The president's thesis is that it takes a government for individuals to succeed disqualifies him from consideration for a second term.
Many describe it as the biggest ideology gaffe of this election year. The speaker says, in essence, that it was merely a grammar goof. Either way, it was a gift to Mitt Romney that, at least temporarily, takes the heat off his tax return dust-up. The mistake, because it certainly was that, was President Obama’s announcement to small business owners, “If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.”…
Article comments
— go to most recent comments76 - Christopher Rose
Roger, your are so funny, albeit unintentionally so.
Keep on living in your imaginary world, you're clearly not equipped for reality; or honesty...
77 - troll
...dunno Chris - for all his faults you might give Roger a more sympathetic read
you do share certain concerns such as eg the overbearing State...one point of focus in Roger's work is to demonstrate how this is inexorably linked to liberalism
78 - Christopher Rose
troll, I don't read anybody sympathetically or unsympathetically, I read everyone informationally.
I know he and I have a few concerns in common but that does not detract from my points, which are information and fact based.
As to liberalism, sure it contributes to state expansion, just as the authoritarian paternalism of the right does too. However, liberalism is tolerant of differences, not controlling or limiting of them.
What we need are more intelligent and better laws and government processes, a meta legal and political system if you like...
79 - troll
... liberalism is tolerant of differences, not controlling or limiting of them. = an essential characteristic of liberalism (per Chris and Glenn Contrarian at least)
so a convincing critique of liberalism would need to highlight the ways in which this narrative is suspect
thanks for the clear re-focus
80 - Igor
@77-the overbearing state is linked to human vanity, the belief that each one has that he knows what is best for others. It's beyond mere politics.
81 - roger nowosielski
@79
But therein lies the contradiction, the idea that devising enlighten laws will do away with intolerance whereas their effect seems precisely the opposite. (Liberalism is a product/form of human enlightenment gone awry.)
Which suggests the need to re-think the proper function of law(s) in a democratic society, with greater stress on the didactic/teaching dimensions, designed to produce consent, than those having to do with censure and/or punishment.
82 - roger nowosielski
... enlightened ... (first line)
83 - Christopher Rose
troll, nothing is beyond a good critiqueing, indeed criticism is a necessary part of improving anything. In that regard, particularly online, what we need is dialectic but what we get is debate and/or rhetoric.
Igor, I'm not sure that all humans believe that they know what is best for others. It is an old world way that is a part of faithism and authoritarianism but more modern folk don't really need a big stick wielding figurehead.
Roger, as far as I have understood this conversation, nobody said that devising enlightened laws would do away with intolerance.
Tolerance is a quality of liberalism but there are no liberal political parties nor are the Western democracies particularly liberal - and increasingly less so both over the last 40 years and particularly since 9/11. You are arguing against something nobody is proposing...
84 - Les Slater
The terms liberal, progressive, left as well as conservative and many other attempts to describe political tendencies are often not much more than epithets these days.
Most organized, loosely or otherwise, political tendencies support the capitalist system. This is why it can be said that the whole range of alleged right to left is headed toward the same dead end.
85 - Zingzing
The problem, les, is that while communism is a beautiful idea, it assumes much of collective humans that we've proven over and over we don't have in us. Yes, we can work together for the better good, but there will always be someone or some group of people that will pervert that spirit and turn it into despotism. (Capitalism, which is greedy and corrupt to its core, at least plays to things that humans are capable of, even if it's not our best qualities.)
If you can tell me how you think we can negate this fundamental flaw in communist reality (not thought, but actual communism in action in the real world), I'm sure I'd at least become more open to persuasion about communism being anything but another dead end. (keep in mind that I'm totally open to socialism in many ways.). Hell. If you can just point me to a historical example of actual communism (in a nation or society at least somewhat comparable to our own) that didn't produce a nightmare, I'd be rather thrilled.
86 - Les Slater
Zing,
Your argument is not against communism but humanity. You are expressing nothing but the pessimism of a demoralized middle class.
Les
87 - Zingzing
Give me a break, les. Or at least meet me midway. And stop with the posturing. I can see right through it, and frankly, it smacks of propaganda. You must admit that communism in reality has not even closely lived up to its promise on paper. And even a smidgen of thought given towards communism's historical failings points towards human greed and the human desire for power as the reason for that failing.
It's not pessimism so much as it is engaging with reality. If you don't see the same problem I do, it seems to me that you are forgetting humanity rather than arguing for it. I love love love the idea of communism, but that's all it's ever really been good at being: an idea. It doesn't seem to work in large societies (and by large I mean even nations much much smaller than our own).
