Castro ditched Cuba for the Dominican Republic on January 1st 1959 and ousted Batista!
VIVA LA REVOLUCIÓN!

*readacted-

After reading voodler's comments which seem reasonable enough, partisan politics are a charade and on this we may agree. What I fear is the border with Mexico and her people's pouring-in to dilute and cheapen the culture most of all, and our government's continued prohibition of narcotics and fear-mongering of terrorism and those who would that country collapse so they can run with the profits laughing(these are from both isle-sides, criminals all). A level of socialization must be reached before you can sell an exodus to the U.S. from the south, and I am disgusted that the Republic of Mexico has been hijacked by the assholes that have run that beautiful country into the ground, especially the cock-sucking Spaniards, those dirty bastards with their silly hats.

Fuck this guys political viewpoint. He was shilling for Obama before the obamabots finally discovered he's just another piece of shit politician. He thought the government was just fine 6 months ago. He was on the Tavis Smiley show saying we need to stop asking so many questions an give a little more of ourselves to the glorious Republic. Now the guy thinks we need to tear down government structures. If you thought USA was fanFUCKINGtastic before Snowden then you have no standing to talk about the future of American Government. I have drawn more inspiration from a hangover induced diarrhea shit. He should just start wearing a rainbow afro wig and some big red shoes so that no one will be confused that this guy is a fucking joke of a human being.

Also, stop your god damned celebrity worship its a disgusting trait that should only be reserved for 12 year old girls.

Read some more Chompsky, drink your 12 pack, and go back to sleep.

India, Curacao,Mexico, Ecuador, Guatemala, Venezuela, Bolivia, Dominican Republic and NICARAGUA! (whoa, awesome like sex)
Belgium, fucking what?
USA's sucked 8-levels of wrong-party, donkey balls

My statement isn't inaccurate. They are a democracy. They have a democratically elected leader. You not liking it does not make it not a democracy. By your logic I might as well say the USA is not a democracy since they are a representative democracy. Of course the USA like Iran is just a variant of democracy. There are 20 something variants:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varieties_of_democracy#Forms

Your use of the word dictator did not have the context to it you now ascribe.

If the Supreme Leader holds a higher position of power, why isn't he visibly controlling the nation? (genuine question)

The president doesn't always have the highest position though. Many republics have both a president and prime minister. The prime minister will run the nation. Or like in Australia where Queen Elizabeth the 2nd holds the highest position, but she is a figurehead only, the parliament runs the nation.

@Trancecoach @enoch

Enoch's questions:

1. People should be producing something if they are getting paid for it - whether that is a good, service, etc. If someone else pays them to create or perform they are owed exactly what they have been promised to be compensated.

2. Enoch I think you are misunderstanding what a free market is. A free market is not a marketplace without regulations. A free market is not anarchy - there are still rules. Instead a free market is a market without a centralized or directing authority. To clarify a free market is one in which government policy does not set pricing.

3. You don't believe or disbelieve in democracy. It isn't a religion, it is a form of government. There is nothing inherently wrong with regulations. The devil is in the details. Regulations can be good or bad for a marketplace.

4. Enoch, I think that is a gross oversimplification of why corporate profits have been as high as they are. Many things have led to large corporate profits including globalization, expanding markets, etc. Yes, here in the USA corporations exercise influence on government, but its only one part of the bigger picture.

5. Completely incorrect. A free market has nothing to do with the existence of copyrights or patents.

6. Democracy is a form of government. A Free Market is a type of market structure. You could have a dictatorship and a free market. A monarch and a free market. A republic and a free market. A Theocracy and a free market.

Furthermore you could have a "Free Market" for automobiles but a "regulated" or "controlled" market for electricity within one country.

For example:

In the USA I would argue automobiles operate in a "Free Market". Yes there are certain standards the government sets (safety, fuel efficiency, etc) but the pricing is determined by the automakers. You can argue about the restrictions. Do they go far enough? Do they go too far? etc.

Conversely, most electric companies prices are regulated by the government and they are required to provide services to certain areas.

Lastly, a free market does not mean the market operates without laws. Copyright and patent law being just a small part of those laws.

I hope this clarifies some of these questions for you.


Best,

Kgrr

Um, Ok, then go ahead and stop them.


Whoever controls the government, controls everyone else.
The problem with plutocracy: the plutocrats rule over you.
The problem with monarchy: the monarch rules over you.
The problem with 'democracy:' the mob (the supposed "majority") rules over you.
The problem with republics: the "people's representatives" rule over you.
The problem with dictatorships: the dictator rules over you.
The 'problem' with anarchy: no one rules over you.

So if you think you can take over the government and rule over everyone else, go ahead, try. Let me know how it goes.


Most (granted not all) so-called crime has more to do with law enforcement than with 'criminals.' Don't believe me? Check out this recently sifted video about the enforcement of the so-called war on drugs.

