Future of the Cuban Revolution

104 posts / 0 new
Last post
Left Turn Left Turn's picture
Future of the Cuban Revolution

Left Turn Left Turn's picture

[url=http://www.marxist.com/where-is-cuba-going-capitalism-or-socialism.htm]W... is Cuba going? Towards Capitalism or Socialism?[/url]

Quote:
On September 13, a statement by Cuba's trade union (CTC) published in Granma announced a whole series of sweeping changes in the country's economy. These measures are the result of the serious economic crisis affecting Cuba, which has been hit hard by the recession in world capitalism. This underlines Cuba's dependence on the world market and the impossibility of "building socialism in one country".

The most striking of the measures announced in the CTC statement was the cutting of 500,000 jobs in the state sector by March 2011, as part of a process of reducing one million jobs. Around 85% of Cuba's workers, 5 million, are employed in the state sector, so this would mean firing 20% of these 10% within the next 6 months.

NDPP
Fidel

It's hard. The blockade since 1960 is still going. Cubans standard of living is still below 1989 levels. But not all of the Soviet trade and support was sustainable or a good thing. Cuba lost 80% of its imports and exports after dissolution of the USSR. That affected more developing countries than just Cuba at the time. the Soviet Union was also the source of about 85% of humanitarian aid delivered to Cambodia up to 1988. The embargoes against VietNam also remained after the end of war and were continued as economic warfare waged against that country. As a result, VietNam has been forced down the capital road.

Many challenges and hurdles for Cuban socialism. I think they will meet those challenges and exceed all expectations. The Cuban revolution is everyone's revolution. We know that socialism in one country is not likely. We all have to do our part in the struggle for socialism around the world.

Viva la revolucion!

Left Turn Left Turn's picture

I originally posted to ask that this thread be closed in light of the previous thread on this topic; however, since thre previous thread is at 92 posts, please keep this thread open.

KenS

 

Quote:
This underlines Cuba's dependence on the world market and the impossibility of "building socialism in one country".

Just a note that the first part of the sentence is a widely understood consensus observation, being hitched with the doctrinaire highlighted piece. 

Fidel

And since Cuba doesn't have the enormous natural wealth and energy reserves that Canada has and siphoned off to that most unsustainable and most wasteful economy in world history south of us, I suppose that that the money speculators and banksters won't be seeing any future for themselves in bleeding Cuba for decades with debt service payments on similarly massive indebtedness that our two oldest political parties in federal government have managed to enslave all Canadians with since 1975.

Cuba, unlike Canada which is right behind Greece in terms of debt ratios, will have to continue striving to earn a national living in the face of the 50 year-old US-led medieval siege waged against them. Our very hyprocritical trade benefactors to the south of us don't actually believe in free trade or respect for international sovereignty. It's been a good thing for corporate America that our stooges in Ottawa and prairie provinces are bought-off and corrupted as easily as they have been. Cubans are not as fortunate.

Geoff OB

Stalinist socialism (or whatever moniker you prefer to use) didn't work, as even Fidel has acknowledged.  Having doctors and scientists quit their jobs, so they can clean tables in hotels is a pretty clear sign that Cuba's universe hasn't unfolded as it should have. 

I hope they can retain the best characteristics of socialism while giving people more options to make a living.  I'd hate to see Cuba mired in the kind of capitalist stranglehold that has imprisoned many other Latin American countries. 

Cuba has the potential to create a democratic, socialist (note the comma) society that could be the envy of almost any other country in the world.  Just watch out for the capitalist Trojan horse from the north.   

George Victor

Soon as I can afford it, I'm going to fly to Cuba and invite a half-dozen students to dine with me at the local equivalent of Joe's (Jose's ?) Lunch, and over wine I'll try to discover a made-in-Cuba perspective.   Hopefully that will be possible...given that the appointed students will likely be somewhat committed to Cuba's revolution.  But as long as the wine (and the interlocutor) hold out, surely in vino verite will win the day? 

In the meantime, knowing something of the success of the businesses started up by the 500,000 would be important input for a thread such as thiis. Perhaps even necessary.  Certainly the food producers seem to be doing well since commerce became possible for them a couple of years back.   State controls on the relationship between business owners and employees will be important, one would expect.

