Williams with Sowell - A Love Affair With Tyrants

[nicodemous52]

HERE is my question...How do we rail against them (liberals) for being friendly with evil, when "we" ourselves are only willing to take a stand against some evil and think ourselves righteous?

[easyjesus66]

@nicodemous52 I see a difference.....being friendly with vs taking a stand against evil. I take the latter when it comes to self preservation. Thats one of the big differences between the parties...

[dubified89]

These guys want to go to war with Iran, WTF? A lot of countries in the Middle East have nukes, why should we worry about the Iranians any more than the others just because Israel doesn't like them. Israel has attacked the U.S. navy before and gets caught committing espionage against us all the time.

[ShinetheLightofTruth]

I wonder why neither men bring up the fact the Prescott Bush, financed Hitler. If France could have taken them our by themselves, in the Mid 30's. Where did the money come from to build their massive weapons of war. in just 5 years. That, with a collapsed economy! (The Elite, Illuminati)! Starting all wars. Control & death is their obsession! Just as Rockefeller Trust was behind China's one child policy. Over 30 Million babies aborted. Satan is their god!

[070911021302]

The fact is that the Us has a long history of support for some of THE most murderous dictatorships of the past 100 years, as long as they support US interests which regimes that help boost profits for corporate businesses and geopolitical. The US have been in league every dictatorship in South America+the Caribbean eg Pinochet, the Shah of Iran, Saudi Arabia, Somoza, Noriega, the Duvalliers, Mobutu in Africa, the apartheid regime of South Africa, Suharto in Indonesia, Saddam Hussein...

[mpc91]

@070911021302 - Really? The most muderous regimes.

We supported Hitler, Stalin, Red China, Pol Pot? I must have missed that.

I will grant that we have supported some bad people, but we supported them because we were opposing someone far, far worse.

It's easy to say in hindsight to say we supported someone we shouldn't have in the comfort of history, when you can take them out of context.

[ShinetheLightofTruth]

@mpc91 I wouldn't have thought that we supported these murderers either. It is not (we the people), it is those behind the money. War is very profitable for those who finance it. All since WW1 have been financed by the Rothschild's. Why has all of the industries that made America great been given to China? To make us week. The U.S. has served it's purpose for the Elite & now they want to destroy us. We invading countries, (Libya}, that have not attract us, Why? Dig deeper!

[070911021302]

@mpc91

The US govt admired Hitler throughout the 1930s. He smashed communism+ terroised German trade unions. It meant that major US investors in Germany eg Henry Ford could reap even greater profits. The US were also sympathetic to Pol Pot as he was an enemy of North Vietnam, who had run the US forces out of South Vietnam It was the North Vietnamese who invaded Cambodia and routed Pol Pot.

What regimes could have been worse than eg Pinochet, Noriega, Mobutu??!

You sound very naieve

[mixmastermeeks]

@070911021302 The U.S. government admired Hitler in the 1930's? Well who was in charge of our government? Certainly not free market capitalists. That should be a big indicator. And certainly the US wasn't sympathetic to Pol Pot. Well, Noam Chomsky was but he was a minority. And you are mixing economics with politics. It certainly is true that Pinochet was a horrible dictator. But did the communists support nicer characters? Was Che really such a great guy?

[weavermama]

@mixmastermeeks Yup. re the 1930's: Don't forget that John Maynard Keynes, the one time director of the British Eugenics Society, said, "... the theory of output as a whole, which is what the following book purports to provide, is more easily adapted to the conditions of a totalitarian state, than is the theory of the production and distribution of a given output under conditions of free competition and a large measure of laissez-faire." -preface to the German edition of The General Theory

[mixmastermeeks]

@weavermama Was Keynes really the director of the British Eugenics society? I didn't know that.

[weavermama]

@mixmastermeeks He sure was. Murray Rothbard does a good job tearing him apart.

[070911021302]

@mixmastermeeks

Free market capitalists often like fascists. Noam Chomsky was a supporter of Pol Pot? How could Noam Chomsky of all people, be sympathetic to a genocidal maniac? What an idiotic statement. The US created the conditions that gave rise to Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge. They also saw the Khmer Rouge as a useful ally against the North Vietnamese, who were their enemy.

Was Che Guevara a nice guy? I have no idea? What has that to do with anything??!

[mixmastermeeks]

@070911021302 And free market capitalists like fascists? Which free market capitalists liked which fascists? Fascism by definition is anti-free market. And Chomsky went on a large campaign in the 1970's claiming that the western media was bias against the Khmer Rouge. He said that they were ignoring the success of the policies of Pol Pot.