Can you tell me how to get around the fact that communism in practice has always been quickly perverted (and corrupted)? or can you tell me why you think it would be different this time? Or are you just going to give me another line?
88 - Les Slater
What are you talking 'this time'? Humanity has tried and we have learned. The attempts by humanity taking destiny into our hands were never thought to be able to work without suppressing the workings of capital on a world scale. There have been misjudgments as to what was possible when but like I say we have learned and now do know that capitalism is not necessary.
Previous attempts have been with relatively small and isolated working classes. The working classes and their vanguard leaderships have been ruthlessly smashed.
Capitalism itself has strengthened the working class qualitatively on a world scale since 1917. We are in a much better position to succeed and the forces of capital are continuously falling into deeper crisis.
It is becoming clear that capital will kill us if we don't kill it. The realization that the system, its political and business leaders have no answers is becoming clear to all but the most dense.
There will be those that will continue to believe that human beings are not capable of finding a way out but I'm quite confident that they will end up quite isolated.
89 - Zingzing
"this time" means whenever the next time comes around.
"we have learned and now do know that capitalism is not necessary"
You seem to be speaking for a large amount of people, many of whom I'd think would agree with you. Unfortunately, a lot of people with money and power would disagree with you, or if they didn't disagree with the "necessary" bit, would still think it desirable enough to fight over it, and they'd be hard to beat. Not saying it's impossible, just saying I think you're a bit over-confident. (and smacking of propaganda again...)
"Capitalism itself has strengthened the working class qualitatively on a world scale since 1917."
It has. Which may lead some in that class to think twice about biting the hand etc etc.
"It is becoming clear that capital will kill us if we don't kill it."
Times is tough right now, but come on. It's only been a few years. A decade ago and a decade from now, capitalism was and may again be doing just dandy by the middle class. It might not make you rich and it might not make you happy, but communism can't promise those things either... And communism (or at least the shitty attempts at communism,) has killed people before and it might again. This again smacks of propaganda. Do your friends like to be around you when you get on this stuff? Just asking.
"There will be those that will continue to believe that human beings are not capable of finding a way out but I'm quite confident that they will end up quite isolated."
All I'm saying is that full-blown communism might not be the answer. It's got several strikes against it already.
But anyway, you're saying that the working classes have learned and the next time we give communism a shot, the problems of past communist regimes won't pop up again because... I don't know. Do we have to suppress capitalism on a world scale? It's unclear from your comment. There are elements of human nature against communism. How does this address those problems?
90 - Igor
@85-Zing: there are many pioneering societies that were socialistic and even communistic, e.g., The Fourier Societies that sprang up all over the US in the 19th century, the Kibbutz's of Israel, the Amanas in Iowa, the, Mennonites and other traditional groups in the Northeast, all of the Indian tribes across the US, etc.
When I was a boy I worked on farms in southern Minnesota populated by Swedes and run in a loose communalism which developed "Co-ops" to jointly market finished farm products to stores, including Co-op groceries across the country. They were largely responsible for destroying grocery monopolies that oppressed both producing farmers and consuming families (that's why the profit margin in the grocery business is about 4%-5% now).
I'm surprised you're unaware of such communitarian successes and can only conclude that such information has been purposefully excluded from your education.
You'll have to search out the information on your own since it appears that USA newspapers and TV are controlled by large conglomerates that have vested interest in keeping citizens ignorant of anything that departs from conventional views.
91 - Les Slater
Zing, you read too much of your middle class demoralization into your understanding of history and human nature.
The direction of the period we are now in was becoming clear in the late 60's. It hit me like a sledge hammer on August 15, 1971. I have been observing, studying and intervening in the class struggle since.
During that time I found how seriously one has to take history and theory. Those that know me will note that my tone and confidence has become much more serious since Katrina. I talk to a lot of people. To see a major U.S. city destroyed by the workings of the capitalist system has opened many eyes. Only a very few have any confidence that government, business, academia or the any of the religious hierarchy have any solutions. This includes the very wealthy.
92 - Les Slater
To make it a little clearer that last sentence should read 'This lack of confidence includes the very wealthy.'
93 - Christopher Rose
Although I have ambivalent feelings about capitalism, I have even more mixed feelings about communism, which has never ever been established as a political system anywhere.
It is great in theory of course but then so are many other theories that can't actually cut it in the world.
