Justin Trudeau Praises Fidel Castro

Fidel Castro has died. He ruled Cuba with an iron fist, and was responsible for untold suffering. He treated the LGBT community abhorrently:

Perez’s unsparing view of the Cuban Revolution was earned through his two years of toil at one of the misnamed “Military Units to Aid Production” during the 1960s. Gay men were sent to these facilities for conversion, for punishment, and as a kind of deterrence. After doing his time at what amounted to forced labor, Perez was rewarded by having his identification card “branded” with his incarceration and thereby shut out of education and employment.

Other stories from the early days of the revolution were equally harrowing, some even worse. One unidentified trans woman explains that she wears sunglasses because of an incident long ago. She then removes the glasses to show an eye bleached by acid that was thrown in her face.

He used firing squads, kept the Cuban people in poverty, and created a repressive system that punished anyone who dared to dissent.

On his passing my Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, had this to say:

“It is with deep sorrow that I learned today of the death of Cuba’s longest serving President.

“Fidel Castro was a larger than life leader who served his people for almost half a century. A legendary revolutionary and orator, Mr. Castro made significant improvements to the education and healthcare of his island nation.

“While a controversial figure, both Mr. Castro’s supporters and detractors recognized his tremendous dedication and love for the Cuban people who had a deep and lasting affection for “el Comandante”.

“I know my father was very proud to call him a friend and I had the opportunity to meet Fidel when my father passed away. It was also a real honour to meet his three sons and his brother President Raúl Castro during my recent visit to Cuba.

“On behalf of all Canadians, Sophie and I offer our deepest condolences to the family, friends and many, many supporters of Mr. Castro. We join the people of Cuba today in mourning the loss of this remarkable leader.”

Apparently, Justin speaks fluent lying-ass-kiss-ese.

Castro was a human monster who had no regard for human rights. He abused his own people, took their wealth and lived like a king while they starved. Castro stood against everything a Western Liberal democracy stands for.

Of course, this is from the man who openly calls himself a feminist, but has no problem giving a speech praising a gender segregated mosque.

To hear a form of truth, we have to turn to a man who seems barely able to string a sentence together without repeating his words over and over like a mantra.

Yes, President-Elect Trump, who said this:

“Today, the world marks the passing of a brutal dictator who oppressed his own people for nearly six decades,” an official Trump statement said. “Fidel Castro’s legacy is one of firing squads, theft, unimaginable suffering, poverty and the denial of fundamental human rights.”

In this instance he is absolutely right. Castro was a brutal dictator who oppressed his own people. While Trump has said some unimaginably stupid things during the election, on this topic he’s right.

How bad has our system become when we have to rely on Trump to do what our supposedly Liberal leaders refuse to do?

 

Advertisements

49 Comments

  1. there is a strange thing that happens to people when someone dies; the ax murderer had a family, and now they love him My husband’s uncle was married to a venal, grasping woman who berated her children and her husband for decades. When she died, the first thing he said, ‘wonderful woman. a wonderful woman.”
    My friend’s mother drove her, finally, into madness; yet when Mrs. Robie died her daughter wrote an obituary for her that made the woman look like Mother Teresa.

    It does sound like this may be what is happening with Castro. People are still terribly superstitious, and perhaps are afraid to speak ill of the dead, just in case he comes back to get ’em.

    • “It does sound like this may be what is happening with Castro. People are still terribly superstitious, and perhaps are afraid to speak ill of the dead, just in case he comes back to get ’em.”

      Yeah, that might be the case. I always prefer truth over fabricated feel good stuff. I’m a weird one I know. LOL.

      Thanks for your thoughts, Judy!

      • absolutely. “oh he looks so natural” he’s not natural, lady, he’s dead. and he never wore makeup, trust me.

        I also object to ‘boughten’ funerals, which are overloads, and the minister (who never knew the deceased anyway) won’t stop until the family is nearly prostate with grief. sigh.

        Im sure that even now Castro is being nominated for Cuban sainthood and a statue of him has already been commissioned. Cynics that we are.

  2. I think in our society many feel it’s improper to speak ill of the dead. It’s not based on whether the person was good or bad — it’s just more “acceptable” to offer positive comments (even though we sometimes have to really dig deep).

    I believe this is even more true in the political arena. The Donald may have spoken truth, but many will consider his remarks coarse and uncaring.

    As for your Trudeau? IMO, he went a little too far to the other extreme, but who am I to say? I’m not a Canadian. 😉

    • “The Donald may have spoken truth, but many will consider his remarks coarse and uncaring.”

      Sad reality when truth is considered course.