[070911021302]

@mixmastermeeks There are any number of facist and/or racist regimes that were loved by amoral free market capitalists. Major western corporations were large scale direct investors or indirectly controlled many of the major resources of these countries eg precious metals, oil, copper, sugar, rubber, aluuminium Germany Chile Argentina Brazil Uruguay Guatamala Nicaragua Panama Iran Rhodesia/Zimbabwe The Congo/Zaire South Africa Indonesia This list is by no means exhaustive...

[mixmastermeeks]

@070911021302 In an honest discussion about economics we could put aside Pinochet and Castro and focus on the results of economic policy. Chile started to reform its economy in 1979. Currently it has more free trade agreements than any other Latin nation. How is Cuba doing?

[070911021302]

@mixmastermeeks Free Trade Agreements (FTA) are not success stories in themselves. FTA's are often simply outsourcing poverty from richer northern hemisphere countrys to poorer southern hemisphere nations. FTA often mean more sweatshops in poor countries. Cuba has free healthcare, free education, produces more doctors per capita than any other country, has one of the world's highest literacy rates, highest life expectancy, lowest rates of poverty+ malnutrition.

How is Chile in comparison?

[mixmastermeeks]

@070911021302 1. I agree that FTA's are not ideal. The fact that they are huge written agreements means that they aren't really free trade. But they are a start. And naturally you are completely wrong about FTA's outsourcing poverty. Was there less poverty in the South prior to trade? Of course not. Ridiculous. If sweatshops are so bad why do people work in them if their alternative (what they were doing prior to the "sweatshops) is so much better?

[070911021302]

@mixmastermeeks

FTAs in reality often mean that jobs that were previously done by poorer people in US or Canada are now being done in the South or Caribbean at a fraction of their former cost. The wage levels are so low for the workers in the south that they often remain in poverty. For example I recall reading how in the 1990s under a FTA Tommy Hilfiger set up an assembly plant in Jamaica which paid the workers around US $35/week. Even in a country like Jamaica that is poverty level wages..

[070911021302]

@mixmastermeeks The FTA's do not reduce poverty but reinforcce+ perpetuate it.

Why do certain people work in them? Presumably because they often feel they have little choice. In many countries in the South, food commodity prices have been deliberately driven down by Northen food conglomerates which makes subsistence farming less viable+ in some cases eg Colombia, Brazil people have been driven forcibly from their land into the city slums where sweatshops of one of the few viable options.

[mixmastermeeks]

@070911021302 2. Cuba vs Chile. Are you kidding? Cuba's healthcare is a nightmare. It is 3 tier. The top health care goes to foreigners who pay the regime directly. The second is for communist officials and the 3rd is what the average Cuban gets. If you are a regular Cuban you are screwed. It is horrible. 75% of Cuban doctors who escape can't pass the medical exams in America. And all of them tell horror stories about cuba's medical system.

[070911021302]

@mixmastermeeks What are you comparing Cuban healthcare to? Sweden, France, UK? It may be inferior to most European or even US healthcare (assuming you have insurance) but most citizens in Asia, Africa or South America would love to have the healthcare Cubans enjoy. I met people from other countries who go to Cuba for healthcare. I have never heard of ordinary people going to Mexico or Chile to use their healthcare. I don't know where you get your information or stats from re Cuban Doctors

[mixmastermeeks]

@070911021302 And it doesn't have a low rate of poverty. The Cuban government says they have low poverty. The government of North Korea also reports low poverty. It doesn't make it true. In fact it is well known Cuba has an enormous food shortage. People build homemade boats to escape Cuba....how many Chileans do the same?

[weavermama]

@mixmastermeeks Ahh, the "voting with your feet" argument. Always effective against statists. It is second only to the "voting with your homemade raft" argument. Well done!

[070911021302]

@mixmastermeeks Cuba has low poverty, low malnutriton rates, high literacy rates+ high life expectancy rates. It compares well to many rich nations+ far exceeds other comparable countries in the Caribbean+ South America.

Have you ever been to Cuba. I travelled to several towns+cities there. Whilst Cubans are poor compared to most US citizens, I have seen far far greater poverty in eg Brazil, Venezuela+ the Caribbean

Explain why so many people leave eg Mexico, Chile, Puerto Rico each year?

[pretorious700]

@070911021302 If you were in Cuba and got out of the cities into the countryside and weren't shocked by the conditions, there's something wrong with you.

[070911021302]

@pretorious700 Perhaps there is something wrong with you. Have you ever travelled to Cuba + have you travelled to other countries in the Caribbean+ South America. Of course Cubans are poor if compared to the average north american or western european. However on average they have a far higher standard of living measures compared to many of the people of the Caribbean+South America. I have seen far worse levels+scale of poverty in Brazil, Venezuela, Argentina, Jamaica etc...

