay military prison facility, or as we like to call it, Club Gitmo, has a history of its prisoners GAINING WEIGHT. Three halal meals a day, prayer rugs and Qurans. And just to be sure you're paying attention, we're putting in a $750,000.00 SOCCER field, so the prisoners can recreate.
http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories … rison.html
Tell me again how cruel Americans are and how wondrous Cuba is. I DARE you.
Oh! illegally held prisoners gain weight, so that makes everything all right does it?
I don't need to tell you anything, I just want you to realise that there may be breaches of human rights in Cuba, just as there are in the US and the UK. You seem to think that it doesn't matter what you do at home but it does matter what other people do at their home!
In an affidavit, dated 5 August 2004 and released on 10 December 2004, Hicks alleged mistreatment by U.S. forces, at Guantanamo included being:
beaten while blindfolded and handcuffed
forced to take unidentified medication
sedated by injection without consent
struck while under sedation
regularly forced to run in leg shackles causing ankle injury
deprived of sleep "as a matter of policy"
witness to use of attack dogs to brutalise and injure detainees.
He also said he met with US military investigators conducting a probe into detainee abuse in Afghanistan and had told the International Red Cross on earlier occasions that he had been mistreated. Hicks told his family in a 2004 visit to Guantanamo Bay that he had been anally assaulted during interrogation by the U.S. in Afghanistan while he was hooded and restrained. Hicks' father claimed; "He said he was anally penetrated a number of times, they put a bag over his head, he wasn't expecting it and didn't know what it was. It was quite brutal." In a Four Corners interview, Terry Hicks discussed these "allegations of physical and sexual abuse of his son by American soldiers.
That's just one example that came to mind because it was famous in Australia where I was living at the time. Prisoners locked up in a cell tend to gain weight, it's hardly surprising.
Prisoners who are being fed a healthy diet by Americans might gain weight, but torture victims and Gulag residents NEVER do. Have you not seen the pictures of Allied prisoners released from German and Japanese concentration camps? Skin and bones.
And our "Club Gitmo, the Terrorist's Tropical Paradise" residents get all the exerciser they want. We're putting in a $750,000.00 SOCCER field for the murderous little darlings.
Alleged, did he?
Like Tawana Brawly 'alleged' she was kidnapped and raped by a white supremacists. Like the Duke LaCross team was 'alleged' to have raped that poor, innocent stripper? Like the Claremont College Professor who 'alleged' a compete hoax:
LA Times ^ | March 17. 2994 | Joy Buchanan, Kristina Sauerwein and Stuart Silverstein
"A week after a reported campus hate crime drew national attention, sparked protests and shut down the prestigious Claremont Colleges, police on Wednesday called the incident a hoax staged by a professor who slashed tires, shattered windows and spray-painted racist graffiti on her own car."
Sorry, my little Communist propagandist. The Left in America has a long and checkered history of making crap up, so they can play the victim. I'm not buying a word of some Socialist's allegations.
What's that old saying? Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice... Shame on Me.
HAHAHA please do you know how much effort goes into preventing people from talking about their experiences as victims of torture? Hicks was released with a suspended sentence and issued with a gag order that he could never talk about what he experienced in Guantanamo, he was one of many who broke that gag order. People in Japanese concentration camps were not fed, someone who is tortured still eats, I say this as someone who has been tortured and as someone whose father still has grill marks all over his back from being tied to a bed and electrically tortured... By a CIA specialist for daring to have a fiancee who passed out pamphlets calling for democracy in Argentina, unfortunately the US government rather liked an anti communist dictatorship there... They aided in the kidnapping torture and murder of 50 000 people. My father was one of the lucky ones released... his fiance was drowned in a barrel of excrement and tossed out of a helicopter over the ocean so her body would never be found. Have you seen the photos of torture at Abu Ghraib? if not here is a link http://marvinlindsay.typepad.com/.a/6a0 … 970c-800wi of US employees torturing people... and you seriously expect me to believe that it does not occur at Guantanamo? Sure shut your eyes and see no evil.
"Torture" at Grab-an-Arab prison? OH what a stink that was. I had some of my old friends on the Detail get me the full file. Stupid, untrained weekend warriors, sent to guard some of the most ruthless butchers in Iraq, made complete asses of themselves.
Some things you need to know: There are Frat-house Hazings that make Abu Ghraib's (once Saddam’s torture palace, where he fed people into plastic shredders) stupidities look tame.
There are also businesses all over the world where guys pay good money to be treated like that.
But Gitmo MUST be a bizillion times worse though, right? Well, let's see.
John you have just ruined my night! I went to the site and I feel sick.
Years ago I read a lot about the 'Soledad Brothers' and thought that was times-past. It's just as bad now ,worse I think. They dare to publicly show and brag what they do to their own youth
Also worth noting that Cuba has not a single person on death row and has not executed anyone is over 8 years compared to the US...
"If this man has no health insurance, should we just let him die?"....Yeah!! YAY!! Wooop Woop
Of course not, once found guilty they are executed, no need for death row, not to mention those killed without trials
Nope, Cuba has a full trial system and death row and in the last several decades has executed fewer people per capita than the US, none for political crimes. There have been only 500 executions is Cuba in 50 years only 4 in the last ten years in comparison the US executed 46 just in 2010.
Only four they let the International Press know about, you mean.
Or do you feel that a Country committing atrocities, who also wants to do business with the U.S. once more, is going to admit to it?
Obama is killing American citizens abroad without pause. Isn't he YOUR guy, my Lock-step Liberal friends?
Anyone can write for that site, it's just like Wikipedia and taken as seriously...
You may as well have copied and pasted an email like Oly does.
And I'm surprised they haven't been sued by Wikipedia for stealing their design.
" USERS RELY ON INFORMATION HERE ENTIRELY AT THEIR OWN RISK. Conservapedia and its editors, contributors, sponsors, affiliates or anyone associated in any way with this project cannot guarantee the validity of any information found here, and shall not be responsible or liable in any way for any inaccurate or libelous information found here. Content of any given article may have been vandalized or modified by someone who lacks knowledge."
And that article was copied from a book so it is plagiarized on that site.
I don't doubt the people of Cuba are controlled and not as free as in the US...there is no need for propaganda on either side. They are still freer than they were under the previous government. But it does go to show you that having the same government or party in rule for too long is a negative.
Once again, it is easy to talk about a country without ever stepping a foot on its land! In spite of many lacks and scarcity, people eat everyday, have a free education, free health care (what we don't for a Western superpower). The ones who complain(ed) are/were probably the ones who benefited of privileges before the revolution.
What we easily forget is that we were the ones who triggered the suffocation of the Cuban economy (U.S. embargo)!
We always refer to our country as the epitome of liberty (no pluralism in the legislative chambers). The government is controlled by the corporations when it comes to legislate. Our constitutional rights are pieced apart and so on...
As many +1 and +100s as it is possible to give!
Thank you, sir!
This from the CIA World Factbook:
"The Treaty of Paris established Cuban independence from the US in 1902 after which the island experienced a string of governments mostly dominated by the military and corrupt politicians. Fidel CASTRO led a rebel army to victory in 1959; his iron rule held the subsequent regime together for nearly five decades. He stepped down as president in February 2008 in favor of his younger brother Raul CASTRO.
Cuba's Communist revolution, with Soviet support, was exported throughout Latin America and Africa during the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s. The country faced a severe economic downturn in 1990 following the withdrawal of former Soviet subsidies worth $4 billion to $6 billion annually.
Cuba at times portrays the US embargo, in place since 1961, as the source if its difficulties. Illicit migration to the US - using homemade rafts, alien smugglers, air flights, or via the southwest border - is a continuing problem. The US Coast Guard intercepted 1,000 individuals attempting to cross the Straits of Florida in fiscal year 2011."
Yup. Life in Cuber is just SO scrumpdillyishous that people from all over the World are clamoring to get in there where the healthcare is awesome, the economy is racing and Brotherly Love is the unspoken law of the land.
Or do I maybe have that backwards?
That would be all the displaced capitalists then!
By the way, it doesn't actually say which way the 1000 individuals where going
~chuckles~ John. You're smarter than that.
Not to worry, though. Communism/Socialism won't have a chance to bury England, if Islam gets its way and you adopt Sharia.
So, you're pretty safe, on that note.
But we have included Sharia law in our legal system but only where it doesn't conflict with English law. Seems to work out OK, as does Beth Din!
BTW the capitalists have their claws well and truly embedded in the UK
Yes Indeed. It is absolutely critical that Muslim men can marry infants, consummate with 9 year olds, beat their wives with impunity and kill their daughters with Honor.
Way to go, England!
Way to go New York:
http://www.naturalnews.com/035192_circu … itual.html
New York will put the Rabbi on trial, find him guilty and toss his stupid ass in prison.
Meanwhile, Islamic Female Genitalia Mutilation is now just ducky in jolly ol' England.
You're not seeing the difference, Shalob?
Oh yeah...I see plenty. In fact, I can see for miles and miles and miles and miles and miles.
btw----there were no IMO's in your post...
Thanks for that, View. I needed a good angry helpless cry right after lunch.
Shalob? You want to re-think your stance on the Religion of Pieces yet?
Or does one stupid Rabbi who will spend the rest of his life in jail, equal 2000 young British girls getting their clitorises sliced off with no punishment for the sick bastards inflicting that life-long pointless trauma, in your dismal little world?
John? Same question.
So now you claim that they practice female genital mutilation in Cuba!
Let me see if I understand you here, Shalob.
There is an epidemic of Jewish male babies dying all over America, because every moil working has Hepatitis, and goes in for some archaic ritual which nobody does anymore, and the Jews have insisted on Mosaic Law in America, so it goes unpunished.
Is that your premise?
Not in Cuba, John. In England. YOUR bailiwick. Did you not watch the links View posted?