      ” IMO, he went a little too far to the other extreme, but who am I to say? I’m not a Canadian.😉”

      Of course you can say!

      I think he went a little far as well. It’s funny reading through the trending Twitter hashtags creating speeches in Trudeau’s name of other dictators who have passed.

      I remember when Falwell passed, what Hitch had to say.

  3. Yep, you pretty much nail it here. The amount of Castro worship among supposed liberals is downright nauseating.

    One thing you didn’t mention was that Castro’s regime executed at absolute minimum over 200 political opponents, mostly during the ’60s and ’70s, with some estimates of the number of victims up in the tens of thousands.

    For those interested in further reading on this authoritarian dictator’s repressive regime (now in all but name a hereditary monarchy), I’d recommend Sam Dolgoff’s “The Cuban Revolution: A Critical Perspective,” Samuel Farber;s “Cuba Since the Revolution of 1959,” Larry Gambone’s “Saint Che,” and Frank Fernádez’s “Cuban Anarchism: The History of a Movement.” (full disclosure: I edited and translated this one)

    With the upcoming 50th anniversary of the “revolutionary” Che Guevara’s death, the current issues of both “The Fifth Estate” and “Anarcho-Syndicalist Review” have informative pieces on this despicable Stalinist.

    Thanks for running this post. It’s a refreshing change of pace from the entirely undeserved encomiums to this authoritarian monster.

    (I’lll be putting up a somewhat longer post on Castro shortly.)

  4. Completely agreed. I think the reason that most of them don’t do so is fear: they’re afraid of being slandered as “racist” or “sexist” (no matter what they actually say–if it’s contrary to PC orthodoxy, they _will_ be slandered).

    In academia, such slander can have very real consequences, including job loss, which is why academic PC authoritarians seem so emboldened and non-PC academic leftists so cowed.

    Because of this, it’s incumbent on those of us freer to speak, those of us outside of academia’s hot house atmosphere, to denounce PC authoritarianism.

    • I agree wholeheartedly. I get slandered often. If you see the post before this one, you’ll find someone trying to shame me but it’s not going to work.

      When I started this blog, I did so with the intent to stand against religious fundamentalism and harmful ideologies. I often faced religionists who said I couldn’t have morals because I was an atheist. They tried to shame me into silence.

      Now the authoritarian Left is trying to do the same with name calling, slurs and regressive legislation.

      However, just like we had the better arguments against the religious right, we also have better arguments than the authoritarian Left.

      The commenter in that last post is now trying to paint the exchange as a tactic in debate, but the truth is glaringly obvious.

      So they can keep trying to smear me and others as ‘isms’ or ‘phobics’ but in the end I believe our arguments will prevail.

      I also think classical Liberals are starting to wake up and notice what is really beginning to happen to the Left.

  5. I think you miss the point here. You are complaining about your prime minister expressing his personal opinion of the man. You can express yours too. You may need to know Fidel meant different things to different people. While the rest of the world was doing business with the apartheid govt in South Africa he stood with the people of SA who were fighting for change.
    Maybe the words of the sage “no good man is wholly good nor no bad man wholly bad” are appropriate here.

  6. And while at it, I need to learn what a western liberal democracy stands for? Sometimes I think I know things only to discover I am misinformed.
    Your prime minister said it is with sorrow he learned of the demise. Would you have preferred he said with joy and pleasantry?
    He said the fellow was an orator and revolutionary? Do you object?
    They he was controversial: that is in my view representing different things to different people. How would you have wanted his message to be written? Or if you were his speech writer, what would you have written?

    • “I need to learn what a western liberal democracy stands for? Sometimes I think I know things only to discover I am misinformed.”

      Freedom of speech. Equal protection of civil and human rights. That sort of thing.

      “Your prime minister said it is with sorrow he learned of the demise. Would you have preferred he said with joy and pleasantry?”

      No. He could just say he learned of the death.

      “He said the fellow was an orator and revolutionary? Do you object?”

      He was both of those.

      I ran across an image that ‘fixed’ Justin’s speech. Not sure if it will work here, but here’s the link: http://bayimg.com/AailoaagK

        • “Aha, equal protection of human and civil rights in theory or in practice?”

          In theory. People are always working on making it a practice.

          “Is denying lgbts their rights part of Western liberal democracy? ”

          Depends where you’re from. In some States they couldn’t marry until recently. But they don’t throw acid in their eyes either or force them into doing hard labor.

          “Freedom of speech includes the freedom for your prime minister to say what he said?”