[070911021302]

@pretorious700 Using standard measures of welfare Cuba scores very well eg child mortality, life expectancy, malnutrition rates, literacy rates, poverty rates. Cuba experiences many problems but fares far better than most of its regional neighbours. I was impressed by the quality of the infrastructure+ shocked to see Cuba had a rail system. Virtually unheard of in the Caribbean. More would have been achieved BUT for sustained US aggression+ hostility dating back over fifty years..

[MrSecondThoughts]

@070911021302

So why aren't you living in Cuba then? $15 a month salary for all, prisons full of your political enemies, complete state control by leftists like you, you'd love it.

[070911021302]

@MrSecondThoughts What an idiotic statement!

[MrSecondThoughts]

@070911021302

You leftists and your denial of agency, your need for slave consciousness. Cuba is poor because of its failed socialist economic model, not because of US embagoes.

[070911021302]

@MrSecondThoughts Cuba's condition has everything to do with US attempts to undermine the regime for over fifty years. Trade embargoes, threats to countries that do wish to trade with Cuba, travel embargoes, assaination attempts, terrorist attacks, attempted coups. The US feared other countries following the Cuban example of anti-US imperilaism+ wealth redistribution.

Explain to me why most Mexicans, Colombians, Brazillians, Hondurans, Panamanians, Chileans etc are poor?

[070911021302]

@mpc91 Who could have been worse for Chileans than Pinochet? Who could have been worse for Panamians than Noriega? Who could have been worse than Congolese than Mobutu? Who could have been worse than Suharto or the Generals in Argentina or Brazil or Greece? The US + its allies has a long history of repression and support of vicious mass murderers...

[MrSecondThoughts]

@070911021302

The communists in all these countries would have been alot worse. You conveniently forget to mention the long history of repression and support of vicious mass murderers of the Soviet Union, where your socialist theories were tried out.

[070911021302]

@MrSecondThoughts

The US has installed+ maintained regimes more murderous than any Communist regime. Mass killers like Suharto, Mobutu, Duvallier+ Pinochet.

Where is your evidence of murderous socialist regimes in developing countries?

Would Lumumba have massacred more people in the Congo than Mobutu? Would Allende have murderered more Chileans than Pinochet? Were the Sandinistas bigger mass murderers than the Somoza/Contra "Rebels" in Nicaragua?

Where is your evidence?

[MrSecondThoughts]

@070911021302

Okay....so you deny the massacres, forced famines, torture, mass killings, gulags of the Soviet Union, China, Vietnam, Cambodia, Korea, Afghanistan?

[070911021302]

@MrSecondThoughts I don't deny the crimes or incompetence of Stalin or Mao. Although Many of the deaths in Communist Russia+China were due to starvation as a result of failed agriculutural plans. There were not the result of state run or paramilitary terror or genocide, which is the case in most of the countries I have mentioned. The deaths in Vietnam are almost all as a result of the US invasion+bombing campaign. Over 4m Vietnamese died from the early 1960s up untill 1975.

[MrSecondThoughts]

@070911021302

The genocidal double standards of the left. The millions who died under communism become either unfortunate mistakes or the fault of their enemies. But you don't allow the West that evasion of responsibility.

[070911021302]

@MrSecondThoughts Cambodia was another US instigated disaster. Cambodia remained neutral throughout the Vietnam war; but that didn't stop Nixon's illegal bombing campaign that killed thousands and destroyed the infrastructure+ civic structures of the country. It was amidst this carnage+chaos that the Khmer Rouge took control with gruesome results.

Afghanistan? US policy makers WANTED the Russians to invade+become embroiled in a long and destructive war i.e their own "Vietnam"

[070911021302]

@MrSecondThoughts I can think of more mass murderous facist totaliterean regimes than I can think of socialist or even Communist ones Guatamala 1948-1990 Iran 1951-1979 Brazil 1960-1985 Argentina 1974-1982 Nicaragua 1940-1980 Greece 1967-1975 Indonesia 1967-1990 East Timor 1975-1995 South Africa 1960-1994 Mozambique 1975-1995 Angola 1974-1990 Haiti 1930-1986, 1994-2000. Iraq 1963-2000 It is a very very long and very very murderous list of US installed and support regimes...

[MrSecondThoughts]

@070911021302

Let me jog your memory:  Soviet Union 1917-1990, China 1945-present, Cuba 1959-present, Ethiopia under Mengistu ...... anywhere the communists took control and installed their nihilism, tyranny and misery

[070911021302]

@MrSecondThoughts My list is far longer than yours, the regimes I have listed were often more depraved + barbarous than the ones you have listed, especially Cuba. Which suggests this: The real US+ western policymakers often are not REALLY interested in Human rights. They are interested in ECONOMIC rights of major corporations. The rights of major corporation to extract huge profits from these countries. Thats why they aid+ abett tyranny or turn a blind eye to its crimes..

