• Display name@feddit.nu
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    24
    ·
    9 months ago

    I guess you could call stomping out peaceful protests with violence an act of terrorism? But that’s not the entire reason lol

    • plinky [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      43
      ·
      9 months ago

      I guess you could call george floyd or la riots stomping a terrorist act thonk

      but for real, islands can’t survive on their own, if tomorrow uk stopped all trade, it will start starving in 2 months. usa sanctions are extra cruel with both finance and shipping conditions

        • я не из калининграда@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          38
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          cuba and korea are already democratic, as in the sense of true democracy, workplace democracy. liberal “democracy” is nothing more than a cover for the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie and foreign imperialists. just look at cuba and korea under their respective american and japanese occupations. thats what the liberal west wants to return them to.

          • Display name@feddit.nu
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            17
            ·
            9 months ago

            Well “true” democracy is a rather open definition lol. With a minimalist definition enough even North Korea is a democracy based on them holding elections but I mean that is obviously not the case. Liberal democracy is just electoral democracy+ rule of law. You can have liberal democracy without capitalism and the bourgeoisie, just look at the Scandinavian countries before the neoliberalists took hold.

              • Display name@feddit.nu
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                10
                ·
                9 months ago

                ? The current Nordic model is hardly socialist, just a welfare model. But in the 60’s it was on its way to eradicate the bourgeoisie and lift the under class in its entirety?

                Didn’t know it was a meme lol, what is it about?

                  • Display name@feddit.nu
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    9
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    9 months ago

                    Sure it was. It diverted after the 70’s though. Any word in particular you think I don’t get the meaning of?

                • ExotiqueMatter@lemmygrad.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  23
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  But in the 60’s it was on its way to eradicate the bourgeoisie and lift the under class in its entirety?

                  No, it was just a welfare state back then too, they just had more concessions at the time because there was the Soviet Unions just next door with guarantied employment, free healthcare and housing, etc, and were getting so riled up over it that the bourgeoisie was getting really scared of potentially having a revolution and decided that temporarily giving these concessions was better than loosing everything.

            • ExotiqueMatter@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              25
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              Sorry but Scandinavian countries were still capitalist and still had a bourgeois class even before the neoliberals came around.

          • Display name@feddit.nu
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            17
            ·
            9 months ago

            That is a very interesting question. “Stable dictatorships instead of unstable democracies.” Most of the liberal democracies in the world seem to prefer that 🤷 What made Japan make it to that list?

            The point still stands, whatever you think about the sanctions against Cuba, the leadership is responsible for it’s people and there’s a very easy way for them to have the sanctions lifted.

              • Display name@feddit.nu
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                11
                ·
                9 months ago

                Oh you mean like that! Yes that is a good point. Can it be considered democratic if you have a hegemony ruling for lengthy periods of time with no shift in power even though there is free and equal competition by the opposition. I think 2012 was the last time an oppositional party held power.

                • plinky [he/him]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  24
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  How can it be equal, if every layer of government is held by one party? (that’s ignoring our typical commie gripes that ldp was showered by cia money till the 70s)

                  but i mean your initial point (the leadership should submit if they care about people) is exact same point made during any siege in all of the history. While premise for that siege (something that makes it palatable for the people) is comparatively pitiful: its not supported by un (overwhelmingly), one party states an dictatorships are routinely supported by usa, cuba is not prosecuting minorities over sexual/racial differences, so what exactly is usa problem you think?

                  • Display name@feddit.nu
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    8
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    Why would one party control all layers of government, or what do you mean?

                    Yeah I get what you mean. Haven’t the UN condemned the sanctions as well based on the starvation as well? Anyway, it’s a siege between USA and Cuba where the rest of the world is free to enter the city gates and trade if they choose to do so ^^ Haha the problem would be that it’s not a friendly dictatorship I suppose.

                    That doesn’t relieve the Cuban government of the responsibility for the sanctions and to their people.

            • davel [he/him]@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              13
              ·
              9 months ago

              Yes they can easily have the sanctions lifted by betraying the people of Cuba and allowing Global North neocolonizers to resume their pillaging of the nation.

              What a dumbass turbolib.

        • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          26
          ·
          9 months ago

          However what is important to remember is that the sanctions are imposed based on the regimes actions against it’s population

          I don’t know every single sanction against the DPRK, but over the last 40 years the sanctions have all been in connection to nuclear development and things like that. Also, it’s rich that you talk about communists being hypocrites while you take western powers at their word for why they are imposing sanctions that starve people by your own admission. The US has done and is doing much crueler things to the people of these states than the states themselves have ever done in any but the most unhinged fantasies.