Said Jameel Jaffer, executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, quoted in "The Misguided Attempt to Control TikTok/The freedom to use social media is a First Amendment right, even if it’s one we should all avail ourselves of less often" (by Jay Caspian Kang in The New Yorker).
I'm afraid that young people today are losing the power and the inclination to decide what to listen to and to sift through things and decide what to think. Why bother when the failure to think the right thing will bring all sorts of trouble? And how can you really believe anything if that's how you acquire your "beliefs"? Everything is completely shallow, even the fear that leads people to say that they believe what they've been told they're supposed to believe.
But yes, at the very least, keep the information flowing, even what the prescribers of correct thought condemn.
Posts
68 comments:
My understanding is, no matter what, even if the app is banned, TikTok will always be able to post content on the web. No?
Isn't the question presented whether an app ban be a content neutral regulation of software?
“Free speech is my right to say what you don’t want to hear.” – George Orwell
Problem is that they don't care what you actually say anymore. The modern speech adversary is an interloper, a middle-man intercepting what you say before a person, anyone ever knew it was said. The interloper can even go back in time and edit what you said that was heard by no one in ways that if it ever can be heard, it wasn't actually what you said.
They do this on Wikipedia every day.
A small group of people in the Government or in Big Business should NOT be allowed to gatekeep and censor what we the people get to see and hear. I thought EVERYBODY agreed with that. But no, its looks like a lot of people never stopped being European peasants or never became assimlated Americans.
They just want to conform, and let all them thar smart people in DC or NYC or at the ADL decide what they see and hear. Its too bad these people would just STOP voting and not worry their pretty little heads about politics. But no, they insist on having conformist opinions and voting the way their masters want.
I used to think USA was special due to our freedom, epecically the 1st Admendment. But a large number of Americans would be perfectly fine under a dictatorship as long as they could drink their beer and grill in peace.
"keep the information flowing"
I agree in principle, but other interests are in play as well, including possible Chinese exploitation of a platform in the US.
Without any evidence or meaningful experiences of what a majority of actual young people are doing and saying and thinking other than the narrow slice of extremist social media, you fear for young people today.
This attitude is precisely what the money making algorithms want you to feel. Please exit through the gift shop, like and subscribe...
#SevenbilliontonsofCO2
I'm afraid that young people today are losing the power and the inclination to decide what to listen to and to sift through things and decide what to think.
"The whole point of the First Amendment is to give ordinary citizens the power and the tools to decide for themselves what information to listen to and what ideas to find persuasive."
#NotKetanjiBrownJackson
yes I don't trust the overseers to do the right thing I don't trust ByteDance either
And yet, if I were to look for what Jaffer and Kang say about the government pressuring social media companies to take down content the government officials disagree with, the recently argued Missouri case, what do you suppose I will find- the same full throated support for free speech advocates? For some reason, I doubt it.
I'm afraid that young people today are losing the power and the inclination to decide what to listen to and to sift through things and decide what to think. Why bother when the failure to think the right thing will bring all sorts of trouble? And how can you really believe anything if that's how you acquire your "beliefs"?
Here there is one entity to blame. The liberal, female dominated education establishment. Both K-12 and College.
Is a student even allowed to form their own opinions based on reading different sources? I would imagine you have to go along to get along. Go along to pass the class or get the degree. I'm sure kids who don't want to wear a rainbow shirt to school, or march in a pride parade are shamed.
Can you imagine a public school student telling a teacher Global Warming is bullshit? There would be a price to pay.
Educators are self-centered, arrogant liberals. They're not "in it for the kids"...
The TikTok problem is the spying not the speech…
"That’s the foundational principle of the First Amendment and a foundational principle of any democracy—that the power to decide what information to access and listen to and how much weight to give it are left to the ordinary citizen and not to the government."
Given the historical context of the writing of the Constitution, I've always assumed that the point of the first amendment was to allow citizens to speak contrary to speech promulgated by the government.
"I'm afraid that young people today are losing the power and the inclination to decide what to listen to and to sift through things and decide what to think."
Today? This pretty much defines the great majority of young people throughout all of history.
TikTok is actively spying for a rival foreign power. That changes the calculations. There is no freedom of speech for enemy spies.
The philosopher novelist Ayn Rand said, as long as we have free speech we have a chance. Without it that may not be so.