One thing that capitalism's detractors tend to ignore is that it is actually taking more and more people out of poverty and that there are signs that there is an actual end to below subsistence level poverty for everyone on the planet within the lifetimes of people under 40 years of age...
94 - Christopher Rose
Igor, none of those examples were on a national level or have thrived over time, so don't really work as viable examples.
Les: "Capitalism itself has strengthened the working class qualitatively on a world scale since 1917. We are in a much better position to succeed and the forces of capital are continuously falling into deeper crisis.
It is becoming clear that capital will kill us if we don't kill it. The realization that the system, its political and business leaders have no answers is becoming clear to all but the most dense.
There will be those that will continue to believe that human beings are not capable of finding a way out but I'm quite confident that they will end up quite isolated."
Can you put some flesh on these rhetorical bones?
I have problems with the very concept of a unified working class; don't actually see how it is the case that the "forces of capital are continuously falling into deeper crisis"; fail to see how capital will kill us but would agree that many contemporary political and business leaders have no answers, although that is often true and new answers do seem to have a way of emerging.
Your last point is quite at odds with all the rest and I completely agree that we humans will find ways of resolving contemporary challenges but I don't think it is going to be in the way you seem to be envisioning...
95 - Les Slater
Chris,
Marxist do not deny the constructive power of capital and Marxists have not been the only ones to recognize the destructive power of capital.
It is becoming painfully clear to most that the destructive power of capital outweighs its constructive power. The consequence of technology and productivity creating misery on the scale it does is insidious.
Not only are the capitalist not able to control capital but it is becoming a threat to them also. The position of the capitalist himself has become quite precarious.
I have been suggesting that the working class itself contest for government leadership in the electoral arena and just let us decide what priorities to push and enforce.
Les
96 - Christopher Rose
Les, again, please substantiate your assertion that the "destructive power of capital outweighs its constructive power", because I don't see the evidence to support that or your other repetitious but similarly unsupported rhetoric.
It's starting to sound like a belief system rather than something more empirical...
97 - Christopher Rose
Oh, as to the notion of the working class, which I still don't see as a homogeneous body, contesting government leadership, that would seem pretty redundant when the political system and the legal structures that underpin it are themselves in need of substantial structural reform.
98 - Zingzing
Igor, #90-- you see that part where I continually ask for examples of communist societies or nations at least somewhat comparable to our own? That's because I know all about what you describe in your comment, and I was sure someone would bring it up, even though it's got no real baring on the idea of turning this nation into a communist nation. So spare me. It's pretty amazing that you think such info is hidden or hard to come by.
99 - Zingzing
Les, #91-- so I see you dodged the question again. Do you not agree that any attempts at a large-scale communist system have been marred by despotism? You speak in such vague terms... Why is that? There's so much rhetoric, but nothing concrete... You sound like a preacher of your gospel, which is more than a little off-putting, and not at all convincing.
100 - Zingzing
Seriously les, I know the metaphor may be a little off (or maybe not), but I'm like a guy looking at a car and you're the guy trying to sell it to me, and when I ask about the gas mileage, you go on about how many people it can fit in the back.
You're not going to sell me on this using that tactic, and you'd damn well better be trying to sell me, shouldn't you?
101 - Les Slater
I answered the questions, maybe not to the best of my ability, but certainly gave it a shot.
I was at a birthday party Saturday and started talking with a professor of philosophy. I knew him and we both have interests in Hegel and Marx. I mentioned I was reading Thomas Aquinas and got into a deep discussion on religion. He said he was not an atheist to which I replied that maybe we need God, from a biological perspective. It was a deep and very theoretical discussion. He got upset when I told him I didn't believe in infinity. We will continue that discussion.
His biggest shock was when I told him I was brought up Pentecostal. He was absolutely amazed that not only did I survive but am able to think.
What I didn't go into with him is that most of the relatives, and some friends, I grew up with never abandoned those beliefs. And you know what? Every last one of them can think. I don't have to hide any of my political beliefs or even avoid them.
Most of the real workers that I come in contact with are devout Christians. And you know what? They think too. I find many are very interested in explanations about how capitalists, the workings of markets and even capital itself thwarts their fulfillment of what they desire and believe they deserve. They are beginning to understand that they, as a class, being organized and taking power is necessary.
I spent over 30 years living in Boston. I couldn't stand it any longer and finally got out. It struck me when John Kerry was running for president that he represented the essence of middle class stupidity. He tried to say that everyone else was stupid.
Here in Chicago it is more confined to the left and other self-described progressives. It's distilled in the occupy movement, which in my opinion is quite reactionary. Politically they are the voice of capital personified.
