NationStates Jolt Archive

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/americas/04/29/venezuela.cuba.ap/
On a recent trip to Havana, Venezuela's president, Hugo Chavez, said that US citizens are opressed. I love this guy. He's gone progressively from opposing Bush's policy to anti-American rantings, and shows signs that he wishes to be a regional power in Latin America. And he says things that, I find, are ultimately baseless. I, btw, live in the US. I do not feel oppressed. In fact, most of the time, I find my political discussions abstract. The government rarely has any impact on my personal life.

is this the same guy that said America would invade Venezuela?

R
O
F
L
M
A
O

is this the same guy that said America would invade Venezuela?

Yes... yes, he most certainly is. :p

Of course, it does depend on where you live in the US... and what you like to do as a (peaceful) hobby, or what you like to (peacefully) consume, and as long as you pay your taxes on time... :rolleyes:

Of course americnas are not oppressed...

*looks around at big guns, held by big men*

Surely you jest...

Didn't he suppress worker riots in his country?

Chavez talks about American oppression while visiting Cuba? That is pretty hypocritical, isn't it?

He talks about American oppression when his own path to power is questionable. This guy is just pandering to Anti-American sentiment, nothing more. He wants more leverage in the Americas, nothing more.

Chavez talks about American oppression while visiting Cuba? That is pretty hypocritical, isn't it?

Well considering the fact that we can't even travel there...

why yes... Americans are oppressed infact just the other day I saw a guy get shoved into a bla...............................

[CONNECTION TERMINATED]

why yes... Americans are oppressed infact just the other day I saw a guy get shoved into a bla...............................

[CONNECTION TERMINATED]


The black van was mine, that man may or may not have been harmed...

Are we oppresed? In what sense? Are we constantly told what to think, how to act, and so on? Yes, of course. Are we free to ignore that? Yes again. Are we quietly given the sense that dissenting opinions could be a very bad idea? Yes, all the time. I think we are not opressed, but all it would take would be a little enforcement and we would be.

The black van was mine, that man may or may not have been harmed...

Agent 754, you've said quite enough already.

Chavez talks about American oppression while visiting Cuba? That is pretty hypocritical, isn't it?

He talks about American oppression when his own path to power is questionable. This guy is just pandering to Anti-American sentiment, nothing more. He wants more leverage in the Americas, nothing more.
For some reason, that didn't connect in my mind.
Anyhow, while sailing on a cruise ship last week, I saw Cuba. We actually passed within a few miles of Havana. At other ports, there were crowded sea-lanes, tall buildings, and a feeling of vibrancy. But none of that was there. All that seemed to make up Cuba were shadows. Even the buildings seemed dull, as opposed to the vibrancy I saw in the Yucutan.

Well considering the fact that we can't even travel there...

Yes, that embargo is bullshit and we should get rid of it. Still, Chavez is somewhat more hypocritical than us.

Are we oppresed? In what sense? Are we constantly told what to think, how to act, and so on? Yes, of course. Are we free to ignore that? Yes again. Are we quietly given the sense that dissenting opinions could be a very bad idea? Yes, all the time. I think we are not opressed, but all it would take would be a little enforcement and we would be.
The US government, if it wanted to, could have the greatest control of its citizens internally. We know that it is already in the government's power to acsess any data on anything at anytime. Yet they don't.

Yes, that embargo is bullshit and we should get rid of it. Still, Chavez is somewhat more hypocritical than us.
I don't want to turn this into a Cuba debate, but...
Cuba threatened US national security. Castro made small attacks on the US as well, such as dumping his criminals into the US during the Mariel Boat Lift. He's apologized for nothing, and is still alive. The embargo ought to be lifted when Castro is outta power, and I am optimistic that it will be. But it can't be a day sooner.

No, Chavez did not supress workers' riots, the America media horribly distorted the facts.

In 2001, I think, an American supported coup was attempted; the "uprising" being of the employers and sections of the military. Chavez was placed under house arrest; but the workers rallied to his side and the "uprising" was crushed.

Of course, all through this time; the American media was showing the exact oppisite. :rolleyes:

You know Chavez has been quoting Marx in his speeches now? Viva Chavez! Long live the Socialist-Bolivarianist revolution of South America! Its spreading, the riots in Belize are opening into Revolution; the sitiuation in Bolivia is tipping towards revolution soon....I could go on...yadda yadda.

Let's see...I voted in an election with like 20 people on the ballot, I wasn't shot even though some of the people I picked lost. I quit my job and got a new one, and took my first paycheck and spent it on booze for a party and nobody questioned it. I wrote my term paper on the merits of feminism, joined some student interest organizations and nobody said anything.

Help, I'm being oppressed.

The only thing that makes what he said sad is that perhaps a few might actually believe it.

No, Chavez did not supress workers' riots, the America media horribly distorted the facts.

In 2001, I think, an American supported coup was attempted; the "uprising" being of the employers and sections of the military. Chavez was placed under house arrest; but the workers rallied to his side and the "uprising" was crushed.

Of course, all through this time; the Amiercan media was showing the exact oppisite. :rolleyes:

You know Chavez has been quoting Marx in his speeches now? Viva Chavez! Long live the Socialist-Bolivarianist revolution of South America! Its spreading, the riots in Belize are opening into Revolution; the sitiuation in Bolivia is tipping towards revolution soon....I could go on...yadda yadda.
Ah, isn't it nice that the far left has a poster boy again? They have moved steadily along to intellectual irrelevancy, and have lost lots of ground since the end of the Cold War. But they still get support among dictator wannabes. It's all very interesting.

I just voted and saw the submitted opinions. I have to disagree with the people that say that we, Americans, are not oppressed. There is way too much that I cannot do that I would or would not do if I had the freedoms to do as I wish. These things are on illegal drugs, skateboarding/rollerblading, and many other freedoms that other countries do have.

Let's see...I voted in an election with like 20 people on the ballot, I wasn't shot even though some of the people I picked lost. I quit my job and got a new one, and took my first paycheck and spent it on booze for a party and nobody questioned it. I wrote my term paper on the merits of feminism, joined some student interest organizations and nobody said anything.

Help, I'm being oppressed.

The only thing that makes what he said sad is that perhaps a few might actually believe it.

He probably meant opressed by the wealthy, not necessarily politically. A little context would've helped!

Ah, isn't it nice that the far left has a poster boy again? They have moved steadily along to intellectual irrelevancy, and have lost lots of ground since the end of the Cold War. But they still get support among dictator wannabes. It's all very interesting.

Chavez is not a dictator, he was democractically elected and even let a democractic refrendum attempting to take him out of power go on a campaign, it failed.
The time of "vanguard dictatorships" is over; South America has recently gone through a horrible experince with the free market inducing poverty all over the region. And now the left is rising in South and Central America; Colombia, Venezeula, Paraguay, Ecaudor, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil and Chile all have growing revolutionary movements if its not a revolution already being staged already.

Ah, isn't it nice that the far left has a poster boy again? They have moved steadily along to intellectual irrelevancy, and have lost lots of ground since the end of the Cold War. But they still get support among dictator wannabes. It's all very interesting.

AHEM. Ever hear of Salvador Allende?

He probably meant opressed by the wealthy, not necessarily politically. A little context would've helped!
I still don't feel oppressed. I live a rather nice life in the US. I, along with many other Americans, am able to shop at many different stores with a huge variety, go out to eat at nice resturants, own a car of my choice, etc. My labor may be "exploited", but if it is, then I am locked in a very big gilded cage. Besides, without my "exploited" status, none of what I see or buy would exist.

AHEM. Ever hear of Salvador Allende?

Or that certain CIA-Supported General Pinochet? ;)

Somewhat off topic, but... the United States is the best thing ever to happen to Castro's Cuba. Why? Because all the Gusanos get on rafts and to to Miami! All his political opponents are in the US instead of Cuba where they can make trouble for him. This leaves the man as a beloved dictator in his own country.

Just a note, Gusanos means worms, and it is the term used by Cubans to refer to anti-Castroists.

I'm an American and I DO feel oppressed... but probably not for the reasons that Chavez believes I am.

I'm opressed because foreign nations have eternal resentment for me and my President for having values. I'm opressed by my countrymen on the other ends of the political spectrum, who have managed to paint me and like-minded people as "less-intelligent", "fat cats", "religious zealots", or whatever label I have thrown at me on a weekly basis. (I say weekly because I mostly subject myself to this BS on this forum, and I'm trying to cut that back to once a week.)

I also recognize there are people that have the opposite beliefs as I do and feel similarly opressed, though I disagree with their reasoning.

But all in all, political disagreement doesn't count as real opression I guess. Not in comparison to countries were dissidents get jailed, shot, starved or raped. Nope. Guess we're not opressed.

Chavez is not a dictator, he was democractically elected and even let a democractic refrendum attempting to take him out of power go on a campaign, it failed.
No, not yet. But he is growing along the same lines that Vladimir Putin is centralizing power, and Robert Mugabe did. He is, what Fareed Zakaria calls, an "elected autocrat": an ultrapopulist strongman able to get elected, and slowly take powers away from the legislature, judiciary, provincial governments, and markets.
The time of "vanguard dictatorships" is over; South America has recently gone through a horrible experince with the free market inducing poverty all over the region. And now the left is rising in South and Central America; Colombia, Venezeula, Paraguay, Ecaudor, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil and Chile all have growing revolutionary movements if its not a revolution already being staged already.
The same arguement was made in the seventies and eighties. Communist governments were established in some states. Either they failed to raise living standards, or fell because they made many enemies internally.
I concede that the region is swinging left, but not as far left as you describe. President Lula of Brazil, for example, is on the moderate left, as is Argentina's Nestor Kirchner. The real reason behind Latin America's poverty is not the free markets or such gobbledygook, but rather, the ideaological battles that have been waged since the confrontation between Simon Bolivar and Jose de San Martin.