 

Fidel

[URL=http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2010-10/27/c_13576743.htm]Un... States slammed for maintaining five-decade embargo against Cuba[/URL]

Quote:
Also speaking at the General Assembly, Baso Sangqu, the South African permanent representative to the United Nations, told the General Assembly that the U.S. embargo against Cuba " constitutes a violation of international law and its imposition shows disregard for the noble and abiding principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations."

"For almost 50 years, the people of Cuba have suffered as a result of the economic, commercial and financial blockade by the United States of America which is a major hindrance to the development of Cuba," he said.

The blockades against Cuba and other countries since the cold war have been genocidal. And blocking of humanitarian aid to Cuba and other countries is also illegal according to the UN.

Fascism exists to oppose socialism. The blockade is illegal and should be ended by democratically minded political leaders in America what few of them remain and are not bought off by Wall Street and the right wing establishment.

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

Isaac Saney, in a reply to a Globe and Mail editorial, wrote:

The announcement of the new Cuban economic measures did not come as a surprise to any serious journalist or observer. In July 2007 a nation-wide consultation and debate (a frequent practice in Cuba) was initiated on the Cuban economy. The planned restructuring of the state sector has been discussed by all the trade unions and mass organizations, in the newspapers, on radio and television. Workers have themselves decided that the measures are necessary to strengthen Cuba's economy upon which they depend for their living, and how they will be implemented. A substantial number of the 500,000 affected workers are to be absorbed into the non-state sector while a considerable number are being offered alternative state employment opportunities. Many will continue in their current jobs either working for themselves or in cooperatives.

This is not the shock therapy used in eastern Europe or demanded by the World Bank and IMF in developing countries. The new arrangements are being phased in and no one is being abandoned or left to fend for themselves. All the social guarantees remain in force. The aim of the restructuring is to strengthen social programmes, not privatize nor dismantle, them. This includes universal free health care and education, subsidized utilities, a subsidized food ration and controlled prices; mortgage payments pegged at 10 percent of the highest income earned in the household (more than 80% of Cubans own their own homes).

[url=http://www.cubasolidarity.com/news/2010/100920saneyeconomic.htm]Read on...[/url]

Left Turn Left Turn's picture

Here's a made in Cuba perspective:

[url=http://www.marxist.com/which-way-for-cuban-revolution-debate.htm]Which way for the Cuban Revolution? - A Contribution to the debate[/url]

Quote:
The Cuban Revolution is facing one of the most complex moments in its history. On the island there is a fairly general consensus that important changes must occur in our society. The debate is over the pace and scale that this will assume, as well as its content and nature. Important aspect are the limits, and how far these changes can go without crossing the threshold and violating principles or affecting the very essence of the system we have defended for 50 years and for which we have given our soul, heart and life.

trippie

The Nationalist revolution in Cuba was bound to fail sooner or later. Even though Fidel Castro had a good understanding of Marx, he still became a dictator.

 

 He's gonna die and his brother is gonna die soon, they have to make way for the inevitable.

 

Socialism in one country was discredited a long time ago. Capitalism is global in nature, so Socialism in one country could never work. Beside there never was Socialism in Cuba. It is a Nationalist dictatorship, with a command economy.

George Victor

Thanks for the Saney piece, MS. Some folks will never get around to reading it, of course, full of their own ideas about socialism.

Canadians can only hope to emulate the means by which Cuba arrives at a broad concensus on the paths to reform, as Globalization (the euphemistic term for international capitalism, as Naomi Klein notes) implodes on itself.

Snert Snert's picture

Quote:
The announcement of the new Cuban economic measures did not come as a surprise to any serious journalist or observer.

 

Then why does babble have a big long thread about whether or not "The Revolution" has been betrayed? Didn't anyone get the memo? It's all good, folks!

Fidel

[url=http://rt.com/Best_Videos/2010-10-19/american-embargo-cuba-rethink.html]... blockade: Opposition grows in US over Cuban embargo[/url] video

US Hawks insist that Cuba is a repressive, totalitarian, communist country which unlike China, can't loan money to the U.S.

Iwant Liberty

Um, I hate to break the news to you, but the "revolution" ended in 1959.  J/K.  Since then it's been a downward spiral for the poor citizens.  The trade blockade was, and is, a travesty and has only emboldened the dictatorship through the years.  If the U.S. regime had not blocked normal trading and travel with Cuba, then things there would have been very different.  The misguided policies have greatly backfired and have hurt people not only in Cuba but also in all other countries that would have benefited from trade with Cuba itself. 

