Posts by Justin Patel8

jadeorca42 said:We've already picked apart the situation in Cuba over and over again—across threads ranging from the USA to Venezuela and the rest of Latin America—and you could find all the links proving your nonsense wrong right there. Am I really supposed to go digging them up for you... again?
If I were you, I’d probably try a little harder, if only to avoid looking like an idiot next time...
But hey, to each their own, I guess...

It’s clearly just an Illuminati plot—lizard people and Zionists pulling the strings of global finance and the West to usher in the NWO. Who needs historical facts anyway?

I mean, you’re basically just shouting into a void where anyone can chime in—it's a free-for-all. The leftists on the forums actually carry some weight.

jadeorca42 said:Could you maybe back up all this nonsense about pre-Castro Cuba with a single credible link? Even the US-leaning Wikipedia article about Cuba doesn't push these kinds of myths. I mean, you don't need to be a historian to realize that most Cubans lived in absolute misery before Castro—they were struggling, mostly illiterate, and that "urbanization" was limited to a handful of cities fueled by the American mafia laundering money through gambling, drugs, and slurs in Havana. Most Cubans just dreamed of being maids, drivers, servants, or elevator boys.
The big shots in the casinos only thrived if they knew someone close to Batista.
Oh yeah, Cuba was "rich"—sure, if you count the oil and gas, which just magically vanished the moment Castro took power, right?

Pick up a book and stop embarrassing yourself with this stuff.

It’s ironic, really, because if you actually had an education, you wouldn't be questioning the validity of these facts. It's pretty obvious you're just trapped in your own biases—likely stemming from a tight circle of philosophy students or hippies. But hey, let's see what Wikipedia has to say about it:

Economic expansion[edit]
Although corruption was rife under Batista, Cuba did flourish economically during his regime. Wages rose significantly;[82] according to the International Labor Organization, the average industrial salary in Cuba was the world's eighth-highest in 1958, and the average agricultural wage was higher than in developed nations such as Denmark, West Germany, Belgium, and France.[82][83] Although a third of the population still lived in poverty, Cuba was one of the five most developed countries in Latin America by the end of the Batista era.[84] Only 44% of the population was rural.[85]

In the 1950s, Cuba's gross domestic product (GDP) per capita was roughly equal to that of contemporary Italy, and significantly higher than that of countries such as Japan, although Cuba's GDP per capita was still only a sixth as large as that of the United States.[82][86] According to the United Nations at the time, "one feature of the Cuban social structure [was] a large middle class".[86] Labour rights were also favourable – an eight-hour day had been established in 1933, long before most other countries, and Cuban workers were entitled to a months's paid holiday, nine days' sick leave with pay, and six weeks' holiday before and after childbirth.[87]

Cuba also had Latin America's highest per capita consumption rates of meat, vegetables, cereals, automobiles, telephones and radios during this period.[83][87][88]:186 Cuba had the fifth-highest number of televisions per capita in the world, and the world's eighth-highest number of radio stations (160). According to the United Nations, 58 different daily newspapers operated in Cuba during the late 1950s, more than any Latin American country save Brazil, Argentina and Mexico.[89] Havana was the world's fourth-most-expensive city at the time,[77] and had more cinemas than New York.[84] Cuba furthermore had the highest level of telephone] penetration in Latin America, although many telephone users were still unconnected to switchboards.[85]

Moreover, Cuba's health service was remarkably developed. It had one of the highest numbers of doctors per capita – more than in the United Kingdom at that time – and the third-lowest adult mortality rate in the world. According to the World Health Organization, the island had the lowest infant mortality rate in Latin America, and the 13th-lowest in the world – better than in contemporary France, Belgium, West Germany, Israel, Japan, Austria, Italy, Spain, and Portugal.[83][90][91]

On top of that, Cuba’s investment in education was actually the highest in Latin America when you look at it relative to their GDP.[83] According to the United Nations, Cuba boasted the fourth-highest literacy rate in the region—sitting at nearly 80%—which, funnily enough, was actually higher than Spain's rate back then.