Somewhat off topic, but... the United States is the best thing ever to happen to Castro's Cuba. Why? Because all the Gusanos get on rafts and to to Miami! All his political opponents are in the US instead of Cuba where they can make trouble for him. This leaves the man as a beloved dictator in his own country.

Just a note, Gusanos means worms, and it is the term used by Cubans to refer to anti-Castroists.

Oh, and as long as I can post things like this on the internet, I'll have a heckuva lot of trouble buying any "Americans are Oppressed" arguments.

AHEM. Ever hear of Salvador Allende?
Yep. Only democratically elected communist ever. It would've been interesting to have him a few more years in power just to see what would happen. I'd predict that the Allende government would survive only with Soviet help, as there was strong domestic opposition. Pinochet's name as dictator of Chile did not come at random, but rather, he was organizing an insurgency.

Well America does have the largest population of incarcerated people in the world... (2 million+) Surely those would qualify as oppressed. Black males do have a greater chance of going to jail than graduating college so oppression is not exactly a thing of the past or a phenomea existing only in other places.

Im so oppressed! I feel the weight of the capitalist pig everyday pushing down on my inalienable right to smoke 12 ounces of pot per day! Free speech is horribly censored, yet I've managed to be able to post this rant on a popular internet site without it being shut down or blocked out by the government! Everyday I cry for the gay oppression (even though Im not gay) that runs rampant - they can't get married for christ's sake! That's worse than HITLER!!!

but I don't hate America.

I only hate its people, its government, its culture, and everything else about it. Call me a traitor, but Im really not, because I love this country enough to say I hate everything about it!

viva che!

Well America does have the largest population of incarcerated people in the world... (2 million+) Surely those would qualify as oppressed. Black males do have a greater chance of going to jail than graduating college so oppression is not exactly a thing of the past or a phenomea existing only in other places.
That, however, is a social issue that is best fixed in the black community. However, I will go even further: this is not a problem for all blacks. It's only a problem for urban blacks. Many communities live in urban slums, yet they all succeed. Hispanics are gradually becoming more middle class, and less urban culture. Nearly all immigrants to the US reach middle class status before a generation passes. So what's wrong with blacks? I have my theories, but I may need another thread to explain them.

Chavez is not a dictator, he was democractically elected and even let a democractic refrendum attempting to take him out of power go on a campaign, it failed.
The time of "vanguard dictatorships" is over; South America has recently gone through a horrible experince with the free market inducing poverty all over the region. And now the left is rising in South and Central America; Colombia, Venezeula, Paraguay, Ecaudor, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil and Chile all have growing revolutionary movements if its not a revolution already being staged already.

While the part about Chavez being democraticaly elected etc is all perfectly factual and correct, the rest about there being a rising of the left that is threatening revolution is utter and total BS.

The left in Brazil, i.e PT. (Partido dos Trabalhadores) is about as left as Tony Blair. There are some true left wing politicians, in PSTU or PC do B but hese are marginalised. Revolution is a thing of the past here in South America. Street protest is happening as it happens in New York or Washington. Are they ready for revolution as well? As most Latin American countries are currently democracies on the rebound from oppresive right wing military dictatorships, the left is rather voal, but this does not mean that "revolution is in the air".

I decided to vote "yes" as ignorance of foreign political affairs is a classical sign of oppression and the Americans here are showing such ignorance.

Salvadore Allende a communist?
A left wing revolution in the offing?
Chavez a dictator?

Give us a break people. Go and learn something about the region before opening your mouth.

I decided to vote "yes" as ignorance of foreign political affairs is a classical sign of oppression and the Americans here are showing such ignorance.

Salvadore Allende a communist?
A left wing revolution in the offing?
Chavez a dictator?

Give us a break people. Go and learn something about the region before opening your mouth.
Oh please! Most people in the world have no idea who Allende, Pinochet, and Chavez are, and that includes the developed world. Their biggest impacts are only regional.

I decided to vote "yes" as ignorance of foreign political affairs is a classical sign of oppression and the Americans here are showing such ignorance.

Salvadore Allende a communist?
A left wing revolution in the offing?
Chavez a dictator?

Give us a break people. Go and learn something about the region before opening your mouth.

How long have you been living in America to know that the U.S. has "ignorance of foreign political affairs?"

How long have you been living in America to know that the U.S. has "ignorance of foreign political affairs?"

I specifically said, "Americans here", nothing about Americans in general. I was referring to the contents of this thread. I did not comment on Americans in general as I , like the rest of the world, do not know enough Americans to do so.

@MM.

Most people in Europe could tell you who Pinochet and Chavez are. A fair number will know of Allende, but not as many as will know of the other two as they are currently in the News whereas Allende is not.

My criticism is not of people not knowing, but of people making so many blatently false assertions. I was clear that I felt that they should learn something, at least a bare minimum glance at wiki would do, before posting.

Some Americans are oppressed, but only mildly compared to other places in the world. It's not the government that does it, though; it's a function of the class structure.

I specifically said, "Americans here", nothing about Americans in general. I was referring to the contents of this thread. I did not comment on Americans in general as I , like the rest of the world, do not know enough Americans to do so.


You already showed generalization by voting yes to seeing how a small portion of a country knows about foreign issues.

How stupid are you, really?

Are you really from Brazil? The only Americans that go down there are the ones that need easy foreign sluts to fuck and from the opressed media that I've seen Brazil is teeming with whores.

Most people in Europe could tell you who Pinochet and Chavez are. A fair number will know of Allende, but not as many as will know of the other two as they are currently in the News whereas Allende is not.

My criticism is not of people not knowing, but of people making so many blatently false assertions. I was clear that I felt that they should learn something, at least a bare minimum glance at wiki would do, before posting.
Well you do have an unfair advantage, as you are a naturally politically active person in Latin America. You probably emerse yourself in regional politics. Yet when it comes to the politics of another developing region, like SE Asia, you may have no clue about it. To be honest, neither do I.
Also, please remember that what you call BS is what I call perception. I have a different perception than you do. I'd love to make you have my perception, but it doesn't necessarily mean that I am wrong.

Again, how long have you been living in America?

The only way to properly gauge a population is to live beside them.

For some reason, that didn't connect in my mind.
Anyhow, while sailing on a cruise ship last week, I saw Cuba. We actually passed within a few miles of Havana. At other ports, there were crowded sea-lanes, tall buildings, and a feeling of vibrancy. But none of that was there. All that seemed to make up Cuba were shadows. Even the buildings seemed dull, as opposed to the vibrancy I saw in the Yucutan.


This will all change once unlce fidel dies. America will be first to land troops to "help". Cant wait to go and gamble and drink rum in Havana. Remember the MAINE!

This will all change once unlce fidel dies. America will be first to land troops to "help". Cant wait to go and gamble and drink rum in Havana. Remember the MAINE!
To be honest, neither can I. When the embargo is lifted, I may be able to buy prime real estate to build a nice vacation home. And then, I will party there like it was 1949!

Are you really from Brazil? The only Americans that go down there are the ones that need easy foreign sluts to fuck and from the opressed media that I've seen Brazil is teeming with whores.


I have been to Brazil. Without doing any whores. Now I wouldnt reccomend any whores in this day of Aids. Brazil in my opinion is a beautiful country with a hell of alot of problems. But I only spent three weeks there.

I voted yes because of a number of reasons:
1. I think the US education system is very partial. For example: I have seen a number of school books in this country, and they do paint some nations as worse than others. Tsarist Russia is said to force serfs into the army. Well, it was really an old kind of draft. US men were "forced" into service during ww1 and other wars of the 20th century. In general the US is portrayed as a hero nation, the only admitted Imperialism being the annexation of Hawaii. The Spanish-American war was all Imperialist!

I am not saying the US is a bad nation, but in Sweden we don't claim we entered the Thirty Year War to help innocent German Lutherans(that was the official reason, together with an increasing threat with a united Catholic Germany), we did it to get territory. Which we got in Westfalen. I at least have not found a single source claiming that we did it for a just cause.

2. Americans who oppose government policies risk being unpatriotic. Since nationalism is an everyday thing no American wants to be called unpatriotic.

3. The country focuses on foreign policies possibly to hide all the domestic problems. The national debt sure is something Bush is not dealing with, if the Democrats got some numbers on it I am sure they would grab many votes.

I think that Americans are not oppressed in the dictatorship. Rather it is a systematic indoctrination. Maybe the democrats and republicans are headed by a common Politburo. Most likely not. We do know that the US might become Oceania with the USA PATRIOT Act and similar laws.

Just as a sideline: The constitutions of the PRC and the USSR are/were very democratic sounding, actually more than the US one. Laws prove nothing.

That, however, is a social issue that is best fixed in the black community. However, I will go even further: this is not a problem for all blacks. It's only a problem for urban blacks. Many communities live in urban slums, yet they all succeed. Hispanics are gradually becoming more middle class, and less urban culture. Nearly all immigrants to the US reach middle class status before a generation passes. So what's wrong with blacks? I have my theories, but I may need another thread to explain them.

A few questions regarding the U.S.

Do African Americans in the south still have to worry about the KKK?