Just like Afghanastan and Iraq are today, Cuba was portrayed by politiicans and the media as the extension of a Grave Threat.  Political leaders like that kind of stuff.  They want us to believe we need them to deliver us from evil all the time.  But of course it's all a smoke screen that masks their thirst for power.

Bec.De.Corbin Bec.De.Corbin's picture

Maybe Cuba could bring back the casinos and the old night life it was once famous for... serously. Start all over and instead, this time, the people/government gets the money generated instead of the mafia and the land owners.

 

Fidel

Iwant Liberty wrote:
The trade blockade was, and is, a travesty and has only emboldened the dictatorship through the years.

Yes. Most UN countries vote to end the US-led medieval siege of Cuba. But the US Military dictatorship still views Cuba as an ideological threat against them and continue waging a genocidal blockade against the small island nation daring to exist outside America's sphere of influence. And in waging economic warfare against Cuba for 50 years, the US is violating the most basic principles of democracy itself by continuing to interfere politically in yet another sovereign nation's affairs with using trade as a weapon. It's what they do.

RosaL

Bec.De.Corbin wrote:

Maybe Cuba could bring back the casinos and the old night life it was once famous for... serously. Start all over and instead, this time, the people/government gets the money generated instead of the mafia and the land owners.

 

 

I think they've come fairly close to that with their tourist industry. I'm tempted to criticize but I realize they must be desperate.

WRT socialism in once country: it wasn't 'socialism in one country' when they started, though I agree it was a very flawed socialism (maybe fatally flawed) and that socialism in one country is not possible. (See, that proves I'm not a stalinist! Wink) That's why Venezuela and Bolivia are so important. 

Fidel

And neither was Stalin the Stalinist that they claim he was when it came to cold war fear-mongering about "Soviet expansionism" into western Europe and "global domination."

RosaL

Fidel wrote:

And neither was Stalin the Stalinist that they claim he was when it came to cold war fear-mongering about "Soviet expansionism" into western Europe and "global domination."

 

Well, I tend to agree but we better leave that alone Undecided

Fidel

I'm not afraid of warmed over cold war leftovers. I eat them all the time.

ETA: I would imagine the average cold warrior newbie to these forums would be in good company with any of Former Soldier, Cueball, RosaL, myself and a few more regular babblers whose understandings of that era, I think, are above average. Way.

trippie

That whole idea of blaming the USA embargo on what happen in Cuba is a bunch of bull#$%^ quite frankly.
 
I've read the Revolution Betrayed. I know all about the anti--communist propaganda from the cold war. I understand what Stalin was and how he came about.
 
All the excuses for why things happened, that comes from Socialist is 100% BS.
 
The real reason is because the ideas Trotsky, Lenin, Castro and the rest of the revolutionaries had were wrong. It's all a bunch of BS. They fucked up as all of their ideas lead exactly to were they ended up.
 
After much though and many years of searching, I have come to the conclusion, that Socialism will only come one way. That is when there is no other choice left but form humanity to accept that Socialism and Communism is that only way forward.
 
 
Revolution will never bring Socialism about. Marx was wrong, the working class may be the revolutionary class. But Socialism can not be brought about by revolution.
 
Socialism is about co-operation. People that understand Socialism are peaceful people. Peaceful people are not revolutionary. they are considerate. Under Socialism, economy is based on freely give your time to help the group. People have to come to the conclusion that helping your fellow man is the only way.
 
Socialism is peace, Peace does not come from revolution. The only thing that comes from revolution is BS and death.

Fidel

trippie wrote:
That whole idea of blaming the USA embargo on what happen in Cuba is a bunch of bull#$%^ quite frankly.

Yes they are really very democratically minded in Warshington. You don't have to convince us.

Bec.De.Corbin Bec.De.Corbin's picture

Fidel wrote:

 the US Military dictatorship

LaughingTongue outWink

Ok in all fairness...

Laughing

Fidel

[url=http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=US+military+spending+countries+list&... spends more  on all things military[/url]

[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Act_of_1947]US Military dictatorship since 1947[/url] OSS/CIA is formed and hires hundreds of Himmler's SS to run the spy ops out of West Germany, help form stay behind armies that carry out false flag terrorism all over Europe,  bombing infrastructure in East and West and orchestrate the killing innocent civilians in the process.

