Can you explain any of this, though? Why do you say he was a dictator? Why do you say he wasn’t a “man of the people,” what could he have done to better help his people prosper? Che and Fidel got along quite well, the anticommunist “left” mostly uses the fact that Che died early to support the idea that the Cuban Revolution was “betrayed,” it’s a convenient rhetorical technique that allows you to claim Leftist aesthetics while agreeing entirely with the US State Department, who wishes to recolonize Cuba.
Absolutely. Fidel was more pragmatic compared to Che. My point was that I believe Che’s idealism could have had a positive effect on Fidel’s career had he survived.
Why do you say he was a dictator?
In 1959, Castro promised free and fair elections the following year. He was the longest-serving non-royal head of state in two centuries with a 50 year reign, and never held an election.
There were elections in many areas, of course, and you conveniently leave out the Bay of Pigs. Ultimately, the measure of democracy in a country is the extent to which the people are satisfied by how much their input is taken into account. The Cuban People supported Fidel, which is why he remained.
There’s no need for name calling. I could just be misinformed, and this could be your chance to change that. I’d appreciate a reply without the condescension.
Everything I’ve read has been to the contrary. Do you have a source on Fidel’s elections? Surely Cuba or its allies must have written at least one article on their free and fair elections in the past fifty years.
I’m sick and tired of westerners barging in and confidently making claims about subjects they know nothing about: If you don’t know anything about Cuban elections, you shouldn’t be proudly making ignorant assertions.
What exactly have you read that “has been to the contrary”?
God, you western chauvinists are incapable of not operating in bad faith. You barge in here making bullshit claims about things you know nothing about with absolutely no sources of your own, then demand people who know better educate you.
I’m not demanding education. I’m asking you to substantiate your point.
If you are incapable of doing so, then your point is simply considered a rumor. Aggressive and condescending language may convince the uneducated, but you’ve successfully proven nothing.
Dumbfuck, YOU were the one who made the unsubstantiated claim. But of course, you’re to much of an arrogant white supremacist to think that YOU should have to do what you demand of others.
I also KNOW you’ve seen the links Cowbee has provided, so at this point you’re literally just throwing a tantrum and trying to waste time in pure bad faith.
Also fucking wild that you call other people uneducated when you’ve already admitted you know nothing about the topic.
Can you explain any of this, though? Why do you say he was a dictator? Why do you say he wasn’t a “man of the people,” what could he have done to better help his people prosper? Che and Fidel got along quite well, the anticommunist “left” mostly uses the fact that Che died early to support the idea that the Cuban Revolution was “betrayed,” it’s a convenient rhetorical technique that allows you to claim Leftist aesthetics while agreeing entirely with the US State Department, who wishes to recolonize Cuba.
Absolutely. Fidel was more pragmatic compared to Che. My point was that I believe Che’s idealism could have had a positive effect on Fidel’s career had he survived.
In 1959, Castro promised free and fair elections the following year. He was the longest-serving non-royal head of state in two centuries with a 50 year reign, and never held an election.
That’s a dictator.
There were elections in many areas, of course, and you conveniently leave out the Bay of Pigs. Ultimately, the measure of democracy in a country is the extent to which the people are satisfied by how much their input is taken into account. The Cuban People supported Fidel, which is why he remained.
He literally did hold elections you utter dumbfuck.
There’s no need for name calling. I could just be misinformed, and this could be your chance to change that. I’d appreciate a reply without the condescension.
Everything I’ve read has been to the contrary. Do you have a source on Fidel’s elections? Surely Cuba or its allies must have written at least one article on their free and fair elections in the past fifty years.
I’m sick and tired of westerners barging in and confidently making claims about subjects they know nothing about: If you don’t know anything about Cuban elections, you shouldn’t be proudly making ignorant assertions.
What exactly have you read that “has been to the contrary”?
So no source then? Lol
God, you western chauvinists are incapable of not operating in bad faith. You barge in here making bullshit claims about things you know nothing about with absolutely no sources of your own, then demand people who know better educate you.
I’m not demanding education. I’m asking you to substantiate your point.
If you are incapable of doing so, then your point is simply considered a rumor. Aggressive and condescending language may convince the uneducated, but you’ve successfully proven nothing.
Dumbfuck, YOU were the one who made the unsubstantiated claim. But of course, you’re to much of an arrogant white supremacist to think that YOU should have to do what you demand of others.
I also KNOW you’ve seen the links Cowbee has provided, so at this point you’re literally just throwing a tantrum and trying to waste time in pure bad faith.
Also fucking wild that you call other people uneducated when you’ve already admitted you know nothing about the topic.