Interesting difference isn’t it?

In 1959, the Cuban Revolution, led by Castro and Ernesto “Che” Guevara, overthrew the ruthless Fulgencio Batista, who had come to power in a coup d’état.

A revolution and a coup d’etat as methods of coming to power. Really, very, very, different, aren’t they?

Marjorie Cohn is professor emerita at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, former president of the National Lawyers Guild and deputy secretary general of the International Association of Democratic Lawyers.

Dear God Almighty.

11 thoughts on “Interesting difference isn’t it?”

  1. History has absolved, and promises to continue to absolve, “El Comandante” Fidel Castro.

    She’s ideologically blind to what she doesn’t want to see.

  2. Fulgencio Batista wrote Cuba’s 1940 constitution, hailed as the most liberal in Latin America, then retired to the countryside, job done. Then he suspended that constitution when he was on the point of failing to be re-elected. Castro overthrew him on the basis of restoring the 1940 constitution. 26 years later Castro got around to restoring contitutional government by writing a brand new one-party socialism-baked-in constitution. I’ll beleive in Cuban progress when they finally get around to un-suspending the 1940 constitution.

  3. The ancien régime in Russia was brought down by a revolution: some months later the Bolsheviks took power by a coup d’état.


  4. Intriguing, the alleged “illegal” sanctions on Cuba.

    Don’t the loony Left continually seek sanctions — Israel, apartheid South Africa etc?

    Someone should tell the “divest” movement.

  5. I do love this – I really do….

    ‘ Fidel Castro was an authoritarian. He ruled with an iron fist.
    There was repression and is repression in Cuba. In Fidel’s kind of argument, he did it in the name of a different kind of democracy, a different kind of freedom—the freedom from illness, the freedom from racism, the freedom from social inequality,” Peter Kornbluh, director of the Cuba Documentation Project, told Amy Goodman on Democracy Now! “And Cuba has a lot of very positives that all the other countries that we don’t talk about don’t have. There isn’t gang violence in Cuba. People aren’t being slaughtered around the streets by guns every day. They defeated the Zika virus right away. There is universal health care and universal education’.

    I see no reason why you could not replace the word ‘Cuba’ with ‘North Korea’ and ‘Fidel’ with ‘Kim’ and it would be just as correct from this guy’s perspective. The fact that very few are willing to do so must I suppose be down to vestigial racism…….

  6. @Van_Patten – yes, and any country in the world could have those nominal things if it was prepared to accept vicious repression.

    But I bet he wouldn’t tolerate it closer to home…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *