Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Atlas and Cuba

stripe.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–68 of 68 posts

Re: Atlas and Cuba

#61

Post by the_af »

wildmusings wrote: post #60
the_af wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, what you're saying is terrible. Allende was, good or bad (I think more good than bad) a democratically elected president. In contrast, Pinochet was a brutal dictator who came to power through a coup d'etat and enforced his rule via bloodshed, murder and repression of dissidents, students and anyone he didn't like; this included a clandestine plan of cooperation between intelligence agencies of neighboring dictato…

You realize that Hitler was elected, right? Democracy is not the be all and end all. It's great because of all of the wonderful things it has done for us. Self-representation is a good in itself, but not greater than human prosperity and freedom. And loyal opposition only works when everyone agrees on the sanctity of the system. I believe in liberal democracy, where the sovereignty of the people is limited by institu…

This conversation is absurd.

Hitler was nothing at all like Allende; the führer was elected but his rule wasn't a democracy and nobody in his right mind would call him democratic. And I'm pretty sure free elections weren't a possibility under Nazism.

Pinochet -- a man who had nothing but disregard for the "freedom" you claim to admire -- was a monster that kidnapped, tortured, murdered and committed crimes against humanity, and then in his later years shielded himself under diplomatic immunity to avoid prosecution. Yet you prefer him -- a mass murderer, unlike Allende -- because "man has never prospered under Communism". I'm sure the people Pinochet ordered tortured and killed were happy that this was done in the name of prosperity.

I strongly recommend you abandon the "let's say Pinochet wasn't so bad" strategy because it's beyond wrong and ridiculous. Just pick any other strategy, but not this one. Also, don't compare flawed but democratic governments to Hitler.

It's cool that you've shown your true colors and don't consider democracy to be "the be all and end all". Unfortunately, this undermines your criticism of Cuba and pretty much everything you say. You lose the right to criticize Cuba because it's a dictatorship or because it suppresses dissidents or because it doesn't respect the rule of law, because Pinochet did all of this and way worse, but you still "prefer him".

Re: Atlas and Cuba

#62

Post by wildmusings »

the_af wrote: post #61
wildmusings wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You realize that Hitler was elected, right? Democracy is not the be all and end all. It's great because of all of the wonderful things it has done for us. Self-representation is a good in itself, but not greater than human prosperity and freedom. And loyal opposition only works when everyone agrees on the sanctity of the system. I believe in liberal democracy, where the sovereignty of the people is limited by institu…

This conversation is absurd. Hitler was nothing at all like Allende; the führer was elected but his rule wasn't a democracy and nobody in his right mind would call him democratic. And I'm pretty sure free elections weren't a possibility under Nazism. Pinochet -- a man who had nothing but disregard for the "freedom" you claim to admire -- was a monster that kidnapped, tortured, murdered and committed crimes against hu…

>Hitler was nothing at all like Allende; the fuhrer was elected but his rule wasn't a democracy and nobody in his right mind would call him democratic.

Allende's regime was not democratic. He was ruling by diktat and ignoring court rulings and acts of congress. That's textbook dictatorship.

>I strongly recommend you abandon the "let's say Pinochet wasn't so bad" strategy because it's beyond wrong and ridiculous. Just pick any other strategy, but not this one. Also, don't compare flawed but democratic governments to Hitler.

What's ridiculous is that you're either unwilling or unable to engage with the concept of a choice between evils. You keep dishonestly portraying my argument as a defense of Pinochet. It is no such thing. Indeed, I would have liked to see Pinochet executed for his crimes, including not handing power back to the democratic institutions after ejecting the dictator. He was still the better of these two evils.

>It's cool that you've shown your true colors and don't consider democracy to be "the be all and end all". Unfortunately, this undermines your criticism of Cuba and pretty much everything you say. You lose the right to criticize Cuba because it's a dictatorship or because it suppresses dissidents or because it doesn't respect the rule of law, because Pinochet did all of this and way worse, but you "prefer him".

Do you really think that democracy is the be all and end all? So you would have no problem with genocide as long as a majority approved of it? I'd love to see you try to defend this absurd stance.

Re: Atlas and Cuba

#63

Post by wildmusings »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #31
13thLetter wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No. I'm saying every country has its problems, and that to say one specific problem must be focused on before any of the problems can be solved is disingenuous. Sorry if that wasn't clear. So why is it that we must focus on the problem of NSA wiretapping before we are even allowed to talk about the problem of millions of people being oppressed by a Communist dictatorship?

I'm not saying what you focus on. I'm looking for solutions I can contribute to on the ground. Political revolution is not one of them. I don't have that sort of capital to expend.

The best thing you could do is not go to Cuba. Every dollar you spend there is just more money for the Castro's repressive apparatus to be used against the people.

Re: Atlas and Cuba

#64

Post by the_af »

wildmusings wrote: post #62
the_af wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This conversation is absurd. Hitler was nothing at all like Allende; the führer was elected but his rule wasn't a democracy and nobody in his right mind would call him democratic. And I'm pretty sure free elections weren't a possibility under Nazism. Pinochet -- a man who had nothing but disregard for the "freedom" you claim to admire -- was a monster that kidnapped, tortured, murdered and committed crimes against hu…

> Hitler was nothing at all like Allende; the fuhrer was elected but his rule wasn't a democracy and nobody in his right mind would call him democratic. Allende's regime was not democratic. He was ruling by diktat and ignoring court rulings and acts of congress. That's textbook dictatorship. > I strongly recommend you abandon the "let's say Pinochet wasn't so bad" strategy because it's beyond wrong and ridiculous. Ju…

No, Allende's wasn't a dictatorship. There was an institutional crisis and the preparation of a coup in progress (and it's no conspiracy theory by now, given all the documentation available, that the CIA was involved in preparing the groundwork for the coup), and Allende was in open conflict with Congress. That's pretty serious and everyone would agree Chile was in serious crisis, but it's not "textbook dictatorship".