[MrSecondThoughts]

@070911021302

Communist regimes killed far more in total in the 20th century, estimated at 94 million.  . (Thats the sound of your selective outrage at the victims of leftwing dictatorships.)

[070911021302]

@MrSecondThoughts I am not sure how you arrive at 94m. I doubt YOU are aware of between 10m-20m Congolese who died at the hands of the Belgians in the first half of the last century , or Armenians murdered by the Ottomans after 1917, the victms of Mobutu in the Congo run into the millions as do the victims of Suharto in Indonesia+East Timor. Victims of US bombing in Vietnam+Cambodia run into the millions as do the victims of US backed regimes all across South America.

[MrSecondThoughts]

@070911021302

94 million people's deaths dismissed in a sentence. Guess for socialists the victims of communism don't matter eh? Just human collateral on the path to your glorious future..how did that work out by the way? I haven't heard much from the Soviet union in a while?

[070911021302]

@MrSecondThoughts

I didn't dismiss the figure, I questioned how you arrived at it. You still haven't answered it. By the way more people died in the last 50 years of British rule in India than died Stalin+ Mao combined. Massacre and mass starvation. Something not widely talked about.

Socialist policies have yielded huge benefits for poor+ working class people all over the world in Canada, UK, France, Spain, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Australia.

[070911021302]

@070911021302 Socialsit programmes have brought free education, free healthcare, public housing, pensions, higher incomes, job security to tens of millions of people who would have been resigned to poverty. Probably the greatest US president was Roosevelt whose New Deal saved the US. the New Deal was essentially a socialist policy of land+ welfare reform, not to mention financial regulation of banks+financial services. The aboloition of which lend to the current banking crisis...

[MrSecondThoughts]

@070911021302

The New Deal turned a cyclical recession into a decade-long depression, only ended with the increase in industrial production during WW2. The current financial crisis was caused by the exposure to bad debts forced on the banks by socialist policies guaranteeing mortgages to poor credit risks, ie.the Democrats voter base.

[070911021302]

@MrSecondThoughts The New Deal caused the depression of the 1930s??

So it wasn't the Wall Street Crash and the Protectionist reponse of the major nations? Well if you believe that version of events, then you will believe almost anything.

Also if you belive that the current crisis was caused by socialists forcing invesment banks to make risky loans then you are an extremely gullible man. Lehman Bros, Goldman Sachs Citibank, victims of socialist policies??!!! Ha Ha Ha...

[MrSecondThoughts]

@070911021302

Wall Street banks were trading the junk mortgages of Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac. Main Street banks were obliged by the US government to accept poor credit risks. When the repayments stopped coming in, the whole Ponzi scheme collapsed. So at root this crisis is the result of a failed socialist-inspired attempt to control the market.

[070911021302]

@MrSecondThoughts The only thing remotely socialist about the financial crisis has been the bailout. If these were truly free market capitalists then those banks would have been allowed to go bust. The bailout has become a sort of welfare for the (super) rich. Goldman Sachs, Citibank, Royal Bank of Scotland have recived hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer money in laonds+guarantees, some of which has been used to pay individual executive bonuses of $10 million plus..

[MrSecondThoughts]

@070911021302

I agree, the bailout is a disgrace, welfare for the rich. But thats a socialist policy - which just shows how dangerous the concentration of economic and political power is. A free-market response would have let failing banks face the consequences of their choices and go under, and be replaced by businesses who had taken better decisions. And we would be out of recession by now, instead of heading for a Japan-style stagnation and decline.

[MrSecondThoughts]

@070911021302

Having said that, I agree that fundamentalist neoliberalism had a big part to play as well. The mixed economy of Germany is the right model, ironically imposed on that country by the US and UK after the war as a solution to the chronic class conflict they saw in their/our own countries as a necessary result of dogmatic capitalism.

[MrSecondThoughts]

@070911021302

The 94m figure is from The Black Book of Communism - where do you get the figures for your ridiculous claim about India from? I accept that socialist policies have provided huge gains for ordinary people across the world. However they were made possible by the success of the capitalist economic system and cultural model. Communism kills the goose that lays the golden eggs.

[070911021302]

@MrSecondThoughts Indian+ some European historians know the truth.Mllions starved to death died each year. At a time when India was self sufficient in food+ exporting grain. The British decided it was more profitable to export food for profit than feed millions of starving Indians. A similar thing happened in Ireland in the 19th Century. Whilst there was failed harvests Britain was exporting food for profit+ allowing Irish catholics in particular people to starve to death.

[070911021302]

@070911021302 Indian+ some European historians know the truth about the massacres of nationalist Indians carried out by the British+ the British rule in mass producing opium in India+ exporting it principally to China, creating tens of millions of Chinese drug addicts.This led to the 19th Century Opium wars+ Britain eventually siezing Hong Kong which it controlled untill 1997. Britain virtually invented the international drugs trade+ many major UK companies have their roots in it.

