BLM supports authoritarian regime that murders their own people

Ana the Ist said:

Good answer...I should have worded my question more carefully...

I meant to ask if there was a popular uprising that we supported Putin or Duarte in quashing?

You know, as your post seemed to suggest.

Click to expand...

Off the top of my head, I'm not aware of us aiding in any quashings as of late (nor did I intend to convey anything about our participation in such), but skimming over the reaction to the Navalny poisoning, it looks like the US might've dragged its heels a bit, with the UK and EU both imposing sanctions in 2020 while the US didn't do anything until Biden took over

And I do seem to recall a pretty hard looking the other way after Saudi Arabia butchered Jamal Khashoggi.

Tiberius Lee said:

My favorite moment of “supports authoritarian regime that murders their own people” Is this one

View attachment 302595

Click to expand...

Yeah....he full on touched a shoulder there.

At this point, I'd be willing to offer Kim a full international pardon if he were willing to dismantle military, step down, and hold democratic elections.

N Korea is basically an open air prison for some 30 million innocent people. I think we can all agree that without exception N Korea is the worst place to live on Earth. The only places even comparable were other communist nations that no longer exist as communist nations. The only place that never gave up "the dream" is N Korea.

That said, I applaud any president's attempt to change the conditions of the Koreans living there....by any means. I don't agree with much of what Trump did while in office...but I think he was brave to make an attempt with N Korea.

I'm sure you disagree....given your post....but I'm not sure why? It's not like N Korea was on the verge of collapse and Trump's efforts revitalized it. It's not as if using force instead of diplomacy won Trump any praise from the left (remember when he sent that Iranian general to rocketing to an early grave?).

So what exactly is your issue with the way he dealt with N Korea?

iluvatar5150 said:

Off the top of my head, I'm not aware of us aiding in any quashings as of late (nor did I intend to convey anything about our participation in such), but skimming over the reaction to the Navalny poisoning, it looks like the US might've dragged its heels a bit, with the UK and EU both imposing sanctions in 2020 while the US didn't do anything until Biden took over

Click to expand...

Is Nalvany dead?

I wasn't aware that Biden actually did anything. I remember him excusing the Uighur genocide as a matter of cultural differences....but since he flip flopped on that I'm willing to consider that perhaps he just forgot what the word "genocide" means.

And I do seem to recall a pretty hard looking the other way after Saudi Arabia butchered Jamal Khashoggi.

Click to expand...

.
Yup. That was dismissed rather quickly. I don't understand the complaint about this from the left. We tend to look the other way on a lot of stuff those nations do like stoning a woman to death or throwing homosexual men off of buildings.

Was there something exceptional about the Kashoggi case?

TLK Valentine said:

Replace one communist regime with another? What would be the point?

Click to expand...

Why would it be another communist regime?

Ana the Ist said:

Why would it be another communist regime?

Click to expand...

Because the embargo is being caused by the capitalists.

Generally speaking, tyrants and despots rule though fear -- not fear of themselves, mind you, but fear of The Other... the enemy waiting in the wings that only the Tyrant can protect them from.

How do you think the Islamists and Ayatollahs keep their hold over their governments? by pointing fingers at "The Great Satan." The Soviet propaganda machine throughout the Cold War warned its people about the perils of "Western Imperialism." To a lesser extent, look at what people here in the US of A are willing to surrender to protect themselves from "The Red Menace" back in the 50s... "Creeping Sharia" just a few years ago... and, if you listen to the Right, "The COVID Hoax"* today

*(N.B. I am not endorsing the idea that Covid is a hoax; merely using that rhetoric as an example.)

In the case of Cuba, Fidel Castro never skipped an opportunity to remind the people about the "evils" of the US... "The world has to know -- if you see the theories they have, the plans they have and the military doctrines they have, it would make your blood run cold . . . Everything they do leads to war,”

Enough people believed him over the decades to insure that his final resting place is a tourist attraction in Santiago de Cuba, and not a bloodstain on the wall somewhere. Was he right? No, but does it matter, when our actions make him look right?

hislegacy said:

The Cuban Government controls businesses, hospital, humanitarian aid and every aspect of live for the people of Cuba. The embargo stops product from entering and leaving Cuba - The Government is the sole proprietor of anything coming into or exiting out of the country.

It directly effects the Government on a much greater scale that the people who receive little from their Governement.

Click to expand...

It hurts no-one but the people themselves. The embargo was a means to turn the screws on the Cubans themselves in order to persuade them to reject their government. Has it worked? Well, obviously not. Has it prevented their government from continuing their human rights abuses? Obviously not. Does everyone support the embargo? Obviously not:

'The UN General Assembly has voted 23 times to demand the US to end the Cuba embargo. In 2014, 188 countries (there are 193 countries in the UN) voted in favor of a resolution titled "Necessity of Ending the Economic, Commercial and Financial Embargo imposed by the United States of America against Cuba." 7 reasons to end the Cuba embargo

Is it just the US imposing the embargo. Yes, but effectively...no.

"Of course the U.S. cannot prohibit firms from other countries from trading with Cuba," Richard Feinberg, a professor of international political economy at the University of California-San Diego, said in an email. "However, the U.S. has instituted various economic sanctions that make that trade and investment riskier and more costly, creating serious disincentives."

In 1992, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the U.S. passed the Cuban Democracy Act. The law barred vessels that had traded with Cuba in the past 180 days from docking at U.S. ports and prevented foreign subsidiaries of American companies from doing business in Cuba. Four years later, President Bill Clinton signed the Helms-Burton Act, which imposed sanctions on foreign companies that traded with Cuba.' Fact check: US Cuba embargo doesn't apply to all countries, companies

As an example, it it exceptionally difficult to withdraw money when in Cuba because if your bank has any connection with a US business whatsoever then the US leans very heavily indeed on those foreign banks who try to deal with Cuba.

And one of the major impacts of the embargo on Cubans is the lack of necessary medical supplies. A direct impact on the health of the Cubans themselves (incidentally, the WHO ranks Cuba as being 39th in the world as regards overall health system performance - and believe it or not, as a comparison, the US stands at 37th. Maybe America could take a few pointers from their neighbours). World Health Organization ranking of health systems in 2000 - Wikipedia

Drop the embargo and watch the changes occur. If the present government falls, then the Cubans may still prefer a socialist replacement, but that's their decision. They'll be better off and you'll be holidaying in Havana and drinking Cuba Libres all day.

hislegacy said:

Why is Black Lives Matter defending the totalitarian Cuban regime? | Opinion

But BLM was not alone. Democratic Socialists of America, whose membership includes four progressive House Democrats—Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Rep. Jamaal Bowman of New York, Rep. Rashida Tlaib of Michigan, and Rep. Cori Bush of Missouri—also declared its solidarity with "the Cuban people and their Revolution in this moment of unrest."

Black Lives Matter faces backlash for Cuba statement: "So much wrong"

BLM shows its true colors in statement praising Cuba

Click to expand...

Ive never taken BLM as an organization seriously. Probably because of dumb things like this.

Otoh, "black lives matter" as a basic statement in the face of American realities has a lot of validity.

AND, we were pretty much asking for an anti-American revolution in Cuba given the character of the USA client Bautista regime.

TLK Valentine said:

The only option for the Cuban people is to escape Cuba and flee to the US... and you know how the Right feels about illegals...

Click to expand...

Right. The Trump administration just announced zero tolerance for illegals coming by boat from Cuba. Wait. Biden administration.

chevyontheriver said:

Right. The Trump administration just announced zero tolerance for illegals coming by boat from Cuba. Wait. Biden administration.

Click to expand...

'"Any migrant intercepted at sea, regardless of their nationality, will not be permitted to enter the United States," Mayorkas said. "This risk is not worth taking." He said 20 people have died in recent weeks during these voyages. The U.S. Coast Guard recently sent two cutter boats to back up others in nearby waters off the coast of Haiti, which is also experiencing a political crisis following the assassination of its president. "Our priority is to preserve and save lives," Mayorkas said. U.S warns Cubans away from sea crossings amid protests, but most cross on land

So how do we know this isn't just an excuse to keep Cubans out? From the same link:

'Since Biden took office in late January, the number of Cubans arriving at the U.S.-Mexico border has risen sharply. This fiscal year through May, which began in October, border officials encountered more than 22,000 Cubans, the highest level in more than a decade.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection data shows vividly the sharp contrast between the approaches of the Trump and Biden administration toward Cuban migrants.

In December 2020 - the last full month of Trump's presidency - nearly two-thirds of all Cubans caught crossing the border were expelled to Mexico under a pandemic-related health order known as Title 42. By May of this year, the last month data is available, around 96% of Cubans were allowed into the United States to reunite with U.S.-based family members and seek legal status in immigration court.'