Do you think the fact that a few Mexicans being incorporated into the main stream about a few hundred years after they settled California, Nevada, Texas, Arizona and Kansas a sign of democratic progress?

In what would you say is the difference between the annual income of the middle class and the annual income of someone living below the poverty line in the United States?

I heard that there are soldiers serving in Iraq, whose families rely on charitable organizations to make ends meet. Is this true?


Slightly off topic. I placed a thread called the drug war. Not one person who responded agreed with the United States government's position on Plan Colombia. Which position do you support and is the government acting on your behalf?

How long have you been living in America to know that the U.S. has "ignorance of foreign political affairs?"

It isn't that some of us (speaking for myself only) don't know, it's that we don't care.

Well you do have an unfair advantage, as you are a naturally politically active person in Latin America. You probably emerse yourself in regional politics. Yet when it comes to the politics of another developing region, like SE Asia, you may have no clue about it. To be honest, neither do I.
Also, please remember that what you call BS is what I call perception. I have a different perception than you do. I'd love to make you have my perception, but it doesn't necessarily mean that I am wrong.

Interesting comment considering Mindinao is a province in the Phillipines currently occupied by left wing Muslim guerrillas.

It isn't that some of us (speaking for myself only) don't know, it's that we don't care.

What you just said shows how much of an idiot you are for trying talking shit about a subject that you know nothing about.

Are you really from Brazil? The only Americans that go down there are the ones that need easy foreign sluts to fuck and from the opressed media that I've seen Brazil is teeming with whores.[/QUOTE]

I've seen similar media coverage of girls in New Orleans, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, New York... wish they all could be California girls.

Are you really from Brazil? The only Americans that go down there are the ones that need easy foreign sluts to fuck and from the opressed media that I've seen Brazil is teeming with whores.

I've seen similar media coverage of girls in New Orleans, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, New York... wish they all could be California girls.[/QUOTE]

What you saw was the supposed oppressed media coverage of the U.S.

How can you possibly take that into consideration when you're all arguing on how limited we are in our freedoms?

I've seen similar media coverage of girls in New Orleans, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, New York... wish they all could be California girls.

What you saw was the supposed oppressed media coverage of the U.S.

How can you possibly take that into consideration when you're all arguing on how limited we are in our freedoms?[/QUOTE]


If I am only given a choice between Coke and Pepsi, is that freedom?

What you saw was the supposed oppressed media coverage of the U.S.

How can you possibly take that into consideration when you're all arguing on how limited we are in our freedoms?


If I am only given a choice between Coke and Pepsi, is that freedom?[/QUOTE]

Don't try to trivialize this, you fucking idiot. From what you're trying to side step it sounds like you if at all barely have spent anytime in the U.S.

To be honest, neither can I. When the embargo is lifted, I may be able to buy prime real estate to build a nice vacation home. And then, I will party there like it was 1949!


Can you imagine the rush to purchase property in Cuba. Will make alot of party officials extremely rich. All those Yanque dollars flowing in will swell there economy like they have never seen.

Some of you ignorant, knuckle draggers should stop trying to scrutinize the U.S. all the time and tend to your own borders. Maybe then your countries will be as successfull as ours.

Don't give me any bullshit about how many books you have read, how much news you watch, or how many times you've vacationed in the U.S. Until you actually live here and are a functioning member of society for several years, you won't know how it is to live here.

As for our school books, whoever commented on it, obviously didn't bother checking out the majority of the books. They would have been surprised to see how the U.S. covers most of history through both sides.

If I am only given a choice between Coke and Pepsi, is that freedom?

Don't try to trivialize this, you fucking idiot. From what you're trying to side step it sounds like you if at all barely have spent anytime in the U.S.[/QUOTE]

It's you who trivializes the issue with your insults. Try looking up a few posts and answer some of the questions I left for Mindinao.

Don't try to trivialize this, you fucking idiot. From what you're trying to side step it sounds like you if at all barely have spent anytime in the U.S.

It's you who trivializes the issue with your insults. Try looking up a few posts and answer some of the questions I left for Mindinao.[/QUOTE]

I did read them and ignored them for a reason. You don't know what you're talking about, ergo you're a fucking idiot. Learn the truth from first party sources before you decide to start slapping the keyboard with your gimpy fingers.

The following...

"I did read them and ignored them for a reason. You don't know what you're talking about, ergo you're a fucking idiot. Learn the truth from first party sources before you decide to start slapping the keyboard with your gimpy fingers."

...is not an informed, intelligent or convincing response to...

Do African Americans in the south still have to worry about the KKK?

Do you think the fact that a few Mexicans being incorporated into the main stream about a few hundred years after they settled California, Nevada, Texas, Arizona and Kansas a sign of democratic progress?

In what would you say is the difference between the annual income of the middle class and the annual income of someone living below the poverty line in the United States?

I heard that there are soldiers serving in Iraq, whose families rely on charitable organizations to make ends meet. Is this true?


Slightly off topic. I placed a thread called the drug war. Not one person who responded agreed with the United States government's position on Plan Colombia. Which position do you support and is the government acting on your behalf?

What you just said shows how much of an idiot you are for trying talking shit about a subject that you know nothing about.

Oh really? If it came across as I was attempting to insult them, I apologize, that was not my intent. I am simply stating that us here in the US have enough problems -- I'm not about to care about someone else's until ours are worked out, unless that problem over there might relate to something that is or could happen over here.

Oh really? If it came across as I was attempting to insult them, I apologize, that was not my intent. I am simply stating that us here in the US have enough problems -- I'm not about to care about someone else's until ours are worked out, unless that problem over there might relate to something that is or could happen over here.


Do you think that globalization and out sourcing of American jobs to third world countries are issues that Americans should concern themselves with?

Oh really? If it came across as I was attempting to insult them, I apologize, that was not my intent. I am simply stating that us here in the US have enough problems -- I'm not about to care about someone else's until ours are worked out, unless that problem over there might relate to something that is or could happen over here.

Well, I agree with you on many things Dercson, but this is not one of them. You simply can't solve all the big problems of a nation of 300 million people. Therefore, if we refuse to help any other countries until our massive utopia is perfect (which it never will be), we're just being selfish and using our own problems as an excuse to not help other countries.

Matter of fact, I think that helping other countries is the key to success on a macro scale, the same way that helping another person is the key to personal success on the micro scale. Course, I could be wrong. National charity could be fundamentally different.

you morons. (of course, everyone says that) :rolleyes:
Americans are not oppressed. I don't want to be angry or insulting to anyone, but we simply are not oppressed. The US is a country where things are the best they have ever been in the history of the world. Yeah, its gots a shitload of flaws, but the rest of history was even worse, and we did call all of that oppression. Everyone here can vote. Everyone can get a job of some sort. Everyone can leave if they want. The media is not censored. Winter Alliance, I have news for you. GEORGE BUSH WON THE ELECTION. that means that the majority of voting-age Americans are more conservative, or something like that. YOU ARE NOT BEING OPPRESSED. STOP WHINING. REPUBLICANS HAVE A MAJORITY IN CONGRESS, AND CONTROL THE WHITE HOUSE. SHUT UP. YOU HAVE NOTHING TO COMPLAIN ABOUT, except for BEING A FUCKING MORON.
ANOTHER NEWS FLASH: the rest of the world does not hate America because it has values. They don't care about its values. The people who hate America hate that we have money and they don't. If they had money, they would be very good friends with America. Very good friends.

(so much for not being angry or insulting)

Do you think that globalization and out sourcing of American jobs to third world countries are issues that Americans should concern themselves with?

Eh, good point. *one for El Jardin*

I'm more concerned with National Security things than economy, though. What's the point in an economy, after all, if the nation is crippled!

The following...

"I did read them and ignored them for a reason. You don't know what you're talking about, ergo you're a fucking idiot. Learn the truth from first party sources before you decide to start slapping the keyboard with your gimpy fingers."

...is not an informed, intelligent or convincing response to...

Do African Americans in the south still have to worry about the KKK?

Do you think the fact that a few Mexicans being incorporated into the main stream about a few hundred years after they settled California, Nevada, Texas, Arizona and Kansas a sign of democratic progress?

In what would you say is the difference between the annual income of the middle class and the annual income of someone living below the poverty line in the United States?

I heard that there are soldiers serving in Iraq, whose families rely on charitable organizations to make ends meet. Is this true?


Slightly off topic. I placed a thread called the drug war. Not one person who responded agreed with the United States government's position on Plan Colombia. Which position do you support and is the government acting on your behalf?

1. An African American living in the South has less of a chance being a victim of the KKK than a white man has of getting mugged and possibly killed in Harlem?

HAVE YOU LIVED IN THIS COUNTRY TO KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT?

2. There are hispanics (not just Mexicans) that hold political offices and are political advocates all over the U.S. Bush just appointed a man of Mexican descent to one of the highest positions in this country.

HAVE YOU LIVED IN THIS COUNTRY TO KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT?

3. There is a major difference between middle class and poverty, guess why? Because every citizen here has the chance to rise above average means. The government ensures that everyone has the chance to succeed, there are those who choose not to and therefore graze the poverty spectrum. Are there unfortunate people here who are poor due to their inactions? Yes.

Does this happen in every country? Yes. Don't act like it only happens in America.

HAVE YOU LIVED IN THIS COUNTRY TO KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT?