[070911021302]

@070911021302 Indian+ some European historians know the truth about the massacres of nationalist Indians carried out by the British+ the British rule in mass producing opium in India+ exporting it principally to China, creating tens of millions of Chinese drug addicts.This led to the 19th Century Opium wars+ Britain eventually siezing Hong Kong which it controlled untill 1997. Britain virtually invented the international drugs trade+ many major UK companies have their roots in it.

[MrSecondThoughts]

@070911021302

I don't deny that the UK and US have a bloody history. As a conservative, I accept that conflicts within and between nations are inevitable. My point is about your neo-communist minimisation and denial of the same horrors and atrocities by socialist states. Why the double standard?

[MrSecondThoughts]

@070911021302

The famines in Ireland and India were caused as least as much by poor agricultural practices and the feudal land ownership system than by free trade. 

[070911021302]

@MrSecondThoughts There are plenty of countries that have not adopted the US model of economic development+ have had far greater economic + social success as a result. Germany and the Scandanavian countries for example. Unfortnately for many developing countries when they have tried to emulate this + use resources for the benefit of poor+ working class people, eg nationalisation, land reform, progreesive taxation, import+ capital controls, they have been violently repressed...

[MrSecondThoughts]

@070911021302

So which economic model succeeded: the modified capitalism of West Germany, or the modified communism of East Germany? And which model is South Korea following, and which is North Korea following?

[ljs96076]

@070911021302 You should come live in Germany for a few years, then decide how you want to rephrase that statement.

[070911021302]

@MrSecondThoughts

I think the only person with selective outrage is you. I oppose barbarism whether it is on Chile or China. Whether it is Greece or Guatamala. The difference between me and you is that I am well aware of the lies, decit+ murderous hypocrisy of Western Govts who preach economic fairness, welfare human rights+ democracy but in reality practice profiteering, impoverishment, inequality, totaltalitarianism+ mass murder +genocide.

[MrSecondThoughts]

@070911021302

Yeah you oppose barbarism of the left or the right, but you only attack the US....

[070911021302]

@MrSecondThoughts . I oppose barbarism wherever I see it. However it is obvious that the US+ its allies are often as guilty of and complicit in the same murderous crimes of which it accuses it's enemies, enemies who were once freinds, who ONLY became a problem when they stopped obeying US orders.

For example Saddam Hussain, Manuel Noriega, Augusto Pinochet, "Papa+ Baby Doc "Duvalier, Suharto, Osama Bin Laden, Roberto Dubuisson, Ferdinand Marcos, Idi Amin, to name but a few..

[070911021302]

@MrSecondThoughts The REAL reason the US has violentyly opposed Communist+ even socialist regimes in the devloping world is that communist+ socialist economics restrict the ability of social elites+ foreign investors to exatract large profits from these countries. Eg nationalisation programmes, progressive taxation, import restrictions. It has nothing to do with human rights or tyranny, because the US has and continues to support the most tyrannical regimes on the planet.

[070911021302]

@070911021302 When Arbenz tried land reform in Gutamala in 1948 he was overthrown+ exiled, when Mossadegh tried nationalisation in 1950 Iran he was overthrown+exiled+replaced by the Shah. when Allende tried nationalisation in Chile in 1970 he was murdered+ replaced by Pinochet. Lamumba tried nationalisation in Zaire 1961 he was murdered+ replaced by Mobutu. Lnad reformist Goulart in Brazil was overthrown, exiled + replaced by a military dictatorship which lasted 25 years.

[MrSecondThoughts]

@070911021302

Impressive list. You missed out communist Russia and China's land reform programmes - remind us how that worked out?

[070911021302]

@MrSecondThoughts The collectivisation programmes of Stalin+ Mao were a disaster. I suspect that most Russians are as poor if not poorer now than they were in 1989. If the US+ its allies were so morally outraged by Communism or Human Rights in Russia or China then why did they not invade or instigate a coup as they did in every other continent? The answer if the Russians+Chinese could effectively fight back+ abuse of Human rights was not the real issue...

[MrSecondThoughts]

@070911021302

Communist societies were so good for the workers, people used to die trying to get over the Berlin Wall into socialist East Germany, didn't they?

[070911021302]

@MrSecondThoughts Far more people died trying to escape persecution in Chile, Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Nicaragua, Honduras, El Salvador, South Africa, Angola, Mozambique, Vietnam, Cambodia, Iran, Indonesia and in many more countries I could mention. All US sponsored regimes or in the case of Vietnam, Panama and Cambodia, a direct US invasion.

You need to get over this US persecution good, Communist persecution bad, mentality that you appear to exhibit in your postings...

