• Display name@feddit.nu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      I guess you could call stomping out peaceful protests with violence an act of terrorism? But that’s not the entire reason lol

      • plinky [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        46
        ·
        8 months ago

        I guess you could call george floyd or la riots stomping a terrorist act thonk

        but for real, islands can’t survive on their own, if tomorrow uk stopped all trade, it will start starving in 2 months. usa sanctions are extra cruel with both finance and shipping conditions

          • cuba and korea are already democratic, as in the sense of true democracy, workplace democracy. liberal “democracy” is nothing more than a cover for the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie and foreign imperialists. just look at cuba and korea under their respective american and japanese occupations. thats what the liberal west wants to return them to.

            • Display name@feddit.nu
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              8 months ago

              Well “true” democracy is a rather open definition lol. With a minimalist definition enough even North Korea is a democracy based on them holding elections but I mean that is obviously not the case. Liberal democracy is just electoral democracy+ rule of law. You can have liberal democracy without capitalism and the bourgeoisie, just look at the Scandinavian countries before the neoliberalists took hold.

                • Display name@feddit.nu
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  ? The current Nordic model is hardly socialist, just a welfare model. But in the 60’s it was on its way to eradicate the bourgeoisie and lift the under class in its entirety?

                  Didn’t know it was a meme lol, what is it about?

                  • ExotiqueMatter@lemmygrad.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    23
                    ·
                    8 months ago

                    But in the 60’s it was on its way to eradicate the bourgeoisie and lift the under class in its entirety?

                    No, it was just a welfare state back then too, they just had more concessions at the time because there was the Soviet Unions just next door with guarantied employment, free healthcare and housing, etc, and were getting so riled up over it that the bourgeoisie was getting really scared of potentially having a revolution and decided that temporarily giving these concessions was better than loosing everything.

              • ExotiqueMatter@lemmygrad.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                25
                ·
                8 months ago

                Sorry but Scandinavian countries were still capitalist and still had a bourgeois class even before the neoliberals came around.

                • Display name@feddit.nu
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  Oh you mean like that! Yes that is a good point. Can it be considered democratic if you have a hegemony ruling for lengthy periods of time with no shift in power even though there is free and equal competition by the opposition. I think 2012 was the last time an oppositional party held power.

                  • plinky [he/him]@hexbear.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    24
                    ·
                    8 months ago

                    How can it be equal, if every layer of government is held by one party? (that’s ignoring our typical commie gripes that ldp was showered by cia money till the 70s)

                    but i mean your initial point (the leadership should submit if they care about people) is exact same point made during any siege in all of the history. While premise for that siege (something that makes it palatable for the people) is comparatively pitiful: its not supported by un (overwhelmingly), one party states an dictatorships are routinely supported by usa, cuba is not prosecuting minorities over sexual/racial differences, so what exactly is usa problem you think?

              • davel [he/him]@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                13
                ·
                8 months ago

                Yes they can easily have the sanctions lifted by betraying the people of Cuba and allowing Global North neocolonizers to resume their pillaging of the nation.

                What a dumbass turbolib.

          • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            28
            ·
            8 months ago

            However what is important to remember is that the sanctions are imposed based on the regimes actions against it’s population

            I don’t know every single sanction against the DPRK, but over the last 40 years the sanctions have all been in connection to nuclear development and things like that. Also, it’s rich that you talk about communists being hypocrites while you take western powers at their word for why they are imposing sanctions that starve people by your own admission. The US has done and is doing much crueler things to the people of these states than the states themselves have ever done in any but the most unhinged fantasies.