4. A number of soldiers in Iraq have had their families rely on charitable organizations. That doesn't mean that it's the majority. The U.S. Army itself has various internal charities to help out the soldiers families. Because it happens to a few, does not mean it happens to all. U.S. soldiers are some of the best paid soldiers in the world, some decide to join the army with a few and several children and expect the payment that an 18 year old normally gets to cover for their family. Soldiers and their families also get free medical, dental, and housing allowances.

HAVE YOU LIVED IN THIS COUNTRY TO KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT?

5. I haven't heard about plan Columbia. Do you want to know why? Because the U.S. is entangled in thousands of operations because THEY have to be the worlds watch dog. Anytime something happens it's the U.S. that acts first and everyone else falls in line.

If you're trying to drop a hint on the U.S. losing the war on drugs, keep this in mind, there are less drug addicts now than there were in the 1980s.

STOP BELIEVING EVERYTHING YOU SEE IN YOUR COUNTRY'S NEWS. IF YOU DON'T LIVE HERE YOU DON'T KNOW HOW GREAT IT IS. WORRY ABOUT YOUR OWN DAMN COUTNRY, CHICO.

How stupid are you, really?
Don't try to trivialize this, you fucking idiot.
What you just said shows how much of an idiot you are for trying talking shit about a subject that you know nothing about.
Some of you ignorant, knuckle draggers should stop trying to scrutinize the U.S. all the time and tend to your own borders.
You don't know what you're talking about, ergo you're a fucking idiot.
This is the second thread I've seen reported today where you were the principal instigator of a flame war. Enough.

I'm too tired to properly chastise you for failing to follow the rules of this forum, so just take a three day forumban instead. If you come back flaming or decide to evade forumban with a puppet, I guess we'll just make it permanent. Got it?

~ Frisbeeteria ~
NationStates Forum Moderator

I'm more concerned with National Security things than economy, though. What's the point in an economy, after all, if the nation is crippled!\
Well, if your economy is in the trash can, that cripples your nation. National Security problems don't really cripple nations, they're just embarassing.
If you look throughout history, every time any nation has been really down, the determining factor in how fast it got back up was its economy. Good examples are Germany after World War I, France after the war of 1887 (invasion by Germany), and Russia after the fall of the Soviet Union.

Do you think that globalization and out sourcing of American jobs to third world countries are issues that Americans should concern themselves with?

All you're trying to do is bring out every negative aspect you read about in the news. Outsourcing is one of many social issues going on right now.

If you want to concern yourself so much, study on how America is the worlds biggest contributor to countries that need assistance in finances, medicine and food.

Well, I agree with you on many things Dercson, but this is not one of them. You simply can't solve all the big problems of a nation of 300 million people. Therefore, if we refuse to help any other countries until our massive utopia is perfect (which it never will be), we're just being selfish and using our own problems as an excuse to not help other countries.

Matter of fact, I think that helping other countries is the key to success on a macro scale, the same way that helping another person is the key to personal success on the micro scale. Course, I could be wrong. National charity could be fundamentally different.

Hence the unless that problem over there might relate to something that is or could happen over here. If the US has a decent reason to get itself involved (as in it will enchance the US is some form), then yes, I see no problem with it, but helping a nation for the sheer purpose of helping is not how it works on the national/global level. It is fine on the personal or communal, but not on the national/global.

If you want to concern yourself so much, study on how America is the worlds biggest contributor to countries that need assistance in finances, medicine and food.

That brings up a good point, actually, dealing with the Middle East. We spend billions in foreign aid there, and they trash talk us both with words and voting against us at every possible moment in the UN, and they get away with it, because they have the oil. Now, that's a problem, because every developed nation in the world needs oil....

I'm an American and I DO feel oppressed... but probably not for the reasons that Chavez believes I am.

I'm opressed because foreign nations have eternal resentment for me and my President for having values. I'm opressed by my countrymen on the other ends of the political spectrum, who have managed to paint me and like-minded people as "less-intelligent", "fat cats", "religious zealots", or whatever label I have thrown at me on a weekly basis. (I say weekly because I mostly subject myself to this BS on this forum, and I'm trying to cut that back to once a week.)

But all in all, political disagreement doesn't count as real opression I guess. Not in comparison to countries were dissidents get jailed, shot, starved or raped. Nope. Guess we're not opressed.

This cant oppress you. You cant really care about jealous foreign nations bearing eternal resentment for you. They'll resent you until they have more power and wealth than you. Then, they'll pity you. Either way, they'll never do anything for you. Who cares what they think.
You're not opressed here. You have more access and more opporotunities than any other land.
As for the BS on this forum-its just that-BS.

I just got some one banned, so I'll try to be delicate in the way I phrase this and hope you don't take this personally.

You say that the US is a country where things are the best they have ever been in the history of the world. How many lives have you lived that qualifies you to say this? Even today, there are countries with better economies and foreigners who view Americans the way Americans view Mexicans. The U.S. is by no means the worste country, but what makes you think it's the best?

Secondly, you state: "the rest of the world does not hate America because it has values. They don't care about its values. The people who hate America hate that we have money and they don't. If they had money, they would be very good friends with America."

The rest of the world does not hate Americans. I am a Canadian and when I travel I am frequently mistaken for an American. The people of third world countries do not hate you, they fear you. They fear you because you have dropped atom bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima. They fear you because you intervened in Vietnam's civil war. They fear you because you invaded Iraq without the consent of the U.N. (which was designed to prevent world powers from bullying weaker nations.)

Now, please realise that this message is not intended to enrage you, but to make you aware of other perspectives.

That brings up a good point, actually, dealing with the Middle East. We spend billions in foreign aid there, and they trash talk us both with words and voting against us at every possible moment in the UN, and they get away with it, because they have the oil. Now, that's a problem, because every developed nation in the world needs oil....


We'll only need oil till its about to run out. Then, one of two things will happen- One-The US will tap tremendous reserves sitting beneath North America and we'll be an oil country.
Or, Two-we will develop an alternative fuel, readily available and cheap enough for the average person to use. Existing equipment will be retrofitted to use it, or new equipment will be developed and available.
And the middle east will dusty and not half as smug.

We'll only need oil till its about to run out. Then, one of two things will happen- One-The US will tap tremendous reserves sitting beneath North America and we'll be an oil country.
Or, Two-we will develop an alternative fuel, readily available and cheap enough for the average person to use. Existing equipment will be retrofitted to use it, or new equipment will be developed and available.
And the middle east will dusty and not half as smug.

To bad #2's impossible...

All you're trying to do is bring out every negative aspect you read about in the news. Outsourcing is one of many social issues going on right now.

If you want to concern yourself so much, study on how America is the worlds biggest contributor to countries that need assistance in finances, medicine and food.

I thought you got the boot. But if you're still around we can chat. I got no grievance with Americans although I am an HOMBRE not a Chico.

In the movie Apocalypse Now, an American masterpiece, there is a line uttered by Martin Sheen (whose real name is Ramon Estevez) it goes: "We cut them apart with a machine gun then give them a band aid."

I see this mentality in Americas food for oil exchange with Iraq. I see this in the foreign aid program called Plan Colombia. I see this in the business practices of Coca Cola, Chiquita Brands, Proctor and Gamble, etc...

And as far as my knowledge of the U.S. I have been there many times and know what it is like because I have family and friends who are Americans, who work for the American government, serve in the American Armed Forces and so I am aware of their everyday struggles.

We'll only need oil till its about to run out. Then, one of two things will happen- One-The US will tap tremendous reserves sitting beneath North America and we'll be an oil country.
Or, Two-we will develop an alternative fuel, readily available and cheap enough for the average person to use. Existing equipment will be retrofitted to use it, or new equipment will be developed and available.
And the middle east will dusty and not half as smug.

The second option is already a viable alternative. It is only because multinational corporations would rather acheive a monopoly on the world's oil reserves that the government will not subsidize the transition.

To bad #2's impossible...


Thats absurd. As soon as its inevitable oil will run out, or become so expensive the average American cant but it, an alternative will be made available. There are several in the works.

Well considering the fact that we can't even travel there...
Huh? Of course he can. What's stopping him???

I'dont support Cuba or think it is a democracy but it still a intresting comparison between the "the evil inefficient communist" Cuba and the "richest and greatest country in the word" USA

USA:
Infant mortality rate:
total: 6.5 deaths/1,000 live births
male: 7.17 deaths/1,000 live births
female: 5.8 deaths/1,000 live births (2005 est.)
Life expectancy at birth:
total population: 77.71 years
male: 74.89 years
female: 80.67 years (2005 est.)

Cuba:
Infant mortality rate:
total: 6.33 deaths/1,000 live births
male: 7.11 deaths/1,000 live births
female: 5.5 deaths/1,000 live births (2005 est.)
Life expectancy at birth:
total population: 77.23 years
male: 74.94 years
female: 79.65 years (2005 est.)
from http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/cu.html

The only Americans that are oppressed are the ones' that are not Republicans..lol :D

The only Americans that are oppressed are the ones' that are not Republicans..lol :D


When Chavez spoke about opression I believe he was referring to political and cultural repression, in that the American government has alienated the American people so much from the rest of the world that they presume that people in the rest of the world hate them.

Do African Americans in the south still have to worry about the KKK?

The KKK is a very small group of wackos, as it has been since the 1970s. I'm not saying that attacks don't happen, but they aren't frequent enough to cause concern.
Do you think the fact that a few Mexicans being incorporated into the main stream about a few hundred years after they settled California, Nevada, Texas, Arizona and Kansas a sign of democratic progress?