So there certainly seems to be a difference between 'the Right' (Trump) and the 'Left' (Biden) as regards Cuban immigration.

chevyontheriver said:

Right. The Trump administration just announced zero tolerance for illegals coming by boat from Cuba. Wait. Biden administration.

Click to expand...

Indeed -- and Biden's decision draws criticism while Donald would have offered anything for a plan to make his Wall float.

Bradskii said:

'"Any migrant intercepted at sea, regardless of their nationality, will not be permitted to enter the United States," Mayorkas said. "This risk is not worth taking." He said 20 people have died in recent weeks during these voyages. The U.S. Coast Guard recently sent two cutter boats to back up others in nearby waters off the coast of Haiti, which is also experiencing a political crisis following the assassination of its president. "Our priority is to preserve and save lives," Mayorkas said. U.S warns Cubans away from sea crossings amid protests, but most cross on land

So how do we know this isn't just an excuse to keep Cubans out? From the same link:

'Since Biden took office in late January, the number of Cubans arriving at the U.S.-Mexico border has risen sharply. This fiscal year through May, which began in October, border officials encountered more than 22,000 Cubans, the highest level in more than a decade.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection data shows vividly the sharp contrast between the approaches of the Trump and Biden administration toward Cuban migrants.

In December 2020 - the last full month of Trump's presidency - nearly two-thirds of all Cubans caught crossing the border were expelled to Mexico under a pandemic-related health order known as Title 42. By May of this year, the last month data is available, around 96% of Cubans were allowed into the United States to reunite with U.S.-based family members and seek legal status in immigration court.'

So there certainly seems to be a difference between 'the Right' (Trump) and the 'Left' (Biden) as regards Cuban immigration.

Click to expand...

Indeed -- the "Wet feet, Dry feet" policy has been in place since 1995 -- short version: if they're intercepted at sea, they get sent back. If they make it to the US, they stay.

TLK Valentine said:

Indeed -- the "Wet feet, Dry feet" policy has been in place since 1995 -- short version: if they're intercepted at sea, they get sent back. If they make it to the US, they stay.

Click to expand...

I'm no supporter of Australia's immigration policies. But I accept that there is a genuine attempt to deter illegal immigration by sea simply because of the very real dangers. Literally hundreds have died in making the attempt. The following news report shows all too horrifically the risks that are taken and the tragic results. Fifty people died whilst the locals stood helpless - including 15 children. The scenes are distressing so I urge discretion in viewing it.

TLK Valentine said:

Because the embargo is being caused by the capitalists.

Click to expand...

Lol seriously? You think that people choose social structures out of spite?

Generally speaking, tyrants and despots rule though fear -- not fear of themselves, mind you, but fear of The Other... the enemy waiting in the wings that only the Tyrant can protect them from.

Click to expand...

Fascinating theory.

How do you think the Islamists and Ayatollahs keep their hold over their governments? by pointing fingers at "The Great Satan."

Click to expand...

Geez...this is going to take awhile to explain...

There's a few aspects of Islam that make it a pretty good fit for authoritarianism. It claims to not only be the one true religion, but the very last religion. It's a religion that doesn't just expect worship....it expects every Muslim to obey the will of God, but also guard the will of God (the Islamic faith) and also to execute God's will.

The Ayatollah Khomeini developed an easy to understand political ideology for the people of Iran that every Muslim could get behind. It's really just two main points...

1. The Ayatollahs has a mandate from god as his voice on earth.
2. Therefore, the Ayatollahs should be in charge of an Islamic state.

Pretty easy to follow, right? See how easy Islam fits with authoritarianism ? It didn't hurt that apostates and traitors were executed.

You're right that they opposed the West and it's governments. They also opposed every other government or system of government.

The Soviet propaganda machine throughout the Cold War warned its people about the perils of "Western Imperialism."

Click to expand...

I don't think you understand the fear that pervaded Soviet Russia. Have you ever heard of the Stalin buzzer?


People were so terrified of Stalin that they didn't want to be the first to stop clapping. Before they installed a buzzer...this used to go on for minutes. Stalin hadn't even started speaking in that clip....

That's fear.

There's other examples of this... performative support. It's almost always driven by fear. Another example is the funeral of Kim Jong Il. The people were expected to cry at the funeral procession and if they didn't, they could face treason charges. The people would go into complete hysterics rolling around on the ground shaking and sobbing.

That's what it looks like when a political system demands conformity. Were people really sad over Kim Jong Ils death? It's doubtful. Were people really that enthusiastic for Stalin? Unlikely.

