Editor Who Wrote of Racism in Cuba Loses His Post

It's likely that publishing ANYTHING in the New York Times, one of the most relentless opponents of the Cuban Revolution on the planet(and of any movement for social justice anywhere in the Americas, INCLUDING Occupy and Idle No More)would get you fired from a media position in Cuba.  It wouldn't be seen as mere dissent, but as actual fraterization with the imperialist enemy.  And which of us could say for sure that it wasn't?

The same thing would happen to an American journalist who had an article published in Der Sturmer in 1943.

Ken Burch wrote:

The same thing would happen to an American journalist who had an article published in Der Sturmer in 1943.

I think a more appropriate comparison would be a left-wing editorial in the National Post - something I have actually read on occasion.

I expect it was more to do with the content than the publisher, but neither reason is a good one.

And along the lines of what lagatta said, its not as if writers don't lose their jobs for criticizing right-wing interests.

Anyways, we're having enough trouble coming to terms with the shit we're being indoctrinated with here.

6079_Smith_W wrote:

Ken Burch wrote:

The same thing would happen to an American journalist who had an article published in Der Sturmer in 1943.

I think a more appropriate comparison would be a left-wing editorial in the National Post - something I have actually read on occasion.

I expect it was more to do with the content than the publisher, but neither reason is a good one.

And along the lines of what lagatta said, its not as if writers don't lose their jobs for criticizing right-wing interests.

I stand by my analogy with Der Sturmer...not that I'm intentionally Godwinning here, but because the example of a left-wing editorial in the Natinoal Post doesn't go far enough.  A left-wing editorial in the National Post is simply an example of an article that doesn't fit the usual "line" of the publication.   Like Der Sturmer looking at American democracy during the 1940's, The New York Times doesn't just disagree with the policies of the Cuban government, it wants that government to be removed from power, by force if necessary, and wants everything that the Cuban Revolution achieved for the people to be completely scrapped and replaced by a total subjugation of Cuba and the Cuban people to American dominance, just as Der Sturmer wanted American democracy and the values of the New Deal to be relaced by total subjugation to the Third Reich, including the roundup of everyone in the UNited States that failed to meet the Aryan standard of racial, sexual and political purity for extermination in Auschwitz-like camps built on U.S. and Canadian soil.

As Der Sturmer wanted to destroy American and Canadian democracy in the 1940's and replace it with cold, brutal repression, so today the New York Times wants to end the Cuban Revolution and Venezuela's Bolivarian Revolution and the successes of the other fully Left governments of Latin America today, just as it worked relentlessly to impose fascism im Chile in 1973, in Guatemals in 1954, and iin many other places in the Americas as well.  The Times doesn't seek merely to criticize Cuba, it seeks to break it and destroy it, simply because Cuba has successfully defied U.S. power for fifty-four years now.  It isn't about dissent, it's about imposing dominance and hegemony.

This is why I chose the example I chose.