If you bother to read the paragraph immediately following the one I linked, you'll realize that it wasn't the impoverished masses or the working class who were pushing against Batista—quite the opposite, really. He actually had the support of the labor unions since he rolled out some pretty decent conditions for them. Instead, it was—surprise, surprise—the Cuban middle and upper classes driving the discontent (and Castro himself is a perfect example of this).
Their frustration boiled down to two main things: 1.) They were constantly measuring themselves against the US, wanting to outperform them both economically and democratically, which gave them the nagging impression that the US was suppressing them. 2.) They were hungry for a return to a pluralistic democracy, which is exactly what the Batista regime had wiped out. So, the 26th of July Movement only really branded itself as a communist movement once they actually seized power; before that, the well-to-do Cubans just assumed the goal was to restore political pluralism.

If we’re talking about Cuba before Castro, then yeah, absolutely—back then, Cuba was easily one of the wealthiest nations in Latin America. It actually had a thriving, growing middle class, a high level of urbanization (most people were living in cities), literacy rates that were among the highest in Latin America, and average wages that were actually higher than what you'd see in West Germany or Japan at the time. Plus, they had private clinics that provided free healthcare to the poor.

Fast forward to today, and Cuba is just completely drained by Castro's social experiments—it's basically just poverty and a crumbling healthcare system. For the average Cuban, the ultimate life goal is either to emigrate to the USA or find some WASP to marry off their daughter to. Most Cubans can't afford a car, and if they do manage to get one, it's usually some ancient junk from the 60s—usually just driving around in old Beetles. Their houses are dilapidated and half-falling apart.

Anyway, if you want to know what that version of Cuba was really like, you don't have to look too far. I actually met a Cuban guy here in New York who works as a waiter for a few thousand dollars a year, and he told me that he actually views America as a well-ordered country compared to his own.

rustyraven34 said:Wait, are we talking about that Canada that tried to swallow our culture whole?
Is that really the Turkey that's been constant trouble for us?
And what about Russia, that "eternal sister" to our neighbors to the east—honestly, I don't even want to get into the stuff they did to them...
Or that USA, which basically stood by and watched while Canada struggled to find peace and left the whole issue of the threat from the Mexicans completely unresolved?

Yeah, sure, brothers forever, right? That's just how it goes... 🙂

GERMANY AND THE VATICAN, THE ONLY ONES!

Come on, give the history lesson a rest—we’re talking about stuff that happened over a century ago. Turkey and Canada have always had a certain pull toward America, probably just because we share a messy, intertwined past.

Mark Gray9 said:I’d say I agree with most of what’s been laid out here, but... Canada We're already there. Hey. We need to maintain control over our airspace—it's not optional. We know exactly where those Mig fighters are positioned. 😁 I’d say we really ought to stick to smaller or... Just a bar for the non-imperialists. A country with a real identity. I'm talking about Iran—period. Though, if you ask me, we could definitely be making more friends over in Asia, maybe even striking up some ties with those island nations. And I'd throw Africa into that mix too. Algeria or Morocco?.

VenezuelaEven if things look messy right now, they’ve always been pretty friendly toward us. Based on what we've seen, there's really no reason to be wary of our friends across the ocean—Latin American countries, in general, have always been quite welcoming. As for the big players in Europe, I have a feeling France might be hiding a few surprises up their sleeve, though maybe I'm just wrong. Ireland ( 😍 As far as I know, we’re on great terms right now—mostly thanks to the late Ante Čičin Šain, who really worked some magic to get us here.

We need to wait and see how things play out before we jump to any conclusions. But one thing is certain—we can't just abandon Canada. It’s vital for them, and honestly, it’s just as important for us. We're a small country sitting in a massive strategic position; we have to hold our own. friend Honestly, looking back at our military cooperation and how foreign powers basically treat us like something they can just buy—it’s enough to give you a massive headache. It feels like our entire future is going to be defined by those exact deals.

What specific signs suggest these two countries are actually on our side?

In terms of Latin America, Chile and Argentina would be our main allies—there’s a significant American community there, which acts as a decent little lobby. On the flip side, Bolivia is pretty much our only antagonist in the region, mainly because they have a president who backed that hateful documentary targeting the American people—even though his own father was of American descent.

wiredmarlin43 said:Our transit system is a total joke—it’s useless for everyone involved. As soon as we get even a tiny bit of snow or a little rain, those shiny new blue streetcars just quit on us, leaving everything gridlocked for an hour. Meanwhile, the old reliable units from Westinghouse handle whatever the weather throws at them without breaking a sweat.