Under Stalin, the great fear came from a rather benign sounding law known as Article 58.

Article 58 (RSFSR Penal Code) - Wikipedia

It's a short read. Basically if you were accused of treason...you were guilty of treason. To quote...

" In effect, Article 58 was carte blanche for the secret police to arrest and imprison anyone deemed suspicious, making for its use as a political weapon.[citation needed] A person could be framed: the latter would arrange an "anti-Soviet" incident in the person's presence and then try the person for it[citation needed]. If the person pleaded innocence, not having reported the incident would also make them liable to imprisonment."

The result was a constant state of fear where even discussion of overthrowing the government was unthinkable. Even doing what you were told, 100% of the time, was no guarantee that you wouldn't lose everything to the state.

To a lesser extent, look at what people here in the US of A are willing to surrender to protect themselves from "The Red Menace" back in the 50s... "Creeping Sharia" just a few years ago... and, if you listen to the Right, "The COVID Hoax"* today

*(N.B. I am not endorsing the idea that Covid is a hoax; merely using that rhetoric as an example.)

Click to expand...

I think there's better examples like "believe women" during the MeToo era and the chaos it caused. You had a countless number of men who supported it out of fear of being seen as "part of the problem". You can also see it in the BLM slogans of "silence is violence" and "inaction makes you complicit" as well as every mention of being on "the wrong side of history". The implication is the same....join us or we will justify coming after you.

You can see it in the performative activism of sports figures. They fear losing their status as black men the same way Kanye did for talking to Trump. I've spent years in Akron and I don't believe for a moment that Lebron is afraid of the police when he gets pulled over.

Brett Weinstein, the Jewish liberal evolutionary biologist and civil rights activist who was literally no chased out of Evergreen College for not conforming to their authoritarian racial "equity" system described a protest wherein student activists had basically locked professors in a room until they either swore allegiance to the "movement" or caved into ridiculous demands.

To his shock and dismay, he watched as professors he knew weren't actually racist....began apologizing for crimes they hadn't done and degrading themselves to students...out of fear of being labeled as a part of the problem.

So yes....you do see this stuff today...but there's far better examples than the ones you proposed.

As for the people of Cuba...I'm not worried about them trying communism again. Anyone who escapes that nightmare never willingly tries it again.

Ana the Ist said:

Lol seriously? You think that people choose social structures out of spite?

Click to expand...

I think they choose the lesser of two (perceived) evils.

There's a few aspects of Islam that make it a pretty good fit for authoritarianism.

Click to expand...

Never claimed otherwise.

It claims to not only be the one true religion, but the very last religion. It's a religion that doesn't just expect worship....it expects every Muslim to obey the will of God, but also guard the will of God (the Islamic faith) and also to execute God's will.

Click to expand...

Whereas "Christianity" is all loosey-goosey on the matter of God's will?

The Ayatollah Khomeini developed an easy to understand political ideology for the people of Iran that every Muslim could get behind. It's really just two main points...

1. The Ayatollahs has a mandate from god as his voice on earth.
2. Therefore, the Ayatollahs should be in charge of an Islamic state.

Pretty easy to follow, right? See how easy Islam fits with authoritarianism ? It didn't hurt that apostates and traitors were executed.

Click to expand...

And yet (at least in Iran) the people chose it in 1978 -- overthrowing the leader who was instilled in power by.... Hmmm... who was it again?

I don't think you understand the fear that pervaded Soviet Russia.

Click to expand...

I understand that they were afraid of something else even more... Granted, Stalin was a maniac, but the USSR has had plenty of rulers since him who were far more levelheaded.

Khrushchev, for example, was certainly no teddy bear, but he knew how to play his own people -- and ours. When he unilaterally stopped Nuclear testing in '58, he made Eisenhower and the US look like the warmongers, or at the very least, that they had to drag us to the table to negotiate a treaty in Paris -- which unfortunately was shot down (pun intended) over a certain U-2 spy plane...

There's other examples of this... performative support. It's almost always driven by fear. Another example is the funeral of Kim Jong Il. The people were expected to cry at the funeral procession and if they didn't, they could face treason charges. The people would go into complete hysterics rolling around on the ground shaking and sobbing.

Click to expand...

One would have to get a look at North Korean Propaganda (which, so I've been told, is ubiquitous and effective through out the nation) so see how they inspire that level of obedience.

I never said they didn't fear their own leaders... just that there's often something out there they're more afraid of.