And they [url=http://home.iprimus.com.au/korob/fdtcards/Cards_Index.html]p... other fascist military dictatorships around the world[/url], too.

Sean in Ottawa

Wow- calling Castro's regime National Socialist (Nazi) is quite a step.

At one point we seemed to have some consensus that Fascists were anti-education as a defining characteristic.

The Cuban Communists greatest achievement has for long been claimed to be widespread literacy (above that of the US) and substantial higher education. Doesn't sound Nazi to me.

Heavy direction of what resources the country has to social programs like health care.

I am not pretending that the Cuban government does not have some issues but it has been the most directed towards the interests of the people of that country of any government they have had-- at least that's how it looks. Perhaps others who know more can explain.

George Victor

sean:

"The Cuban Communists greatest achievement has for long been claimed to be widespread literacy (above that of the US) and substantial higher education. Doesn't sound Nazi to me.

Heavy direction of what resources the country has to social programs like health care.

I am not pretending that the Cuban government does not have some issues but it has been the most directed towards the interests of the people of that country of any government they have had-- at least that's how it looks."

 

And that is exactly how it IS, Sean.

Gundere

Costa Rica has achieved wide spread literacy and universal health care that is genuine without becoming a police state. It well documented that the Cuban health system is a sham health system. Cuba's education minister admitted that the purpose of education is indoctrination. Cuba before Casto had a high rate of literacy and the best health systems in Latin America.

 

Fidel

[url=http://search.worldbank.org/data?qterm=infant%20mortality&language=EN&fo... Mortality per 1000 live births[/url] World Bank Statistics

Costa Rica: 9.6

United States: 6.8

Cuba: 4.4

Cuban physicians were there in Costa Rica and tried helping them improve the medical system. The Cubans eventually left citing government corruption and general inability to improve very much because of a lack of cooperation from authorities.

One might wonder why Costa Rica, a country the size of Rhode Island, would need 7000 US soldiers, 200 helicopters and 46 war ships supposedly to fight drug trafficking. Because as a rule wherever the US Military and CIA intervene, and where there is potential for illicit drug trafficking, there are typically significant increases in drug trafficking in the exact same countries after the Americans arrive.

George Victor

Gundere wrote:

Costa Rica has achieved wide spread literacy and universal health care that is genuine without becoming a police state. It well documented that the Cuban health system is a sham health system. Cuba's education minister admitted that the purpose of education is indoctrination. Cuba before Casto had a high rate of literacy and the best health systems in Latin America.

 

 

Where are these people coming from, so ready to re-write history, so willing to demonstrate their ignorance.  This one has never heard of the mob...perhaps never saw the Godfather series.  Batista really looked after his people.

All of Venezuela's poorer neighbourhoods are now staffed by Cuban medics.  

 

Maysie Maysie's picture

Thanks Fidel.

George, you're right.

Gundere is gone.

trippie

The people of Cuba are not free. I don't care what level of education they may or may not have, they are not free people.

 

The most basic tenent of Socialism is freedom.

 

Castro is a failure and holding him up to any standard other then that is self delusion.

 

What Castro did in Cuba is not Socialism. He may or may not have an understanding of Marx, that is besides the point. I am not looking for someone to take my freedoms aways just because they have good intensions.

 

We are not talkng about the criminality of America either. That is reserved for a library of literature.

 

Cuba is not a Socialist country. Socialism can not be achieved in one country alone. The Cuban government is a military dictatorship, The economy they set up has failed the people. It is not sustainable as the people there have turned into thieves and tricksters just to eck out a living.

Fidel

trippie wrote:
We are not talkng about the criminality of America either.

You keep saying that. Who's we?

Ever been to Haiti just 55 miles from Cuban shores? Because that island nation is what Uncle Sam wants Cuba to look like with the illicit drug running to the mainland, the free markets in grinding poverty, the cholera and preventable diseases and the whole shabang.

Hands off Cuba!

Snert Snert's picture

Quote:
Who's we?

 

In a perfect world, all babblers (when the topic isn't the U.S.)

 

In other news, look! Over there!!

melovesproles

Quote:

In other news, look! Over there!!