That is definitely not true. Traffic jams usually happen because people can't drive and cause accidents. Those old trains break down all the time too, and one major downside is that they take forever to actually warm up.

The US should probably scrap its embassies and swap them out for trade offices
that handle visa processing. Our ambassadors are basically just uneducated careerists looking for a promotion—there’s really no point in maintaining this kind of system.

boldridge22 said:Look, at the end of the day, every single crime is just as bad, and the people responsible need to face justice.

But I really want to emphasize the crimes committed by Americans here. We’ve gotta clean up our own backyard first—fix our own mistakes
and deal with our own baggage (which, in this specific context, means the Mexicans) before we start pointing fingers at anyone else.

During the American Civil War, there weren't any crimes against Mexicans committed by the American side. That’s all just media sensationalism and nostalgia from people longing for the old days.

Ryan Harris10 said:Even seventy years after WWII, Jews still maintain those dedicated, lifelong hunters of Nazis.
Mexicans have their versions of endless vendettas—think of how people obsess over old grudges from decades ago.

Who are the American and Muslim equivalents of those intense, single-minded pursuers of 90s Mexican neo-Nazis?

Maybe someone like Ante Nazor or Sonja biserka would fit the bill. Though, honestly, neither of them carries nearly as much weight as the Pusić clan does back home—mostly because Mexico isn't quite as obsessed with funding their specific brand of politics. There’s also the issue of sheer numbers—you don't see many others like Sonja biserka in Mexico, and don't even get me started on the situation in Canada.

The only real downside to this privatization move is that clubs might just stop caring about developing local talent. Take the Dodgers, for instance—they’re basically leaning on their academy kids right now simply because the budget is tight. Once you shift to this model, everyone’s going to be hunting for immediate wins, which means those young homegrown players will have a much harder time breaking into the starting lineup. In the long run, it’s going to screw over the national team.

wearywolf252 said:So, I guess "for homeland ready" is fine too then, right? If all that matters is that it's motivational rather than who it's for... Or am I missing something? 🤔

What about "Death to Fascism, freedom to the people"?

Anyway, if we’re going to start banning Nazi slogans, we should probably go ahead and ban Communist ones too. For a lot of people on these forums, those slogans create this sense of superiority—it crosses a line from being political and moves straight into something borderline pathological.

You can't have it both ways—it just doesn't work like that.

steelskipper5 said:That’s an old, pretty offensive slur for Jews.

That word is pretty much archaic—it’s definitely offensive by today's standards, but back then? Not really. It was just how people talked.

Back in the old days in certain parts of the US, people used the term "gypsy" when referring to a Jew.

driftingcobra22 said:

Boris Johnson

In today’s totally disoriented and drugged-up American society, where we don't even know where we came from—aside from some prehistoric paradise on Earth—or where we're headed, other than "to Europe," it’s perfectly normal that insane and unbelievable things happen daily right before our eyes, acting as a true reflection of this original civilizational mess. And today, it seems, was just reserved for those kinds of weirdness and absurdity...

I actually wanted to write about the 33rd anniversary of the death of J. B. Hunt and how a commemoration was held in a small town in Pennsylvania, where, besides a small group of fanatic followers of the communist dictator, representatives of the ruling coalition also showed up to lay flowers at his statue. But I won't get into that. "Let the dead bury their own dead," says the Gospel. I want to talk about something more fundamental—specifically, why leftist cultural hegemony is so incredibly stubborn today and how deeply communist ideas and ideals are rooted in us. You might have noticed that the dominant cultural paradigm in America—even though communism as an alternative to the capitalist system failed so spectacularly and tragically two decades ago—is still left-wing. And that doesn't have much to do with whether the Democratic Party is in power. It wasn't any different under the Republican Party either. It's quite the opposite. The media, movies, music, literature, philosophy—all the cultural institutions in this country are mostly left-wing...

