Both military dictators, both bastards, both Latin-Americans. One leftist, one rightist in their authoritarian styles. Both dead, if this is true.
So, while Yglesias excoriates the WaPo for noticing (in the wake of yesterday’s op-ed in the WSJ) that some of the market reforms made by Pinochet have contributed to Chile’s robust economy, the quartet practices in the park and we sing dirges in the dark. On the other hand, we’ve got Cuba, a failed ex-Soviet client state still ruled by a repressive regime. I wonder (for purely rhetorical purposes), will Yglesias be as outraged about lefty publications remembering old Fidel in much more hagiographic terms than the WaPo author who acknowledges the brutalities of Pinochet’s regime?
And whereas the international left feels cheated that old bastard Pinochet died before he could be brought to justice, there was never any call for Castro to be indicted for his crimes against the Cuban people, or for real elections, for that matter, or for freedom of political expression, from that quarter. And while Putin’s regime eliminates his political opponents, Bush is the world’s evil dictator. And while journalists are assassinated in Caracas, Chavez is the people’s hero. And while Syria’s Ba’athists murder their political opponents in Lebanon, we really ought to treat with them.
The conjunction of these two deaths provides for us an opportunity to observe in real time the functioning of the double standard.
I await MSMs eulogising when Fidel goes to the workers paradise in the sky.
Which brings up another topic. When =The Best Friend of the Cuban Worker- finally cacks, and a miricle happens and the country isn’t burdened by another socialist idiot, are therer any cubans left that can impliment a democratic society?
I gert the impression that the remaining cubans are pretty much beaten down, used up.
Was there more to this sentence that got left out, or is the “while” superfluous?
Slartibart,
Thanks for the heads up. Yeah, there should be more, but I forgot what it was, so I’ll just make something up.
You raise some useful comparisons. “Fascist” and “Nazi” are still the default kneejerk insults of the left, but Stalin and Mao killed millions more innocents than Hitler managed.
Pinochet may have been a bit of a shit, but he also achieved some progress in Chile.
What has Castro achieved other than proving you can perpetuate a stone-age economy with the morality of Mordor just off the coast of Florida?
But you are right. When the bearded old fraud kicks the bucket and Raul takes over in true socialist style, the leftist press will fawn like puppies.
I passed this post along to some folks. Hope it receives the attention it deserves, because it certainly does throw down a fairly ornate and noticable gauntlet (the proceeds from which, should it ever be sold on, say, eBay, are to be spread equally among the proletariat, so that all may prosper, and true equality finally be reached!)
Thanks, Jeff, and furriskey, and alia.
Could you provide some examples of the lie-beral emm ess emm fawning over Castro, because I can’t find many myself. Even the traitors at the NY Times don’t seem very fond of him:
Unserious–
Have the MSM confirmed he’s dead, yet? Wait till that happens, give it 24 hours, and we’ll talk again.
TW: happened15
I don’t much buy into the Pinochet-was-good-for-the-economy justification, BTW. Hitler was, arguably, very good for Deutschland’s economy.
Pinochet had a pile of crimes against humanity that, while dwarfed by what the Third Reich accomplished, still must be seriously considered when weighing whether Pinochet was in aggregate a Good Thing for Chile, as compared with the unrealized possibility of Chile tiring of Allende and giving him the old heave-ho, to be replaced by a democratically elected successor.
In any event, Dan, I thank you for completing the sentence, if not the idea. Been there, done that, got.
That’s a nice one right there, furriskey
I think that BushMcChimpy Hitler signed a blood oath deal with the mob (or maybe Nazi sympathisers left over from Grandmoguldad’s family dealings) to knock Castro off. After all he was only in his eighty’s and we were assured by Cuba that he would live past a hundred.
Conspiracy; it’s what’s for dinner!
Not quite the same, but I recall how the media reacted when Arafat died. It was about the same time Ashcroft left the administration. The press of course fawned over the ‘statesman’ Arafat and slammed Ashcroft as a villian looking to destroy the constitution and our freedoms.
Tells you all you need to know about the media and it’s view of the world.
I understand Pinochet’s dying words to his critics were “Entiérreme en el resto que se inclina, diga el mundo besar mi asno!”
I thought it was “Either this wallpaper goes, or I do! Oh wait, someone already said-”