Protestantism

» pink101 - Man For All Seasons

In response to Man For All Seasons posted by Migisi:

.
I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake."
From "A Man For All Seasons.
.
What a great point!
.

-- posted by pink101

» Brian Tubbs - Obama and Cuba

Well, we now know that Barack Obama intends to meet with Raul Castro "without precondition" when and if he (Obama) becomes President - which, at this point, seems likely.

It also appears that many of Obama's supporters are still caught up in the anti-Batista, pro-Castro "Revolutionary" spirit. Check this out...

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/d-s-hube/20...

Che Guevara????? I find it interesting that admirers of a murderous, communist terrorist like Guevara would so enthusiastically embrace Barack Obama. Interesting.

» pink101 - Che Cuevara

In response to Obama and Cuba posted by BrianTubbs:
.
Che Guevara????? I find it interesting that admirers of a murderous, communist terrorist like Guevara would so enthusiastically embrace Barack Obama. Interesting.
.
Perhaps you could provide us with reliable sources for claiming that Che was a murderous, communist terrorist?
.
But, I doubt it.
.

-- posted by pink101

» Brian Tubbs - Che Cuevara

In response to Che Cuevara posted by pink101:

That he was a communist is EASY to prove....

http://www.marxists.org/archive/guevara/

That he was a terrorist (meaning one who utilized terror for political ends) and a murderer is also easy to prove...

http://www.slate.com/id/2107100/

***Slate, btw, is NOT a conservative publication.

And then there's....

http://www.independent.org/newsroom/arti...

Oh, and let's let the man speak for himself, shall we...

"To send men to the firing squad, judicial proof is unnecessary...These procedures are an archaic bourgeois detail. This is a revolution! And a revolutionary must become a cold killing machine motivated by pure hate."

Go ahead, Pink. Defend him, if you wish.

» pink101 - Picking Your Battles

In response to Che Cuevara posted by BrianTubbs:
.
You have made a wise choice to oppose Che Guevara here.
.
It is not an easy task to defend him or his actions against a system that was allegedly corrupting an entire people into crime and debauchery. And, it certainly wouldn't be easy for you to defend the Batista government; but, it can be said that such is your position as much as it can be said that I am the defender of Ernesto "Che" Guevara.
.
But, many have defended both sides of the situation. So there is no need for me to attempt it.
.
In any event, the entire Cuban Revolution was won over the continuous opposition of anti-Castro criminal forces in the U.S.A. and Che Guevara was the messianic figure of that revolution. So, it's easy to find all the negative comments one ever can use against any defense.
.
However, if anyone is sincerely interested in knowing why anyone would ever reach out in defense of Guevara, all they have to do is run a web search. I'm sure they will find all the answers they might need--on both sides of the question.
.
Here's a starter: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Che_Guevara
.

-- posted by pink101

» Brian Tubbs - Revolution

In response to Picking Your Battles posted by pink101:

Broadly-speaking (and it's impossible not to over-simplify in some of these Internet discussions), the Cuban revolution consisted of two elements. One was the general, anti-Batista element that simply wanted to free Cuba from the crime, corruption, etc. The other element was the hardline, Marxist-Leninist contingent, and that included Guevara. The revolution of course won - and so did the hardline communists.

The same pattern existed in the Russian Revolution, btw. Initially, the Russian Revolution was not communist. There was a second revolution that put Lenin in power.

» pink101 - Revolution

In response to Revolution posted by BrianTubbs:

.
I remember the Cuban revolution. I was a young man in my twenties. I remember seeing Castro as a guest on some late night television show discussing his dreams for Cuba. His every effort at conciliation with the United States was rejected by our government administrations and he was forced into the bosom of the Soviet Union--he had no choice other than to succumb to domination by the multinational corporate structure that was so strong in America.
.
I don't think you can understand the situation from a position of political bias. But, for some of us, it is only too obvious. We are fed a line of bunk that we're expected to swallow. Some of us do and some of us don't.
.
I think the present economic situation is a good example. Who is being led to the slaughter?
.

-- posted by pink101

» Brian Tubbs - Revolution

In response to Revolution posted by pink101:

I remember the Cuban revolution. I was a young man in my twenties.

Okay, I respect that, but that doesn't mean your understanding of the Cuban revolution is more accurate than mine.

I remember seeing Castro as a guest on some late night television show discussing his dreams for Cuba. His every effort at conciliation with the United States was rejected by our government administrations and he was forced into the bosom of the Soviet Union--he had no choice other than to succumb to domination by the multinational corporate structure that was so strong in America.

That is PRECISELY how he played his cards. It was brilliant. If he succeeded in making generous and well-received overtures to the American people, he could neutralize the USA - which was definitely in his best interests. If he was not successful, then he could APPEAR the reasonable statesman reaching out the olive branch - and having it slapped away.

Don't underestimate Fidel Castro's PR mastery. He knew how to play the media, play the UN, and play the American people. In addition to playing the Cuban people.

I don't think you can understand the situation from a position of political bias.

Hold and freeze this moment into your consciousness. I'm not offended, but I want you - and everyone else reading this - to see something. When we disagree, YOU frame it as my being biased and you seeing it "clearly." Which is precisely what you do here.

I don't mind you offering up the possibility that my conservative, pro-free market bias might affect my perspective on Castro. You can make that argument. Perhaps there is merit to it. But don't then try to claim that you speak simply from what "is only too obvious." We BOTH have our biases, Pink. Both of us. Your position is not inherently superior to mine.

But, for some of us, it is only too obvious. We are fed a line of bunk that we're expected to swallow. Some of us do and some of us don't.

And I believe that Batista, Castro, and Guevara - all three - put out their respective "lines of bunk" for others to swallow. None of the three were honorable, respectable statesmen. They were ALL in it for themselves. None of them was/is good for Cuba.

» pink101 - Revolution

.
It was brilliant. If [Castro] succeeded in making generous and well-received overtures to the American people, he could neutralize the USA - which was definitely in his best interests.
.
I don't understand what you mean in saying that "he could neutralize the USA". How could the USA have been disadvantaged by an open policy with Cuba? The reason the economic blockade was installed had to do with the gangster element of Batista Cuba lobbying the US government to discredit Cuban socialism. That's what opened the door to the Soviets and why they were able to move in. Our policy with Cuba created a problem that never needed to exist--other than to satisfy the Cubans that took over Miami.
.
The Cuban problem seems to be one entirely about the differences between a capitalistic system and a socialistic system. I take it that corporate interests in the USA cannot abide the idea that socialism could ever succeed. Every trick in the book was used to disgrace and discredit Castro and the Revolution.
.
But, the disgrace belongs to capitalism in this case.
.
I'm all for capitalism; but, I'm also all for socialism. The two systems can co-exist in with each other. Certain national resources are reasonable targets for government ownership. The Cuban sugar industry was being raped by multinational interests. It was the same way with the Venezuelan oil industry. I think Chavez has every moral right to nationalize that country's national resources. It makes good sense to me that energy be nationalized. I don't have any vested interests in Exxon's success--it can go to hell as far as I'm concerned.
.

-- posted by pink101

» Brian Tubbs - Socialism

In response to Revolution posted by pink101:

Socialism works just fine with ALL the parties involved VOLUNTARILY and OF THEIR OWN ACCORD choose to participate - and do so honestly, openly, and willingly.