[070911021302]

@MrSecondThoughts You naievely suggest that only Communists create misery+tyranny for domestic populations. The US + its allies have no problem with misery+tyranny and have created+ endorsed it all over the world+continue to do so to this day The US is a firm ally of the odious dictatorships in Arabia eg Saudi, Kuwait, Bahrain. It was supporter of Mubarak in Egypt for 30 years. There are many many historical+ contempary examples of this. Have ever researched any of them?

[MrSecondThoughts]

@070911021302

Don't worry pal, your friends in the muslim brotherhood will soon be taking over in all those places, so you will soon be able to tell me how much better life is for the Arabs then.

[070911021302]

@MrSecondThoughts Firstly you are not and never will be a "Pal" of mine. Secondly I doubt you really know what the Muslim brotherhood is. Thirdly if the people of those and any other countries wish to elect capitalist or socialist or even communist leaders. It is their right to do so. If they wish to elect secular or theocratic regimes. It is their right to do so.They have the right to live free from US imperialism+ murderous dictatorships.

[MrSecondThoughts]

@070911021302

You forgot to mention Zionist terrorism!

[leondarnell1]

I love these two.

[adulby]

Williams/Sowell greatest econ duo alive. 

[doobersmanster]

Millions and Millions killed by Communism and socialism...Why? When people demonize freedom..what are we to do? It is against all common sense.. and human nature...it is Brain washing Gramsci socialism..slow manipulation of culture and societies through popular media and manipulation of the zietgiest..

[louiethegreater]

The condition of Cuba is not Castros fault. When he kicked the IMF, World Bank, and International Bankers out of Cuba is when Cubas economic problems began.

The first thing was the U.S. placed sanctions on Cuba, and pressured the rest of the world into doing the same. Castro offered the hand of friendship to the U.S., but Kennedy slapped it away, because Castro would not allow multinationals to run roughshod over nis country, not to mention, the bay of pigs, and Kennedy attempting ot assinate.

[jeebiskebowski]

@louiethegreater

So the economic problems for communist Cuba came from not being able to trade with and make business deals with capitalists? You sir, have just made my day. I don't often see communist supporters admit that their economic prosperity is held up by capitalists.

[louiethegreater]

I am not a communist supporter, I am a protecitonist capitalist, not one that earns weath of the backs of the worlds poor. I will explain myself further, Castro kicked the International Bankers and IMF out of Cuba, as an attempt to protect Cuba's resources from being gobbled up by international investers, he actully had the odassity to believe Cubas resources belonged to the Cuban people. He returned the land to the people who worked it, that had been given by Betista to rich landlords.

[pretorious700]

@louiethegreater "audacity".... your spelling approaches your ignorant misapprehension of Cuban history.

[louiethegreater]

@pretor Is visiting forums, correcting folks spelling, what you do to cover up your own ignorance of the issues. My post is exactly accurate of the Cuban evolution form Batista to present day. The bottom line is that they were forced into isolation because Castro rejected globalization, and neo-liberalism. The same is happening to Iraq, Afganistan, Iran, Venezuela, Angola, and Lybia. All because they will not allow international bankers to buy up their assets, that actually belong to citizens.

[craig4252]

@louiethegreater

Castro would have gotten in bed with any political group/ideology that would have best consolidated his power. The same could be said for others, particularly leaders of many Third World states, to include all of those you mentioned. It's selfish and pragmatic. There's nothing idealistic about it. Go work in some of those countries and see how quickly the certainty you hold for your professor's BS holds up. You'll form your own opinions at that point.

[louiethegreater]

@craig4252 Castro, had already consolidated, long before he embraced the Soviets. Actually, Kennedy, and the CIA consolidated his power for him, through the Bay of Pigs Invasian. The Cuban people reacted behind Castro, against the the Bay of Pigs Invasian. They thought they were being invaded by the U.S. and actually they were. Castro reached out to the Soviets after the U.S. had slapped his hand away and attempted to assinate him. The U.S. controlled 50% of Cubas land and all their industry.

[louiethegreater]

@craig4252 When Castro renigued in his promise to hold elections, than the U.S. decided it was their responsability to punish him. They decided not to buy Cuban sugar, and sell Cuba the technology needed to maintain her economy ( actually sanctions ). During that period Castro turned to the Soviets, they agreed to buy Cubas sugar, and provide him technology to maintain Cubas economy. Actually the more the State Department chose to punish Cuba the closer they drew to the Soviets.

[craig4252]

@louiethegreater

Oh the college antics continue. I agree with everything you wrote here, none of which contradicts what I wrote. What you wrote earlier is total BS though. Castro would have gotten in bed with anyone who would solidify his power. Communist, fascist, capitalist, whatever. Take some classes on Indonesia or the non-allignment movement if you get the chance.