There is an editorial in the WSJ that explains the concern about the Chinese administering TikTok. I think the writer makes some good points. The issue - as with all social media, I think - is the use of personal data gathered while reading/viewing. If the government would stop censoring the CONTENT of social media it would certainly fulfill the first amendment goal of a free and fair exchange of information. Certainly our young people could benefit from having to deal with a variety of opinions and, likewise, a presentation of a variety of "facts". Isn't that what a liberal education is supposed to be about? I do not think that they need their personal data captured and then manipulated by any foreign power, enemy or "friend". I know Ann is not so naive as to think that social media are not in the business of capturing and exploiting personal data.
'Or Not'. That is the crux of the whole argument about the Boogie Men from Country X spying on American Citizens using freely available software. Because it is up to the citizen's discretion to use the software, with all of the risk that it entails - or not. It is up to the intellect to decide and act upon its curiosities - or not. It is up to the intellect to decide that mining personal data isn't an acceptable condition. I don't use social media because of this, Chinese or otherwise. Not !
It is NOT the role of government to decide what curiosities are allowed - or not. The freedom of the human mind cannot be unstrung. I thought this had already been discovered in the gulags, discussed, and decided, and accepted as truth.
I do think it's the role of government to construct rules about how commercial enterprises, foreign and domestic (and adversarial) make use of User Data in unethical or non-transparent ways. But it would appear that our government, for all of its breast-beating on Chinese Tik Tok data capture, is not sufficiently inspired to do something about it.
Inneresting, that.
“My [the black AA justice speaking] biggest concern is that your view has the First Amendment hamstringing the government in significant ways at the most important time. I mean, what would you have the government do?"
That's the VERY purpose of the 1A - to LIMIT, to hamstring, the government.
What we would have the government do, Justice Jackson asks. NOTHING. Basically, the Constitution demands of fedgov - Leave the People Alone.
When the Founders/Framers envisioned freedom, they meant freedom FROM government.
Suggest viewing of Overview of America from the John Birch Society. The left hates our Constitution. Now you know - their oaths are meaningless.
Watch Overview of America,
https://jbs.org/video/featured/overview-of-america/?mc_cid=aab99f82ce
Sorry, but the First Amendment only applies to nice people who say and do the right things. Everybody else can GTFOH.
Would you have china tapping your phone? That is what is happening out of parent's sight.
Do you think Tide pods are for breakfast?
The fracture in our society is not happenstance.
Wise Up!
Two hours/night TV before dinner didn't usher in transsexuals.
I thought for a moment narciso had made an inadvertent pun at 11:17am, but I think it must have been inadvertent:
"yes I don't trust the overseers to do the right thing I don't trust ByteDance either"
I presume he meant "overseers" as those American who watch over (over-see) us, supposedly for our own good, but actually for their own profit.
But the same word looks like it could almost mean foreigners who live overseas and are definitely not seeking our good, but are trying to harm us by addicting us to their propaganda. Or would that be spelled "overseaers" with an extra A?
"A small group of people in the Government or in Big Business should NOT be allowed to gatekeep and censor what we the people get to see and hear."
The First Amendment only restricts the government from suppressing speech; newspapers and broadcast and on-line organs and any such entities that promulgate information owned by private businesses are under the control of their owners. The government is not permitted to ban or control TikTok, but the owners of TikTok can do as they please.
"TikTok is actively spying for a rival foreign power. That changes the calculations. There is no freedom of speech for enemy spies."
Ok. I'll bite. Is tiktok's founder a former PLA Intelligence Chief? Yes. Is tiktok's algorithm different in China than it is in the USA for nefarious reasons? You betcha. Is tiktok aggregating biometric and secondary data on people who use their platform and storing it in diverse archives all across the PRC? Yes, I've seen the server farms.
It the idiocy of American children and the banality of their parents a reason to suppress our fundamental rights and institute yet more overreaching policies in the name of security like the Patriot Act did? No. Not on your life. We've played this game before. We all did, and what we have lost in the 23 years since 9/11 has not been worth it so that we could spend $20 trillion and lose 2500 American lives to replace the Taliban with the Taliban.
Washington DC has got to stop being the parent of last resort for the cohort of American retards that refuse to turn off the fucking phone or scold their kids to get the fuck up and play outside or their phones get taken away. This all stops - tomorrow - if people simply modify their behavior to make themselves and their children less vulnerable. We all know that won't happen, but I also don't care.
I and my family and my children and millions of others are never going to sacrifice liberty for security again. Ship has fucking sailed.
"TikTok is actively spying for a rival foreign power."