The Mexicans that lived there then were quickly outnumbered by settlers. More progress has been made by the Hispanic community that has filtered in since the 1940s, whose purchasing power parity is set to exceed blacks this year.
In what would you say is the difference between the annual income of the middle class and the annual income of someone living below the poverty line in the United States?

I'm not a statistician in this area, and I don't know. But the US poverty line is generously high.
I heard that there are soldiers serving in Iraq, whose families rely on charitable organizations to make ends meet. Is this true?

Probably. If you want to call me an evil sob, do so. However, I find it more of a problem with the culture of some people that send troops overseas, and not the government's fault.
Slightly off topic. I placed a thread called the drug war. Not one person who responded agreed with the United States government's position on Plan Colombia. Which position do you support and is the government acting on your behalf?
That is off topic. Anyhow, I like Plan Colombia. It has been a big factor in making sure that Colombia did not become a failed state, and is making the guerillas retreat. The question about drugs is irrelevant to me, what matters is that Colombia is not a breeder of instability.

"The KKK is a very small group of wackos, as it has been since the 1970s. I'm not saying that attacks don't happen, but they aren't frequent enough to cause concern." - Mystic Mindinao

As long as you're not African or Jewish.

"The Mexicans that lived there then were quickly outnumbered by settlers. More progress has been made by the Hispanic community that has filtered in since the 1940s, whose purchasing power parity is set to exceed blacks this year." - Mystic Mindinao

Doesn't really answer the question, but then by this rational the U.S. government should stop supporting Isreal and let the Palestinians take over the West Bank.

"I'm not a statistician in this area, and I don't know. But the US poverty line is generously high." - Mystic Mindinao

So is the cost of living.

"Probably. If you want to call me an evil sob, do so. However, I find it more of a problem with the culture of some people that send troops overseas, and not the government's fault." - Mystic Mindinao

So people who are supoosedly fighting for your rights (although we both know they're fighting so some Texas oil baron can buy himself another fleet of yachts) shouldn't be paid a wage that allows them to provide for their families?


"That is off topic. Anyhow, I like Plan Colombia. It has been a big factor in making sure that Colombia did not become a failed state, and is making the guerillas retreat. The question about drugs is irrelevant to me, what matters is that Colombia is not a breeder of instability." - Mystic Mindinao

Anyone who lives in Colombia will tell you that Colombia is a failed state. Since Plan Colombia was initiated the guerrillas have increased their attacks on government outposts, the rainforest has been showered with defoliants and millions of innocent civilians have been killed and displaced. If anything, I would say that it is American intervention that is the breeder of instability.

The government itself is not especially oppressive, though it isn't free, either. The culture is quite oppressive, though, particularly when it comes to sexuality.

The government itself is not especially oppressive, though it isn't free, either. The culture is quite oppressive, though, particularly when it comes to sexuality.

I was waiting for someone to say that-suprised that it didn't show up earlier...there has always been a minority in this country that has been denied their rights and treated as second class citizens. The gay community in America does not have all the rights that heterosexuals have. They certainly fall under the category of oppressed. This country isn't horrible about oppression, and depending on how you define it you may be able to find oppression in most countries-i.e.-oppression by the wealthy, by the government, by the general citizens, by stereotypes and gender roles....

secondly, the reason we have the embargo on Cuba is a residual effect from the 60's during Kennedy's presidency. Cold war+paranoia+domino effect+missiles in Cuba+Cuba's conversion to a communistic government (which the U.S. subsequently lost millions of dollars worth of property)=One pissed off country. And if I've learned anything from our history, it is that the United States can hold a grudge for a very long time.

Yes, we're so oppressed that guys like Michael Moore can make major films calling the President a lying criminal. :rolleyes:

also in case your wondering morality is based on the block of cheese in my left rear pocket... *nods*

1. The only person I ever saw dressed like the KKK was when I was maybe 13. He was walking down one of the major streets of my hometown. When someone finally noticed him, people came pouring out of bars and stores to beat him down.
I was raised to believe racism is ignorant and evil. I would never live in a part of America where people felt they could act like Sith does without fear of consequence. In fact, I know dozens of people who left the South to avoid his type of mentality.

2. Last night my wife and I talked about the high percentage (about one quarter of the population, and growing fast) of Mexicans (along with a minority of other hispanics) in my hometown. We both quickly agreed that if/when we go back to live there, we both need to become fluent in Spanish. Soon Latinos will be the majority in California. Of course they need to be at least proportionately represented in state government. Will this cause problems? probably, but only for those that insist on labelling the world into "us" and "them" instead of seeing people as being people, and having value as such. "We hold these truths to be self-evident....that all men are created equal".

3. Poverty is crippling. It convinces people that they do not have enough value to succeed in life. It steals hope. This is true in whatever country you live in. So of course there is a gap.

4. Don't know. Been overseas for 11 years since I last lived in the US (made a few short visits)

I had never travelled outside the US before I was 20. I haven't lived there for the past 11 years. In the last year or so, I'm meeting more and more "fellow Americans" with scary, ignorant, and hateful viewpoints. One American here in China even said he would only help me with overseas voting if I voted for the president that he agreed with. This is democracy?? Since that time my political views have been in more flux than at any other time of my life. I joined NS to try to figure out what I think is important politically based on all the garbage I'm discovering.

oppressed by whom? who has such power? ;)

the fact that we can all openly talk uninhibited in a public forum about whether or not we actually are opressed is an indication that we aren't. and i wanted to trash talk the government i could all i wanted and not have to worry about being punished or oppressed.

"I was raised to believe racism is ignorant and evil. I would never live in a part of America where people felt they could act like Sith does without fear of consequence. In fact, I know dozens of people who left the South to avoid his type of mentality." - Californian Refugees

Can you say that these people are not oppressed if they have to make that move?

"Last night my wife and I talked about the high percentage (about one quarter of the population, and growing fast) of Mexicans (along with a minority of other hispanics) in my hometown. We both quickly agreed that if/when we go back to live there, we both need to become fluent in Spanish. Soon Latinos will be the majority in California." - Californian Refugees

Mexicans have been the majority in California for centuries. I have a cousin who lives in California. She is married to a Mexican. He told me that Mexicans in California have a name for themselves... "the majority minority"

"Of course they (Latinos) need to be at least proportionately represented in state government. Will this cause problems? probably, but only for those that insist on labelling the world into "us" and "them" instead of seeing people as being people, and having value as such. "We hold these truths to be self-evident....that all men are created equal". " - Californian Refugees

Good sentiment. I'm guessing that you are not a Latino, but do you understand the problems that are unique to Latinos and other visible minorities? And if so what are you willing to do about it?

"Poverty is crippling. It convinces people that they do not have enough value to succeed in life. It steals hope. This is true in whatever country you live in. So of course there is a gap." - Californian Refugees

I agree.

"I had never travelled outside the US before I was 20. I haven't lived there for the past 11 years. In the last year or so, I'm meeting more and more "fellow Americans" with scary, ignorant, and hateful viewpoints. One American here in China even said he would only help me with overseas voting if I voted for the president that he agreed with. This is democracy?? Since that time my political views have been in more flux than at any other time of my life. I joined NS to try to figure out what I think is important politically based on all the garbage I'm discovering." - Californian Refugees

As a fellow North American who has travelled I have experienced the same thing. I wish you luck on your adventures and hope you are able to find some beauty underneath the garbage.

I had never travelled outside the US before I was 20. I haven't lived there for the past 11 years. In the last year or so, I'm meeting more and more "fellow Americans" with scary, ignorant, and hateful viewpoints. One American here in China even said he would only help me with overseas voting if I voted for the president that he agreed with. This is democracy?? Since that time my political views have been in more flux than at any other time of my life. I joined NS to try to figure out what I think is important politically based on all the garbage I'm discovering.
Unless politics interest you, I wouldn't worry about it. Politics rarely affects my personal life, nor that of any others that I know. There is just so many pertinent things that people need to worry about. As you are an American in China, you either live there for busiiness, or your wife does. That, I would think, is a bit more pertinent to you. I myself find politics a hobby, and not my life.

Can you say that these people are not oppressed if they have to make that move?

Yes, you absolutely can. They are not oppressed. They chose to move. Oppression would be the government forcing them to move, or they being told they HAVE to stay, regardless of it.

Mexicans have been the majority in California for centuries. I have a cousin who lives in California. She is married to a Mexican. He told me that Mexicans in California have a name for themselves... "the majority minority"

Yeah, until America conquored it, and California became United States land, and us "evil" white people came in and made ourselves the majority.

Thing is, we moved in legally. The Mexicans are coming across the border illegally in a MEXICAN STATE SPONSORED invasion. This is illegal, and all Mexicans that came into the United States like that should be immediately deported, and all current invadors that attempt to come across the border should be shot. THe Minutemen, God bless their souls, down there should be armed to deal with these people.

"Poverty is crippling. It convinces people that they do not have enough value to succeed in life. It steals hope. This is true in whatever country you live in. So of course there is a gap." - Californian Refugees

I agree.

Which is why people need to be educated in the oppertunities the the US has. The United States of America has the greatest potential in the world, but no one lets people use it in the name of so-called "equality." The Constitution guarentees equality of oppertunity, not outcome.

Unless politics interest you, I wouldn't worry about it. Politics rarely affects my personal life, nor that of any others that I know. There is just so many pertinent things that people need to worry about. As you are an American in China, you either live there for busiiness, or your wife does. That, I would think, is a bit more pertinent to you. I myself find politics a hobby, and not my life.