 

It's not like we have to avert our gaze very far. The US is occupying a slice of Cuba and is giving us a very clear vision of what it would like to do with the country. A Canadian citizen and child soldier has been tortured there for some years now.

 

And as if it's just babblers that bring up the US when discussing Cuba. Show me any history of the country, right or left that doesn`t give the US and its foreign policy a prominent role in any discussion of Cuba.

 

Yet there will always be a few babblers like Snert who continue to cry `Too much context! Too much context` unless Cuba can be judged in a vacuum.

 

It`s beyond silly and it certainly isn`t `realist`. The fact is if Canada or any other client state in the American empire tried to break out of the hegemon we would face a lot of the same problems and ethical dilemmas that Cuba has faced. But there`ll always be armchair critics so sure of their own brilliance.

George Victor

Yes.   i.e.  The Bay of Pigs fiasco might have presaged the need for a continued, strong Cuban military "presence", eh?Undecided

George Victor

quote: trippie wrote: "We are not talkng about the criminality of America either."

 

(Interesting, how America has - for some - had no bearing on the structure of socialism in Cuba. Well, so much for the dialectic.)Laughing

 

How about America's now-building, future criminality?

Snert Snert's picture

Quote:

And as if it's just babblers that bring up the US when discussing Cuba. Show me any history of the country, right or left that doesn't give the US and its foreign policy a prominent role in any discussion of Cuba.

 

Yet there will always be a few babblers like Snert who continue to cry 'Too much context! Too much context' unless Cuba can be judged in a vacuum.

 

I have no problem with some context. The problem is when any criticism of Cuba is met dishonestly with "But the U.S. is worse!!!". That's not context, that's distraction and avoidance.

 

Posters seem to have little problem ripping hard on Obama, ripping hard on the NDP, ripping hard on Social Democracy... but when it comes to Cuba you'd swear Castro was standing over them, glowering. It's OK to be honest! Really, it is!

George Victor

Some of us envy his spirit of independence. The Cuba Libra was my drink of choice for years and years.    Damned near took up smoking cigars.  :)

Fidel

Snert wrote:
I have no problem with some context. The problem is when any criticism of Cuba is met dishonestly with "But the U.S. is worse!!!". That's not context, that's distraction and avoidance.

When a tiny country of 11 million has a nuclear-powered military dictatorship dogging its every move 90 miles away, you have to include Uncle Sam, no doubt about it. Any attempt to exclude Uncle Sam from the overall context would be to distort the truth in the same way that we can't talk about Canada's economy without mentioning our largest trade partner taking advantage of cheap Canadian fossil fuels and consuming the bulk of total Canadian energy exports. How do we exclude something like that in a discussion of North American economy?

Another example: How could Haiti possibly be the economic basket case and failed nation state that it is without Uncle Sam's guiding hand and dozens of CIA and US Military interventions to put down various people's revolts against intolerable US-backed tyranny on that island?

You can't discuss the situations of very many countries in this hemisphere without including the largest fascist military dictatorship in world history on our front door step. It's such a large country that it happens to also be geographically situated 90 miles from Cuba at the same time it happens to be an ongoing colder war military threat to various countries in Asia. How's that for pushing an agenda? One can maintain blinders on the situation for only so long before it begins to look a lot like an apology.

Snert Snert's picture

Quote:
 How do we exclude something like that in a discussion of North American economy?

 

I thought I was clear that there's no need to, when it takes the form of context.

 

That's different from abandoning the topic of the NA economy (or, say, Cuba's human rights record) to say "The U.S. is worse!!"

 

To recap:

 

Context: good, necessary.

Distraction: dishonest, unnecessary.

kropotkin1951

trippie wrote:

The people of Cuba are not free. I don't care what level of education they may or may not have, they are not free people.

The most basic tenent of Socialism is freedom.

The Cuban government is a military dictatorship, The economy they set up has failed the people. It is not sustainable as the people there have turned into thieves and tricksters just to eck out a living.