Sez who? How? Even if so, what secrets can they pry from you and me and the multitude of other TikTok users? What about the data all other online providers are harvesting from us?
"That’s the foundational principle of the First Amendment and a foundational principle of any democracy—that the power to decide what information to access and listen to and how much weight to give it are left to the ordinary citizen and not to the government."
How refreshingly clear, although I don't see access to TikTok as a 1A issue. All of that quote could have and should have been said in SCOTUS on Monday, especially in response to the ridiculous 1A musings of new Assoc. Justice Jackson.
"Educators are self-centered, arrogant liberals. They're not 'in it for the kids'...."
I'm curious how you managed to get access to the internet in your hand-excavated underground bunker? Is your router powered by tin-foil?
TikTok is just a gateway to restoring Covid level emergency powers of censorship as routine powers.
Every few months I spend some time online casually clicking through company websites about farm tractors and heavy construction equipment. It is entertaining, and it usually resets the algorithms somewhat from whatever I've been seeing online - from Tibetan throat singing to the reproduction habits of Gray Foxes just recently - to more innocuous fare such as Mohindra lawn tractors suitable for use on a Delhi suburban garden, or John Deere megaharvesters that would work fine on Arrakis harvesting spice and dodging Shai-halud.
This guiding me to what Google or X or Pinterest or Instagram wants me to see, based on what I juse looked at, is the censorship I hate online. It might end up worse than the CIA nd the White House Communications Chief and Mossad and Xi's minions telling Google what to let me see.
How about the social media allow me to search and find what I want? Otherwise, give me the full force firehose of all that there is, either on one particular subjext such as COVID vaccines, or the presidential campaigns, or Opossum gender differentiation in the field, or on today's news. But stop with guiding me, curating my internet for maximized clicks, or limiting what can be seen.
The whole point of the First Amendment is NOT to give the Communist Chinese gov't the power to drive US discussion.
Which is what letting them own TikTok does.
I some American wants to create a TikTok, the US gov't should have no voice about it, or into it.
But a propaganda arm of ao foreign enemy? Yes, the US Gov't should be able to shut that down.
And since the people running TikTok control what gets highlighted, what gets pushed, yes they DIO "control the discussion" on TikTok
News is an entertainment choice. Most choose soap opera and channel that news.
The right chooses the "You won't believe what the soap opera channels are saying" channel, a smaller audience since there are no women because they mock soap opera. It's entertaining to the right.
Slight correction, the right is going for soap opera as well, as the clickbait need for traffic asserts itself. This is mostly patriotic and Christian values soap opera about devils.
Blogger Robert Cook said...
I'm curious how you managed to get access to the internet in your hand-excavated underground bunker? Is your router powered by tin-foil?
Tin-foil...it's your originality that's most impressive.
We lived through the Act 10 Teacher temper tantrum in Wisconsin. NOTHING about what they did was about "the kids". They also proved during COVID, the well-being of kids was the least of Teacher concerns. All their bullshit hyperventilating about "dying if we go to work" was nothing but hypochondriacal self-centeredness. They only people worse were the line dancing nurses.
During the "pandemic" the ditch diggers went to work. So did the pheasant pluckers. The truck drivers. Factory workers.
You know who they are Robert...all the people self-centered, arrogant, liberal teachers look down upon. The people with calluses and dirty hands...
In my day it was commercials for cereals and then the toys in the cereal. It was the toys that made me compliant. Kix with the balsa wood plane, or Lucky Charms with the styrofoam kite?
But it was only cereal
Now?
Inflationary brainwash.
All intrusive spyware disguised as EULAs on apps/social media should be outlawed or at least made so transparent that voluntary assent can be done as an informed consumer. But TikTok is a good place to start weeding out the worst of the worst. Then address he rest.
If like Cook you are still hopelessly ignorant of the hideous extent to which TikTok hoovers up everything (as in every damned thing) from the environment in which your devices operate, just search past Althouse posts about TT and read the extensive and still (surprise!) incomplete list I provided. The Chinese Communists have access to, and are actively acquiring at all times, anything you do with or around your phone once TT is installed.
Robert Cook said...
"TikTok is actively spying for a rival foreign power."
"Sez who? How? Even if so, what secrets can they pry from you and me and the multitude of other TikTok users? What about the data all other online providers are harvesting from us?"
I gave you the data already. Go back about a week ago and read it. If you're too lazy googlefu, "Ryan McBeth". That will get you started.