Do you not HATE that little girls get to be mutilated with ZERO consequences for the perpetrators, Shalob?
What about compulsory circumcision in the u.s after the 2nd world war?
What about it, jandee?
And if it was ever "mandatory" it no longer is. I'm cut, my brothers were cut, all my friends in the service were cut. But when I was having babies, the Doc told us it was strictly a Parental Preference deal.
Or are you trying to equate a strictly male procedure, with demonstrated health benefits and no lasting physical or emotional scaring, performed while an infant boy is far too young to ever remember it, with the horrible physical mutilation of a pubescent little girl's clitoris, under barbaric conditions, having lasting mental and emotional repercussions?
Is that your point, jandee? Are you truly that cruel and insensitive?
What has any of this got to do with Cuba?
The mutilation of girls is not an Islamic thing,it pre-dates Islam by centuries and is not prescribed by Islam, it is custom, not religion, just as the cutting of boys in the US is custom and not religion.
Can't you actually read!!
Or do you fail to understand "when it does not conflict with English Law" as well?
Oh yeah. Saw that.
I'm guessing you're going to ignore the unwritten law of Incrementalism, and just HOPE they don't push for further and further watering down of British law.
Best of luck with that, John.
Evidently the Muslims in England didn't get that memo, John.
Don't say I didn't try to warn ya. Then again, by some of the posts you put up, I can tell you barely half read anything posted which might disagree with your lock-step liberal mindset.
Running around with your fingers in your ears yelling "NA NA NA NA I CAN'T HEAR YOU" must get tiresome, after a while.
So what you are saying is horrible crimes are committed in England? well DUH horrible crimes are committed everywhere and sometimes they are because of cultural differences, the acts are against English law and are punished when discovered, what is your point? Shall I say children are murdered in the US and then expect that to mean something?
The article View posted said the barbarians who are committing those mutilations WERE NOT GOING TO BE PROSECUTED! That's the whole damned point, Josak.
"British girls undergo horror of genital mutilation despite tough laws
Female circumcision will be inflicted on up to 2,000 British schoolgirls during the summer holidays – leaving brutal physical and emotional scars. Yet there have been no prosecutions against the practice"
Time for you to pay attention.
There is nothing Muslim that mandates female mutilation and nothing under Sharia law either. It is purely custom that is not exclusive to and pre-dates Islam.
The fact that there have been no prosecutions in Britain does not mean that we nod and let it go, rather it reflects the extreme difficulty in bringing a prosecution.
For a prosecution to happen entails a young girl going against her parents and making a complaint, not very likely is it?
Here, read what an Islamic scholar has to say about FGM
Oh, by the way, no prosecutions have taken place in the US either, though the practice is just as common there. Mind you the legislation prohibiting it has been around for as long as it has in the UK so you may well show us up yet.
You've got a link to the story of the 2000 American girls about to be mutilated? Or are you just blowing smoke, hoping nobody will ask?
From the articles you posted, John. Read deeper than the stupid headlines sometimes, huh?
"...the procedure has been officially banned in the U.S. since 1996..."
"...tens of thousands of young girls taken back to their home countries, in a process known as 'vacation-cutting.' Once there, the girls are often cut using a broken glass or unsterilized razor blades, and, more often than not, without anesthesia. While FGC may be banned in the U.S., there is no law protecting girls from being taken overseas to have the procedure in another country. "
GIRLS. IN. ENGLAND. Are being mutilated, John. WITHOUT leaving the country. With impunity for their torturers. That has been the point the whole time and you know it, John. Nice try switching up your argument.
Muslims in America fear our justice enough to leave the country before they mutilate their daughters. Muslims in England thumb their noses at British law, knowing they can hide behind your extreme sensitivity to offending a protected political class.
All because your idiot socialist politicians allowed Islamic pressure to substitute for common sense, and Sharia "when it doesn't violate British law" (yeah right) has been added to your judicial system.
You and I can disagree about politics all day long, but that would never make me wish Islamic Sharia on your country. You have my sympathies, dude. Stop voting Leftist while you still have the chance to turn it around.
Where is the evidence that more than an insignificant number of girls are being mutilated in the UK?
The sources I look at say that they are going to their motherland in the school holidays to be mutilated.
I wish we did have some socialist politicians in the UK, might make it a better place. I haven't been able to vote for the left since 1979, it just doesn't exist any more.
I don;t understand the value of this side track that is being thrown at you John, how does this correlate to socialism or relate to Cuba?
That's exactly what it is, a side track, a common tactic of the right when losing an argument, move the goal posts!
I think the OP is under the illusion that the UK is somehow socialist, that couldn't be farther from the truth.
*shakes head* God forbid he actually believe this, it's a conservative party alliance currently leading the country. Say it ain't so Stripedcrunchy!
It's people who have a very fixed view of the world and how it all is. They don't like that image being shaken and so refuse to believe any evidence you show them that shakes that belief.
If, for instance, they believe that Islam encourages the cutting of girls, no evidence to the contrary will change that.
If they believe socialism is dictatorial, it doesn't matter how many times you disprove that they will hang on to their belief.
Or capitalism, show them the evils and they will immediately say "no, that's socialism".
Of course you are for socialism. How else could you be sitting around on the dole blabbering about irrelevant political theory.
I don't even know if John is on the dole but that comment is disgraceful after all what are you doing? Political theory happens to dictate the our lives and how we live them, if you have no interest then get off the politics boards and leave them for people with interest in the subject and the intelligence and civility to discuss them in a positive manner.
Another of the ill-educated who does not understand socialism at all!
Do you know (of course you don't) that socialists in the UK opposed the dole?
~if only to piss off jandee~ Golly! Don't ever let a conversation go where it takes you in a forum, because John and Josak could get lost. Er somethin'.
American View posted a link showing where 2000 British little girls were going to be mutilated, right there on British soil, which we all know you read, John. "...an insignificant number of girls..." in your curious opinion, evidently.
Doesn't the Left tell me we should outlaw all guns, even if only ONE less child gets murdered because of that idea?
I give real world examples, you give hypothetical and your own personal opinion. Who cares if Islam or the Koran require Female Mutilation? Sharia says a man's women are his to beat, scar, throw acid on or outright put to death, if he claims Honor as his motivation.
YOUR stupid politicians fell for it. Because liberalism has rotted their ability to think for themselves. The last British woman I dated, told me that defending yourself can actually be a crime, in England.
If a woman stabs a rapist, in her bedroom, with a knife, it can be argued that she was "laying in wait" for him. My girlfriend kept her sewing work out on her nightstand, so she could have that as the excuse for the big sharp pointy scissors she kept in the drawer.
Conservatives don't think that way, guys. We believe that if someone is trying to hurt or kill you, you've got the right to kill them, right back. And yes, I said Kill for Hurt. People out to kill you often hurt you first. I'd rather be judged by twelve than carried by six.
Conservatives want people to be individuals, self supporting and self sustaining. Autonomous from the Collective; free to be and think and exist as they wish. NOT as the Centralized Government Power insists they be.
Cuba needs more of that.
The preamble to the film in the link View posted
"A truly horrifying expose of how Muslim girls in the UK are being taken back to the old country to have their genitals mutilated and prepared for forced marriage. Its heart breaking."
See where it says "taken back to the old country" just like they do in the US?
You really shouldn't date Daily Mail readers, they have a skewed vision of life. Defending yourself isn't a crime in England and I defy you to produce evidence that it is.
I don't know, you tell me, does it get tiresome?
It is easy to talk about a nursing home you have not been in, yet it does not mean there is not horrible issues going on there. That is a poor argument for Cuba. Perhaps you and others forget all the US companies that were lived up to invest in Cuba. The communist revelation and the dictator taking over the country took care of that.
And let's not talk about why the US embargo happened. Besides we could not hurt Cuba could we, after all they had Russia sending them everything they needed right?
Lets see, they cannot get medical care to all their people, yet Chavez went to Cuba to be treated for Cancer. Hmm. I guess the tens of thousands who fled Cuba and came here all lied and made up the stories of their persecution.
Prior to the Revolution, Cuba had a higher standard of living in 1958 than half of Europe, a larger middle class than Switzerland, a more highly unionized work force than the U.S., more doctors and dentists per capita than Great Britain, more cars and televisions per capita than Canada or Germany and was inundated with immigrants.
Cuba kills or jails people who try to leave it. When a group of people tried to leave in 1994, a Cuban navy ship rammed their boat and shot water cannons at survivors, drowning 43 people.
THIS you call enlightenment and freedom?
Cuba's Communist Party is the only legal party, and officially sanctioned candidates run unopposed. Why would ANYONE interested in Human Rights have DICK to do with a dictatorship which has no problem killing its own civilians wholesale?
Prior to the revolution Cuba was run by the mafia and US corporations, was a casino, and had some of the highest prostitution rates in the western world.
It has been argued by some that short-sighted U.S. policy pushed Cuba into it's relationship with the Soviet Union. However, it probably didn't take much pushing on Fidel to get him to align with the USSR which heavily subsidized the Cuban economy for many years. The time is overdue to end the U.S. embargo and establish a cordial, mutually beneficial relationship with Cuba.
Do we allow them to continue with their gross Human Rights violations, or demand they open up to Human Rights organizations and end the slavery, first?
Before lifting the Embargo, that is.
Cuban cigars smoked in Canada had an excellent flavor, if memory serves.
Do we allow the US to continue with its gross human rights violations?
Oh Yes! I see! you mean the murder of babies in Afghanistan yesterday!!
Well, had that soldier been shouting Allouah ach-bar! (sic) we would know for sure it wasn't a Religiously motivated act of terrorism.
But, since the soldier was American, we know it was Capitalism that made him do it.
We also know NOTHING bad ever happens to children in Afghanistan, by the natives, their husbands, or their families themselves.