102 - Zingzing
You didn't answer the question to my satisfaction, that's for sure. You didn't even directly address it. As for the rest of what you just said, I'm struggling to find any connection to what we were talking about, unless it was directed to someone else.
103 - Christopher Rose
Les, you didn't actually answer the questions at all, but you did confirm my suspicion that you are speaking out of faith not reason.
Your rather bizarre ramblings in #101 are lavish demonstration of a lack of clarity that is not a little unnerving.
Your views are divisive and reactionary in and of themselves and therefore lacking in credibility and value. Shame...
104 - Les Slater
Chris,
I'm a scientist by nature. I spent a career as a fairly high level electronics design engineer. Part of the scientist side is cosmology, thermodynamics and particle physics. My engineering experience hardware (both digital and analog), software, communications, signal processing, high energy - lots of things.
Since we are attempting to communicate here, and complaining about its shortcomings, I will let you know some the background of what I base what I say, what I observe and what I believe.
First, I can't see, hear, smell or otherwise observe all of reality. I have much experience with sampling and sampling theory. For that I'm indebted to Harry Nyquist. To go deeper as to what the samples might mean I'm indebted to Claude Shannon and Warren Weaver.
When interpreting a snippet of news or what a person may say he thinks on a certain subject one has to have some sense of the common shared experience and history and an immediate context.
Another technique I use is borrowed from particle physics, interjecting something that might shake something loose, maybe 'unnerving' and see what flies. Not always productive but over time and from different angles a picture begins to take shape.
Both 'fact' and 'faith' are ultimately based on a material reality. But both are interpretations of that material reality and may or may not correspond to the essence of that reality. There are even facts that may be true but only superficially related to the essential reality.
I strive very hard that any faith I have is related to the essence of material reality and its motion.
You may dismiss the likes of Hegel or Marx but believe me if you don't deeply understand what they are describing then you will be hopelessly lost.
Note that I did not say you had to be an expert in any academic sense but what they were attempting to describe is real.
Les
105 - Igor
@93-Chris: you don't suppose there can be something other than 'capitalism' or 'communism', do you? Or perhaps some felicitous combination of the two? Do you think that politics in Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Netherlands, etc., etc., is doomed?
It's not obvious to me that the Political Wheel Of Fortune only has two numbers on it.
106 - Igor
@93-Chris: the last paragraph seems astonishingly obtuse given all the current evidence that capitalism is presently embarked on a course of plundering wealth from the middle class while re-distributing wealth upward and pressing more people downward as we progress toward a society of "haves and have nots".
The middle is being raided from above.
107 - troll
"real workers" Les?
----
just as capitalist (like) exploitation (and I use that descriptor to remind us of what we're talking about) existed within a predominantly feudal social structure - and despite initially having no nation to call its own eventually dominated the dominator - so communist (like) productive enterprises exist within the currently dominant capitalist social structure...
- just sayin'
108 - Igor
@93-Chris: your first paragraph is puzzling since soviet (Stalinist) communism existed in the Soviet Union for 70 years and subjugated 100s of millions.
Soviet communism succeeded in creating industrial society in a backward agrarian society. It also succeeded in subjugating millions of people and even succeeded in Racial Cleansing of 10s of millions (Like the muzhiks). They were the first to launch a successful earth satellite. Etc. Of course, the arts suffered under "Socialist Realism", despite some great movies, good Prokofieff, Katchiturian, Stravinski, Shostakovitch,... and suddenly Pasternak and Solzhenitsin let the irrepressible human Russian soul loose.
109 - Igor
@98-Zing: what basis of comparison do you require when you say: "...you see that part where I continually ask for examples of communist societies or nations at least somewhat comparable to our own? "
Communist Russia, the Soviet Union, was as geographically large and populous as the USA, and so was comparable.
110 - Zingzing
It was, Igor, but that's not the type of example you were giving before. Besides, the ussr quickly devolved into despotism and even in its less despotic later days, it still wasn't the best advertisement for communism. You seemed to have missed my question to Les, which concerned a communist regime in a nation of at least comparable size to the us, which DID NOT devolve into despotism. "comparable" means at least a few million. On a small scale, it seems to me that communism can work, and in the early days of civilization, was probably a necessity. But I think the 20th/21st century experiments with large scale communism have all been disastrous or at least far below the even the most basic promise of communism's idea. Given the evidence, I'm not willing to trade in our current system, even with all its flaws, for what we've seen of communism in action.
