>>Oh brother. Yes, anarchists should be critical of all statist regimes
>>and nobody is more consistent on this than me.
>
> It didn't appear that way in this case Chuck.
Oh, shit! I'm sorry that I forgot to criticize all other world leaders in some rambling aside. I'm a consistent critic of all governments, which anybody should know who knows me. Sorry if that wasn't clear to you.
> Nonsense, you did not make any criticism of Castro, or comment and any
> aspect of Cuba or Castro whatever. All you did was make a derogatory
> remark casting him as a dictator, when, all anarchists should know, the
> "leaders" of any state which guarantees private property by force are
> dictators, this is among the core-concepts in anarchism.
Saying that Castro is a dictator isn't criticism? I'm mystified? Was I praising him? It's pretty clear that Castro is a dictator. The guys been in office for over 50 years. Even the authoritarian leaders of the most repressive states turn over more frequently than Castro.
> Thus lashing out as Castro as dictator while making _no other comments_
> is exactly mimicking the propaganda industry in creating an impression
> that Castro is somehow //more// dictatorial than your average Statist
> regime, which is not an anarchist point of view that I can understand.
There you go again, repeating the idiotic, braindead leftist mantra that *any* criticism of Castro or Cuba is doing the work of the U.S. state.
Duh. I know that the U.S. state has been attacking Cuba for years. In fact, I'm a member of a military family because my father served the U.S. in Cuba in 1959.
I really have to wonder if you are an anarchist.
Is Castro *more* dictatorial thatn your average statist regime? Probably not, but he is still the head of oppressive regime. One that is uncritically supported by U.S. leftist, which is *why* I'm commenting here about Cuba. If somebody posted here in support of Chavez, Morales, or Sarkozy, I would probably criticize them too. But I like to poke leftists on Castro, because they try to keep their obnoxious love for Castro hidden in the closet.
> Further, the "Castro has done nothing" argument is also an aspect of the
> US propoganda, and you presented it uncritically. Despite the fact that
> the facts of objective reality show that Cuba has done remarkably well
> for a poor, isolated country.
I'm sure that Castro has done a few good things for Cuba. A stopped clock tells the right time twice a day anyway.
> This is garbage. Pointing out that Cuba has exceeded all reasonable
> expectations for a poor, isolated country is in no way the same as
> blindly supporting //the current global hegemon//.
Your rebuttal is the same tired leftist garbage I ear all the time from leftists. Are you a closet Castro supporter too? It wouldn't surprise me.
> You are not doing anything about any sacred cows because the little that
> you actual said, "Castro has done nothing," is demonstrably false and
> your characterization of Castro as a dictator is uninteresting; all
> States are dictorships as any Anarchist ought to know.
Jesus Christ, I was putting down Castro and the leftists who worship at his feet. If you know a better way to rub theire faces in this pathetic Castro-worship, I'd like to hear it.
> You personal crusade against the foibles of "American Leftist" seems
> more like a juvenile tirade against "Posers" that a serious argument as
> well.
Ah, personal attack huh? When did I attack you?
> How do you feel about Hugo Chavez, btw?
He sucks too. Another poster boy for the failed hopes of the American Left.
Chuck