But if you're set on finding every exception to the general idea, *shrug*

That's what it looks like when a political system demands conformity. Were people really sad over Kim Jong Ils death? It's doubtful. Were people really that enthusiastic for Stalin? Unlikely.

Click to expand...

Without conformity, there is chaos -- or so I've heard. People who fear chaos will jump at the chance for conformity.

Some people flock to authoritarianism for the "freedom" it offers them -- freedom from responsibility, that is. As long as they can say "I was just following orders," be those orders from a government or god (or in the case of theocracies, a government claiming to speak for a god), they can live guilt- and shame-free. But I digress...

Under Stalin,

Click to expand...

Stopping you here for a second to remind you that Stalin originally rose to power alongside Lenin -- he was one of the original "heroes" of the October Revolution and Russian Civil War. He promised order and he delivered it... and you would be surprised how many people will accept peace at any price.

You of course raise a valid (albeit obvious) point about the man -- he was a maniac. But he was able to win over the support of the Party from the likes of Trotsky, Kamenev, and Zinoviev... and by the time they wised up, Stalin was already sending assassins to their door.

Stalin used popularity to get the job, and fear to keep it. Yes, fear of himself, to be sure... but he might've ended his political career a couple of decades earlier (hanging from a gibbet),were it not for a man called Adolf...

Again, I speak in terms of generalities -- you can certainly find notable exceptions.

I think there's better examples like "believe women" during the MeToo era and the chaos it caused. You had a countless number of men who supported it out of fear of being seen as "part of the problem". You can also see it in the BLM slogans of "silence is violence" and "inaction makes you complicit" as well as every mention of being on "the wrong side of history". The implication is the same....join us or we will justify coming after you.

Click to expand...

Fear is a powerful motivator -- isn't it? Nobody wants to be on the wrong side of history, do they?

So yes....you do see this stuff today...but there's far better examples than the ones you proposed.

Click to expand...

So long as we agree.

As for the people of Cuba...I'm not worried about them trying communism again. Anyone who escapes that nightmare never willingly tries it again.

Click to expand...

To escape, one must first have somewhere to escape to. Seems their best bet would be to stay and fight -- and I don't care much for their odds.

durangodawood said:

Ive never taken BLM as an organization seriously. Probably because of dumb things like this.

Otoh, "black lives matter" as a basic statement in the face of American realities has a lot of validity.

Click to expand...

I don't recall anyone disagreeing with the statement.

"It's ok to be white" however...that gets a lot of people really worked up.

Ana the Ist said:

I don't recall anyone disagreeing with the statement.

"It's ok to be white" however...that gets a lot of people really worked up.

Click to expand...

When was the last time you heard someone say that?

No, seriously -- when? Seems to be the sort of thing people only start chanting when they're trying to drown out something else.

Kentonio said:

Supporting an embargo of a tiny country that pose absolutely zero threat to the US (and haven't for at least the last 40 years) is pretty interesting. I guess allowing people to chose their own governments is only ok if those people happen to be American.

Click to expand...

January 6th is evidence to the contrary.

Oneiric1975 said:

Just so long as you leave me out of it. Thanks! I have little use for your type of "critique".

Click to expand...

You can click on user names and then on "ignore" in the window that pops out.

Ana the Ist said:

Yeah....he full on touched a shoulder there.

At this point, I'd be willing to offer Kim a full international pardon if he were willing to dismantle military, step down, and hold democratic elections.

N Korea is basically an open air prison for some 30 million innocent people. I think we can all agree that without exception N Korea is the worst place to live on Earth. The only places even comparable were other communist nations that no longer exist as communist nations. The only place that never gave up "the dream" is N Korea.

That said, I applaud any president's attempt to change the conditions of the Koreans living there....by any means. I don't agree with much of what Trump did while in office...but I think he was brave to make an attempt with N Korea.

I'm sure you disagree....given your post....but I'm not sure why? It's not like N Korea was on the verge of collapse and Trump's efforts revitalized it. It's not as if using force instead of diplomacy won Trump any praise from the left (remember when he sent that Iranian general to rocketing to an early grave?).

So what exactly is your issue with the way he dealt with N Korea?

Click to expand...

Did Trump achieve any thing by meeting with Kim ? No , he did not.

The idea of US President meeting with N.K. leader is so bad that Trump’s own National Security Advisor John Bolton didn’t attend the meeting. I rest my case.

Tiberius Lee said:

Did Trump achieve any thing by meeting with Kim ? No , he did not.

Click to expand...

Well, he did achieve a wonderful Public Relations coup... for North Korea.