Althouse:
I'm afraid that young people today are losing the power and the inclination to decide what to listen to and to sift through things and decide what to think. Why bother when the failure to think the right thing will bring all sorts of trouble? And how can you really believe anything if that's how you acquire your "beliefs"? Everything is completely shallow, even the fear that leads people to say that they believe what they've been told they're supposed to believe.
Socrates, is that you?
That reads like a copy/paste mix of every age's parental fears/youth's responses.
It's amusing the stupid shit young people of your and my then did and believed, and just as amusing the stupid shit our elders of then feared.
RideSpaceMountain:
They do this on Wikipedia every day.
They always have. Wikipedia has never been a reliable anything. The article squatter is the synonym of an SJW in action.
Static Ping: "TikTok is actively spying for a rival foreign power."
Robert Cook: Sez who? How? Even if so, what secrets can they pry from you and me and the multitude of other TikTok users? What about the data all other online providers are harvesting from us?
In China, everything is subservient to the state. Those "private" companies that think differently get educated in their misunderstanding quite forcefully. Of course, the Chinese government is using the data from TikTok for their own information gathering. It's a spying tool, and an obvious one at that. The only real question is whether they are limiting the spying to data harvesting or if there is more to it. (There is more to it.)
As to the data harvesting of other online providers, that is such a non sequitur that I am not sure why you thought that was an argument. TikTok is engaging in espionage. If China instead setup, say, a chain of coffee shops to engage in espionage, the fact that American coffee shops also sell overpriced, substandard coffee is not really relevant to the whole espionage thing.
A number of commenters refer to China as our "enemy". But the US has not declared war on China (nor has China declared war on us). If we WERE at war with China, I would agree that our govt could properly take anti-China actions, and banning Tik-Tok would be among the least acts of war that would be appropriate. But we aren't at war with China. China is, perhaps, a "rival" of the US, or a "competitor". Like, say, the EU.
If our "rival" China is using Tik-Tok for improper purposes -- say, industrial or commercial espionage -- then make that case, and I'd support proposals for curbing that behavior.
"The whole point of the First Amendment is to give ordinary citizens the power and the tools to decide for themselves what information to listen to. . . ."
The whole point of the TikTok Algorithm is to remove from its customers the power and the tools to decide for themselves what information they are fed.
"As to the data harvesting of other online providers, that is such a non sequitur that I am not sure why you thought that was an argument. TikTok is engaging in espionage."
If it's so clear, and so dire, and so urgent...please describe the nature and means of their "espionage." What information are they stealing from TikTok's audience, how are they stealing it, and what can they do with it? If you want to convince those who are skeptical (or innocently unaware) that there is a credible threat from China via TikTok, please articulate it, with details and facts and sources.
I'm afraid that young people today are losing the power and the inclination to decide what to listen to and to sift through things and decide what to think.
They're not losing the power. They simply aren't being taught how to do so. Many of "free-thinking" radicals of the 60's became the establishment in government and education. And to them the concept of "free-thinking" now means thinking as they do. Whole generations are now falling into this trap. Even back in the 70's I only had a few professors who really tried to get their students to "think" as opposed to "learn" and there is a difference. Those who can are putting their kids into private school and/or homeschooling them and the difference between a group of kids from a solid private school and a public one can be truly astounding.
Ever hear of a Shrink Wrap Warranty? Do you read all the fine print on all the agreements required with use of your phone, laptop, ipad etc.? Maybe, like Cookie here, you expect magic of your communications devices.
Always rely on the benevolence of the Chicoms.
"To win without fighting is best".
Worked with Covid-19, didn't it?
I understand the claim that Tik Tok is "spying" on our youth, but how is that different from Facebook, Instagram and other "socials" doing the same.
If the answer is: they aren't doing the "spying": China is.
But didn't Tokyo Rose try to subvert and undermine our war effort, among both our troops and our citizens, when we were actually at war with Japan?
Was it ever against the law for Americans to listen to her?
Did our government actively seek to block her transmissions?
As Cook asks: what's the real beef here?
The Godfather said...
A number of commenters refer to China as our "enemy". But the US has not declared war on China (nor has China declared war on us).
So, you're saying you live your life with your head up your ass?
That's sad. Really, really sad.
Next you're going to tell us Fidel really loved America, right?
As president, Trump issued an executive order in 2020 that declared that TikTok threatened “the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States.”
His reversal now is also partially the product of a lobbying campaign connected to a GOP megadonor with connections that reach into Trump’s inner circle.
