Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Fidel Castro celebrates 90th birthday, criticises Obama in public letter [View all]Uponthegears
(1,499 posts)But, apart from declaring that Marti wasn't a "power-hungry tyrant" and Castro, by contrast, was a tyrant, which is nothing more than a repetition of your original claim in the form of an ad hominem attack, you offer precious little to support your premise, or to answer my simple question.
Perhaps if I ask it again in a different way, we can get a better idea of how you arrived at your original comparison. Let's try.
IF Marti knew (as history has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt) that the US and/or the same multi-nationals that fueled the Banana Republics, would not permit a socialist democracy to exist in the Western Hemisphere, which part of his vision would he have sacrificed, democracy or socialism?
I think you know the answer. Marti wrote extensively about how it was capitalism that fueled the enslavement of the people of Latin America. As did Castro, he understood that tyrannical rule was the byproduct of economic inequality, not the other way around. More importantly, and going back to my original premise, the PEOPLE, those poor people who were forced to worry about simple things like eating and not getting killed instead of engaging in high-minded political discourse over whether they should be ruled by an elected leader or a self-declared one, who stood shoulder to shoulder with Fidel, Raul, and Che, understood it too.