The scene in which gamers blow Fidel's brains off

The Cuban government is very angry. The reason: This scene from a Call of Duty: Black-Ops mission that requires to kill Fidel Castro. They are claiming some bullshit about it being "perverse." I wonder if the victims of Castro's dictatorship agree.



Here's what an article in Cubadebate—a website ran by the Cuban government who claims to fight "media terrorism"—says. It's double-perverse!

This new video game is doubly perverse. On one hand, it glorifies the illegal assassination attempts the United States government planned against the Cuban leader...and on the other, it stimulates sociopathic attitudes in North American children and adolescents. What the United States couldn't accomplish in more than 50 years, they are now trying to do virtually.

Like we say in Spain: ¡Manda cojones! (roughly, what a load of crap). I don't know if this is going to stimulate "sociapathic attitudes" in North America as much as Cubadebate's articles stimulate sycophantic attitudes among Castro's acolytes—but I'm sure than all my cuban friends would love to play this mission... and then be sad to discover that it was not the real Castro, but a double.

Unlike those now in jail for political reasons. Or the people who have disappeared and have been killed indiscriminately during Castro's regime, since the first minute of the revolution. I imagine those wouldn't like to play this game. The ones who are alive after decades in jail for expressing their opinions would probably like to actually pull the trigger. I can't blame them.


In any case, the fact that Castro's dictatorial regime—in which individuals have no right to freely express themselves and could be arrested without warrant in the middle of the night—is criticizing a game scene that simulates a fantasy black-op is so hypocritical that it's nauseating. [NBC Miami and Kotaku]



Castro is no humanitarian, but if you're seriously arguing that the alternative would have been better, you're absolutely insane.

Fulgencio Batista—the man deposed by Castro—was not only a brutal, repressive dictator who sponsored the ravaging of his own population, but was also actively engaged in selling off Cuba to corporate/business interests abroad (including the American mafia) for his own personal financial gain. When he parachuted out of the country, he did so with the treasury in his pocket.

I think the hatred of Castro neglects the reality that solving a problem, such as that posed by a brutal military dictator, cannot always be done in a 100% virtuous way, or in a way that comports 100% with American-style democracy.

Castro's position was that a re-balancing needed to occur, in which the upper classes, who had benefited for so long under the corrupt rule of Batista, would have wealth transferred to the lower classes. Industries would be nationalized, and foreign interests—which sought to control the resources and labor market—would be kicked out.

Castro? Not the best leader ever. Batista? Worlds fucking worse. Things on this scale take time and don't happen easily, but to deride Castro, as though he's just a common criminal who wrested power for nefarious, comic book villain-esque reasons, is absurd, and is tantamount to eating up the standard American line on Cuba like the most domesticated of sheep.

The Cubans in America are almost entirely anti-Castro because they either are members of the elite class who got booted out after the revolution, or they're children of those people. It's not that they don't have a valid opinion worth noting, but rather, that to take their word as the gold standard by which to judge Castro would be like holding up a random Teabagger's word as the gold standard by which we should judge President Obama.

That said, I don't have a problem with a Castro-killing scenario being in this game. Mostly because it's drawing on historical precedent, not just dreaming up the concept of assassinating Castro out of thin air, in hopes that it would be brought to action in real life.