Regimes supported

Juan Vicente Gomez, Venezuela, 1908-1935.
Jorge Ubico, Guatemala, 1931-1944.
Fulgencio Batista, Republic of Cuba 1952-1959.
Syngman Rhee, Republic of Korea (South Korea), 1948-1960.
Rafael Trujillo, Dominican Republic, 1930-1961.[citation needed]
Ngo Dinh Diem, Republic of Vietnam (South Vietnam), 1955-1963.
Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, Iran, 1953-1979.
Anastasio Somoza Garcia, Nicaragua, 1967-1979.
Military Junta in Guatemala, 1954-1982.
Military Junta in Bolivia, 1964-1982.[citation needed]
Military Junta in Argentina, 1976-1983.
Brazilian military government, 1964-1985.
François Duvalier and Jean-Claude Duvalier, Republic of Haiti, 1957-1971; 1971-1986.[citation needed]
Alfredo Stroessner, Paraguay, 1954-1989.[citation needed]
Ferdinand Marcos, Philippines, 1965-1986.[8][9]
General Manuel Noriega, Republic of Panama, 1983-1989.
General Augusto Pinochet, Chile, 1973-1990.
Saddam Hussein, Republic of Iraq, 1982-1990.
General (military), Suharto Republic of Indonesia, 1975-1995.
Mobutu Sese Seko, Zaire/Congo, 1965-1997.
Hosni Mubarak, Egypt, 1981-2011.
Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa, Kingdom of Bahrain, 2012.
Saudi royal family, 2012.
Islam Karimov, Uzbekistan, 1991-2012.[10]
Meles Zenawi, Ethiopia, 1995-2012.[11]
Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo, Equatorial Guinea, 2006-2012.[12]

Do you really know with certainty how "regulated" (whatever that means) "Europe" really is?

How about places like the Czech Republic (with a 15% flat tax)? Are they more "regulated" or less "regulated?"

How about Cyprus? Or Malta? I think Europe provides for some interesting discussion, but you need at least some knowledge of it and what goes on in its many countries.

Respect? Thats mandatory in a democratic republic. Everyone who says people who allow this deserve respect, doesnt know shit about democracy.

I could have sworn that there were different colored lightsabers in semi-cannon material (all the extended universe stuff is licensed and authorized so I consider it semi-cannon) prior to the prequels. Dark Forces II for example, and the extended universe books (Mara Jade). By Knights of the Old Republic (which did indeed come after the prequels) multi colored lightsabers were a bit more common...

The explanation of the color is from the crystals that make up the lightsaber (Lea's is red so it isn't side alignment, then again her kid...), and during the official universe time frame the empire controlled the crystals more which limited the colors out there... but that is more of a retcon...

Still interesting to hear how and why we got a new color in the official universe.

Sure, there is no need to speak in terms of civil war. Unless you're one of these guntoting, armed to the teeth nutjobs who think it would be a good idea. You know, the kind of people who buy an *assault rifle* for self defense.
However, no matter how well trained your riot police is, their less than lethal tactics are only useful up to a certain amount of people, they can become rather useless if the crowds get too big to contain or simply too violent themselves. That's when it gets interesting, that is when protest can turn into riots.
When the cops face huge, somewhat peacful crowds, they might enter Tiananmen Square. At what point would american cops or military personnel start thinking that it's unwise or inhuman to start firing into the crowd? Before the first shot? After the second magazine? On day three?
It's not the 1960s anymore but the sixties are not forgotten. Not by those who faced police officers willing to fire into the crowd. You know, black people. The kind of people whose parents and grandparents are still alive to tell them about their fight against oppression. This is still alive in the american concious, it shaped your country and it won't go away soon. Just ask Barak about his birth certificate.
Civil unrest is part of your recent history, the seed is there. Even under a President Stalin all you'd need go from isolated, contained riots to complete and irreversible shitstorm is a Martyr, a Neda Agha Soltan or a Treyvon Martin. No matter what ethnicity (although african american would be nice), that would present a tipping point.
Your police can bring out the tanks on Times Square if they want but if half of NY shows up, these guys inside the tanks might want to get out ASAP.
The Erich Honecker regime of the German Democratic Republic was basically brought down by somewhat peaceful demonstrations of people shouting "I'm mad as hell and I won't take it anymore" in east german accents.
The StaSi, the Ministry of State Security, who was efficient enough to make *every* citizen a potential informant in the eyes of their opposition, ran from the protesters like little girls. They used to imprison and torture people who spoke up.
The east german border used to be the most secure in the entire world. It was protected by minefields and guards who shot and killed anyone who tried to cross it. Before David Hasselhoff even had a chance to put on his illuminated leather jacket the government caved and just fucking opened it. People just strolled through Checkpoint Charlie and bought Bananas as if it was Christmas.
This was the beginning of the end for the Soviet Union. You know, the guys who lost over 20 Million people in WW2 and still kicked the Nazis in the nuts.
Nobody brought a gun. All the east germans had was shitty cars and lots of anger. They tore down not just a dictatorship, they tore down the iron curtain.
And they didn't even have a Nelson Mandela. Or Lech Walesa.
I still stand by my point: strength in numbers, not caliber.

If you look at the giant Ukraine flag on the wall, or if you look at the profile of the person who recorded it, you'll see it wasn't.

Still qualifies for the channel under your breakaway republics rule, though.

Russia Channel by Barseps

I may have bitten off a wee bit more than I can chew here, but hey ho, I'll give it a go. As the Russia/USSR thing is bound to be a bit confusing, I'll keep it down to 2 rules:-

(1)....You MAY post videos from any of the 15 former breakaway Soviet Republics, listed here:-

Libertarian nonsense. There has never existed a "free market" that did not have rules and regulations enforced by a government. Cite a historical example of a functioning, laissez-faire economy at the state or nation level, I dare you.

Since government in the form of a democratic republic is representative of and composed of the people that are governed, removing the government from the economy means removing the people from the economy. A transition to an ideal "free market" simply means that those that currently "have" will face absolutely zero pressure to consider the "have nots". There will be no environmental regulations, no ability to prevent monopolies, nothing to stop outright exploitation of the labor force.

Our government hasn't created the 1%, it has failed to stop them from accumulating the wealth and power that they have. The answer is not to abolish the only mechanisms that could possibly rein them in but to strengthen and enforce those mechanisms.