          Of course. No one is arguing that he shouldn’t be allowed to say it. He should be allowed to say it and then we should be allowed to disagree with him.

          “So you feel that he should have had the same emotion you had?”

          I feel he should be using facts to inform his speech. Not lies and ass-kissery.

            • “So in the case of LGBTs you draw the line at throwing acid in their faces?”

              No. That’s silly. But do you really think there is an equivalency between how Canada treats LGBT and how Fidel did?

              You’re trying to draw a false equivalency.

              “What facts do you think he should have used? The facts you agree with only or what?”

              Any facts. He’s being openly mocked around the world for praising a brutal dictator. And rightfully so.

              • I am not drawing a false equivalency. You gave the example, not I.
                Who is mocking him? Why, I am surprised at what a thin lens you use. Fidel was cruel to his people, and there is a lot that has been written about it but so far as I can tell he doesn’t run a torture complex in any country nor did his government send drones left right and centre in the name of anti-terror.
                Don’t use a small window to view the world, you need to stand on the mountain top 😉

                • “I am not drawing a false equivalency.”

                  Yes you are.

                  “Who is mocking him?”

                  Pretty much everyone. For example, #trudeueulogies was trending on Twitter. Newspapers. Youtube pundits.

                  “there is a lot that has been written about it but so far as I can tell he doesn’t run a torture complex in any country ”

                  He ran a complex that forced gay people to do forced labor. That’s a torture complex and one I quoted.

                  Why are you defending a known brutal dictator?

                  ” nor did his government send drones left right and centre in the name of anti-terror.”

                  You should call America with your false equivalency. I’m Canadian and we don’t do those things.

                  However, if you were gay, would you rather live in Fidel’s Cuba or America? In fact, no matter your race or sexual orientation, would you rather live in Cuba under Fidel or America?

                  ” Why, I am surprised at what a thin lens you use. ”

                  Back at you. Your lens doesn’t seem to let in facts or allow you to see a difference between America and places like Cuba or Saudi Arabia – a difference between Fidel Castro and Obama. You think they’re all equivalent, when they aren’t. What you’re doing is trying for moral relativism.

                    • “I am not defending Fidel.”

                      Sure seems like it. You seemed annoyed that I don’t think my Prime Minister should be glowingly praising a known brutal dictator.

                      “All along this was about the speech of your prime minister.”

                      Until you started mentioning America and wars etc.

                      “I condemn the actions of the Saudis, the Israeli or any non state actor whose goal is to harass the other. ”

                      Great. So do I. However, I’m not willing to draw false equivalencies either.

                    • “Well, so be it. In my first comment, I said there is no bad person wholly bad”

                      And I agreed with you. Did you miss that part?

                      Of course Castro is a human being and so he’s not likely to be all bad. That doesn’t erase the fact that he used firing squads, killed and tortured political dissidents, starved people, forced gay people to do forced labor etc.

                      “You see false equivalency where there is none”

                      You clearly tried to draw a line between America and Fidel run Cuba. That’s a false equivalency.

                      “you on the other hand suffer what other moralists suffer. ”

                      I’m not a moralist. I leave that to those who try to regulate speech and call people ‘isms’ or ‘phobics’ for expressing opinions they don’t agree with.

                      I’m a person who happens to think my Prime Minister was dopey for praising a known brutal dictator.

  7. In the developed west there is a pervasive assumption that free market capitalism is supremely better than communism. Evidence points to it being impossible for the media and the academics to comment on current issues outside of the lens of that assumption. Additionally, is a flawed assumption about what constitutes poverty/acceptable standards of living. I’m not commenting here on Fidel Castro specifically because I don’t know enough about him. I’m referencing the way Cuba, its government and its people are globally/publicly regarded, through a very thick lens of assumptions. Further, the United States and allied nations won’t admit, but are very culpable in the conditions in Cuba because of decades of sanctions based on those flawed assumptions.

    • Hi HG!

      Are you saying that you believe communism is better than capitalism?

      I think the evidence says otherwise, although communism sounds good on paper, but in practice it has never turned out well for anyone but the people running the show.

      “Further, the United States and allied nations won’t admit, but are very culpable in the conditions in Cuba because of decades of sanctions based on those flawed assumptions.”

      I agree with this. I think sanctions did hurt living conditions in Cuba.

      However, that didn’t stop Fidel from living in lavish luxury and he clearly didn’t much care if his people starved and died.

  8. Ever hear of fake news? It goes deeper than Facebook trolling. There are journalists who alter their experiences or express them subjectively. Firing squads were a thing of the long past. All these allegations are ridiculous. And compared to western society, he was a much better leader.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s