[louiethegreater]

@craig4252 Hey why don't you tell me about the Indonesian non-alignment movement. Does this mean you actually offer something to the forum.

[louiethegreater]

@craig4252 Well if that is you openion of Castro you are welcome to it. However you should understand that here is no historical evidence of it.

[louiethegreater]

@jeebiskebowski Hey by the way China is not capitalist, they are communist, should be be enriching the communist government of China, because they offered their peasant population to multinationals as cheap labor. That peasant offering was intended to attract foreign investment. So without protectionist tariffs we have a trillion dollar trade deficit with Communist China, and 50% of americans cannot earn enough to reach the federal tax threshold. Those are communist supporters sir not me.

[louiethegreater]

I didn't hear Watson praise, Mao, Stalen or Hitler. Castro never murdered millions of people. When he gained power in Cuba he did eliminate those loyal to the Batista Government. Castro simply wanted to reclaim his country from the american mafia, and the corporate takeover of Cuba. He simply grew tired of the corporate takeover making second class citizens out of his countrymen, in their own country, not to mention making whores out of Cuban woman. Hoover spokesmen should not comment on Castro.

[mpc91]

@louiethegreater - So the main reason he never murdered millions is that... oh yeah, there just weren't enough people around to murder.

[anon2999]

I can't help but think I've heard that song that starts at about 0:10 before... anyone care to help me recall it?

[AroundSun]

@anon2999 At 0:10, Its just good old speakeasy music, Tom Sowell was there in his diapers supporting the anti-prohibition movement. That was his jam.

[GeorgeMozosko]

@anon2999

i heard it on garageband... the music is part of the base software.

[daddyg321]

All the leftists I've dealt with had a major inferiority complex, and were 'want to be"bullies who had no problem "selling" themselves to real bullies in order to force others to submit.

[umrmecheman]

the lover affair can easily be explained by the fact that liberals think they can solve every woe known to man if they just have enough power to enact their policies. great example was senator fulbright from Arkansas in the 60's who lamented in a speech that LBJ was being "hobbled by the constitution" in his efforts to create a better society.

of course the founders knew the dangers of these so called enlightened people and made us a constitutional republic not a simple democracy

[CmdrTobs]

I find this bizarre. People *right* or *left* have lauded dictators. It simply has to do with if they agree with them on certain key policies. Nothing more.

To correct Sowell, the troops were given orders to "flee" if opposed, rather than the OKW or Hitler having to personally climb down.Hitler was well cemented by 1936 the failure of an unannounced re-militarisation of the RL would not have toppled him.

I am guessing those "many people" Sowell references are vapour/thoroughly discredited.

[walt7500]

France during the inter bellum was paralised by the left. Communist were sabotaging aircraft production in a way that it would disintegrate in mid air. The essence was that A Hitler knew how weak France by political disintegration was! Would france have been a strong healthy nation, they wouldn't have acted like cowards. This is a very interessting period of history.

[martymaul]

MR Sowell often praises tyrants of the US .. These leaders murdered and committed the genocide of millions of native Americans throughout the Americas. They were proponents of Jim crow policies against black s. Blacks had to fight for whatever privilages we have. the government didn,t give black people jack . This is a myth that neo -con like MR Sowell and Walter Williams like to espouse to appease their non scense. By the way China has the motrgage on the US thanks to Neo -con economics .

[syghur]

@martymaul If you want to be taken seriously it will help to learn how to spell. Or use grammar properly. 'Non scense' is one of the most egregious offenses against the English language I have ever seen.

[syghur]

@martymaul Something tells me that if you can barely master your language then the intricacies of banking theory are also beyond your grasp.

[CmdrTobs]

@syghur No, spelling Dyslexia is more common than you might think. Poor spelling and incorrect grammar is a dubious reason at best to reject any argument, particularly one centred around numbers.

[syghur]

@CmdrTobs 'Non scense' is not spelling dyslexia. It is ignorance.

Spelling and grammar are the primary way that we convey our ideas. They are very important no matter what shape the discussion takes.

[CmdrTobs]

@syghur That particular err is more likely the result of a thought disconnection while forming ideas. I occasionally write 'alot' or double a word when trying to conceptualise a complex thought while simultaneously typing.

What you are really advocating is the conflation of a lucid err ,within a largely well spelt and punctuated argument, with the argument itself in an attempt to throw it out.

I reject your appeal to 'grammar sophistry', your arguments will have to stand on their own merits.

[syghur]

@CmdrTobs Bwahaha. Someone found a thesaurus.

[CmdrTobs]

@syghur You're Beautiful.

[ScarlettKnights]

Excellent video, thanks for sharing.

[Kurtlane]

I think Mao and his henchmen have killed about 100 million people.