I read a very disturbing article that the US military was becoming very far right Christian....and if you don't follow: you are persona non grata.
Also read about a disturbing number of rapes...gang rapes that occur there.
I think it's our responsibilty to take care of the rot on our end, not simply demonize the other side.
"Do we allow them to continue their gross human rights violations?"
Well we have diplomatic and trade relations with quite a few other countries that have considerably more heinous human rights violations than Cuba. Maybe we could work out a deal under which Cuba AND the United States would put a stop to their own human rights violations including ending extra judicial assassinations of citizens, Texas's habit of railroading innocent people to the electric chair, Joe Arpaio's harassment of legal and undocumented immigrants and so forth.
What human rights violations? Is that like 12.4 million American children are living in food insecure households?
Golly, lets ask a man jailed in Cuba for Political Dissent, who needed to come to AMERICA, leaving the Bestest Healthcare System in the World for HEALTH REASONS, how he feels about his Benevolent Communist Country.
And spare me your pathetic liberal pablum about "food insecurity" numbers and "children." America is the land of Food-stamps, WIC, 3 free school meals a day and church sponsored free food banks.
You want to stop the starvation? DONATE SOME OF YOUR OWN PERSONAL MONEY TO YOUR LOCAL CHURCH, ya greedy selfish liberal whiners.
I am sick to death of every bleeding-heart whiny Leftist greedy lazy pig SWEARING that whatever government program they're angling for is "for the children." Particularly when the definition of a Child is now a 26 year old!
Socialists are a race? Or is "greedy selfish bleeding heart whiny Leftist pig" the racial slur, here? Well, it is rather an insult to pigs. Pigs are a race.
Actually, I mentioned WIC. Wouldn't that make me more a misogynist
than a racist? I mean, in your "label people who disagree with you a bad name so they will seem less genuine" mindset, jandee.
Enlighten me as to the raaaacist element in my rant, Oh easily offended one.
Here's a joke for ya, American View:
What do you call a Conservative winning an argument with a liberal?
Come on jandee! You were gonna show the ol' Crunchy where he was writing racism! I am all kindsa pins & needles, awaiting your enlightenment with baited breath.
After which you can explain how the 2nd Amendment isn't about how the Right to Bare Arms Shall Not Be Infringed, and the privacy clause means it's OK to kill unborn babies.
There is little doubt that the words associated with Golliwog----------------
Golly,Golli,Wog,and Golliwog itself are used as racial slurs......
Two things, jandee:
A. I've never ever in my life heard "Golliwog" or any variation thereof, to be used as a racial slur. Nor am I now aware of which race it might apply to, based on your post. I guess I didn't grow up in as racist a home as I thought. Or... YOU thought.
B. I used the term "golly" in the same way I might have said gosh, shucks, well howdy or gee whiz. A statement of bewilderment, as might be expressed by someone who desired not to use profanity. NOT as a noun.
Is there a "nice" word you can teach me which describes someone who leaps to the worst assumption possible, in an effort to be offended, so they can claim victim status at all times, dear jandee?
The only ones that come to my mind, are ones I don't use in front of children.
I think its the Muslim women who don't have a right to bare their arms.
Wonder how she feels about the statements that come from the left. She needs to read my article on it
Clinging proudly to my Guns and Bible. Bitterly disputing every attempt to take either from me. OR from my Countrymen.
So, you watched that video, did ya?
I guess it depends on how someone takes it. Either it was meant as an insult or your cannot spell.
Hell, I was told I attacked someone for telling them to quit whining and was tossed for a week. So your guess is as good as mine LMC
How you like that? Insulted in a foreign language....
well, I never! Thurston, get me a drink!
Not a foreign language. A Tolkien reference.
Oh OK! I used one too...Frodo! was that the little Gremlin who stole the ring and was hoarding it for himself?
Frodo was the guy who inherited the ring, and who ultimately was responsible for its destruction. Frodo would be Capitalism: Stabbed, harried, forced to carry a burden, the destruction of which meant the salvation of the world. Socialism/Communism would be the Ring.
I might be Sam in this analogy. The simple, honest gardener cum bodyguard, who carried Frodo when he could not walk for himself. It was Sam dealt Shalob a near mortal wound, defending Frodo.
Shalob? You occasionally, accidentally, stumble into wit.
Nah..I think that analogy is all wrong. I think they were fighting greedy villians...and we all know greed is numero uno quality to possess for success in Capitalism.
I rather like the analogy that no one does it on their own...and when in trouble, there is help there for you.
And yet, ultimately, the entire fate of the future rested on ONE MAN'S shoulders. Frodo. The "fellowship" barely made it past the first book. Boromir tried to take what what not his, at sword point, so he could use it "for the good the people." Socialists always insist that what they're taking from you is done with only the best of intentions.
Individualism always wins the day.
How many people were on the committee that invented the Light-bulb? The steam engine? Champagne? The Printing Press? The myriad uses for Peanut oil? The theory of Relativity?
The Mind of Man is the single greatest source of prosperity in the known universe. Capitalism is the concept that what a man creates or generates off his own energies is HIS to keep, sell or give away, and NO ONE ELSE should have a say in it.
The profit motive, creating a better more prosperous life your yourself and those around you, has been the impetus for most every invention in the history of the world.
Greed is a singularly Socialist concept; you see what another man has made, and insist he GIVE it to you, because you could never have come up with it on your own.The entire socialist agenda is one of TAKING from those who produce and create, at gun point.
Capitalism is the constant encouragement of individuals to improve their lives, through their own energies. Wealth must be CREATED, before it can ever be "spread around." Socialism is about looting and steeling from the working man, with Government's aide & sanction.
Which is why it only works until you run out of other people's money.
Where do you get your ideas from?
Greed is a singularly capitalist concept, what's mine is mine and mine alone. Where in any idea of socialism does it say that "The entire socialist agenda is one of TAKING from those who produce and create, at gun point."
You are having a laugh, or getting socialism confused with capitalism which is founded on taking from those who create and produce.
And socialism is about looting and stealing from the working man! Er wrong again, that's capitalism for you.
So, what's mine is YOURS?
What I produce, with my own mind, on my own dime, with my own energy, is somehow NOT mine? And to say that it is, is greed?
Why then, should I or anyone, produce another damned thing?
There you go again, totally confused!
"What I produce, with my own mind, on my own dime, with my own energy, is somehow NOT mine? And to say that it is, is greed?"
So you work in a factory making biscuits, you get to keep every biscuit you make and don't have somebody taking those biscuits off you and paying you a fraction of what they are worth!
Boy oh boy.
HAHAHAHAH no he doesn't get it, what's the difference if most of your earnings are taken by the private sector or the public sector? except that if they are taken by the state some of them will go back to helping you and the rest will help those around you, on the other hand if they go to the private sector they go towards making a small group of people wealthier... The truth of the matter is very very few in a capitalist system get to keep what they make.
Did I spend the money to build the Factory? Did I spend the money to design and build the machine I run which manufactures the biscuits? Did I hire the trucking company which takes the biscuits to the market where YOU can buy them? Did I spend the money advertising the biscuits so people would look for them in the supermarket? Did I hire and pay for the sales team which went out to the supermarket to make sure the shelves had the right displays? Did I pay for the warehousing of those biscuits while they awaited shipping?
Did I pay all the taxes on every dime the factory generated: P&L, excise, shipping, labor, union and use? Did I pay for the background & health check to see if I was qualified to work with biscuits YOU were going to eat?
If so, then YES, *I* should get every damned dime that biscuit generates.
If NOT, then perhaps I should look at what my labor is actually worth to the evil rich people who DID and DO spend all that money, so I might have a job.
Feeling just the least bit stupid, yet?
Did you build the factory, did you design and build the machines, did you manufacture the biscuits, did you drive the trucks, did you design the advertisements, did you go out and actually sell the biscuits, did you warehouse the biscuits?
You didn't pay the taxes on every dime the factory generates, the workers did, did you pay for health checks, no, the workers did.
Are you feeling just a bit stupid yet?
So where is the theft? under socialism you would have helped build the factory with your taxes so you would be fully entitled to your share of the produce of it, so no one is asking for what is your, merely the portion that is theirs.
So, as the guy who pulls the handle that splorts the dough onto the machine that makes the biscuits... What portion should be mine, again?
Because John seems to feel I alone should be getting 100% of that Biscuit Product, if things are going to be fair.
And John? My employees don't pay those taxes, my customers do.
Or should I just give the biscuits away free, and everyone involved in their production and sales can go pound sand?
Josak? Name me ONE DAMNED THING the government makes or does for less money, time and efficiency than the Private sector.
The State is an absolute cesspit of corruption, graft, kick-backs and cronyism.
No, not 100%, but why is it fair that somebody who produces nothing should get 200 times what the actual wealth producers get?
Without the employees there would be no product to sell to your customers.
Although the question was addressed to Josak, let me answer it.
We had government operated public utilities in the UK which were sold off to private capital, since when prices have shot through the roof so far that many people now cannot afford to heat their homes. There are now many suppliers who make for great inefficiency for the consumer.
Your state that is a cesspit of corruption, graft, kick backs and cronyism is a capitalist state and reflects all that is bad about capitalism.
Excellent. I think we're winnowing it down to a point where we can decide where exactly the rubber meets the road.
"...is it fair that somebody who produces nothing should get 200 times what the actual wealth producers get?
Without the employees there would be no product to sell to your customers."
We'll look at your first point: Someone who produces nothing. John has a biscuit recipe, which is mad tasty. He gives some to a few friends, who INSIST he give them the recipe. Instead, he starts selling bags of biscuits to friends and family, and demand begins to grow. John see's an opportunity to create a bunch of money for himself, and jobs for hundreds of people, at the same time.
