> I concur with Justin's reponse to Chuck.
> Chuck's remarks concerning Cuba represent
> the sort of thing that
> gives anarchism a bad name among progressives.
I give anarchism a bad name be expressing a rather normal anarchist opinion about a world leader who has been in power for over 40 years?
What the bloody fuck do you think anarchism is about anyway? Some kind of black-clad movement of closet Ralph Nader supporters? A bunch of closet leftists who have pictures of Che hanging on the walls of our apartments?
Which part of anti-authoritarianism do you not understand? Which part of propaganda by the deed do you not understand? Do you get that anarchism is an anti-statist movement?
> Does Chuck honestly believe that if Castro's regime
> were to be overthrown anytime within the forseeable
> future, that it will be succeeded by an anarchist
> utopia (and does Pug belive that it would be
> succeeded by some sort of European-style
> social democracy)?
Nope, I never said that. Not a good try at creating a strawman.
Cubans would be much better off without Castro, without a leftist government, without U.S. interference, and the freedom to run their own lives. I don't see anarchism happening in Cuba any time soon, but defending Castro's regime is just disgusting and indefensible.
> Much more likely, it would be succeeded
> by a US-backed rightist regime that would proceed
> to undo all of the progressive reforms instituted
> under Castro. In other words, goodbye free universal
> health care, bye bye free public eduation from nursery
> school to graduate school, goodbye lowcost
> public housing, goodbye to Cuban government
> attempts to put an end to discrimination on the
> basis of race or gender. Welcome to the privatization
> of state owned industries (accompanied by
> mass layoffs to workers to make them more
> attractive to US investors). And in the end
> such a regime will probably not have a
> much better record on matters like civil
> liberties or gay rights than the current
> one. Fortunately, I don't think that
> people like Chuck or Pug will ever
> have the power to influence events
> in Cuba one way or the other.
Whatever. This is just typical leftist blathering in defense of Castro. You forgot to mention the medical clinics and the free rice and beans.
I'm fully aware of the geopolitical stakes involving Cuba. But your argument pretty much illustrates that Castro and the Cuban revolution were not sustainable.
My power to influence events in Cuba is irrelevant since this is merely an Internet discussion. I never made any claim to have any power over the situation in Cuba.
Chuck Infoshop.org