View Single Post
Old 1st March 2021, 02:48 PM   #611
xjx388's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 9,319
Originally Posted by dann View Post
As always, bloody boring and based on hearsay and no real knowledge of anything. Common phrases and vague ideas. Truly ad nauseam!
Excellent summation of your little thread here.

The two political parties in the USA serve one purpose only: to choose a personality, the prime specimen of the American Dream to compete for the post as the leader of the country for the next four years, be it Obama, Hillary, Trump or Biden, presented with more or less meaningless slogans that each and every voter can interpret to mean whatever they want it to.
LOL, so not cults of personality but run-of-the-mill politicking.

You are the one who brought up cults of personality. You just have a hard time recognizing them in your own backyard, which is not Wikipedia's problem.
Your complete misapprehension of what exactly a cult of personality is is your own problem. It seems you didn't even read the very article you linked to which is in perfect synch with what I'm talking about:

The term came to prominence in 1956, in Nikita Khrushchev's secret speech On the Cult of Personality and Its Consequences, given on the final day of the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. In the speech, Khrushchev, who was the First Secretary of the Communist Party – in effect, the leader of the country – criticized the lionization and idealization of Joseph Stalin, and by implication, his Communist contemporary Mao Zedong, as being contrary to Marxist doctrine. The speech was later made public and was part of the "de-Stalinization" process in the Soviet Union.
And it's interesting that once "de-Stalinaztion" began, it ultimately led to the end of the Soviet Union itself.
Yes, what something is usually "presented as" is good enough for you. And writers or dictators, they're all the same to you.
Nope. I specifically said I didn't have a problem with the writers as much as I did the dictators.
What I like isn't really the question. What this thread is about is the point. And you would like to turn it into a thread where you present your complaints about whatever you imagine is socialism, communism, Marxism, instead of sticking to the point, which is how capitalism has mismanaged the pandemic response. The worse your Neo-liberalist state Texas is doing, the more disinclined you become to discuss its coronavirus strategy, which is why your posts are one long line of attempts to derail the thread.
It's not a derail to ask naturally-arising questions that spring from the topic of the thread. If Capitalism is the problem, what's the solution? This is all an elaborate dodge on your part to avoid having to show your hand. I can infer what's in your hand based on your body of work on this forum. It's very interesting to me that you refuse to answer a simple question about solutions.

Yes, capitalism sucks at responding to the pandemic, but I have actually been more specific than that, and the more laissez-faire the version of capitalism is, the worse it is at fighting the pandemic. You don't get it because you are not interested in getting it.
I get it. I have the same complaints. Now what? What does that get us? Absolutely nothing! What would be important to do next is to talk about how we resolve the problems we both agree exist.

You're the complainer. I am the critic of the way capitalism and its beneficiaries, rich people, have spread the virus and are still doing what they can to get first in line for vaccines instead of letting it go to the people who need it the most.
Who do you think was/will be first in line for the vaccine in Cuba? You don't think Raul Castro and his lackies will get the first doses?

And let's talk about this country you brought up who has handled the pandemic so well, Cuba. First of all, I don't trust their numbers given the history of hiding multiple human rights violations and the state-controlled media. But let's grant that they've done better than the US. Wonderful. What about the bread shortages and the fact that the people there can't even get access to the basic goods and services we take for granted? What about the fact that they have no access to a free press or even the freedom to criticize their government? You have to ignore their record on basic human rights to praise them for their (dubious) success in handling the panemic. Ask a Cuban refugee living in Miami if they would trade places with their former countrymen.

You seem to confuse cult of personality with dictators,
No sir -you seem to forget that the term was coined to refer to exactly those dictators.
which is probably part of the reason why you don't recognize the U.S. version of cults of personality. I doubt that Fidel Castro enshrined much into the Cuban Constitution. Could you at least come up with a quotation to illustrate your point? Doesn't it say so in one of your textbooks?
If you'd like to live in the fantasy world in which Fidel Castro didn't have much to do with the 1976 Cuban Constitution or his brother had nothing to do 2019 Constitution . . . well, I hope you have a cool pet unicorn there.

Yes, there is a cult of personality in Cuba surrounding Fidel Castro. He was the leader of the Cuban revolution, so it's no surprise, really. There is a cult of personality surrounding Lincoln in the USA - "even when he's dead." There's a Kennedy cult as well even though he never freed any slaves.
Holy Moley. This is such a bad take ... yeesh.
But that's not a cult of personality in your opinion because cults of personality in your opinion only occurs when they are cults of people you don't like.
Nope. I understand what a cult of personality is; I'm sorry you don't.
By the way, Castro disapproved of any attempts to worship him, one of the reasons why you find big murals of Che and Camilo (and a memorial to Martí) at the Plaza de la Revolución, but so far none of Castro. Otherwise, Cuba is so pleasantly free of cults of living politicians that you probably don't even know the name of the present head of state.
Raul Castro.

Yes, China is capitalist! And you actually seem to be proud of it! Mao probably knew as little of Marx's analysis of capitalism as you do. And no, I'm not going to provide you with any kind of alternative. You have already pretended to know all about it based on your "textbooks", which turned out to be nothing at all.
Nothing but a dodge. You simply don't have an alternative, or if you do, it's (based on some other of your posts, if I'm remembering correctly) "Let's give real-deal Marxism a try!"
However, it is very obvious that China's "embrace some capitalistic ideas" didn't go all the way in their response to the pandemic, which I bet the Chinese are quite content with:
USA: 1,563
China: 3
Yay! They did pandemic good! Now, if they would just allow a free press, stopped "silencing" dissidents, stopped torturing ethnic minorities . . . you get the idea.

Then stop complaining.
This dodge is nowhere as good as your last one.
Yes, ad nauseam. I guess reminding you of the theme of this thread will be in vain, but if you have any comments about the current vaccine inequality, feel free to share.
That's better!
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top