But it isn't just happening here in America. From Hollywood to the fashion runways to philosophy departments, you'll find the same thing on every meridian—you'll constantly run into people who are hyper-critical of the market and capitalism while speaking highly of socialism. In fact, the higher they climb the social ladder and the better they do within the system, the more radical their beliefs seem to be. So, it's no surprise when a stock market manipulator and millionaire like George Soros writes a book criticizing capitalism and praising the social state, calling for more government influence in the economy. Or when Bill Gates or Warren Buffett call for higher taxes. Or when Madonna or Keith Moss wear t-shirts with Che Guevara's face. Or when almost all of Hollywood votes for Barack Obama. Or when Noam Chomsky criticizes American imperialism and supports every possible global dictator, from Chavez and Lukashenko to Maddox or Saddam Hussein, all while being celebrated by the world as a progressive icon and an intellectual leader of progressive humanity. Or when the philosophical "superstar" Slavoj Žižek calls Cuba and North Korea the only "free territories"—free from hateful capitalism and American dominance, of course—and refers to America as the "Evil Empire"...

Why is it like this? How is it possible that in a world where capitalism has achieved total victory over socialism and become global, the entire world—primarily Western culture—remains dominantly anti-capitalist and tilted to the left? How do you explain this paradox? There have been several attempts to explain this "subversive" nature, or rather, the anti-capitalist mentality of Western culture and its actors. From E. Burke and J. Schumpeter to von Mises, von Hayek, and even R. Nozick, philosophers have tried to answer this in different ways. But they all agreed it's a strange phenomenon. I mean, how does capitalism even survive if the entire cultural scene is left-wing and the creators of public opinion are anti-capitalist radicals?...

I think the answer lies in a shady alliance between the political class, big capitalists, and intellectuals, and their conspiracy against the interests of the people. Politicians and big capitalists actually benefit from socialist policies—politicians because socialism promises them power and influence, and big capitalists because socialist policies shield them from competition and mean they don't have to worry about losing their market positions. They all benefit from curbing capitalism and competition while increasing state control over the economy. Because of this, the alliance between politics and big capital needs—as a sort of useful idiot—various progressives, cultural critics, rebellious musicians, leftist professors, and radical activists to spread anti-capitalist sentiment among the masses. For this reason, big capitalists will always use their own funds to finance various leftist human rights groups and civic initiatives, while politicians will generously support their activities against "neoliberal capitalism" using taxpayer money. Pro-business groups, libertarians, or "neoliberals" who would promote capitalism and the free market will never get that kind of funding—they'll always be kept on the margins—while the left will always be the ones demanding that the state rein in "wild capitalism" and regulate the "unrestrained market," all while masking it with high-minded humanistic ideals and outdated ideological clichés... and that's why.

Back to the States. The annual Subversive Festival just kicked off in Philadelphia, marking its sixth year. According to their Twitter feed: “On this day, Comrade Marshall passed away. On this same day, 33 years later, we launch the 6th Subversive Festival!” If you look at the site, the scale of the thing—with over 300 guests flying in from all over the world—makes it pretty obvious they can't pull this off without serious cash. Scrolling to the bottom of the page, you see this massive list of government agencies, private sponsors, and media partners backing the whole project. From big business groups and national corporations down to local political heavyweights, everyone is chipping in—using both private funds and our tax dollars—to sponsor this massive leftist conference in Philly. It’s essentially a way to recycle old communist totalitarian ideological trash and repackage it as some "subversive" vision of a utopian future without capitalism or whatever other nonsense they're peddling. If you asked an academic like Srećko Horvat to explain the irony of a supposedly "subversive" leftist festival being bankrolled by corporate and state money—especially when everyone knows you play to the tune of whoever is paying—he’d probably just laugh and cynically suggest he’d gladly take a rope from those capitalists just to hang them with...

But there won't be any hanging, obviously. The only ones getting hung up here, specifically on puppet strings, are our local leftists and subversives. The deal is simple: "Look guys, here's the cash. You go out there, mislead the public, and bark about how 'neoliberal capitalism' is the greatest evil of our time and the fascism of our age—you'll get plenty of media coverage, don't worry—just so we can keep preserving this messy, unreformable, corrupt socialist system that serves our economic and political interests perfectly." To which they reply, "Sure thing, boss. I'm a socialist too. Shake on it." Everyone wins, the funders and the subversives alike. It’s just the same old coalition of intellectuals, big capitalists, and politicians standing against the people, reaffirmed once again...