Politics affects the price of gas, the cost of education, whether you live in an environment that is without pollution, whether you have access to clean drinking water, whether you can buy the latest fashions. It affects the kind of car you can drive, or if you can drive. It affects whether or not you can drink liquor or use narcotics, it affects the kinds of television programs you can watch. It affects where you can go for vacation, it affects whether or not you send your children to fight in a war. Do you consider any of these things to be pertinent?

Can you say that these people are not oppressed if they have to make that move?
I think oppression is something different. But yes, they were systematically excluded, daily having to deal with garbage from idiots that no-one should have to.



Mexicans have been the majority in California for centuries. I have a cousin who lives in California. She is married to a Mexican. He told me that Mexicans in California have a name for themselves... "the majority minority"

When I graduated from high school (1990), my hometown was 43% black, 28% white, 14% latino, 14% asian.
In 2000, the population was 36% black, 24% white, 22% latino, and 15% asian. The trend is continuing. By the time I retire Oakland will be like LA, San Diego etc. have been for centuries. Time to learn Spanish. Not to do so just wouldn't be right. But in the past the majority for my hometown has always been Black, not Latino.



Good sentiment. I'm guessing that you are not a Latino, but do you understand the problems that are unique to Latinos and other visible minorities? And if so what are you willing to do about it?

nope, ethnically I'm northwest european. My wife is Hong Kong Chinese. We speak Cantonese exclusively at home. The problems I understand some. I intend to make a difference wherever I am. We'll see what the situation is once we do move back, years down the road.

I agree.

Personal experience (briefly) Having to choose not to take the bus so that you can save the money for a meal every couple days........I'm just glad that part of my life is over.



As a fellow North American who has travelled I have experienced the same thing. I wish you luck on your adventures and hope you are able to find some beauty underneath the garbage.
Thanks. :) There is beauty everywhere, and garbage everywhere. The problem is to figure out what to do about the garbage, and make sure we find it all so it doesn't start to stink even worse.

Politics affects the price of gas, the cost of education, whether you live in an environment that is without pollution, whether you have access to clean drinking water, whether you can buy the latest fashions. It affects the kind of car you can drive, or if you can drive. It affects whether or not you can drink liquor or use narcotics, it affects the kinds of television programs you can watch. It affects where you can go for vacation, it affects whether or not you send your children to fight in a war. Do you consider any of these things to be pertinent?
Well, they are guranteed in a free society. There is very rarely any major structural changes in a free society.

Well, they are guranteed in a free society. There is very rarely any major structural changes in a free society.

When you say "they" what exactly are you referring to?

When you say "they" what exactly are you referring to?
What you describe.

Then the use of narcotics is guaranteed in a free society?

Then the use of narcotics is guaranteed in a free society?
Some of them. If one feels so strongly about it, move to a country that legalized it, like the Netherlands.

Some of them. If one feels so strongly about it, move to a country that legalized it, like the Netherlands.

What if the person does not have the affluence to move? Is affluence guaranteed in a free society?

What if the person does not have the affluence to move? Is affluence guaranteed in a free society?
No. Just the oppritunity for affluence. Now for the remainder of this discussion, can you do me a favor? Use statements, not questions. Thanks.

No. Just the oppritunity for affluence. Now for the remainder of this discussion, can you do me a favor? Use statements, not questions. Thanks.

I use questions because you are an American and understand the function of a free society better than I do. Also because you posted this thread which leaves me with the impression that you believe Chavez is in error in his statement that Americans are oppressed. I'm simply curious to know why you think this.

I use questions because you are an American and understand the function of a free society better than I do. Also because you posted this thread which leaves me with the impression that you believe Chavez is in error in his statement that Americans are oppressed. I'm simply curious to know why you think this.
So where are you from, anyhow?

So where are you from, anyhow?

I'm Canadian.

I'm Canadian.
I'd think you can answer your own questions, then.

I'd think you can answer your own questions, then.

My question is "Why do you think Chavez's statement is invalid?"

I can not explain to myself why you think a statement is invalid.

My question is "Why do you think Chavez's statement is invalid?"

I can not explain to myself why you think a statement is invalid.
I do because I think we are not. Compared to most other nations, I don't think we are oppressed at all. I can buy what I want, when I want it, I can move where I want, I can say what I want, think what I want, and be what I want.

I do because I think we are not. Compared to most other nations, I don't think we are oppressed at all. I can buy what I want, when I want it, I can move where I want, I can say what I want, think what I want, and be what I want.

If you live in such a free society, then why were American civilians in San Francisco and Colorado Springs assaulted and arrested by police for protesting the war in Iraq? Why were riot police called to break up a protest of the G7 in Seattle?

You say that compared to most nations you are not oppressed at all but I have been to several countries where I can do things publicly that I could never do in the United States. If life in the United States is so liberated, why are there pilgrimages of American college kids going to Amsterdam and Mexico in search of sex and drugs? Why is it that when I watch a movie on an American television station certain scenes are cut out because of content? Why is it that most Americans are only familiar with two of the four Presidential candidates that ran in the 2004 election?

I apologize for all the questions, but would appreciate if you could answer some of them.

If you live in such a free society, then why were American civilians in San Francisco and Colorado Springs assaulted and arrested by police for protesting the war in Iraq? Why were riot police called to break up a protest of the G7 in Seattle?

You say that compared to most nations you are not oppressed at all but I have been to several countries where I can do things publicly that I could never do in the United States. If life in the United States is so liberated, why are there pilgrimages of American college kids going to Amsterdam and Mexico in search of sex and drugs? Why is it that when I watch a movie on an American television station certain scenes are cut out because of content? Why is it that most Americans are only familiar with two of the four Presidential candidates that ran in the 2004 election?

I apologize for all the questions, but would appreciate if you could answer some of them.

two things will answer most of those questions:

1. Peaceful protests do not lead to arrests. Arrests occur when violence begins to take place.

2. Violating public decency/peace will definately lead to trouble. Why do kids go to the other countries? Because in the U.S. they would be violating law to drink underage or engage in other illegal activities which are not illegal in those countries.

Of course the Americans are oppressed by global capitalism as are the majority of the world's people but in the USA it is regulated even less than in most European countries.

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/americas/04/29/venezuela.cuba.ap/
On a recent trip to Havana, Venezuela's president, Hugo Chavez, said that US citizens are opressed. I love this guy. He's gone progressively from opposing Bush's policy to anti-American rantings, and shows signs that he wishes to be a regional power in Latin America. And he says things that, I find, are ultimately baseless. I, btw, live in the US. I do not feel oppressed. In fact, most of the time, I find my political discussions abstract. The government rarely has any impact on my personal life.


I am an American, and I don't think I'm praticularly opressed.

two things will answer most of those questions:

1. Peaceful protests do not lead to arrests. Arrests occur when violence begins to take place.

2. Violating public decency/peace will definately lead to trouble. Why do kids go to the other countries? Because in the U.S. they would be violating law to drink underage or engage in other illegal activities which are not illegal in those countries.


1. Based on the reports I read and the news reports that were televised the Colorado Springs protest was peaceful. Also, when the protests against the G7 in Seattle broke out I was in Canada and had access to British, Canadian and American stations. Each station covered the same story but the American commentary made the protest seem more violent than the British or Canadian press.

2. My question was intended to find out if they would go to other countries if the society they lived in was more liberal?

1. Based on the reports I read and the news reports that were televised the Colorado Springs protest was peaceful. Also, when the protests against the G7 in Seattle broke out I was in Canada and had access to British, Canadian and American stations. Each station covered the same story but the American commentary made the protest seem more violent than the British or Canadian press.

2. My question was intended to find out if they would go to other countries if the society they lived in was more liberal?

"less liberal" and "oppressed" are two different things....

It is not the "liberality" of other nations that draw teenagers and college students to mexico and other countries, it is the lass-imposed laws and regulations. If they were really oppressed, they would not have the opportunity to GO to those countries....

"less liberal" and "oppressed" are two different things....

It is not the "liberality" of other nations that draw teenagers and college students to mexico and other countries, it is the lass-imposed laws and regulations. If they were really oppressed, they would not have the opportunity to GO to those countries....

If the determining factor as to whether a person is oppressed or not is the ability to go to another country, then if they can't afford to go does this mean they are oppressed?

If you want to address this question please do, but the point I was trying to make is that there are different kinds of oppression. Mental and physical. For example: Let's say you take some carbonated water, put it in a can and add sugar, then you put a red label on it. Then you take another can, fill it with the same ingredients and put a blue label on it. When the consumer comes to buy your product you tell them there's a difference, when really there isn't. But the consumer doesn't know any better, so they believe they have the freedom to choose between the blue can and the red can.

To me, it is a form of oppression when a government lies to it's people. And if the ruling class of the United States are not lying to it's people, then why wasn't Ralph Nader included in the Presidential Debate?

Oh ,, hellyeah.. poor us. Please.. we're only opressed if we look deep into it. And I have no need to do so. If you're getting at the conspiracy of domination.. subliminaly or whatever. Its world wide.. not just America.. We are just one of the major world powers..... so ofcourse we are gonna be one of the top notch holders of the blame game.

here's one of many = http://carpenoctem.tv/cons/

If the determining factor as to whether a person is oppressed or not is the ability to go to another country, then if they can't afford to go does this mean they are oppressed?

If you want to address this question please do, but the point I was trying to make is that there are different kinds of oppression. Mental and physical. For example: Let's say you take some carbonated water, put it in a can and add sugar, then you put a red label on it. Then you take another can, fill it with the same ingredients and put a blue label on it. When the consumer comes to buy your product you tell them there's a difference, when really there isn't. But the consumer doesn't know any better, so they believe they have the freedom to choose between the blue can and the red can.

