- Capitalism and Alternatives -

Just did old chap...

Posted by: Frenchy on October 20, 1999 at 17:50:20:

In Reply to: Give me some facts, please posted by Nikhil Jaikumar on October 20, 1999 at 15:51:01:

: Again, what you've supplied is nothing more than Mr. Horowitz opinion. leaving aside what I persoanlly think of teh man, if I merely quoted half a dozen pro-Sandinista writers at you, would that convince you of anything? Maybe I will. Woiuld you like to hear what Salman Rushdie or any of the otherwriters ahs to say about this issue? I'll just give you a taste. Rushdie said that he had always conceived of hsi role as a writer to be in oppisition; in opposition to the Indian, Pakistani and British government. The FSLN, however, were the first government he had ever seen that he would consider it hsi duty, not to oppose, but to support. I agree with him wholeheartedly; the FLSN were the best government the Americas had seen in the second half of teh twentieth century, and had I been born ten years earlier, I would also have considered it my sacred duty to defend them against all enemies and help them bring dmemocracy and human development to their suffering country.

: On the subject of 'democracy within teh revolution': it was Arturo cruz who refused to share power, he left the counrty because he wanted to rule Nicaragua as sole dictator. Seven parties contested teh 1984 elections, four of which were centrist or right-wing, hostile to teh revolution, including teh Conservative Party. Two of them were left-wing marxists, hostile to teh FLSN, and the seventh was teh FLSN. Every political tendency was allowed to form a party and contest the election, even the Liberal Party of Somoza. the Sandinistas exerted no control over which parties could run for office. In fact, the system was far mroe open and accessible than the American system, because in Nicaragua you didn't have to show taht you had a certain amount of support or money to be listed on teh ballot or to receive government money. Every party that applied was given the same amount fo moeny and allowed to stand on teh ballot. The media was a center of hot debates, in which a far broader range of opinion was displayed than in teh American media. The Conservative Party media was allowed to decry the FSLN and teh drevoilution to tehir hearts' conetnt,a nd actually went to teh extent of calling for a foreign invasion.Imagine, for a second, a newspaper in america openly calling for a Soviet invasion. By any objective standard, Nicaragua was more open and democratic than teh US. Tehrefore, you can quote to me Horowitz and his opinions to your heart's content, but you have no resposne to teh facts I just supplied; unless you can give me FACTS, I can't accept your man's opinions.

: On teh subject of admiration for teh Soviets. PM Nehru of India, teh foudner of teh world's largets democracy, admired teh Soviets immensely for their economic development and their proletarian socialism. In hsi book about twentieth-century hsitory, eh admires teh Bolshevik revolution as one of history's greatest steps forward. Do you think taht he wasn't a democrat? Many, AMny democrats have admierd and suppoted the Soviet Union.

: : Somebody asked me how was it possible that the Sandanista's was not a democratic organization, a legitimate expression of the people's will, given that the Sandanista's won their election fair and square from Samoza.

: : Here's how. Read and weep.
: : "The year 1956-which is also the year Soviet tanks flattened the freedom fighters of Budapest-is the year that tells us who the Sandanistas really are. I this year, because the truth had to be admitted at last, the left all over the world was forced to redefine itself in relation to the Soviet facts. China's Communist leader, Mao, decided he liked Stalin's way better. For Mao's sinister folly, 25 million people died in the "great leaps" and "cultural revolutions" he then launched. But in Europe and America a new anti-Stalinist left was born. This "New Left", of which I was one of the founders, was repelled by the evils it was now forced to see and embarassed by the tarnish the totalitarians had brought to the socialist cause. It turned its back on the Soviet model of Stalin and his heirs.
: : In Nicaragua, the Sandanista vanguard was neither embarrassed nor repelled. The following year, 1957, Carlos Fonseca, the revered founding father of the Sandanista Front, visited Russia and its new and improved totalitarian state. To Fonseca, as to Borge and his other comrades, the Soviet monstrosity was their revolutionary dream come true. In his pamplet, A Nicaraguan in Moscow, Fonseca proclaimed Soviet Communism his model for Latin America's revolutionary future.
: : A second step in this vision of a Communist America is now being realized in Nicaragua. The 'commandante' directorate, the army, and the secret police (socialism's three most important institutions) are already mirrors of the Soviet state- not only structurally but in their personnel, trained and often manned by agents of the Soviet axis.
: : Yet the most important figure in this transformation is not a Nicaraguan at all, but Cuba's first communist, Fidel Castro. From 1959, when Carlos Fonseca and Tomas Borge first arrived in Havana, and for 20 years after, the Sandanista leaders became disciples of Fidel in Havana and with his blessings went on to Moscow, where Stalin's henchman completed their revolutionary course. Humberto Ortega, Daniel's less visible but more important brother, is Fidel's personal protege. Ortega is the author 'tercerista' strategy, which allied their miniscule sect to a coalition of democrats contending for power. Fidel is not only the image in which the Sandanista leadership has created itself and the author of its victorious strategy, but the architect of its politburo, the 'commandante' directorate. The directorate was personally created by Fidel in Havana on the eve of the final struggle, sealed with a pledge of military aid agaisnt the Samoza regime. Without Castro's intervention, Arturo Cruz and the other anti-Somoza and pro-democratic Contras would be the government of Nicaragua today.
: : And it was Fidel who showed the Sandanistas how to steal the revolution after the victory and how to secure their theft by manipulating their most important allies: the American left and its liberal sympathizers.

: : A final word to my former comrades and successors in the left: It is no accident that the greatest atrocities of the 20th century have been committed by Marxist radicals; and it is no accident that they have been committed by radicals in power against their own peoples. Hatred of self, and by extension one's country, is the root of the radical cause. As American radicals, the most egregious sin you can commit is to betray the the privileges and freedoms ordinary people from all over the world have come to this country to create- privileges and freedoms that ordinary people all ove the world would feel blessed to have themselves. But the worst of it is this: that you betray all of this tangible good that you can see around you for a socialist pie-in-the-sky that has meant horrible deaths and miserable lives for the hundreds of millions who have already fallen under its sway.

: : David Horowitz in a speech for a debate on Nicaragua at the University of California at Berkeley, April 4, 1986.

: : So, that's how you give the appearence of having broad support for your cause.
: : You lie about your intentions and when your goals have been met, you get rid of your supporters and replace them with your own team.
: : Hope this answers your excellent question.

Sheesh, some people!! You ask how the charade was done, I take the time to find out and it turns out you knew it all along! Shame on me. The part that isn't clear is why David Horowitz's analysis of this situation is an opinion only. He himself was a red-diaper baby, he was heavily involved in the radicalism of the sixties and seventies. He was there. I can't think of a more worthy teacher of the facts than a former comrade.
Perhaps your sore only because he is telling the truth. Which means...
Of well.
India??? My God! What does India have to teach anyone about democracy? They were doing fine until they kicked out the Brits! If that's democracy, if that is really what democracy is, please call me anti-democratic. I'm not surprised that Nehru admired Russia, a lot of otherwise intelligent people got took for a ride on that one.
And don't forget, I've stated in an earlier post my own attraction to Communism when I was much younger.

PS, you sign yourself off as a Sandanista and before you used different initials. What did they mean?

PPS, what sort of work do you do?

Follow Ups:

The Debating Room Post a Followup