Castro
Andrew | 30.11.2003 04:26
What happened to the previous topic on Castro? I hope it wasn't deleted because the author happened to criticise Castro, I wouldn't have imagined Indymedia the sort of outlet to exercise blatant and disgusting censorship. I genuinely hope there's another reason for why it seems to have disappeared. Maybe it's just my computer?
The topic in question, included a debate over whether it was right to support Castro, with several Castro supporters pointing to the tremendous achievements in terms of health care and literacy rates. If this site truly advocates freedom of speech, and freedom for all people, then issues like this need to be discussed, or else the 'Left' will continue to be compromised.
For daring to criticise Castro's human rights abuses, I was accused of working for Bush and the neo-cons, a ridiculous, paranoid, and downright childish attack that reminded me of the simplistic black and white vision of Bush himself, where there is no middle ground, and where criticism of human rights abuses must be silenced when convenient.
Why is it so difficult for people to grasp the concept that it is possible to be both opposed to the dirty imperialist tactics of the US, in attempting to install another more compliant puppet like Batista (often through terrorist tactics) but ALSO be opposed to Castro's dictatorship and his repressive policies.
I have yet to see an intelligent reply to why all the repression is necessary. It is often argued that if the US were under attack, they too would do the same, and it is true. Following September 11th the US government has introduced or proposed numerous unconstitutional and dangerous measures - the Patriot Act 1+2, Operation TIPS, Total Information Awareness etc and Britain has just recently proposed a possible suspension of the human rights act when 'emergencies' occur, banning assemblies and such, however I support none of them, so why support Castro when he does the same? His response to US aggression is even more repressive and most of it is unnecessary. How is the abuse of Cuban prisoners helping anything? Why is it necessary to make it a criminal offence to write to the government? There can be no justification for crushing non-violent dissent.
Instead of telling me to "just piss of" as EzyPzy ever so intelligently instructed me to do, answer me. Simply because Castro has survived US sanctions which hurt ordinary Cubans more than him, does not make him heroic.
To those who act as apologists for the dictatorship, I ask again: Are you seriously claiming that the following statements are just lies?
"Over the past forty years, Cuba has developed a highly effective machinery of repression. The denial of basic civil and political rights is written into Cuban law. In the name of legality, armed security forces, aided by state-controlled mass organizations, silence dissent with heavy prison terms, threats of prosecution, harassment, or exile. Cuba uses these tools to restrict severely the exercise of fundamental human rights of expression, association, and assembly. The conditions in Cuba's prisons are inhuman, and political prisoners suffer additional degrading treatment and torture. In recent years, Cuba has added new repressive laws and continued prosecuting nonviolent dissidents while shrugging off international appeals for reform and placating visiting dignitaries with occasional releases of political prisoners."
- Human Rights Watch
"The authorities continued to try to discourage dissent by harassing suspected critics of the government. Suspected dissidents were subjected to short-term detention, frequent summonses, threats, eviction, loss of employment and restrictions on movement."
- Amnesty International, 2003 Cuban Report.
I should make it clear, I do NOT in any way support a US regime change, whether in the form of a violent invasion, or a underhand CIA coup. I would much prefer either willing reforms from Castro or if needs be, another Cuban revolution.
However to simply silence any criticism is to limit the chances of any positive reforms occuring, while playing into the hands of the Bush administration who will claim the monopoly on self proclaimed human rights concerns, and therefore, the monopoly on possible courses of action.
The topic in question, included a debate over whether it was right to support Castro, with several Castro supporters pointing to the tremendous achievements in terms of health care and literacy rates. If this site truly advocates freedom of speech, and freedom for all people, then issues like this need to be discussed, or else the 'Left' will continue to be compromised.
For daring to criticise Castro's human rights abuses, I was accused of working for Bush and the neo-cons, a ridiculous, paranoid, and downright childish attack that reminded me of the simplistic black and white vision of Bush himself, where there is no middle ground, and where criticism of human rights abuses must be silenced when convenient.
Why is it so difficult for people to grasp the concept that it is possible to be both opposed to the dirty imperialist tactics of the US, in attempting to install another more compliant puppet like Batista (often through terrorist tactics) but ALSO be opposed to Castro's dictatorship and his repressive policies.
I have yet to see an intelligent reply to why all the repression is necessary. It is often argued that if the US were under attack, they too would do the same, and it is true. Following September 11th the US government has introduced or proposed numerous unconstitutional and dangerous measures - the Patriot Act 1+2, Operation TIPS, Total Information Awareness etc and Britain has just recently proposed a possible suspension of the human rights act when 'emergencies' occur, banning assemblies and such, however I support none of them, so why support Castro when he does the same? His response to US aggression is even more repressive and most of it is unnecessary. How is the abuse of Cuban prisoners helping anything? Why is it necessary to make it a criminal offence to write to the government? There can be no justification for crushing non-violent dissent.
Instead of telling me to "just piss of" as EzyPzy ever so intelligently instructed me to do, answer me. Simply because Castro has survived US sanctions which hurt ordinary Cubans more than him, does not make him heroic.
To those who act as apologists for the dictatorship, I ask again: Are you seriously claiming that the following statements are just lies?
"Over the past forty years, Cuba has developed a highly effective machinery of repression. The denial of basic civil and political rights is written into Cuban law. In the name of legality, armed security forces, aided by state-controlled mass organizations, silence dissent with heavy prison terms, threats of prosecution, harassment, or exile. Cuba uses these tools to restrict severely the exercise of fundamental human rights of expression, association, and assembly. The conditions in Cuba's prisons are inhuman, and political prisoners suffer additional degrading treatment and torture. In recent years, Cuba has added new repressive laws and continued prosecuting nonviolent dissidents while shrugging off international appeals for reform and placating visiting dignitaries with occasional releases of political prisoners."
- Human Rights Watch
"The authorities continued to try to discourage dissent by harassing suspected critics of the government. Suspected dissidents were subjected to short-term detention, frequent summonses, threats, eviction, loss of employment and restrictions on movement."
- Amnesty International, 2003 Cuban Report.
I should make it clear, I do NOT in any way support a US regime change, whether in the form of a violent invasion, or a underhand CIA coup. I would much prefer either willing reforms from Castro or if needs be, another Cuban revolution.
However to simply silence any criticism is to limit the chances of any positive reforms occuring, while playing into the hands of the Bush administration who will claim the monopoly on self proclaimed human rights concerns, and therefore, the monopoly on possible courses of action.
Andrew
Comments
Display the following comment