To me, it is a form of oppression when a government lies to it's people. And if the ruling class of the United States are not lying to it's people, then why wasn't Ralph Nader included in the Presidential Debate?

Um... could it be for the same reason that the Libertarian wasn't, or the Workers World candidate wasn't? Perot got into the debate in 1992, because he had a wide-base of support among members of both the left, and the right. Nader is, sad to tell you, just a lefty. He would have merely echoed (in more extreme terms) the same positions Kerry supports-he would have given no real contribution to the event besides making the democrat look more moderate.
The Presidential debates aren't paid for by Tax-Dollars, they aren't covered under the same kind of laws that would cover, say, the State of the Union address. For the purposes of a Presidential Election, having a 'me too' boy standing next to the front-runner of the party with a yellow-dog 40+% of the vote ("Yellow-Dog" meaning that the party faithful will support anyone the party leadership chooses, regardless of factors like character, electability, or record in the Senate). Effectively, even with that exposure, Nader didn't stand a snowball's chance in hell of swaying sufficient numbers of moderates and Conservatives to impact the core constituencies of either party enough to actually win.
Ross Perot in '92 had that kind of pull-people on the right were pissed about Ruby Ridge, Immigration, NAFTA, GATT, a weak economy, and an unfinished war.
People on the Left were pissed about the Congressional Pay-raises, a weak economy, and the continued existence of George Herbert Walker Bush.
There were enough people from both sides of the Aisle to make Perot a viable candidate-so he got in. Nader's support is entirely in traditionally democrat sectors-mainly the same demographics that supported Howard Dean during the Primaries. He didn't pull over ten percent in any state, and barely got on the ballot in most.

Presidential Debates have a "Time Clock", the producers have to find the most-viable candidates, the two that most appeal to that 20-some-odd percent that didn't decide back in January who they wanted to vote for. In order to make the debates substantive, this means you need to have (within that time limit) time enough to ask lots of questions, and get reasonably complete answers from the Debaters.

Each participant reduces that amount of time proportionally. With someone like John Kerry or Al Gore (long-winded Filibuster Senators), he'd barely get past his preface before his time was up.

There being no viable 'alternative' candidate on the Right in 2004 (Buchanan turned into a joke, Steve Forbes decided not to run again, and the Libertarian-whose-name-escapes-me decided to pretend to be a Democrat), there is simply nobody available to balance it out. It would have been "Soft Left" (Kerry) and "Hard Left" (Nader) against George Bush-a man who can say what he's going to say in less than a minute (Compared to ten minutes for John Kerry) and get the meaning he wants across.

I'm an American and I DO feel oppressed... but probably not for the reasons that Chavez believes I am.

I'm opressed because foreign nations have eternal resentment for me and my President for having values. I'm opressed by my countrymen on the other ends of the political spectrum, who have managed to paint me and like-minded people as "less-intelligent", "fat cats", "religious zealots", or whatever label I have thrown at me on a weekly basis. (I say weekly because I mostly subject myself to this BS on this forum, and I'm trying to cut that back to once a week.)

I also recognize there are people that have the opposite beliefs as I do and feel similarly opressed, though I disagree with their reasoning.

But all in all, political disagreement doesn't count as real opression I guess. Not in comparison to countries were dissidents get jailed, shot, starved or raped. Nope. Guess we're not opressed.
Applause!

Yep. Only democratically elected communist ever. It would've been interesting to have him a few more years in power just to see what would happen. I'd predict that the Allende government would survive only with Soviet help, as there was strong domestic opposition. Pinochet's name as dictator of Chile did not come at random, but rather, he was organizing an insurgency.
Moldova had a democratically elected Communist parliament not too long ago, which selected a Communist Prime Minister. Does that count? It's not a presidential race, but it was democratic.

"I thought we were an autonomous collective"
"You're foolin yourself! We're livin in a dictatorship!!"

"King eh? And how did you get to be king? By exploiting the workers!! By perpetuating an outdated imperalist dogma!"

"Did you see him repressing me?"

It is sad to see that nearly one third of those who voted think that we are oppressed. If we were oppressed, how would I be able to own anything here? How would I be here right now?

oppression in the US?.. haha. thats pretty funny. you want oppression, go to saudi arabia, where women are stoned to death for being raped... go to cuba, where the communist dictator (castro) takes money from the people. We are in no way oppressed. We are allowed to speak our minds in public, even advertise it on television or in the newspaper... might i direct your attention to the Bill of Rights (you read it)? This nation was created on teh basis of having a government of the people, by the people and for the people... that is true because we are a democratic-republic nation of the majority.. and is still very true today...

about the embargo on cuba.. its a matter of principle, becuase we dont support a communist dictatorship, especially one so close to america.
(i know someones gonna bring up our trade relations with china, who is also communist) so... to put it bluntly.. on top of being a communist nation so close to us.. cuba has almost nothing to offer that we cant get from somewhere else at a better price and quality.

If you live in such a free society, then why were American civilians in San Francisco and Colorado Springs assaulted and arrested by police for protesting the war in Iraq? Why were riot police called to break up a protest of the G7 in Seattle?

You say that compared to most nations you are not oppressed at all but I have been to several countries where I can do things publicly that I could never do in the United States. If life in the United States is so liberated, why are there pilgrimages of American college kids going to Amsterdam and Mexico in search of sex and drugs? Why is it that when I watch a movie on an American television station certain scenes are cut out because of content? Why is it that most Americans are only familiar with two of the four Presidential candidates that ran in the 2004 election?

I apologize for all the questions, but would appreciate if you could answer some of them.
You've made your own conclusions already. Why should I answer them?

Moldova had a democratically elected Communist parliament not too long ago, which selected a Communist Prime Minister. Does that count? It's not a presidential race, but it was democratic.
Yet they are more or less simply called communists, and are not communist in ideaology. I suspect they were elected only because it comforted the Moldovans to know that the old guard was in power.

"Um... could it be for the same reason that the Libertarian wasn't, or the Workers World candidate wasn't? Perot got into the debate in 1992, because he had a wide-base of support among members of both the left, and the right. Nader is, sad to tell you, just a lefty. He would have merely echoed (in more extreme terms) the same positions Kerry supports-he would have given no real contribution to the event besides making the democrat look more moderate." - Cadillac-Gage

So because a person has extreme views does this mean they shouldn't be voiced?

"The Presidential debates aren't paid for by Tax-Dollars, they aren't covered under the same kind of laws that would cover, say, the State of the Union address." - Cadillac-Gage

Who finances the debates and decides on the rules of conduct during these debates?

"For the purposes of a Presidential Election, having a 'me too' boy standing next to the front-runner of the party with a yellow-dog 40+% of the vote ("Yellow-Dog" meaning that the party faithful will support anyone the party leadership chooses, regardless of factors like character, electability, or record in the Senate). Effectively, even with that exposure, Nader didn't stand a snowball's chance in hell of swaying sufficient numbers of moderates and Conservatives to impact the core constituencies of either party enough to actually win." - Cadillac-Gage

Since he didn't get a chance to be heard, I guess we'll never know. But Nader's strategy wasn't to win the election. (This might seem absurd to those who have a win at all costs mentality.) A President holds office for four years, eight if he is re-elected. (I say "he" because the United States has not had a President who wasn't an anglo-saxon male.) This is a transitory position. Nader's goal is to make Americans aware of the flaws in the electoral proccess.

"Ross Perot in '92 had that kind of pull-people on the right were pissed about Ruby Ridge, Immigration, NAFTA, GATT, a weak economy, and an unfinished war. People on the Left were pissed about the Congressional Pay-raises, a weak economy, and the continued existence of George Herbert Walker Bush. There were enough people from both sides of the Aisle to make Perot a viable candidate-so he got in." - Cadillac-Gage

He also had a lot of money, which helps when you want to buy television spots.

"Nader's support is entirely in traditionally democrat sectors-mainly the same demographics that supported Howard Dean during the Primaries. He didn't pull over ten percent in any state, and barely got on the ballot in most."

But he did get on the ballot.

"Presidential Debates have a "Time Clock", the producers have to find the most-viable candidates, the two that most appeal to that 20-some-odd percent that didn't decide back in January who they wanted to vote for. In order to make the debates substantive, this means you need to have (within that time limit) time enough to ask lots of questions, and get reasonably complete answers from the Debaters. Each participant reduces that amount of time proportionally. With someone like John Kerry or Al Gore (long-winded Filibuster Senators), he'd barely get past his preface before his time was up." - Cadillac-Gage

The Canadian version of these debates is something you might want to take a look at. There are as many as five candidates on stage, and when you consider that this is supposed to be one of the most important decisions Americans make, shouldn't networks provide as much air time as is necessary?

"There being no viable 'alternative' candidate on the Right in 2004 (Buchanan turned into a joke, Steve Forbes decided not to run again, and the Libertarian-whose-name-escapes-me decided to pretend to be a Democrat), there is simply nobody available to balance it out. It would have been "Soft Left" (Kerry) and "Hard Left" (Nader) against George Bush-a man who can say what he's going to say in less than a minute (Compared to ten minutes for John Kerry) and get the meaning he wants across." - Cadillac-Gage

As long as the earpiece doesn't fall out.

You've made your own conclusions already. Why should I answer them?

Because I answer yours.