111 - Zingzing
Igor: "Chris: your first paragraph is puzzling since soviet (Stalinist) communism existed in the Soviet Union for 70 years and subjugated 100s of millions."
I'd be willing to bet that Chris is saying that that wasn't really communism, as it was too perverted by the regime. Much the same as communism has been perverted in Cuba, Pre-90s china (and other parts of Asia that have made significant market reforms over the last couple of decades), as well as N Korea, which has not even attempted a classless society in many decades, if ever.
112 - Christopher Rose
Les, fascinating as your #104 is, how does it relate to either my remarks to you or your own prior remarks?
Igor, my answer to your #105 questions are maybe, but not so far; hopefully; and no.
Re your #106, what is happening in the USA and some other Western democracies is not the world; there is a clear trend that global poverty is declining and has been for many years now, regardless of short term localised problems.
World Bank data shows that the percentage of the population living in households with consumption or income per person below the poverty line has decreased in each region of the world since 1990:
Region 1990 2002 2004
E Asia/Pacific 15.40% 12.33% 9.07%
Europe/Central Asia 3.60% 1.28% 0.95%
L America/Caribbean 9.62% 9.08% 8.64%
M East/N Africa 2.08% 1.69% 1.47%
South Asia 35.04% 33.44% 30.84%
Sub-Saharan Africa 46.07% 42.63% 41.09%
As to the Soviet Union, what went on there was absolutely not Communism. There have never been any communist states ever.
113 - Les Slater
Chris,
My 104 was in response to your 103 which was a response to my 101. Before that there was a history of me trying to get across specifics as to the degeneration of capitalism and where to look to resolve the crisis.
Your very brief 103 complained on a couple fronts. One that I ramble and lack clarity and also that my views are divisive and reactionary. On the latter I have no idea what you are talking about.
As far as my 'ramblings' go, since I was not convincing you or Zing I thought I would give a little glimpse into what I think about and a little about how I think.
104, which you find fascinating, was an attempt at further elaboration of how I come to the views that I have and a little about some of my communications methodology.
The parts about essence vs the superficial goes back to the theme of this thread, namely a certain perspective on Obama in the 2012 elections. I attempted to point out that regardless of differences of politicians including their capabilities or lack thereof, that the direction the government would go had much more to do with underlying factors at work, factors that were beyond human control.
I contend that some of those factors need to be suppressed.
Les
114 - Christopher Rose
Les, I know which comments you were referring to but your 104 had no thematic relevance to anything preceding it.
Your views are reactionary because they are a reaction to your perception of the status quo and divisive because you see one class as pitted against another.
I can't actually relate to your view as it just seems to be based on a redundant and incomplete understanding of issues and what is actually going on in the world, as opposed to in the world of your political theory, but thanks for the conversation.
115 - Les Slater
Chris,
I told you a little about how I observe, think and communicate. Maybe you can enlighten me, in what I have written in this thread, how I advocate pitting one class against another.
Les
116 - Zingzing
"since I was not convincing you or Zing..."
you could easily attempt to do that, but you don't... I wonder why. Both Chris and I have expressed huge doubts about communism's ability to translate from the page to reality without becoming a distorted, malign thing, so much so that's it becomes impossible to actually call it communism and it becomes some form of despotism.
I've been poking around and found that Tito's Yugoslavia, while more socialistic than communistic, and while he was a dictator with a lot of problems and more than a little blood on his hands, may be the best shot you've got. There's loads of Balkan states (and other areas of eastern europe and near asia that weren't part of the ussr or the eastern bloc per se) that were once considered communist (but now are not) and they may have some history you should know something about and it's possible you could regale us with some stories of communist successes in those areas.
I, at least, want some facts. I want to see that the communist dream doesn't always become a nightmare. Where and when has it ever been that communism delivered anything close to what it promises? Socialism, communism's better equipped cousin, has its problems certainly, but they are minor compared to communism, and at least passable when compared to capitalism.
I find it hard to believe that, given the swings and easily corruptible qualities of capitalism, that anyone would fully subscribe to it. I also find it hard to believe that given the history and easily corruptible qualities of communism, that anyone would fully subscribe to it. Some mix of these things, even if bits of them harm the upper classes, and even if bits of them harm the lower and middle classes, is what's needed. No system will ever be perfect for all, but if we tinker and toy with an open mind, we might just produce something that doesn't simplify modern life down to ideas that have no baring on the modern world, and gives us both individual opportunity and a communal safety net.
