they did it because they collapsed under their own incompetence.
Huh, and here I thought they did it because peaceful protests were just so darn effective.
And if Cuba is the standard you have for quality of life, I feel sorry for you.
First off, Cuba’s quality of life is greatly impacted by the US embargo. Secondly, even with the embargo Cuba’s quality of life greatly improved compared to what it had before. If the standard you have for quality of life is the Batista gangster state, I feel sorry for you.
Funny how you chauvanists always try to compare the quality of life in former colonies to that of the imperial core as if it’s some kind of point in your favor. If you do an actually fair comparison by looking at what came before, Castro was a massive improvement over Batista, the PRC was a massive improvement over the ROC, and the USSR was a massive improvement over the tsar.
I’m comparing what our lives are here under democratic rule here in my country to what they were under the single party communist system. And we have no desire to go back. The communists will never win another election here, and for good reason. If you have to force your system of government on the population at gunpoint, it’s not anything to be proud of.
And again, if you want to argue that’s true in certain situations, then knock yourself out. Don’t try to propose it as some universal law or dismiss objective quality of life improvements in other countries.
Just so long as you arbitrarily exclude Iran, Guatemala, Indonesia, Chile, and the many, many other cases where the CIA overthrew peaceful, democratically elected leaders who went against their economic interests, while also blaming countries for things outside of their control, and refusing to consider changes in quality of life and insist that every former colony be compared to the nations that stole/are stealing their wealth and resources.
I think you are making my point for me. Violent revolutions are often if not usually hijacked and perverted by violent parties to achieve their own ends, which almost never line up with the needs of the actual citizens of the territory.
“Violent revolutions” like when Mossadegh was democratically elected? Or Jacobo Árbenz, again, being democratically elected?
You are making my point for me. Westerners are so ignorant of the histories of these countries that it doesn’t matter how peaceful they are. You’ll just assume that they’re violent based on nothing. How are you supposed to win public support when the public doesn’t know you exist, and doesn’t care if you live or die?
Huh, and here I thought they did it because peaceful protests were just so darn effective.
First off, Cuba’s quality of life is greatly impacted by the US embargo. Secondly, even with the embargo Cuba’s quality of life greatly improved compared to what it had before. If the standard you have for quality of life is the Batista gangster state, I feel sorry for you.
Funny how you chauvanists always try to compare the quality of life in former colonies to that of the imperial core as if it’s some kind of point in your favor. If you do an actually fair comparison by looking at what came before, Castro was a massive improvement over Batista, the PRC was a massive improvement over the ROC, and the USSR was a massive improvement over the tsar.
I’m comparing what our lives are here under democratic rule here in my country to what they were under the single party communist system. And we have no desire to go back. The communists will never win another election here, and for good reason. If you have to force your system of government on the population at gunpoint, it’s not anything to be proud of.
And again, if you want to argue that’s true in certain situations, then knock yourself out. Don’t try to propose it as some universal law or dismiss objective quality of life improvements in other countries.
I’m only arguing based on the real world examples presented on each side of the argument to date.
Just so long as you arbitrarily exclude Iran, Guatemala, Indonesia, Chile, and the many, many other cases where the CIA overthrew peaceful, democratically elected leaders who went against their economic interests, while also blaming countries for things outside of their control, and refusing to consider changes in quality of life and insist that every former colony be compared to the nations that stole/are stealing their wealth and resources.
I think you are making my point for me. Violent revolutions are often if not usually hijacked and perverted by violent parties to achieve their own ends, which almost never line up with the needs of the actual citizens of the territory.
I have no idea how showing a bunch of peaceful movements that got slaughtered “makes your point for you.”
It looks to me like you are listing violent revolutions.
“Violent revolutions” like when Mossadegh was democratically elected? Or Jacobo Árbenz, again, being democratically elected?
You are making my point for me. Westerners are so ignorant of the histories of these countries that it doesn’t matter how peaceful they are. You’ll just assume that they’re violent based on nothing. How are you supposed to win public support when the public doesn’t know you exist, and doesn’t care if you live or die?