In the comments to the post about the new category, James Schipper argues against the morality of deporting anyone.
One way we Communists really messed up was in killing so many people. If we don’t knock it off and quit killing people, no one will ever let us come into power ever again. I’m leery about living in a Commie dictatorship myself. Many of those persecuted were revolutionaries, and they were often killed or imprisoned. Why support a Communist revolution that may well kill or imprison me.
This leaves the question of what to do with the counterrevolutionaries, especially the violent and incorrigible ones, of which there are many, who will never allow the system to work.
I am convinced that many 3rd world countries may just need a Communist dictatorship. Colombia, Peru, Brazil, Haiti, India, Bangladesh and some other places come to mind.
In some countries like Colombia, you have a choice between what is for all intents and purposes a rightwing dictatorship or the possiblity of a leftwing dictatorship. Democracy does not seem to be a possibility in a place like this. In that case I pick a Left dictatorship if it can end the civil war and make life better for the mass of oppressed people, which in Colombia’s case means the 80% in poverty. After revolutions, the contras usually just split, and we ought to encourage them.
Let us look at Haiti. Democracy is not possible. The Right simply overthrew it with guns and US help, even when Aristide got 92% of the vote he was still called a dictator.
The only way Haiti will achieve liberation is via a violent revolution. After the revolution, the Ruling Class that does not want to go along with the program will have to be repressed.
The reason they need to be repressed is that immediately they will try to start up an armed contra movement, and they have all the guns and money on their side. They also have the whole Haitian media too. Their media will need to be shut down, its assets confiscated and given the supporters of the revolution.
We have several options for these nasty people, who, along with their ancestors, have a waterfall of blood on their hands. Haiti has a life expectancy of 44 years and this is largely their doing.
We can kill them (The adults will pretty much all deserve it anyway considering how much blood they have on their hands.), put them in prison (What a waste of money.) or just throw them out of the country. The Tonton Macoute types will simply have to be rounded up and killed very quickly, even if that means killing thousands of people. We could throw them out too, but why? They have so much blood on their hands.
There really is no other solution for that country. Until such a solution occurs, there will be no justice for Haiti.
I think that if Communist countries did more expulsion and less killing, Communism would not have such a black name as it has now.
3
20
20
20
Dear Robert
What makes you think that there are enough people in Haiti who are able to carry out your program? Your main point, that an oligarchy which only accepts democracy when it produces results that are to its liking should be eliminated as an effective political force, is valid, I think. An oligarchy that thinks that a country consists only of its richest 10% does not deserve any sympathy from the populace.
Regards. James
What makes you think that there are enough people in Haiti who are able to carry out your program?
I don’t know, James. What do you mean?
The whole problem there is that the only people who have ever had the guns have been the Oligarchy and its hired guns. When Aristide won, the US overthrew them. Then we let him come back, but without cops and with no army. Then we helped form an insurgency to get rid of him.
Dear Robert.
What I meant is that in Haiti there are very few people outside the oligarchy who have the skills to carry out a revolution and afterwards bring good government to the people. It is a bit like Congo under the Belgians. All the top positions were in the hand of Belgians and only a handful of Africans had higer education. When the Belgians left, chaos ensued.
Regards. James
Aristide had some excellent people working with him and his government could have done a lot of good if we had given them a chance. But we embargoed them from the get-go and then we unleashed an insurgency against them. Not only that, but we won’t let him come back. He has the support of 90% of the population!
Dear Robert
I’m quite willing to believe that Arisitde had some good people at the level of generals, so to speak. However, an institution needs not only good generals but also good lower officers and good NCOs. How many of those were available to Aristide?
As to the embargo, if I remember correctly, it was imposed on the junta that deposed Aristide.
Regards. James
Yes, first the junta was embargoed, but then Clinton the so called liberal put Aristide back in. Aristide raised the minimum wage and all Hell broke loose. All US aid was cut off and the regime was economically strangled. Furthermore, an armed insurgency was started up. At the same time, Aristide was denied any guns and weapons. Aristide had a lot of good people working for him from top to bottom but he was never even given a chance, and he still is not.
“Democracy” is hopeless in Haiti and anyways, it is impossible. At this point, I am afraid armed revolution is the only way. But the Haitians do not seem to be organized for that. BTW, the UN has come in with guns incredibly to safeguard the regime the deposed Aristide. The guns are mostly used to attack Aristide’s supporters. It’s simply incredible.
The MSM will never tell you one word of any of this. In some way, I am very happy that all of these big papers and newsmagazines are going under. Goodbye and good riddance.