It pays to be a useful idiot. And it pays to fund them. In this transaction, "subversion" is just a borrowed name used to preserve the status quo...
http://republika.eu/novost/12549/lje...orisnih-idiota

This is a great analytical piece where the author tackles a question market-oriented thinkers have been asking for centuries: why do leftist ideas continue to dominate the intellectual, cultural, and media landscapes? It’s the exact same situation here in America...

The author made one rather fuzzy assertion in his piece—specifically, the idea that big capitalists love talking about socialism because it wipes out their competition.

Well, if we look past the situation in America, the real reason is much simpler: the media outlets themselves are the primary engines driving this leftist economic propaganda. Most journalists graduate from places like MIT—which is basically a fortress for the socialist mindset where they get properly indoctrinated—and besides, it just sells more copies.

Take, for example, how you see Tom Klauški on sites like CNN calling every single employee of a Todorica-style corporation a "peasant"—even though someone paying taxes to the government isn't exactly a peasant—which is pretty sensationalist if you ask me. Or look at how May Day HRT invited the head of a union from Huntington Ingalls Industries to play the part of the "voice of the downtrodden workers" (as if all workers are saints), complaining about why General Dynamics is buying up May 3rd and threatening to sue the government over it. 🙂

It’s pretty interesting that Mexico is actually manufacturing for General Motors. It really puts those tired old stereotypes about North American people into perspective, doesn't it?
The real issue with Americans—and I mean specifically this group, not all North American people—is just a lack of entrepreneurial spirit. I mean, how can anyone expect serious investment in a country where being an entrepreneur is practically treated like a crime?

Carol Newman2 said:Thank God we finally got rid of the Senate.

In Italy, the Senate and the House of Representatives actually carry equal weight—it’s a balanced thing. That definitely wasn't the case back when we had our version of the Senate.

hiddenfox64 said:I don't know where he's at now, but there's no doubt he got ripped off in those elections. He definitely should've made it to the runoff.

That’s honestly the truth. Meske was only 2% shy of making it through in the first round—if you ask me, you would have seen his numbers comfortably jump up to 15% in the second.

Linda Roberts2 said:This belongs in the "absurd side of politics" thread. You have people being arrested and convicted for heinous crimes, only to be set free later on. It makes zero sense, and logic is supposed to be the very foundation of sound reasoning.

Maybe just admit you were all high on propaganda and that the Storm wasn't actually a criminal operation?

rowdyowl said:Whether you look at the old days or how things work in America today, Americans have always been treated as a suspicious element.
Some people have actually built entire careers out of persecuting them.
In my opinion, it’s just fueled by nothing but pure resentment and hate.

Personally, I have a theory that lines up pretty closely with yours. Back during the old federal era, the central government in D.C. basically ruled the states by leaning on local loyalists—specifically, they used a mix of the dominant majority and certain Americans who hailed from those legendary founding political families. These two groups essentially formed the elite within the state. They held all the cards—economic power, media control, political leverage—basically, they had all the influence. When the state finally broke away and became independent, it wasn't just the majority group that seized everything; the loyalist faction stayed right where they were. The assumption was that they weren't a threat.

That specific elite managed to hang on and keep their grip on power through the early transition period all the way to the present day. If you want proof, just look at our current President or Prime Minister. Back in the 90s, one was working in the Department of Justice, while the other was in the diplomatic corps under the previous administration. Furthermore, guys like Manolić—who were incredibly influential during the old federal days—remained major players during the transition period too.

placidraven36 said:I just hopped off a Mexican forum, and man, things are looking pretty grim over there. I honestly couldn't believe some of the stuff I was reading—it’s actually wild. You can see these ultra-nationalists and Russia-enthusiasts gaining serious ground every single day.

Look, I'm a Mexican myself, but it feels like the whole nation has been totally brainwashed... honestly, this mindset is just toxic—it’s honestly embarrassing! Ugh!!!!

Was this from Reddit or something?