So, John borrows a modest amount of money from the bank on a personal loan, assuming all the risk if the the biscuits fail, rents a little space, buys an oven & all the ingredients, pays the Government to inspect & license his endeavor, hires an accountant and an attorney, makes hundreds of calls to businesses who might be interested in buying biscuits and eventually starts to making Biscuits.
Halleluiah! John's Biscuits are an overnight smash hit (after three straight years of 12 hour days and no weekends, that is). Suddenly, John's ability to meet demand by himself out of his little space is outstripped by the amount of biscuits he needs to make.
John has been making all the payments and meeting all the regulatory requirements for the past 3 years, and clearing a full 4% net profit over monthly costs. Which comes to about $1200.00 a month in real money, Which he has been using to eat with.
John takes another loan from the bank, this time against John Holden LLC, DBA John's Biscuits. He moves into a much larger facility and commences to hiring staff...
15 years later, John's Biscuits are selling all over the globe, his little Biscuit Empire employs 20,000 people on three continents, he has been to court an average of twice a year battling trade infringements and patent rights issues on the machine he invented to make biscuits faster and for less money, and John hasn't baked his own biscuits in 10 years.
John knows that well paid employees with stock options and excellent healthcare are loyal employees, so he takes great care of his people. John works diligently to expand his operations, so he can offer better jobs to more people, all over the world.
Oh, and John still makes just 4% net. Only, that figure has become 6,000,000 a month. He gives half that to Charity, invests quite a bit, and has opened a Foundation, which he mentors at himself, dedicated to helping other small entrepreneurs get started via loans and advice you just can't get at the bank.
Does John REALLY take too much out of his business, which should be going to the guy who pulls the handle to splort the dough??
This "hypothetical" is based on the real life of the man behind the Samuel Adam's brewery.
But much more typically, a man with no interest in biscuits pays another man to come up with a winning recipe, borrows some money off the people who will make his biscuits and pays them peanuts to do so. Meanwhile he grows fat off the biscuits whilst his workers get them selves up to their eyeballs in debt making biscuits for him to sell.
Answer the question, John. Is 4% net too much for the originator and proprietor to be making?
All you ever answer with are paranoid fantasies about what you fervently hope and pray are what REALLY AND FOR TRUE happens in the minds of people who generate wealth. The sincerest belief that all who read you should immediately buy in to your beliefs.
Sadly, the psychological underpinnings for that kind of attitude, are thus:
We tend to assume, as thinking beings, that most everyone else sees and reacts to the world much the same way we do, ourselves. Liars and Cheats tend to feel everyone is also a liar and a cheat (I hubbed on that, not a month ago), friendly people feel everyone else is friendly, etcetera etcetera.
Socialists, as I have pointed out repeatedly, are greedy. They want what they have not produced for themselves. They vote for politicians who promise to take it from the haves' and give it to the have-nots (the socialist dependent-class voters).
Consequently, Socialists assume EVERYONE is greedy, and the people with the most money are obviously the most greedy. Unless those rich people run for office on the Democrat/Socialist ticket; that automatically absolves a rich man from any taint of wrong doing. Because the JournOList won't let the Press tell you otherwise.
No, that's capitalists who want what they haven't produced themselves.
Socialists want a fair share of what they produce themselves.
You seem to really struggle to understand socialism, getting it mixed up with the worst of capitalism.
See the conservatives spend most of their time complaining about welfare and universal healthcare, they don't believe that a man deserves to get what he did not work for. What they don't understand is that so do Socialists, the party line for many socialist governments was "he who does not work neither shall he eat" a line from the bible in fact, see a socialist does not believe in unemployment benefits, he believes in a disability payment and a fair pension once a person retires but a socialist believes that EVERYONE should work under fair conditions and with decent pay and treatment, they also believe workers should have a say in how their workplace is run so that work is not the degrading and depressing thing that it is for most of the workforce, the only difference is the government guarantees that everyone will have a job if they want one, there will never be a spot left open, and everyone will have a job so socialists don't wan;t to have what others produce, they don't even want to set up a system where a person gets what he doesen't contribute to making they just want a system where everyone works and everyone gets a fair portion of what they produce without the owner of the business taking he vast majority, so no, greed is capitalist, socialists don't want your money, socialists want people to work and get a fair share of what they produce and the people who produce it get the benefit, not the leeches who put down money they got from wherever and call that work because that adds nothing to society and steals from those who need.
The ignorance displayed in this thread about what socialism is disturbing, the fact of the matter is they don't know what socialism is or what it's aims are or they would not talk such poppycock.
Also if you had told Hitler he was a socialist he would have had you in a prison camp the next day.
Socialism is too bureaucratic for my taste, no matter what the flavor. People are tossing "Capitalism" around as if it were a political system and it isn't. That is a throwback to, and a hangover from clumsy communist propaganda from as far back the fifties. Talk about emotion verses fact. The system failed, because it was built and perpetuated on Black Cow.
The world financial system is what you are referring to as "Capitalism". That is only one aspect of the concept of capitalism. Capitalism is selling at a profit and it takes many forms. A political system can allow capitalism, but it can not be capitalism. America dominates in capitalism, so you want to zero in on us as originators and perpetrators. We didn't invent it. Our system of individual freedoms has allowed our unprecedented success to happen.
There are more billionaires in Moscow than New York City. Why? The socialist bureaucrats controlled all of the wealth, and when the wall came down they said, "Do you see all of this gold I was in charge of? It's mine now!"
If the system is based on equitable distribution, then why is everyone else broke?
This rhetoric is from a bygone era when people could be idealistic about something that hasn't been tried. If you really want to improve the human condition, then come up with something better.
Moreover: How can you, the benevolent Socialist, "share" what is mine before first TAKING IT from me?
Socialism TAKES what Capitalism makes. Socialist Governments use force or threat of force to make their workers comply.
No business in the world can Tax, Levy, Lien or in any other way FORCE me to give it my money, my energy or my intellect, yet Governments d that all the time. Socialist Governments do it more than any other.
Thanks for the good laugh. Frodo capitalism! No, if he were a capitalist he would have either kept the ring for himself or sold it on to the highest bidder and Sam would only have saved him if the price was right.
I loathe communism but the day that the US wipes out every possible alternative to its own brand of capitalism is the the day to get off the planet.
We will throw a party like never before, on that day.
You 'aving a laarf ! They will deal and wheel anywhere ,anytime if there's a profit for them !'Um, 'scuse me comrade China !Get it? If Brit or France had the wealth of Iran ,well we would well be on the list from the wonderful U.S
there are many attractive women in Cuba, but I found that the ones in Las Vegas are more liberal in their sexual attitudes...
so score one for vacationing in the USA!
With respect to Guantanamo, the "treaty" was established by force and the US has no moral rights to keep occupying the territory of another nation in this way. However, the US is morally bankrupt in many other ways, so the fact it continues its illegal occupation does not surprise me.
Incidentally, in additon to my trips to Cuba, I have visited Washington DC, Arlington, Baltimore and New Orleans several times. I do admit New Orleans was fun, but it was interesting that a US couple I met and spoke with on a river boat trip there took great pains to assure me New Orleans was totally different to the rest of the USA.
Were I to be condemned to leave Wales, the beautiful country that adopted me, and told I had to choose life in the US or life in Cuba, I would have no hesitation in choosing Cuba in preference to the US. I find the Cuban people wonderful in how inventive they have become to get round potential problems caused by the embargo. Funnily enough, despite the way some people bang on about political repression, I find Cubans refreshingly free of the dismal political correctness that is so pervasive in much of US society. The deciding factor, of course, would be the fact that in Cuba I would be assured of social support were I to need it. I would not have to fear about medical fees, for example. Incidentally, while it is not so easy to find an aspirin for a minor niggle in Cuba, people who need advanced medical care are assured it. If they have to be flown into Havana to obtain it, a companion is offered accomodation and other living costs free as long as necessary.
You see, despite what you may believe, a significant proportion of the world's population does NOT look up to the example of the US and does its best to avoid falling into the same traps as the US.
My Cuban friends are shining examples of what Cuba offers to the rest of the world. They are both doctors, and also engaged in scientific research, which is how I met them originally. They could earn many times as much being doorkeepers in hotels for foreign tourists in Varadero, but they choose to remain in their profession. What is more, they gave up two years of their lives to give medical provision in an isolated region in Ethiopia, and another two years to teach medical students in the Gambia. Currently, they have volunteered for a further posting elsewhere. This does not gain them huge advantages back home; at most they get a week's free stay in a fancy tourist hotel in Santiago de Cuba. They volunteer, because like the Cuban government, they feel it is something that is important, in a world where so many people lack basic health provision.
Concerning health, independent statistics show that perinatal mortality in Cuba is lower than in the US. I believe that the literacy rate in Cuba is overtaking that of the US.
I don't know much about Cuba personally but my girlfriend is Cuban-American. Her family's culture is rooted in hatred of the Cuban regime and how grateful they are for the liberties they have in America. She can never draw out any cash when she goes to meet her extended family there because they'll steal it. The "American" side of the family are swimming in wealth in comparison. My basic hypothesis is: people don't run from a happy and fulfilling life.
Which is funny because many people left the US to Cuba during the cold war (one of them actually being Harvey Lee Oswald who wanted to emigrate to Cuba but was not allowed by the government this is apparently one of the main reasons he killed Kennedy)
Now lets examine the immigration side of this #1 many many of the people who fled Cuba were wither government cooperators (who would never admit that they were since that government killed hundreds of thousands of it's own people) #2 Very wealthy and wanted to get out most of their wealth before it was redistributed (inevitably the hate the government for taking what they left behind) #3 Are people who leave Cuba for the most basic reason, the same reason people come here from Mexico, because the US is a wealthier country and it's close so while Cuba's economy is still growing it is not equal to that of the US so many will leave to get to a stronger economy, it's simple.