About 30 million died in Great Leap Forward campaign alone. And that was followed by Cultural Revolution, the bloodiest peacetime upheaval in human history.

So you can do your own math.

[XCritonX]

The tyrant says: "Peace is wonderful, I love peace, and if you don't give me what I want I will hurt or kill you until I get peace."

[macdogq]

Stalin fooled by Hitler, but manage for his country survival, because with the help of U.S.

[JohnBreadForger]

And the Russian winter. Russia's winter has a great win-loss record.

[Dontgupt20]

Williams and Sowell for President and VP.

I have had a crush on Williams for 2 years.

[stater68]

A matchup of a real black man vs. half-cracker would be great

[treijackson]

Either party is only out for theri machine. Most neither care or pay attention to the people. Our freedoms have been eroding since the early 20th century.

We cannot allow the Government to decide what is best for all. They only justify theur existance by their policies not what is right and good for all.

[bravo0105]

I always envisioned myself working for a major defense contractor after I finished up school. It didn't play out that way when I got out of the joint, primarily on account of the poor state of defense contracting. Given current events, I'm absolutely convinced that soon I'm going to have more opportunities to make good on that ambition than I'd ever imagined. God Help Us All!

[backtotheday]

Fear mongering is lying to create false panic. (Kinda like global warming hysteria where you make people believe we will be under water in 20 years just so Al Gore can make billions.) There are actually violent people who will behave violently. Discussing the history of tyrants is not fear mongering. Tyrants still exist as evidenced by the Iran elections. A government that fires on its own citizens merely for protesting.

[Federalist306]

Walt for president!

[caltrop69]

Whoa! Anyone else notice the resemblance between Hitler and Edward Norton?

Don't misunderstand me, here...I'm just talking about physical characteristics. I have no idea what Edward Norton's political ideology is.

The picture at 2:36 could BE HIM, though, with a mustache.

Hitler is Tyler Durden.

[DolphinFilms]

Did I understand them correctly? Did they just make a case for the Bush doctrine of a preemptive strike against Iran?

[DolphinFilms]

Btw, not only did Diane Watson praise Castro she also praised Che and said that Obama was born in Kenya.

[MyFreedomChannel]

@DolphinFilms Do you have an audio of Diane Watson's statement about Obama's birth place? Just curious as to where you got that information? There are many people who question the validity of the COLB his campaign posted on the internet last year.

[DolphinFilms]

@MyFreedomChannel yes, do a you tube search for "watson1" or "Rep Diane Watson in her own words".

i'm one those that question his eligibility, call me a "birther" if they like, i'm proud of it until proven otherwise. at first I thought is was a none issue, but after all the legal end a rounds by his lawyers instead of producing his "long form" i began to question his motives. and know we have rep. diane watson giddy over the fact that we have elected a president from Kenya.

[MyFreedomChannel]

@DolphinFilms "Dolphin!" I'm also one of the many "birthers." LOL ...

Thanks for the search tip! :) Semper Fi!

[XCritonX]

@DolphinFilms At least she may have been right about BHO. That is 1 for 3, or "even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while".

[LPBguy]

I'm a big fan of both of these guys but I too am rather shocked by what I just heard. I think the remark about hitler was more of a case against multinational government and tolerance for socialism. The remarks about Iran...I simply can't explain those. Both of these guys are self described libertarians so I'm not sure why they would say something like that.

[Elasaltaculos]

Yes, I agree. We have way bigger problems than Iran developing nukes. I am a fan of both of these men, but that I just can't square with.

[TravisBickle2]

Guess what?

That is EXACTLY what the left wants you to believe.

Congrats, sucker.

[Elasaltaculos]

guess what? You are the victim of constant fear-mongering just so that the "left" and the "right" can exercise more control over your life. Sounds to me like you are the sucker.

[fdny9682]

Dude, i there just being realistics, sucks but its a reality

[TravisBickle2]

It's pretty simple:

Both claim to be all about "peace" yet act just the opposite.

Jeez!!

[hannel19]

@DolphinFilms Lol, I think they did. Its funny how you got negatived too, considering you never said if it was good or bad and just asked a question.

[DolphinFilms]

It really amazes me how people don't listen, understand, think for themselves or ask questions... they just follow the party line... sheeple. I personally don't believe in the Bush doctrine and I was very surprised to hear them make the case for it. I do think Williams and Sowell are both brilliant when it comes to economics.

[chukmaty]

The Bush doctrine was necessary and was taken up after Bush was bashed into reality that his father's policies and Clinton's policies were doomed to events like 9/11. It is an unpleasant realization, but after he corrected that coarse and accepted a Reaganite interpretation of Wilsonian interventionism, America became far more safe.

[TravisBickle2]

No they didn't.

I highly suggest a re view.

[DolphinFilms]

Yes they did.

It is you that needs the review.