Politics as usual. From both sides.
didn't Ketanji Brown Jackson declare that the 1st amendment was a THREAT to the power of goverment?
The People pretend that The Constitution gives them "rights".. But CLEARLY, those "rights" aren't going to "hamstring" the US Government!
OBEY!
“The whole point of the TikTok Algorithm is to remove from its customers the power and the tools to decide for themselves what information they are fed.”
I have never understood this. I loved TikTok. This is how it worked for me: In the search box I put in (for example) cats. A lot of cat accounts showed up. I subscribed to some and then from then on when I opened the app I saw clips from the accounts I subscribed to. In between the clips were advertisements. And if I clicked on whoever made that advertisement, then I would see more ads.But the short clips that appeared were only from the accounts I subscribed to. Since it was so easy to make TikTok videos I was able to see a lot of short videos by some really fascinating people. Very often a TikTok person would mention another account or would interview someone who also had a TikTok account, then I would follow those TikTok accounts as well. Kind of like X but more fun, less political.
Would suggest more would be engaged with the news if it was factual, unbiased and scientific based. And let people make their own minds up…
Endless click baiting op-eds across both left and right are doing news a disservice and seek to divide rather than inform.
You know how we’re not supposed to body-shame obese people?
Free speech is the one thing where the more we have of it the better. Truly.
This was never about free speech-
tik tok is chi com - and they are collecting data.
Two-eyed Jack said...
"The whole point of the First Amendment is to give ordinary citizens the power and the tools to decide for themselves what information to listen to. . . ."
The whole point of the TikTok Algorithm is to remove from its customers the power and the tools to decide for themselves what information they are fed.
*******************
How's that work?
Can't ANYONE go to TikTok, then go to other sources of information? Like Fox, or YouTube or CNN?
HOW does TikTok "remove" the power to do anything?
ALSO: isn't the assumption here that a segment of the population---its young people---are too stupid to think for themselves? We hear a lot about Dems having that attitude, but it's unusual coming from the right.
"If it's so clear, and so dire, and so urgent...please describe the nature and means of their "espionage." What information are they stealing from TikTok's audience, how are they stealing it, and what can they do with it?"
They're able to see what people pay attention to — that is, how speech is received. Observing speech and its reception, you learn about people. To call this "espionage" is to express a fear of free speech.
I've read through all the comments, and really don't understand the argument, I guess. Tik Tok is used by its fans voluntarily. To say that it's 'Chinese propagandizing' is to place it into a category that is dissonant, when taking other social media services into consideration. They are all capturing your data. They are allselling it and doing things that are invasive to your privacy, some of them illegally. They are all wanting to capture and steer your attention to their preferred areas. You implicitly accepted this risk and invited them in ! Because you are entertained by the product and still prefer it, over the risks, or you find that the product's utility exceeds the risk. You have always been the product on social media.
How can the risks be so dire, when they are being implicitly accepted, in exchange for entertainment? How can Tik Tok's 'Chinese' risks be so exceptionally dire, so as to raise the defenses of the US Government? I accept that they are spying; I accept that Tik Tok is an extension of the Chinese State. I accept that they are an adversary and, because of their political system and strategic behaviors, an enemy.
But: Banning a platform, because the 'threat is so grave' from this form of entertainment? Hmm - Not buying it. I will decide my own risks, and pursue my own curiosities. I do not trust government to be selectively limiting what I, and other free people, are allowed to see and think. They have proven themselves untrustworthy in myriad ways, in recent times. When this is allowed, soon it will become rife - and invisible. And nothing I read here has described a credible threat, aside from the jingoistic 'enemy' and 'spying' trigger words.
I don't use Tik Tok or TwitterX or other social media because I prefer to preserve whatever shreds of privacy I can. But I understand the adult distinction between 'not allowed to' and 'prefer not to'.
And: My children are grown adults, but if I had kids they wouldn't be on Tik Tok. Why have your kids been allowed, if you're so concerned?
The Godfather said...
"A number of commenters refer to China as our "enemy". But the US has not declared war on China (nor has China declared war on us). If we WERE at war with China, I would agree that our govt could properly take anti-China actions, and banning Tik-Tok would be among the least acts of war that would be appropriate. But we aren't at war with China."
China has said more than once that they are ,"in a conflict", With the United States.
There is no in TiKTok in China. They don't need it to influence their people. They need it to influence you.