Do you not think that the Cuban government killing its own people might have something to do with the mass emigration, and the promise of government favours might have something to do with immigration? And the rest is just expounding on my point, nothing really funny about it. People don't want as much of their property to be stolen and want to make more money, so they go to a freer country. It's also interesting to note that the 'growing' Cuban economy has not grown at all since the Cold War.
There is not mass emigration as such. My own perceptions when talking to Cubans were that most people in Cuba are conscious of how the situation has developed and back their government.
As for governments letting criminals go free, the Cuban government took a genius step and let its criminals go to the US, where they have been welcomed with open arms rather than being jailed. Not surprising really, since Mafia rule has been the norm in the US for a long time.
They back their government killing people? Well gee.
The Cuban government executed 3200 people in two years after the revolution, these were cooperators of the dictatorships, men who ordered the deaths of civilians before the revolution, torturers and people who violently rose up against the revolution after it's success who killed civilians (i.e murderers). Since then people were executed under capital punishment only for crimes such as murder and rape (just like in the US) no one has been executed in 8 years and currently no one sits on death row, I would hardly call that fleeing from government killings unless you were guilty of mass murder or accessory to it . As for the economy:
Due to the continued growth of tourism, growth began 1999 with a 6.2% increase in GDP. Growth in recent years has picked up significantly, with a growth in GDP of 11.8% in 2005. In 2007 the Cuban economy grew by 7.5%, below the expected 10%, but higher than the Latin American average rate of growth. Accordingly, the cumulative growth in GDP since 2004 stood at 42.5 %.
This is all despite the US embargo, the only time the Cuban economy has declined was in the "special period" after the collapse of the USSR when Cuba lost it's primary trading partner as well as several billion dollars it had loaned to the USSR.
Oh is that all? Just 3200? Silly me.
GDP is a classically poor way of judging economic growth as it includes government spending and various other things. Its inventor even said that governments should not use it as such. Just ask your average single mother what the economy is like and then you'll have a better judgment. Cuba still remains the 178th economically free country in the world and that can not be good for businesses nor individuals.
You can argue all you like but you have to accept that for some reason Cubans just don't like Cuba that much. But to put it in comparison to the United States is only as fair in that the US is economically free in comparison (but far far far too tyrannical for any reasonable human) but just as tyrannical socially. But if you disagree you could always move to Cuba!
I lived in Cuba for 6 years, I moved to the US because guess what, the Freedom loving US would't let my family of US citizens move there and I did not want to be separated from them any longer. Cuba has executed 3 people in the last 10 years, in 2010 the US executed 44, to save me the effort of looking up every year I am just going to times that by ten and get 440 in the last decade... So let's do the math
population of Cuba 11.5 million
population of USA 311 million
11.5 goes into 311 pretty much exactly 27 times
27 X 3 = 81
So look at that, unless 2010 was a record year for executions in the USA Cuba executes about 5.5 times fewer people than the USA per capita so if people left Cuba worried about being executed they should play the numbers and go right back
As for the economy you will note if you bother to look it up that it's growth is much faster than it was before the revolution.
Frankly anyone who argues that Cuba was better off before socialism is very very ignorant, either from the perspectives of the freedom they have and especially from their wealth, not to mention social benefits (literacy rate has tripled or quadrupled etc.) But the improvement from such dire straits as Cuba was in before cannot happen overnight, on the other hand there is America not too far away with a much stronger economy, who can be blamed for leaving?
You say GDP per person is not a reliable method of measuring economic growth well then tell me what is and I will use that, if you like I know several mothers (some single) who I can call and ask what they think is going on but I already know what they will say.
Well I'm glad you enjoyed it there. I can't account for why so many Cubans left and are still leaving, but it can't just be because they are idiots . . . or rich people.
It says right there why, because the US for the time being has a stronger economy, it really is no mystery. Also please tell me how to measure this economy for you.
Jobs created? last year per capita Cuba produced twice the quantity of jobs than the US.
Okay great . . . I'm not really sure where we are going here.
I measure how good an economy is by quality of life, advances in technology etc. Jobs and GDP are a means to an end. What good is an economy if it is not producing what the consumers want?
The self-employed people and others that I mixed with in Cuba last year were very pleased with their life. I heard choirs singing in the streets,in churches,all different mixes of religion. We joined in with groups who loaned us their guitars.I even put some splurges on an artists work.
I didn't see anybody with fancy handbags or shoes but that's normal in the student area I live in anyway.
There was also a Czech student in my class who's first question about me was what I thought about communism. I basically had no opinion at the time, but he told me that his Grandfather was murdered by the communists because he didn't want to give up his farmland to the state, and it is from this this guy's stance on politics was born.
I cite these examples because I believe personal experience is a much better barometer for truth than theorising intellectual concepts and what-not. The fact is that everyone I have met who has been personally associated with communism and socialism has had a bad experience with it.
P.S. psst. . .Socialism and Communism are deeply flawed on a theoretical level too!
No, on a theoretical level they make perfect sense. The bought politicians who purport to be socialists are deeply flawed.
You mean like Tony Blair, that Thatcherite socialist?
"Then, after a time, when these people, being reduced to the
last extreme of misery, cried out that they and their children were dying of hunger, the System grudgingly unlocked the doors of the great warehouses, and taking out a small part of the things that were stored within, distributed it amongst the famished workers, at the same time reminding them that it was Charity, because all the things in the warehouses, although they had been made by the workers, were now the property of the people who do nothing.
And then the starving, bootless, ragged, stupid wretches fell down and worshipped the System, and offered up their children as living sacrifices upon its altars, saying:
`This beautiful System is the only one possible, and the best that human wisdom can devise. May the System
live for ever! Cursed be those who seek to destroy the System!'"
I've yet to read a more eloquent description of the Socialist Mentality, John.
Under Capitalism, the workers get to keep a far larger portion of what they earn with labor and creativity. Lower Taxes are kind of a Republican Conservative Capitalist thing.
Socialism TELLS you that it's taking from you so it can distribute the wealth, but the Ruling Class, say the Russian Politburo or any Communist country's Elite, always seem to be the ones with the loot, and there is NO middle class.
I know you desperately want Capitalism to be filled the Takers, John. But you keep using examples of Socialist/Communist history (or future fiction, in this case) and saying they are Capitalism's sins.
Capitalism is the wealth creating engine of the World, and Socialists seek to confiscate that wealth at every opportunity. Socialism has come to America in the form of Unionism and Crony Capitalism.
YOU think that because Capitalism allows people to fail, it must be greedy. Capitalism creates an environment where it is FAR easier to succeed, which is what brought America to the status of World Power in less time than any nation has ever done it, in the history of mankind.
Jesus Himself said "you will always have poor among you." There are people who are going to be poor, no matter what you do for them.
Conservatives, the political water carriers for Capitalism, are the most generous donators to charitable works in America, and I feel confident saying "in the world." By a large margin, especially when compared to out Liberal friends and neighbors. Arthur C. Brooks, a professor at Syracuse University, published "Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism." The surprise is that liberals are markedly less charitable than conservatives.
Poverty is most often a lack of opportunity. Capitalism allows for, creates and overtly encourages, opportunity.
You were going to tell me the number of people on those committees, again?
You so dismally fail to understand socialism that I'm not sure I can be bothered to reply to your canard.
Capitalism is the wealth creating engine of the few and it does this by stealing the wealth off the producers.
Where in socialism does it say that socialism confiscates that wealth at every opportunity? Again,you are attributing capitalist mores to socialism.
You can "share" wealth that hasn't been created? Spread Around wealth that you somehow leave in my pocket, simultaneously?
Neat trick, that.
Before it can give, Socialism must necessarily Take. Creating dependent slaves to the State, and indentured servants (slaves) of those who still work.
You see people who have more wealth than you, and demand the State give some of it TO you, despite your having never earned it. THAT, dear friend, is the very definition of Greed.
When have I ever demanded anything that I have not earned?
Sorry, again that is a capitalist trait. As is slavery, that's another capitalist trait.
By taxing you are asking for property that is not yours.
You still havn't moved to Somalia huh? No taxation there and guess what? It's the poorest country in the world.
Actually the Islamist factions that run it steal from the population all the time, just like a government. A government is just a Mafia with the illusion of democracy for everyone. At least when Libertarians cite the Soviet Union and Maoist China as red failures, they do operate under the principles of Communism/Socialism. When people mention Somalia as an example of Anarchism they are just lying.
So the state is being run by a mafia? and why would that be? What combats a mafia? But seriously then give me an example of a functioning Anarchist nation (don't say small sections of pre civil war Spain because they hardly existed) and as for Christiania (which you may not be aware of) I have visited it, I staid there a few days, it's incredibly poor and the whole economy runs on drugs.
There are no functioning Anarchist nations, but since everything we enjoy about what we do in life comes from the fact that we are free to do it, why not extend that? We enjoy going to the store of our choice, buying our choice of milk, trusting the store owner that he will give it to us when we pay him and him trusting us that we will pay him when he gives it to us. But when we ask that we would like to be able to buy ANY kind of milk that the shop owner can make, including raw milk . . . SWAT TEAMS - REGULATION - INSPECTIONS. Why is all of that necessary when we were doing so well enjoying our freedom together buying our milk? All of the previous steps were undertaken without the need for regulation and swat teams, so why should we accept them with the rest? Let's take freedom to its fullest extent!
Funny then that the US has one of the worst wealth distributions and the USSR, Cuba, and Communist China had a far better wealth distribution according to GINI index, sorry but if the worker gets so much more under a capitalist system and the middle class is so much larger how come socialist or communist states have a more equal wealth distribution.
For example Cuba has a Gini index of 25 or slightly more (the lower the index the more equal the distribution) the US is at nearly 50 and rising.
That's the rub. You can have as much as everyone else but everyone will then be poor!