You know what is a textbook dictatorship, one that 100% of the world agrees was a dictatorship, though? Pinochet's. And you claim to prefer him.

It's hilarious because every single crime you claim Allende committed, Pinochet actually committed and worse. No-one elected Pinochet, but people -- regardless how "flimsy" was the majority -- elected Allende. Allende didn't suspend constitutional rights, Pinochet did. You could outvote Allende in open elections, but you couldn't do that to Pinochet, because he didn't hold elections. You claim Allende overruled Congress, but guess who DISSOLVED Congress? Pinochet. Torture under Pinochet's rule was stomach-churning: rape, bone-crushing and mutilation of genitals were par for the course... you really, really need to review who you claim to prefer.

In the "choice of two evils" (your words), you choose the worst, plain and simple.

Re: Atlas and Cuba

#65

Post by wildmusings »

the_af wrote: post #64
wildmusings wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Hitler was nothing at all like Allende; the fuhrer was elected but his rule wasn't a democracy and nobody in his right mind would call him democratic. Allende's regime was not democratic. He was ruling by diktat and ignoring court rulings and acts of congress. That's textbook dictatorship. > I strongly recommend you abandon the "let's say Pinochet wasn't so bad" strategy because it's beyond wrong and ridiculous. Ju…

No, Allende's wasn't a dictatorship. There was an institutional crisis and the preparation of a coup in progress (and it's no conspiracy theory by now, given all the documentation available, that the CIA was involved in preparing the groundwork for the coup), and Allende was in open conflict with Congress. That's pretty serious and everyone would agree Chile was in serious crisis, but it's not "textbook dictatorship"…

Had Allende been allowed to have his way, Chile would probably be like Cuba today, poor, miserable, and enslaved, rather than the richest and most stable country in the region. Chile under Allende also would have been another foothold for the Soviets in the Western hemisphere.

Castro didn't come out as a totalitarian communist on the morning after the revolution. He first methodically solidified his power and only showed his true colors when he knew his position was safe. There's every reason to believe that Allende was following the same playbook.

Re: Atlas and Cuba

#66

Post by reis4g »

oblio wrote: post #58
reis4g wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's that communism thing you talk about anyway? Doesn't sound like the Marx I read. Also, please, define "disaster". Since by my knowledge, Cuba is neither a disaster, nor a communist country...

Nobody has implemented Communism or Capitalism exactly as they are defined in their textbooks. The difference between the two systems is that one of them, even when implemented incorrectly, still works in practice. The other one is an intellectual's dream that caused pain and suffering for millions of people. We should drop the "no true Scotsman" for Communism, at this point.

>The difference between the two systems is that one of them, even when implemented incorrectly, still works in practice.

No, the difference between them is everything but that. IMHO Communism is more just, intelligent and advanced way of doing things... Saying that Capitalism "works" is just untrue, though it would be good to know what are your reasons to think that, and what news do you read? What's a socio-economic system that "works" for you?

>The other one is an intellectual's dream that caused pain and suffering for millions of people.

"An intellectual's dream", seriously? For starters it is not just one intellectual but lots of the brightest sociological minds on history, and also, it's not a dream, the idea of communism has all the backing of centuries of sociological development and science, and it's a very plausible evolution to the non-ever-working capitalism.

>We should drop the "no true Scotsman" for Communism, at this point.

Agree. My point though, is that we can't keep stigmatizing communism and misusing the term because of poor knowledge or out-of-space-time implementations.

Re: Atlas and Cuba

#67

Post by cortesoft »

reis4g wrote: post #49
cortesoft wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I always thought the embargo was counter productive. I think the best way to influence Cuba was to enable trade with us.

"Influence Cuba" WTF? That's not a healthy/productive way of thinking... What's that you want to "influence" exactly? really? don't you know there are lots of fields where US and most countries in the world would benefit from Cuban influence instead? And in any case, it shouldn't be about influencing as surely is right now for the powerful Goliat, but about doing the right thing at the very least.

Well clearly the US was trying to influence Cuba with the embargo... That is the purpose of an embargo, to influence another state. I am not saying that is a good thing, just that clearly that is what they were trying to do.

And since they were trying to do that, I think they could have done it in a better way.

Re: Atlas and Cuba

#68

Post by reis4g »

cortesoft wrote: post #67
reis4g wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Influence Cuba" WTF? That's not a healthy/productive way of thinking... What's that you want to "influence" exactly? really? don't you know there are lots of fields where US and most countries in the world would benefit from Cuban influence instead? And in any case, it shouldn't be about influencing as surely is right now for the powerful Goliat, but about doing the right thing at the very least.

Well clearly the US was trying to influence Cuba with the embargo... That is the purpose of an embargo, to influence another state. I am not saying that is a good thing, just that clearly that is what they were trying to do. And since they were trying to do that, I think they could have done it in a better way.

Yes, that's true. Messed up as it is.
Post reply on HN