Slashdot Mirror

I don't see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its own people.

Not a nut or a bolt will reach Chile.... We will do all in our power to condemn Chileans to utmost poverty

Yes, the freedom of themselves and their people from oppression by the racist American government and people of the time. For an alternative to the propaganda you've been exposed to, you might try reading this, or this (the latter with a good and honest summary of pros and cons). Search Google for plenty more.

Are you saying that in similar circumstances, you would just suck it up? When a people's pride, dignity and survival is at stake, in an unjust society and under unjust laws, conventions and law enforcement, some may claim that they would not choose violence as a solution - and a few might follow through, like King and Gandhi. Others may choose the coward's path, and suffer in silence.

But in these circumstances, violent rhetoric and violence is a very understandable and natural (as in human nature) course of action, and if you condemn the Black Panthers for that, it's only because you've never remotely been in a similar position.

You're probably a white male (as am I), and you probably grew up in an environment in which the closest you ever came to "oppression" was being grounded for not doing your homework.

The Black Panthers originated partly in response to police brutality in Oakland, CA. Police brutality against blacks in American cities is hardly a solved problem, but today, it gets dealt with much more effectively by society and the government. That wasn't the case in 1966. You can thank the Black Panthers directly for the relatively peaceful society you enjoy today, because they clearly demonstrated what can happen if you don't deal with issues such as police brutality and discrimination in a fair and open manner.

I can think of at least one severe example of an exception... Dresden. I think precision bombing might have just been the more efficient method as opposed to any moral stand.

"Time and time again"? Please name all these Latin American countries and governments that 1) were freely elected, and 2) were overthrown by the US, and 3) the US installed a "military dictator".

If we did it "time and time again", I'm sure you won't have any trouble naming several. 5? 10?

Bill Moyer in "The Secret Government" 1988 would say Guatemala in the 60's was a CIA excersize in such tactics. A more indepth look may find that Bill Moyer's take a little too contravant. Not innacurate, but he definately loaded the dice.

Before one says Panama they should look here. There were definate topplings of democratic regimes, but just have a look for yourself, some of those regimes were supported by the US rather than the rebels who toppled them.

A look at Nicaragua is here, "The rise of Democracy in South America" is here

Someone already mentioned Chile, but he was not a popular president (elected on only 36%, which is even lower than Clinton) although fairly elected. Also, he siezed many US and other nations holdings and "redistributed" them.

I'm not really wanting to give a site for all the countries. Just a little overview of some of the most contraversial. I'm also not saying they are the instances you are looking for, just heading off misinformed trolls.

Ah, I see, so if $COERCION is required to preserve $ETHNICITY in $GEOGRAPHICAL_REGION, that makes it OK?

I suppose you have no problem, then, with what happened in Bosnia... or Rwanda... or Cambodia... or, well, we won't mention that little country in Europe 60 years ago that decided it was OK to use a little bit of force to gain some "living space" for its ethnically-pure citizens.

Do a google search on "pur laine" (lit: "pure wool"). You'll see that there is a sizable segment of the Quebec population that thinks of itself as racially-pure.

Do some more searching, you'll find links between Quebec Nationalism and fascism. Sample source: 1996 article, "A Look At The Catholic Far Right In Quebec"

Better source: The story of Jean-louis Roux, Lieutenant Governor of Quebec, and his time as a Nazi sympathizer in the early 40s where he took part in Montreal's little mini-Kristallnacht: Source: 1996 B'Nai Brith article.

I'll leave off with an article from last year: Quebec Language Policy Isn't Funny.

Bottom line: There are some (to use the clinical diagnosis) seriously sick motherfuckers in Quebec. They have a hell of a lot of power, given how sick they are - they've kept a lot of secrets, and they've had a lot of cooperation in covering things up. Quebec language policies are just the tip of the iceberg - the underlying ethnic nationalism is a real problem, and a real threat, to fundamental freedoms in Canada.

This isn't a reply to the parent message, but instead a reply to the parent message's replies. If find it easier to just say this once than to reply individually to all of them.

Now, I don't remember whether he's a socialist, a communist, or what, but I know he's ONE of those things, and it sure ain't Democracy.
By Marx's definition, a true Communist society can't exist without Democracy, seeing as how there isn't any government in a true Communist society and the people rule themselves. This, of course, is a bit too utopian, which is why you don't see any true Communist societies. What you see instead is the totalitarian Leninist/Stalinist states (i.e.: Soviet Union) and Social Democrat states (i.e.: the majority present-day Europe).

while every country that has even remotely adopted Marxist dogma is now deep in poverty.
and
In case you didn't notice, socialism has now proven itself to be a failure in most areas of the world.
The majority of Europe is Socialist. Is France a failure? Is Sweden a failure? Is Germany a failure?

My guess is that it won't -- for the same reason that they aren't wealthy in the first place -- they refuse to work for and earn it.

Since when does hard work equate with being wealthy in our society? My Grandfather worked as a mason for most of his life - which I consider fairly laborous work - and he didn't die rich. Now compare some upstart twenty-something year-olds that make a web portal and become millionaires overnight.

I can't believe how many people I've heard compare Communism/Socialism and Democracy, thinking the two are incompatible. Communism and Socialism are economic states! Democracy is a governmental state! The U.S. is a Capitalist Republic, whereas the Soviet Union was a Socialist Dictatorship. There is nothing that says you can't have a Socialist Democracy or Capitalist Dictatorship.
Another thing that really erks me is when I see kids at school (or even adults) talking about how much they love living in a democracy. The U.S. is a Republic. We democratically elect people to rule over us. We as citizens don't have say in government decision, we just choose who does say (and the polls tend to be biased towards a selection of only two or three people).
If anyone is actually interested, here's the websites for the U.S. Communist Party and the U.S. Socialist Party. You'll notice neither of them talk about destroying the current free-market system everyone here appears to be enjoying, but instead more realistic goals like increasing Union presence, equal hourly pay according to job (i.e.: how much labor is required to effectively work in this field), etc.
-Chris Andreasen