Cubans are begging for capitalism, americans are begging for socialism

50% Normal
18 Comments

I find it terribly ironic how a lot of very well funded American socialist groups like AOC and BLM say that Cuba's issues are because of the American embargo.

Communism in and of it self doesn't allow free markets to exist. How can one believe a capitalist economy somehow hurts a communist country? How can one think Cuba is ruined by and saved by foreign free market economies?

Voting Results
50% Normal
Based on 6 votes (3 yes)
Help us keep this site organized and clean. Thanks!
[ Report Post ]
Comments ( 18 )
  • LloydAsher
    2 years ago

    Pretty much the situation in America is that it's the normal people vs the mentally unstable people.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    4
    4
  • [Old Memory]
    2 years ago

    Americans are mostly asking of social-democracy, which right-wing organizations and conspiratards like the John Birch Society have conflated, purposefully and otherwise, with socialism for decades. "Socialism" isn't when the government does a thing, it's when workers possess control over the means of production, democratically or otherwise. Something basic like "jobs should pay a living wage and people shouldn't have to call Uber to go to the hospital" does not a socialist make.

    Now, if someone were to insist that work places should be democratized and rent-seeking abolished, THEN I might consider that person a socialist.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    2
    2
      -
    • Anonymous Post Author
      2 years ago

      The radical left are actually calling for state control. BLM are an admitted Marxist organization and have and do support communist regimes. AOC has publicly said the government should take over energy because the private sector is "ruining the earth".

      She is very well funded as are BLM and they have a very high quality of life and enjoy the fruits of a free economy and freedom to speak their mind. Neither of which Cubans can do.

      Its more than ironic it is patently hypocritical.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      0
      0
  • techpc
    2 years ago

    All of those that I've seen who lived in communist countries never seem to want more communism. Funny how that works out.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    1
    1
      -
    • Lyka4
      2 years ago

      Yeah bc every existing communist country is authoritarian lol. No one wants to live under an authoritarian regime unless they're the one in power, period, left or right.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      1
      1
  • Voray
    2 years ago

    AOC isn't an organization and she's no more well-funded than any other politician. And when did BLM support communist countries? And "Marxist" is just a scare word. MLK had socialist views and he was good guy and not "well-funded."

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
      -
    • Anonymous Post Author
      2 years ago

      You're furthing proving my point in that AOC is as a well funded individual with a pro socialist agenda. Marxism isn't a buzzword, it is literally the ideaology that the Cuban people are fighting against and radical leftist in the states are promoting.

      Black Lives Matter co-founder Patrisse Cullors described herself and fellow co-founder Alicia Garza as “trained Marxists” in a recently resurfaced video from 2015.

      “We actually do have an ideological frame[work],” Cullors said of her organization. “We are trained Marxists. We are super-versed on, sort of, ideological theories.”

      I think Cullors recently bought a mansion.

      Either way, my point is that Cubans are begging for democracy and open markets while some Americans are using their freedom and erned income to shit all over their rights.

      It is embarrassing. And terribly Ironic.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      2
      2
  • Anonymous Post Author
    2 years ago

    I disagree clunk. I don't think it is ever moral to take what someone has worked for and forcefully give it to someone else that didn't work for it. That is the fundamental problem with collectivism, it requires force. 100 million plus dead souls can atone for that in the 20th century.

    Capitalism has eradicated poverty on a global scale. It is the most moral economic system.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
      -
    • Clunk42
      2 years ago

      "take what someone has worked for and forcefully give it to someone else".

      There's the issue with capitalism. It causes people to lose their morals. It has caused you to believe, for example, that the only way a government can do things is by force. That is not the intention, however. The goal is to make a government that wouldn't have to use force, because the people would trust the government. Capitalism is based around a distrust of the government, which makes the government incapable, while socialism is based around excessive trust of the government, making the government overly capable. Ultimately, they both lead to the government having to use force to do what is right.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      0
      0
  • Clunk42
    2 years ago

    They're both two sides of the same coin, really. Capitalism leads to a lack of morals, which socialism tries to correct, but socialism leads to a terrible economy, which capitalism tries to correct.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
      -
    • Anonymous Post Author
      2 years ago

      I don't disagree in that the goals of both are the betterment of humanity, but in practice in the past two centuries capitalism has lifted more humans out of poverty, increased life expancy, and led to unprecedented inovation; quality of life.

      While collectivism (socialism, communism),in the past two centuries has led to an unprecidented number of human deaths and suffering.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      0
      0
        -
      • Clunk42
        2 years ago

        Of course. A wrecked economy kills more people than corrupted morals.

        Comment Hidden ( show )
        0
        0
          -
        • Anonymous Post Author
          2 years ago

          Capitalism is more moral in that is a free exchange. You voluntarily give your good or service to someone else for their good or service.

          That has proven historically to be way more moral than pointing a gun at someone and telling them to work for someone else, or else.

          Comment Hidden ( show )
          0
          0
            -
          • Clunk42
            2 years ago

            It is slightly more voluntary. You still have to have a productive job, either way.

            Comment Hidden ( show )
            0
            0
              -
            • Anonymous Post Author
              2 years ago

              Yes, hypothetically. But fortunately capitalist based economies don't shoot people that aren't participating.

              Comment Hidden ( show )
              0
              0