I prefer a country where everyone has a modest home, electricity, food and fresh water to a country where some have Palaces and mansions while the majority starve, I would suggest that believing the opposite is deeply morally bankrupt, but of course if you do believe so it comes from someone with no knowledge of what it is to be poor so I can't really blame you.
That's a false dichotomy. How about we try and come up with a system in which everyone can be prosperous in their own way, which doesn't involve violence?
So tell me what it is? Anarchy... Like Somalia? Where since there is no police violence is constant and which is the poorest country in the world? Don't get me wrong I like the idea, I am not seeing the reality.
Well let's do a thought experiment where we imagine we've settled on a new planet and trying to make a community. When we come to questions, like 'how will we stop murderers?', we don't say that the system doesn't work just because someone has asked a question, we try and work without violence to the very end we we simply have to (the rare instances where there are crazy murderers running around with no chance of stopping them). We could get together and put some of our money into a pot and give it to people to protect us and call it whatever we like: the police force, the watch-men, it doesn't matter. Then the rules are defined by ourselves without bureaucrats and put into a contract or a DRO (Dispute Resolution Order) which lays out what happens when there is a dispute. The WRONG solution is for the Watchmen to come to us, point a gun at our heads and demand money so that we can be protected. That is what the government does.
So say someone steals your car, who gets it back? This stuff happens all the time so I guess every day we will need to be putting money into this pot to track down these individuals, now will they be professional police or will they be bounty hunters or some such, either which way eventually certain people will take to policing because they have the skill or the willingness to do so, and eventually this force will get quite big say that one day they get together and realize well we can charge whatever we want for this and kill anyone who attempts to undercut us what do the people in our thought experiment do then? presumably they will employ other people, but these will be marked for death or beatings by this union of "lawmen" and soon no one will be willing to do it, so they will pay unreasonable rates and then the "union" will accumulate a lot of money and one day they will say well we have a lot of money and a lot of good guns, how about we employ some people to help us and declare that everyone needs to pay us a constant amount of money or else we will go round and burn down their house etc. Then what do the people do? if they rebel many die and violence ensues if they submit then we are right back where we are today except under a government on which we can inflict no change. How do we solve this?
Anarchist conditions existed in pre communist China for a brief time but then Warlords started sprouting up everywhere and expanding and eventually all free communities were crushed, why? because they had no standing army and professional soldiers and since they had neither they could not protect themselves.
You've described perfectly what the government is at the moment, so let's talk about what we should do now. We should all at once stop paying taxes. As soon as the source of their income has disappeared they have no power. Without promise of payment, nobody will work for the government. The thing is, government has the good sense to cool off on the threats of violence so that the people have the illusion of being free. That way, business makes a lot of money and generates revenue for the state. Then the state can gradually and incrementally increase its power and hold over the people, and before you know it we are in a police state (look around).
The key is to truly hold to the principle of non-violence! We do not at any point give in to the mafia. We can even hold regulation in our DROs which restricts the power of the police force, kind of like the Constitution, except it is an actual binding contract and we can withdraw our side of the bargain if we're not getting what we asked for. We have to stick with government for 4 years no matter what they do. Obama is not even American, let alone the many impeachable offenses he has committed whilst he has been in office, to no reply.
But without some form of government who enforces that contract?
Oh, and I'd like to remind you that unlike Obama, you aren't American.
Who enforces the contract when you go to buy some milk? Every action taken in that transaction is free and based on trust. There is no incentive for either of you to break that contract.
I happen to be talking to people who are American so I thought it better to make it more personal so it hits home. Cameron, in turn, promised a referendum on the EU and then didn't give it to us. That means we have every right to stop paying taxes because he didn't pull through on his side of the bargain.
There is a world of difference between popping down to the shop and building a major road or policing a country.
I was going to warn you of the dangers of commenting on anything American but then I thought that's probably only a danger to left wingers - you on the radical right will probably be safe enough.
"How about we try and come up with a system in which everyone can be prosperous in their own way, which doesn't involve violence?"
We already have it, though. We call it Capitalism.
Actually taxation is violence, I believe justified violence, see you as a capitalist believe in giving the state monopoly of force (military and police) and that force is used for taxation therefore justifiable violence. Unfortunately you know none of this because I have seen potatoes that are better read and you have no idea what you are supporting.
Actually taxation is violence, I believe justified violence, see you as a capitalist believe in giving the state monopoly of force (military and police) and that force is used for taxation therefore justifiable violence. Unfortunately you know none of this because I have seen potatoes that are better read and you have no idea what you are supporting.
So you oppose socialism because it creates a tyranny of the state yet you have no knowledge of the power you give to the state in the system you propose... see why it's impossible to take your arguments seriously?
Tell us please, O guru of governments, HOW does Free Market Capitalism and Small Government Conservatism add up to more power for the State?
THIS I gotta hear.
Did I say that anywhere in my comment... no, we all know that socialism is a system that gives power to the state, it's in the basic definition, the difference is whether you consider this a good or bad thing but the reality is this what I said in my comment still stands you don't know the terms and you don't understand the principles of force violence and force in potentia these things are the center of this debate, you need to know them, you don't, this is sad you should go read, even conservative texts will teach you this stuff, try "Civil Disobedience" by Thoreau.
No Josak, state socialism gives power to the state but that is only one form of socialism. I much prefer the socialism that gives power to the people.
Well Capitalism can exist with the state or without it. I would call myself a Capitalist, but I don't believe we need the state to protect it.
No, we need the state to protect us from capitalism.
Most state capitalists believe it is the other way around so that was where I was coming from. I don't think the state can or does protect us from anything.
It doesn't take two seconds to do some research and find out Obama is a liar and has violated the constitution, being "far right" has nothing to do with it. There is no left and right anymore, only statists and libertarians.
In order to argue for a system you have to provide evidence that it does what it claims to do. The state does not protect us from unsafe food (it in fact makes the food unsafe), it does not protect us from criminal acts (the state is the biggest cause of criminal activity) and it certainly does not protect us from invasion by foreign powers (the UK is run domestically by the EU and by the US on foreign policy, you tell me where the British has sovereignty).
Aye, and it doesn't take two seconds to find out that Obama was born in Kenya and is a Muslim. Shame the powers that allowed him to be elected didn't know that!
How does the state make food unsafe?
How is the state the biggest cause of criminal activity?
The UK is not run by the EU though I'm inclined to agree with you on foreign policy.
I still hold a British passport, pay my taxes to Britain and every thing else. Where are these foreign powers that rule us?
Of course they knew that. Not that it really matters - his face, this mild-mannered 'gentleman' with the message of hope and change was what was necessary to implement this agenda, so they'll put anything in the media and forge any document they like. It's not difficult when you give somebody the power to steal from you.
British people pay taxes to our MPs who legislate about 20% of what is to be legislated for in the UK. We elect MEPs to 'debate' in Europe, and then a group of around 20 unelected beuarocrats decide what should happen in our country.
The EU then legislates to the teeth, subsidises Monsanto-like corporations to poison our foods with GMOs, pesticides, aspartame and thousands of other un-godly chemicals; they ban the growing of your own medicinal herbs, strangle trade in every single sector you can think (why do you think Greece is going down the tubes?). The EU fires Presidents and Prime Ministers at will and installs their own henchmen (Mario Monti, the 'saviour' of Italy), and through their single currency destroy economies.
Public housing areas are breeding ground for criminals - who have no incentive to be productive members of society because the Bank of England manufactured economic collapse has destroyed industry and jobs. They receive no education from state schooling. They are victimised by the state-run media. The police force do nothing to stop the crime and do everything to 'meet quotas' - missing vast crimes within its own institution, social services, schools . . .
Do you want me to go on? You can argue whether or not all of those things should be government jobs, but you can not argue that they are doing a GOOD job.
We don't pay taxes to our MPs.
And as for public housing areas breeding criminals, I'm not going to say any more, I don't fancy another suspension at the moment and if I told you what I thought of that comment one would almost surely follow.
unfurtuantely here you crossed the line between debate and ignorance, you have NO concept of what poverty is or what it's like, you have no understandi g of what povert does to an individual, you have no knowledge of the horrors faced by the homeless nighlty yet you dare to critisize public housing, you have no idea what it's like to not know how to read or write or do simple arithmentic yet you critisize public schooling, you went off the deep end and what you have said is #1 baseless #2 ignorant #3 very deeply offensive to thos who do know what they are talking about in respect to these matters, you have lived (I bet my bottow dollar) a sheltered and relatively comfortable life and you think you have any foundation to critisize programms for helping the most unfurtunate amongst us. Your comment fills me (as evidently it does John) with disgust and it should fill you with shame.
Do you know what it's like to be homeless, the cold, the constant fear and sleep deprivation, the regular beatings, the kids whose idea of a great time is to set the homeless on fire after dousing them in petrol (don't believe me? look up some of the hundreds of vids of it online) the desperate acts that this condition inevitably leads to? Who do you think is more likely to commit a crime, the guy who has a safe roof over his head and thus the means to get a job etc or a man who is living out of a box and is as such all but unemployable? Your arguments require more empathy, logic and experience.
True. But we need the state to protect the citizens against the capitalists.
Keep going, Inner. I enjoy your outlook on England, and I'm learning quite a bit.
My goodness me. Everything I have said is demonstrable, but as with all statists, at some point they have to stop debating facts because they don't have the factual argument, and HAVE to resort to the moral argument, which they fail at too. Decide which angle you're going for and then we can have a debate.
False dichotomies, all of it. It's either public housing or poverty. Public schooling or illiteracy. Endless war or terrorism. You know, there are other options. I'm not going to be peer pressured into changing my opinion by a bunch of demagogues.
Well you see that's entirely your fault, you say there are other options but you fail to demonstrate them, there are currently millions of people in the UK in public housing, take it away and they are on the street what is your mythical solution.