117 - Les Slater
Zing,
I look at things very differently than you do. Or at least it would seem so on the surface.
I wasn't always a communist. I had to be convinced. A very short time after U.S. went off the gold standard I started hanging around the U.S. Socialist Workers Party and read 'Revolution Betrayed' by Leon Trotsky. It was very informative reading about what actually happened causing the degeneration of the Soviet Union. You should read it but I doubt it would totally convince you.
What did convince me at the time was a written account of a dispute within the Socialist Workers Party in 1939 and '40. Two major books were published about that dispute. One was 'In Defense of Marxism' by Leon Trotsky and the other 'Struggle for a Proletarian Party' by James P. Cannon.
The dispute erupted around the Stalin-Hitler Pact and the Soviet's occupation of eastern Poland and invasion of Finland.
The ideological leader of the opposition within the Party was one James Burnham. There were two others, one was Max Shachtman.
The point of the opposition was that with the Stalin-Hitler Pact and the military invasions of Poland and Finland that the Soviet Union could not be considered any different than Nazi Germany and could in no way be defended.
I was a new member of the Socialist Workers Party as I began reading 'Defense of Marxism' I agreed with the opposition that thought Trotsky was just splitting hairs because he was so connected with the Russian Revolution.
Before the end of the book I was won over to Trotsky's position and Burnham went from being a 'communist' to admitting his views were far from any form of Marxism. He later went on to Join William F. Buckley in the founding of the 'National Review'.
From this I became thoroughly convinced that class perspective has an extremely important bearing on one's political views. Reading wikipedia's piece on James Burnham can be quite enlightening.
And, oh yes, I do have a positive example to look to: Cuba.
Les
118 - Glenn Contrarian
Les -
Cuba's not exactly a positive example. Yes, they can rightfully brag about their medical system, particularly given the stupid half-century embargo that America keeps enforcing, but there's not much in the way of freedom of speech. They DO have many political prisoners there.
119 - Les Slater
Glen,
I've been to Cuba twice. My experience is that people do not have the slightest fear of criticizing the government or its political leaders or even the political system itself.
ALL of the celebrated 'political' prisoners that I have heard of have committed crimes similar to what might get you a prison term for in the U.S.
Les
120 - Cindy
Zing,
The 'modern world' seems perfectly suited to using technology for direct democracy rather than representative democracy. I wonder why that is never suggested, tested, or implemented on even the smallest levels as a potentially better alternative.
121 - Les Slater
Cindy,
Under the present class divided society with a minority, very privileged and powerful, ruling class having pretty much a monopoly forming opinions, any attempts at technology enabled direct democracy would, I believe, be a step toward mob rule.
Les
122 - Glenn Contrarian
Les -
Really? According to the Havana Times, Cuba 'finally' released all its non-violent political prisoners in 2011. According to the BBC (from before the actions in the Havana Times article), there were 167 political prisoners in Cuba.
But most telling is this article from earlier this year:
In 2011, Smith led Congress and members of the international community to nominate Biscet for the Nobel Peace Prize.
Biscet said that he has endured torture and inhumane cruelty at the orders of a dictatorship seeking to coerce him to stop his work to promote human rights in Cuba.
He told of the abuse that he suffered at the hands of the political police, who beat him, disfigured his face and broke his foot.
He and his family were tortured, he said, and three assassination attempts were made against him.
Biscet has been arrested multiple times, including once after he accused the Cuban government of allowing and hiding botched abortions.
While in prison, he was awarded the Medal of Freedom by President George W. Bush for opposing the Castro regime.
The Catholic Church in Cuba helped secure Biscet’s release â€" along with over 50 other dissidents â€" in March 2011. After his release, he chose to remain in Cuba and continue fighting for human rights.
In his testimony, Biscet described the cruel treatment he suffered and observed during almost 12 years in prison.
To be fair, America is the closest thing to a prison society in the world, and it is a national shame. But we can certainly speak out against our government. That's apparently not the case in Cuba.
123 - Igor
Neither communism nor capitalism is capable of being scaled up from small units to huge units.
We saw that demonstrated 30 years ago in the failure and breakup of the Soviets. It hasn't happened so disruptively to capitalism, yet, but we seem to be getting closer.
Meanwhile, many smaller states seem to prosper in each camp. We should learn from them.
124 - Glenn Contrarian
Igor -
Well said.
125 - Les Slater
Glenn,
Not that I would put a whole lot of faith in what Havana Times might say but the first link you provide, on balance, makes my case more than yours.
Les