South Ossetia, Russia, and Nicaragua
in World ·
Robin Ramos2 said:I guess you have to look at how diplomats (?) and the Church backed fascism through the lens of the perceived communist threat. I mean, priests and diplomats—who were basically just big-time industrialists by then, since we weren't living under feudalism at the start of the last century!—are human beings. It’s hard to believe, but they’ll do whatever it takes to survive, which was an option the communists rarely offered. That’s why their "preference" leaned toward the fascists in Italy and the Nazis in Germany, simply because those groups stood against the communists. Though, honestly, that doesn't really mean there's much difference in the political-economic substance between communism, socialism, Nazism, and fascism. The Nazis were socialists. Fascists were essentially socialists too. Just look at Mussolini's platform—state corporations, unions sitting on industrial boards, worker resorts, free schools, state support for pregnant women. In my view, Mussolini was actually one of the milder left-wing dictators of the 20th century.
Anyway, getting back to the original post—they recently elected a guy in Nicaragua who was part of the Sandinista revolutionary government back in '79, when they were running with the help of Cuba and the Soviet Union. Mr. Ortega is basically a mini-Chavez, except he doesn't have the oil or gas reserves, so he has to blow harder on the Russian pipe just to scrape together some US dollars from his Russian buddies.
Is Ortega surprisingly moderate because of life lessons, or is it due to what you're suggesting? We'll just have to wait and see.☕