Also please stop throwing around the word demagogue you don't know how to use it nor do you know it's history, indeed in it's traditional use it's a compliment.
Also please demonstrate your demonstrable facts.
I'm sure we'd all love it if you actually started arguing facts rather than right wing cant.
Leave the 'Dolts' in their Chains. They deserve them!
Is that the same capitalism that believes greed is good? That causes famines? Wars without a cause? The deaths of children? Slavery? Child soldiers? You're deluded.
It's called prison and when we the 99% are all in them then the minorities who have the wealth will be overjoyed and wont require the use of violence-then they can drink and drug themselves to their own greedy deaths,and also drive themselves to suicide by reading their own mindless 'rags'
Murdoch down, just the daily mail, express and telegraph to go!
Can't wait!! Goodbye Murdoch .'. Tarnisher of Liverpool'
Yep, you and me both, Jandee. He's scum.
But he's capitalist scum so he must be all right!
Now you are just being ridiculous. On the upside . . . the statement was short.
He's corporatist scum, not Capitalist. So is George Soros, the 'liberal' side of that coin.
Wealth is not a pie to share equally. Our task is to create as many pies as possible so that everybody can have as much as they want.
Where have you been living? The biggest share of the pie always gravitates to the same place. If you haven't noticed, then you are either uneducated, naive or wilful ignorance has prevented you from noticing that you "are eating all the pies."
This is very easy.....those with the most capital will then control the "small government" state.
In the case of the United States, the profit motive did not create safer trains or rail travel. It was the hand of regulation exercised through the voice of the discontented, maimed, and killed who stirred enough attention for the federal government to act. What did "free market capitalism" do for travel fares before regulation was enacted?
The "drive for the dollar", or physical wealth in general, should not be the drive for producing a good, or for performing a service.
And yet, it is, Mike. All wishful thinking to the contrary.
You are correct that Political Power is courted most effectively by money, but to say it's the way Capitalism cedes more power to the State, holds no water. Rich Socialists (George Souros, Al Gore, Bill Clinton, John F-ing Kerry, virtually all of Hollywood) do everything they can to control our ever more socialist American government. They own the Democrat Party, whole.
The bulk of Republican donations are under $100.00 Little guys like ol Crunchy, helping out as we can. We also tend to be Charity minded, Christian, and given to fighting for the rights & freedoms of people all over the world.
Small businesses are still the #1 employer in America, and small businesses HATE Big Government.
And will you people PLEASE stop confusing Socialist Crony Capitalism, where Obama forced through the half billion dollar loans for Solyndra, which everyone KNEW was going to go Bankrupt, because the CEO was a HUGH Obama campaign bundler, for instance, with Free Market Capitalism?
Socialist Crony Capitalism is where the State attempts to pick the winners and losers, by subsidizing the people who suck up, and penalizing via taxes, regulations and other forms of harassment, the people who FAIL to suck up.
The Free Market allows people to succeed, regardless of their political affiliations, if they make a better mouse trap.
Competition breads higher quality and lower prices.
Socialism erases competition, by making everyone equally miserable. Everyone Loses under Socialism, eventually.
Your harp on Obama and Solyndra are nothing but partisan smoke and mirrors.
"Socialist America", as you see it evolving (somehow) is another myth.
Boogedy Boogedy Al Gore?
Somehow that doesn't send chills down many spines...
This forum topic is a criticism of Cuba...but really what it shows is display of how little many people know of the Coban-American melodrama.
I wonder what Cuba would have become had the United States kept its original bargain...to stay out of an internal conflict between Spain and one of its colonies.
Some people point to Spanish and then U.S. controlled Cuba (before Castro) and see "success".... But, even after Cuba became "independent" from Spain (free from "imperialism"/foreign control), Spaniards controlled up to half of productive land, with Americans holding up to half of the rest. This is all well documented, but you can read "Cuba Under the Platt Amendment" and go from there.
Freedom is not free.....especially for the Cuban people under Spanish and American control. Yet, for those with access to capital (which we all know is not "free"), they were free to do whatever they wanted ("the American playpen").
For a tiny island nation with a population a microscopic percentage of the U.S., and all "Western" nations (It's amazing how that term is monopolized without regard for reality) is able to find success, and outlast the subjugation that superpowers have placed upon it.
Americans grow up spoiled because their nation is large, strong, and unified (or so it would appear). For those who are born and raised here, there is definitely a disconnect that exists when it comes to discussing "self-determination" and "liberty". I wonder how many would change their minds if they were, instead, the Cubans; Not the European/Americans who migrated to Cuba to take advantage of the cheap labor and maleable-weak government they installed for their own benefit, mind you, but those who were taken against their will or coerced and their descendents.
Here is what the San Francisco Chronicle had to say about the "smoke and mirrors" Solyndra debacle:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c … 1KUV3L.DTL
If you don't see an ever expanding Public Sector, earning wages far and away greater than their Private Sector counterparts as Creeping Socialism, you're blind as a bat.
Why don't you delve into reality....
Compare Enron and their "conservative" connections...all the way to the Bush family and the White House, and then look at Solyndra...
It is so ridiculous how many "free marketers/small government" minds wrap themselves up in crony-politics and economics.
And then they try to forget, and try to get everyone else to forget, what they are really up to.
Mike? Take your smoke and your mirrors elsewhere, because truth-shading doesn't cut it.
You want Enron's Reality? Let's ask the New York Times. Or are they too right wing for your tastes?
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/21/us/en … amp;src=pm
Where are the Republican ties to the boondoggle we all know as Solyndra? Nowhere to be found. Obama and his cronies own that, free and clear.
I live in Florida, you can't throw a rock without hitting a Cuban. They are great people, and they know how to eat. I hope we start normalizing trade. That might loosen up the old school hardliners on the Island. The tourist trade can help their situation.
We talk like the cold war is over and do business with China like they don't have a totalitarian regime. Why not cut our neighbors a break. We can work it out.
By the way. I heard Obama stand before a summit meeting of middle eastern nations and declare himself to be a Christian. A Muslim would not do that. When he explained his attitude and position, he got a standing ovation. I am an Independent and am not swayed by political propaganda based on a slip of the tongue.
So what if a president is Islamic? It is admissible within the framework of the Constitution. It is hard to explain to some foreigners.
That one puzzles me too.
I think it would do the US good to have a none Christian president.
Dare to dream my friend! The American people are not tolerant enough of such a person. Whichever candidate came out as an atheist, or simply a non-christian, would be destroyed, even if their opponent was Rick Santorum!
"Another co-author, the University of British Columbia’s Ara Norenzayan, said one of the reasons for doing the study was a recent poll that found that only 45 percent of Americans who responded would vote for an atheist presidential candidate. Those who were polled said atheists least represented their vision of America." http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2011 … new-study/
Very depressing, considering alleged Christians have been in charge for a long time, and look at where we are.
Good like little girls legally being mutilated, John?
PASS, thank you.
No--like little girls growing up free to control their own lives...not have it overseen by the church/state.
What on earth are you babbling on about now?
Like I said. It is hard to explain to some foreigners. How are things between you and Argentina? I heard they found oil off the Falklands. It would take someone from BP to be arrogant and ignorant enough to drill there.
What? Do you mean BP will be arrogant and ignorant enough to drill off the horn? I don't doubt it. They are beyond clueless. I bet Argentina will be ready for you this time.
Oh yes, but I must add that BP isn't wholly British owned any more
Don't tell me the Saudis, Japanese, Chinese, Bulgarian or Lithuanian interests found their way in through the stock markets (the biggest pyramid scheme ever devised)?
Back to the real point? Cubans are cool. We can all learn a lot from them. Even little hovels are decorated with ornamental stone work or concrete. They are vibrant and accepting. They are clever and resourceful. They excel here. Race is not a huge issue with the average Cuban. The races have mixed to good effect there. I want to be friends, again.
We can all do better. We shouldn't settle for things the way they are.
Actually mostly Americans!
I've never been to Cuba but I know people who have and they've sang its praises - and not left wing loonies either!
Unfortunately the few are quite happy with the way things are and with their band of supporters, that's the way they'll stay for some time.
I have no doubt that Cubans are indeed, cool. There music alone speaks volumes to that point.
Communism, and the wretched circumstances it forces Cubans to live under, are what I am trying to address. Imagine what an economic powerhouse Cuba could be, were she free of the shackles of her socialist masters, and allowed to prosper.
Oh come on, it's the US that stops Cuba from prospering.
We are one country among hundreds, John.
Either we suck, and the world would be better off without us, or we are the single most important buying public in existence, and Cuba cannot prosper without American commerce.
PICK ONE, and then try to stick with it.
COMMUNISM stops Cuba from prospering. Like it does every nation who adopts it. Modern Socialism is just the polite door-man for Communist Dictatorship.
Alright, I see what you are saying. The fact is . . . communism never works. People are too greedy. In modern times, the revolution has only served to change regimes. The system has never been able to move beyond the totalitarian phase, and the "party' has always become a small elite faction. Case in point . . . there are more billionaires in Moscow than New York city. The gold, oil, and money was not equally distributed according to doctrine.
I am afraid this doctrinal delineation was taken by the early Church as well. At first, everyone was giving all to everyone. A few weeks later, the game changed.
Don't kid yourself, Cuba knows the drill. All they want is a little dignity and respect. We all need the same thing. Why is it so hard to come by?
I hear what you are saying. The revolution never makes it past the totalitarian stage. There are more billionaires in Moscow than New York. The "Party" becomes a small elite. Rather than distributing equally according to doctrine, the elite take it all. If you squawk, they have something for you.
The early church was distracted by a similar doctrinal delineation. At first, folks were giving all to everyone. A few weeks later, the game changed.