Because I answer yours.
You have already made up your own conclusions. I am not gonna give answers to someone that tries to make them fit into some form of an ideaological box. Go find one of my fellow Americans who has the same neo-Steinim hippy liberatarian view of the world you do. And believe me, there are plenty of them.

If you live in such a free society, then why were American civilians in San Francisco and Colorado Springs assaulted and arrested by police for protesting the war in Iraq?
In the case of San Francisco there was graffiti, slashed tires, and slingshots were used against officers. Even Mayor Willie Brown, who's against the war, said these protestors seemed more interested in trying "to disrupt the city, rather than gather peacefully to voice their desire for peace."
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/gate/archive/2003/03/20/protesters.DTL

You have already made up your own conclusions. I am not gonna give answers to someone that tries to make them fit into some form of an ideaological box. Go find one of my fellow Americans who has the same neo-Steinim hippy liberatarian view of the world you do. And believe me, there are plenty of them.

What's with the labels?

Oops I guess that's another question.

In the case of San Francisco there was graffiti, slashed tires, and slingshots were used against officers. Even Mayor Willie Brown, who's against the war, said these protestors seemed more interested in trying "to disrupt the city, rather than gather peacefully to voice their desire for peace."
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/gate/archive/2003/03/20/protesters.DTL

Thanks for the response. Do you know what the press said about the other protests I mentioned?

I don't feel opressed at all. I can feel what I want to, think what I want to, voice that opinion when I want to, practice what religion I want to, and go to bed knowing I can wake up to do it again the next morning.

It would be easy though. So many different groups and cultures make up America and how the goverments managed given all things into consideration, I'm actually suprised that it hasn't gone too far to one side enough to do it.

oppression in the US?.. haha. thats pretty funny. you want oppression, go to saudi arabia, where women are stoned to death for being raped... go to cuba, where the communist dictator (castro) takes money from the people. We are in no way oppressed. We are allowed to speak our minds in public, even advertise it on television or in the newspaper... might i direct your attention to the Bill of Rights (you read it)? This nation was created on teh basis of having a government of the people, by the people and for the people... that is true because we are a democratic-republic nation of the majority.. and is still very true today...
[/I]

Well that´s no fair; highlights on other culture´s dark aspects to prove a point of superiority or some sort I find no logic. I would say, americans kill their sick on national TV, and that´s not fair either.

Well... has anyone thought about the poor?
ooohhh, yeah lets talk about communism vs the 'free world'- i can vote, i must be free then.

you own a pc, you have the internet, you (probably) have a car, a house...

what about those millions in the states who live in actual poverty? what in the hell diff does it make to them whether you call cuba or china etc etc oppressed?

what about their freedoms to put food on the table, send their kids to school, get proper health care, socail welfare, live the 'american dream'. the poor are the oppressed, they fall between the cracks and no one actually gives a damn about them- thery're ignored in the big geoplitical battles of communism vs the 'free world'

Well... has anyone thought about the poor?
ooohhh, yeah lets talk about communism vs the 'free world'- i can vote, i must be free then.

you own a pc, you have the internet, you (probably) have a car, a house...

what about those millions in the states who live in actual poverty? what in the hell diff does it make to them whether you call cuba or china etc etc oppressed?

what about their freedoms to put food on the table, send their kids to school, get proper health care, socail welfare, live the 'american dream'. the poor are the oppressed, they fall between the cracks and no one actually gives a damn about them- thery're ignored in the big geoplitical battles of communism vs the 'free world'

Rather it be just them than everyone else, too. Just because their lives suck doesn't mean everyone else's has to, also.

Chavez talks about American oppression while visiting Cuba? That is pretty hypocritical, isn't it?

He talks about American oppression when his own path to power is questionable. This guy is just pandering to Anti-American sentiment, nothing more. He wants more leverage in the Americas, nothing more.
Bush's path to power was questionable too.

Well... has anyone thought about the poor?
ooohhh, yeah lets talk about communism vs the 'free world'- i can vote, i must be free then.

you own a pc, you have the internet, you (probably) have a car, a house...

what about those millions in the states who live in actual poverty? what in the hell diff does it make to them whether you call cuba or china etc etc oppressed?

what about their freedoms to put food on the table, send their kids to school, get proper health care, socail welfare, live the 'american dream'. the poor are the oppressed, they fall between the cracks and no one actually gives a damn about them- thery're ignored in the big geoplitical battles of communism vs the 'free world'

Most of those places were civilized before the U.S. even existed as a nation. They could have prosperity if they were willing to do the work-but they're not. The failure of Africa, the Middle East, some Asian countries, in other words, the 'third world' is mostly self-inflicted. Some countries (including Brazil, Argentina, Peru, and Venezuela, along with most of your 'asian tiger' nations) are now doing what they should have done in the first place, and developing the infrastructural improvements to become 'first world' instead of 'third world' countries.

Incidentally, this is reason number one why the U.S. isn't going to invade Venezuela-Hugo Chavez may be distasteful, but he'll go away eventually on his own (unless he actually does turn Tyrant and declares himself 'President for life'), no Intervention is necessary, or desirable. (the beauty of an Elected government is, it changes on its own.)
This is pretty stark contrast to Cuba, which has had Uncle Fidel in office since the 1949 revolution.

Most of those places were civilized before the U.S. even existed as a nation. They could have prosperity if they were willing to do the work-but they're not. The failure of Africa, the Middle East, some Asian countries, in other words, the 'third world' is mostly self-inflicted. Some countries (including Brazil, Argentina, Peru, and Venezuela, along with most of your 'asian tiger' nations) are now doing what they should have done in the first place, and developing the infrastructural improvements to become 'first world' instead of 'third world' countries.

Not gonna argue here.

By the way, what is the "Second World?"

Okay...

The middle-class(I'm in it) and the upper-class will always claim the lower-class(read the poor) are poor because of them being lazy. It used to be claimed that it was god who gave to whoever so you shouldn't disturb his work. Since divine rule and such has been dispelled people simply blame it on the poor. Exxon and Shell are causing much pain in central african nations with oil, just like United Fruit in Guatemala(they had CIA overthrow a communist government and install a terribly oppressive regime). The third world countries are mainly former colonies which has been oppressed from Europe at first and now by huge corporations.

I think that most people here are thinking of opression the wrong way. The US is not Pol Pot's Cambodia. Just because it doesn't have SA men beating up people doesn't mean it is not oppressive. Oppression comes in many shapes and sizes, and there is of course a wide range of definitions. Some whackos will claim that the US is ruled by a small "Politburo" of Jewish businessmen who sponsor both republican and democratic presidential candidates.
The fact that you can say that you can discuss it proves nothing. In my oppinion the perfect dictatorship is one where people simply don't know that they live in a dictatorship. Maybe Kerry and Bush is eating dinner together and laughing at the American voters when cameras are not within sight.

Someone claimed that the US is hated because of its wealth. The reason the US is seen as wealthy is because it has a small percentage of inhabitants with trillions of dollars. Around 12% of the US population are considered poor by CIA standards, the last time I looked. Germany has none. The US has both extreme wealth and great poverty. While the poverty of the United States is not comparable to some countries, most countries represented on this forum have at least the same kind of money. I live in Sweden and my family has more money than many Americans and less than many. We have three cars, a house, a couple of computers, TVs, cats, and my parents have good jobs. What do the general population of America have that I don't? And trust me, most people I know have basically the same stuff. The infamous hate of the US is mainly because of some very questionable decisions and the fact that it holds a position as world police. This is a position which comes with a great hatred towards you. Do you think Lincoln liked the United Kingdom? He probably hated it, especially when there was concern that they would aid the Confederacy.

Not gonna argue here.

By the way, what is the "Second World?"

Interesting fact: In reality the third world does not exist. While it is used nowadays to describe developing countries, it was at first used to describe the non-aligned nations during the Cold War. The first world was NATO and friendly nations, the second the Communist Bloc, and the third everyone else. The reason was that most non-aligned were poor or underdeveloped, with some exceptions.

When they talk of it as being the level of development the US, Western Europe, Japan, etc. are considered the first world, often Eastern Europe and South America is the second, most other nations the third, and the poorest sometimes the fourth.

Interesting fact: In reality the third world does not exist. While it is used nowadays to describe developing countries, it was at first used to describe the non-aligned nations during the Cold War. The first world was NATO and friendly nations, the second the Communist Bloc, and the third everyone else. The reason was that most non-aligned were poor or underdeveloped, with some exceptions.

When they talk of it as being the level of development the US, Western Europe, Japan, etc. are considered the first world, often Eastern Europe and South America is the second, most other nations the third, and the poorest sometimes the fourth.

Well, I learn something knew every day!

I'm guessing Antarctica would be the fifth world? ;)

Well, I learn something knew every day!

I'm guessing Antarctica would be the fifth world? ;)


Which would make the native American reservation system the sixth.

Well considering the fact that we can't even travel there...

I'm planning on going to Cuba with my wife for our honeymoon next year(I'm Canadian). I hope ol' Fidel is still alive and kickin' or we may have to change our plans due to political unrest(not sure who would instigate such a thing though *cough!*).

I've heard it's a nice place to live, very socially progressive, despite the Embargo. High rates of literacy and University enrollment are signs that communism can't be all bad. At least that's my oppinon(unless the big men with big guns tell me other wise! ;) ) .

And hey! They still have their old cars from the 50's running! We could learn a thing or two from the Cubans!

Not gonna argue here.

By the way, what is the "Second World?"

I believe that refers to Communist countries. The people are better off financially than the third world but lack the freedoms enjoyed by the first world.