One cyber security company did an experiment. How many people could they recruit to participatr in a protest that would shut down Washington DC using TikTok? They got 13 million responses. At a cost of 15 million dollars. We don't need China influencing our own chuckleheads.
What she said.
"Next you're going to tell us Fidel really loved America, right?"
Why would he love America, given the shit we poured on him? But, why do you assume he innately hated the US or had any intentions toward the US? His concern was Cuba. One can debate whether he was good for Cuba or bad for Cuba, and its people, whether he was a tyrant, or worse than the gangster government in Cuba he toppled, etc., but the idea he had plans to "get us" in some way, or that he was some sort of puppet proxy for the Russians to harm or bring down the US is ridiculous.
The countries in the world we have traditionally hated and seen as our implacable enemies with intents to destroy us were (and are) the nations we would not abide and whom we always plotted to destroy. They are the countries we cannot control or make our puppets. (This is not to suggest all or any of these national antagonists were or are heavens on earth, paragons of liberty and all the wonderful freedoms we claim to have and cherish, but only to recognize they had their own issues and concerns.) Their greatest sins--in the eyes of our government--were and are that they represent barriers to America's dominance (if not control) of the rest of the world. Our bully boy tactics with other countries are pushing them to make alliances with each other to counter our global economic and political dominance.
Empires rise, but always also fall, the outcome of their own overreach and hubris. We may be in the pre-fall period of our empire. Part of our hubris has been marking as "deadly enemies of the US" many nations that we could have worked with cooperatively, notwithstanding their political and social differences from us. But...empires cannot share or cooperate; they can only take and dominate.
Robert. You should see the shit he poured on the Cuban people.
w/o TikTok how's anybody supposed to know what's trending?
On the plus side, the sales of paper bags will increase.
"Robert. You should see the shit he poured on the Cuban people."
Was he worse for most Cubans than Batista? Batista overthrew the legitimate government of Cuba in a coup, and he suspended Constitutional protections within Cuba. But, again, that's ignoring my point. Whether better (or worse) Batista or Castro for the people of Cuba, that's their internal business, not of our concern and not for us to interfere with.
This is not a free speech issue nor is it a censorship issue. China is using tik-tok to spy on Americans big time. Also, in China, tik-tok for young people only shows wholesome stuff but in the US it gets pretty nasty and disturbing. That is why the solution proposed was for bytedance to sell their interest in it because that takes China out of the picture.
Was he worse for most Cubans than Batista?
Of course. At least under Batista your property was yours and you could leave any time.
At a cost of 15 thousand dollars.
Robert Cook said...
"Next you're going to tell us Fidel really loved America, right?"
Why would he love America, given the shit we poured on him? But, why do you assume he innately hated the US or had any intentions toward the US?
Gosh, I dont' know?
Maybe because he was a communist dictator and a proxy for our enemy the USSR?
Just spitballing here
"Maybe because he was a communist dictator and a proxy for our enemy the USSR?"
No, he was not a proxy for the USSR, if by that, you're saying he was just a puppet of the Russians, whose purpose was to act as an agent for them in their conflict with us, (a conflict mostly created by us). He was allied with Russia, if for no other reason because he could not ally with the US; the US was implacably determined to oust or kill Castro. If you're concerned that we should have opposed him and plotted to oust/kill him because he was a dictator, why don't you say that about all the right-leaning dictators in South America with whom we are and have been allies and benefactors?
Robert Cook said...
"Robert. You should see the shit he poured on the Cuban people."
Was he worse for most Cubans than Batista?
What % of Cubans risked their lives to escape to the US under Batista?
What % under Castro?
Here's a real world metric you can always trust:
Governments that try to kill you if you try to escape are always worse than governments that don't do that
"'Was he worse for most Cubans than Batista?'
"Of course. At least under Batista your property was yours and you could leave any time."
If you were among the minority of the wealthy who owned property...who didn't want to leave. The masses of Cubans were not in that demographic. Remember, I asked if Castro was worse than Batista for "most Cubans."
Robert Cook said...
Cookie: "'Was he worse for most Cubans than Batista?'
Me: "Of course. At least under Batista your property was yours and you could leave any time."
If you were among the minority of the wealthy who owned property...who didn't want to leave. The masses of Cubans were not in that demographic. Remember, I asked if Castro was worse than Batista for "most Cubans."
Really? The Batista gov't murdered people / threw them in jail for trying to leave?
You got some support for that claim? Because it sounds completely delusional
Post a Comment