More on Fidel Castro’s Blog

The previous post focused on the online blog which Cuban Comandante Fidel Castro writes. It noted that:

Fidel Castro is in many ways a throw-back to the past, back in the days when communism ruled half of Europe and nuclear war seemed a distinct possibility. He is more than 80 years old now, and no longer controls the nation Cuba.

Nevertheless, Mr. Castro still maintains a blog (older articles can be accessed here), in which he writes about the latest happenings in this world. To be fair, the postings are probably taken from some sort of written article; most likely they are put online by a government employee rather than him.

It makes for fascinating reading.

There are several other interesting aspects of the blog, which this post will talk about.

One quite surprising thing is the extent to which Mr. Castro follows American politics. The shooting of Congresswomen Gabrielle Giffords was, for instance, actually given several posts of coverage. This says something about America’s influence in the world. If a crazy man shoots a minor politician elsewhere in the world, nobody would care. But when it happens in America, even Fidel Castro himself writes about it.

Mr. Castro tends to quote speeches and newspaper articles – even those made by his ideological opponents – at length. He then makes brief comments, usually in disagreement. This is quite different from the American style.

In addition, sometimes the wording is not done well or doesn’t entirely make sense, although the general idea is still pretty clear. This maybe due to translation issues into English. Alternatively, Mr. Castro’s age may have led to his writing style deteriorating.

Finally, there are times when the Comandante’s opinions are out-of-whack with even the most radical Americans. The last few articles, for instance, argue that Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi is currently a hero resisting Western aggression.

Then there is his interpretation of North Korea’s sinking of a South Korean submarine:

SINCE the day of March 26, neither Obama nor the president of South Korea have been able to explain what really happened to the flagship of the South Korean Navy, the state-of-the-art submarine hunter Cheonan, which was taking part in a maneuver with the U.S. Navy to the west of the Korean Peninsula, close to the limits of the two Republics, which provoked 46 deaths and dozens of injured.

The embarrassing aspect for the empire is that its ally knows from reliable sources that the boat was sunk by the United States. There is no way of eluding that fact, which will accompany them like a shadow.

Once again, this conspiracy theory goes against the entire educated opinion of the United States.

All in all, Mr. Castro’s writings offer quite a different perspective from the typical Washington attitude. This is a pretty obvious conclusion, but it is worth repeating. It is also very much worth reading what he writes. As the previous post argued:

All in all, I highly encourage anybody reading this to visit Mr. Castro’s website. One’s understanding of the world is always enhanced by reading what one’s ideological opponents say. With the rise of the Internet, it’s quite amazing that anybody can just go online and check out some of Mr. Castro’s thoughts on current events. One should take the opportunity.

--Inoljt, http://mypolitikal.com/

 

Reading Fidel Castro’s Blog

Fidel Castro is in many ways a throw-back to the past, back in the days when communism ruled half of Europe and nuclear war seemed a distinct possibility. He is more than 80 years old now, and no longer controls the nation Cuba.

Nevertheless, Mr. Castro still maintains a blog (older articles can be accessed here), in which he writes about the latest happenings in this world. To be fair, the postings are probably taken from some sort of written article; most likely they are put online by a government employee rather than him.

It makes for fascinating reading.

The communist leader actually writes quite similarly to a lot of leftist rhetoric. Were it not for his references to “The Empire” (i.e. America) or occasional meetings with world leaders, Mr. Castro’s column would not be out-of-place on the Daily Kos featured blog list.

Mr. Castro, for instance, is a big fan of environmentalism and stopping climate change. This is somewhat surprising, considering that climate change didn’t exist as an issue for much of the revolutionary’s life.

I could not help but look at how the Comandante views President Barack Obama. On the one hand, he does appear to give Mr. Obama some credit for being the first African-American president. On the other, he views Mr. Obama as the product of American institutions (which he is). Therefore the president is still an “enemy” – “He [Mr. Obama] supports his system and he will be get support from it.”

At times Mr. Castro is quite critical of the president:

When Obama was questioned about the coup d’état against the heroic President Salvador Allende, promoted like many others by the United States, and the mysterious death of Eduardo Frei Montalva, assassinated by agents of the DINA, a creation of the U.S. government, he lost his presence of mind and began to stutter.