All the Cubans want is to maintain some dignity and respect. Why is that so hard to give? If we reach out, they will be glad to take our hand.
http://cubasurf.ca/cubasurf/surf-inform … ng-in-cuba
I have been reading these posts. Why is everyone so hung up on politics and theory of government? It is a joke. Government is irrelevant to the relationships between people. We should simply boycott every government until they get in line behind us. Everyone has an agenda except those who are busy living.
Cuba is on the ropes, and all of this rhetoric is a drag. Go see Cuba for yourself! Then we'll talk.
http://www.insightcuba.com/?siteID=Cali … QAodNh9RZw
Lived there six years, and i had family there way back before the revolution so I am back, what are you going to tell me?
What a great and interesting world this would be if we didn't have to give support to the victims of oppression in this world. I would be so happy if It wasn't 'asked of me' to go on peace marches and union stuff,if I didn't have to worry about Palestine being viciously bombed and attacked at every turn,where cancer sufferers can not have medical treatment as the Israel road blocks are preventing medical aid .Yes if I didn't have to think of these refugees under occupation and waiting for their moral right which is a free Palestine + justice+dignity,
well then if we could see a few of these things becoming to be ! Well then!
I could relax with my dog training ,painting.(harmonica) and blah,blah.
So! maybe this is why poeple are 'hung up' on politics ! Why they don't think this 'rhetoric is a drag' and why doing nothing is selfish and lazy and a million other 'doltish' things------Been to Cuba and they won't let me live there-work to do here???
jandee - I play harmonica like you would not believe. I could come to London and play with any band that doesn't have one. It ain't a hobby. I'm not talking about doing nothing. Hello? I am suggesting we reach out to Cubans and lift the embargo. If you wait for government or drive by quippers on HubPages, you are stuck in Black Cow,
As far as Palestine is concerned. Israel is Palestine. Ask any Roman Centurion. There is no such thing as a Palestinian people group. That is a hoax perpetuated by Arafat. What we call Palestinians are disenfranchised Arabs who wandered into a no man's land. Ancient prophecy is coming true. Israel was scattered. Now they are being brought back to where they belong. The desert blooms and the "fig tree is budding". What do you know? Spring is here! Before history is over, Israel will return to her pre-dispersion borders, forget 1968. Read up!
I feel for the people, but why don't their Arab brothers provide them some space and aid for a homeland? Why can't they join with them in something besides the maniacal destruction of Zion?
We are talking Cubans. They are sweet people. The Palestinians are not, except for the children, they are narrow-minded bigoted murderers of innocent people. Nothing justifies their constant killing of civilians. Why don't you just invite them to immigrate to England and feed them mushy peas?
You have missed the point about government in your obvious confusion about world affairs and how they affect you personally. I am saying, "We the People", but want someone else to handle business.
You don't know anything about Cuba or Cubans, so what is it that you are trying to accomplish? Is there lead in the water in Liverpool, or what?
You don't play my kind of Harmonicai ! I love the Palestinians and I play 'Progressive! Okay Matey!!
Incidentally in my book USrael are one and the same so how can I discuss one without the other old chap????
Hey darlin' . . . I'm sure we can jam. I thought you read my bio and were getting in some kind of off-handed dig. I did not realize (realise) you play as well. Oops!
I don't hate Palestinians, but their claim is bogus and I don't support it. Sure. Israel and the U.S. are one, I hope. I've read the book. Israel wins!
You would love it in Florida! We have limes everywhere.
"we the people" like the people of Palestine? Oh, sorry, the Arabs. Perhaps that statement makes you feel "better" about ethnic cleansing .In fact, why don't the Jews of the world find a home for their brothers? Does that statement sound offensive? It should. Two people, maybe, just maybe, without the interference of those who purport to "know" the answers and who so often condemn, a solution may be found!! if I was a religious person, I'd pray that one day you'd find your conscience and recognise that those who preside over an apartheid state are not "good" or worthy. As I'm not a religious person, I hope that one day you'll see sense. By the way, the mushy peas attack is very passée, the British rarely eat them. Do some homework! And another BTW, Liverpodlians had some very important news this week; just like Cuba, it has been confirmed that they are not a bunch of scroungers, drunkards and they did not make unreasonable demands, but their again, just like the Palestine/Israel conflict, I doubt you could even recognise the real situation.
Oh you've got me going now. Which British MP on seeing mushy peas in a chip shop said "give me some of that Guacamole as well"
Would it be that working class traitor JP?
All I can come up with is Peter Meddlesome but that doesn't tie in with my memory.
Strangely enough Palestine was actually composed of a lot of Christians before Israel claimed the land they were the first people to resist not the Arabs, just because states did not exist in the past does not mean they don't have the right to exist now, indeed most countries we have now did not exist during Roman times furthermore there were people resisting Israel long before Arafat.
Furthermore you have lived in Cuba right?.... and now you're telling others what Cubans are like... I see.
Oh Dear me!,
All our London Bands are waiting in anticipation for wonderful you !
Are you bringing the 'trumpet' you blow so well???
Just an attempt to raise this from the dead, although that's probably the best place for it!
This must be a good thread, what with the last post being deleted.
My two cents.....Cuba isn't perfect, but no government is. I agree wholeheartedly that the evidence shows they are much better off now than they were before the revolution. If people would get over the label of "socialism" that has been vomited up by the conservative right, they would understand that we are a socialist country by nature that has been given over to capitalism. the military provides health care, housing, even clothing for its troops...thats socialism. our police, fire, schools...all given to us by the government funded by our taxes, thats socialism. even our national anthem was written by a socialist, the "under god" portion wasnt even in it for the first 30 years or so when it was changed. if there were to come a day when the wealthy of the country woke up and forgot to be greedy, and remembered that sharing isnt a bad thing, we would all be better off. Cuba has been under US embargo for over 50 years, all because the people wanted a better way than being run by a US backed dictator. I think that alot of the things people complain about Cuba would be better off if they were out from under the thumb of the US. When you talk about human rights violations, it isnt right for any country but I think its been proven that the US is about as bad as any other country. As far as Cubans or other countries having people wanting to come here to the US, that number is dwindling, even some illegals here are already are leaving, and once more and more see that the American dream is no reality anymore less will want to immigrate here. Anyway, thanks for the thread, its been interesting.
"Stalin himself said; “America is like a healthy body and its resistance is three fold: its patriotism, its morality, and its spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas, America will collapse from within.”"
You prove that Stalin had no clue about what he was talking about.
I can't remember, how many times did he visit/spend time in the United States?
In terms of Nazi Germany, Fascism was simply a ploy, a guise to place more and more power under a tiny percentage of the population at the expense of everyone else.
We didn't start out as a Socialist country, unless the six time American Socialist Party candidate for President knew Socialism less than you Lock-step Liberal Lemmings do.
All too true. Just as Thomas said, they have without question adopted every premise of the socialist platform.
Perhaps I should have chosen my words more carefully, I didnt realize that as a lock step liberal lemming, I assumed that we should all be educated enough to understand the context of the message. But perhaps I should know better when posting where warmongering, jackboot conservatives are involved. While I would change the "started out as" to "started out with many socialist influences" my individual points are still valid. thanks
When it is so difficult to separate the grain from the chaff in all the media hoopla, to be able to be clear headed about what is what in your own country, Striped, how can you have such clarity of vision about the atrocities of a communist government (Cuba) that you do not know except from second hand information (of dubious source..atleast that is what comes out from this forum conversation!)? Some kind of Zen?
I am sure you will agree, that there is something to be said about Cuba being able to keep its flag(communist) flying high even after such confirmed bad reputation!
he will never commit himself to anything as obvious as that so will never agree to anything..
All the money they were getting from the USSR can't have had a little something to do with it, sen?
Serving as the chief exporter of Communist Thug Enforcers throughout South America helped, too.
you guys and your ideologies are all the same in the end...
Cuba is a complex situation. There is good and bad but I think it is up to the cuban people who live in cuba to decide what kind of government they want to have.Not up to the US government, or to the cubans that live in Miami.And if the majority of the cuban people decide one day they no longer will tolerate the current regime it will fall because in the history of the world there has never been a true tyranny that was able to survive once the masses have decided against it.
Yes mostly correct . Re. Tyranny! don't think the Soviet union falling was because of the peoples wishes! It was more of the paralysis and bombardment from U.S along with the usual dirty tricks. Lesson learned is each country sticks to it's own 'work'.........
Indeed, polling soon before the collapse showed only 30 percent of Russians wanted a capitalist state, 45% wanted the USSR to continue and 25% wanted alterations to the system within the communist framework.
Indeed, polling soon before the collapse showed only 30 percent of Russians wanted a capitalist state, 45% wanted the USSR to continue and 25% wanted alterations to the system within the communist framework.
by IslandBites4 years ago
What's your opinion about political prisoners like Nelson Mandela, Gandhi...? Are you aware there has been and still are political prisoners in the United States (even though US government criticize and condemn other...
by Haseena4 years ago
Why are there still so many countries that have political prisoners?Why are there still so many countries that have political prisoners, and what can we do to make this problem disappear?
by RKHenry8 years ago
"The president has directed the secretaries of state, treasury and commerce to carry out the actions necessary to lift all restrictions on the ability of individuals to visit family members in Cuba and to send them...
by mbuggieh3 years ago
LIGNET notes today that: "Russian President Vladimir Putin’s actions in Ukraine demonstrate a newfound willingness to use economic, political and military pressure to maintain the Kremlin’s hold over former...
by flacoinohio4 years ago
Why is the Second Amendment important to you?I find it amazing that the right to bear arms is important to so many Americans. With all of the political and social issues that we need to address in our country...
by cjhunsinger7 years ago
The governance of America has been slowly shifting from the Constitution, individual freedom, to the mandate of the United Nations Charter and the Declaration on Human Rights, a notably socialistic document. That...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.