Without any doubt, at the end of his speech, the commentator on Chilean television was totally accurate when he stated that Obama had nothing to offer the hemisphere…

Obama now has before him a visit to El Salvador, tomorrow, Tuesday. There he will have to invent a lot, because in that sister Central American nation the weapons and advisors that it received from his country were responsible for much bloodshed.

I wish him bon voyage and a little more good sense.

This is unsurprising, considering just who is writing these words. At the same time, Mr. Castro does seem to have a sense of caution. Before the 2008 presidential election, he wrote:

When these views that I sustain are published tomorrow [after the election], nobody will have time to say that I wrote something that could be used by any candidate to advance his campaign. I had to be, and I have been, neutral in this electoral competition. It is not “interference in the internal affairs of the United States”, as the State Department would put it, as respectful as it is of other countries’ sovereignty.

All in all, I highly encourage anybody reading this to visit Mr. Castro’s website. One’s understanding of the world is always enhanced by reading what one’s ideological opponents say. With the rise of the Internet, it’s quite amazing that anybody can just go online and check out some of Mr. Castro’s thoughts on current events. One should take the opportunity.

The next post will offer more some more thoughts on Mr. Castro’s blog.

--Inoljt

Foreshadowing the Jeremiah Wright Scandal

If Barack gets past the primary, he might have to publicly distance himself from me. I said it to Barack personally, and he said yeah, that might have to happen.

- Jeremiah Wright, April 2007

Today, former Reverend Jeremiah Wright is nationally infamous as the controversial former head of President Barack Obama’s former church. During the primary campaign, tapes of Mr. Wright’s sermons did deep damage to Mr. Obama’s candidacy, to which Mr. Obama later responded with a unique and heartfelt speech about race. To this day the Wright affair remains the most damaging scandal the president has encountered.

ABC’s news report, however, was not the first time that a news organization reported about Mr. Wright’s controversial statements. Take, for instance, this fascinating New York Times story – a report written a full year before the Jeremiah Wright scandal exploded.

The story is titled “A Candidate, His Minister, and the Search for Faith.” Generally the report is about what the title says it is – Mr. Obama’s experience with religion and the black church. Given Mr. Wright’s involvement with the latter, he is also a presence in the report.

The Times cannot help but note several of Mr. Wright’s controversial stances, including his support for black liberation theology. It quotes a professor who says that “Some white people hear it [black liberation theology] as racism in reverse.” Later, a long quote goes:

Mr. Wright’s political statements may be more controversial than his theological ones. He has said that Zionism has an element of “white racism.” (For its part, the Anti-Defamation League says it has no evidence of any anti-Semitism by Mr. Wright.)

On the Sunday after the terrorist attacks of 9/11, Mr. Wright said the attacks were a consequence of violent American policies. Four years later he wrote that the attacks had proved that “people of color had not gone away, faded into the woodwork or just ‘disappeared’ as the Great White West went on its merry way of ignoring Black concerns.”

Presumably the reporter had read Mr. Wright’s statement that “America’s chickens are coming home to roost,” or something quite similar.

What is most interesting about this report is what happened afterwards: nothing. No controversy broke out. Fox News did not take up the report. The story disappeared into the black hole of history, even though it expressed concern about many of the same things ABC News later would.

There are reasons for why this happened. A written description of a controversial statement holds much less power to incite than actually hearing said statement on video. This is especially true with Mr. Wright, who preached in a particularly passionate and inflammatory manner. And Mr. Obama’s candidacy was barely known in April of 2007; he still trailed far behind Ms. Clinton at the time, and most did not believe the candidate had a chance of becoming president.

The story finishes with a distinctly prophetic statement – the quote at the beginning of the page. More than a year before the Jeremiah Wright controversy exploded, Mr. Wright himself predicted that Mr. Obama “might have to publicly distance himself from me.”

And that is exactly what happened.

--Inoljt, http://mypolitikal.com/

 

 

Diaries

Advertise Blogads