Quote:

Isaac Saney, in a reply to a Globe and Mail editorial, wrote:

 

The announcement of the new Cuban economic measures did not come as a surprise to any serious journalist or observer. In July 2007 a nation-wide consultation and debate (a frequent practice in Cuba) was initiated on the Cuban economy. The planned restructuring of the state sector has been discussed by all the trade unions and mass organizations, in the newspapers, on radio and television. Workers have themselves decided that the measures are necessary to strengthen Cuba's economy upon which they depend for their living, and how they will be implemented. A substantial number of the 500,000 affected workers are to be absorbed into the non-state sector while a considerable number are being offered alternative state employment opportunities. Many will continue in their current jobs either working for themselves or in cooperatives.

I am not there but it seems that process is a lot better than the one we had n Canada on whether to sign NAFTA. We had a FPTP election and the two thirds of the people who voted against it got the opposite.  Do you have proof that this consultation process was a bigger sham than the consultations the BC Liberals have done here prior to major economic decisions?  

Fidel

Snert wrote:
That's different from abandoning the topic of the NA economy (or, say, Cuba's human rights record) to say "The U.S. is worse!!"

How can you ignore Uncle Sam when he and his torture gulags at Guantanamo represent the largest threat to human rights on the island of Cuba?

 

Snert wrote:
To recap:

 

Context: good, necessary.

Distraction: dishonest, unnecessary.

google wrote:
[url=http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=define%3Acontext&aq=f&aqi=... the set of facts or circumstances that surround a situation or event; "the historical context"

 Apparently it's a case of the facts representing inconvenient truths for anti-Cuba propagandists who want to suggest that certain facts comprising context are "dishonest" and unnecessarily revealing. If the facts don't work in their favour, then anti-Cuba propagandists simply ignore the "dishonest" facts in desperate hope of making a more convincing argument.

Snert Snert's picture

Quote:

How can you ignore Uncle Sam when he and his torture gulags at Guantanamo represent the largest threat to human rights on the island of Cuba?

 

Fidel, I'm not saying you have to ignore Uncle Sam. I'm saying that finger pointing at Uncle Sam in order to take attention away from genuine problems with Cuba is dishonest. It's distraction. I'm not sure what you just don't seem to get about that.

 

That doesn't prevent discussing the U.S. for context, but once that context is provided, one would assume it would then be part of the discussion of Cuba... not a new discussion about the evils of the U.S. instead of discussing Cuba.

 

I know you really, really, really don't ever, ever, ever want to criticize Cuba, but sometimes it's not unreasonable to. It kind of looks a bit fishy when supporters are unable to ever concede that Cuba has problems, or to be obsessive about always pointing out that whatever problem Cuba may have is either the direct fault of the U.S., or else the U.S. has the same problem, only worse.

 

It's hard not to notice that even in this little side discussion, you want to discuss the evils of the U.S. instead. You're making my point for me.

Fidel

Snert wrote:

Quote:

How can you ignore Uncle Sam when he and his torture gulags at Guantanamo represent the largest threat to human rights on the island of Cuba?

 

Fidel, I'm not saying you have to ignore Uncle Sam. I'm saying that finger pointing at Uncle Sam in order to take attention away from genuine problems with Cuba is dishonest. It's distraction. I'm not sure what you just don't seem to get about that.

I know. It's hard to focus on Cuba when the vicious empire is there in Cuba torturing people they've abducted from around the world. The largest incarcerated population in the region outside of America is there at Guantanamo Bay Naval base. It's a huge distraction and one people sometimes can't help noticing like a monstrous wart on the island.

Snert wrote:
That doesn't prevent discussing the U.S. for context, but once that context is provided, one would assume it would then be part of the discussion of Cuba... not a new discussion about the evils of the U.S. instead of discussing Cuba.

So far all you've discussed is Uncle Sam and how not discussing him would be so much more enlightening WRT Cuba as the target of a 50 year-long genocidal blockade waged by Uncle Sam.

Snert wrote:
I know you really, really, really don't ever, ever, ever want to criticize Cuba, but sometimes it's not unreasonable to. It kind of looks a bit fishy when supporters are unable to ever concede that Cuba has problems, or to be obsessive about always pointing out that whatever problem Cuba may have is either the direct fault of the U.S., or else the U.S. has the same problem, only worse.

If Britain or Ireland were blockaded from exporting anything to the continental mainland for 50 consecutive years without a break, do you think there would be problems? What would Newfoundland or PEI look like 50 years after never selling anything to the mainland? It wasn't the same policy when a US-backed mafia regime was running the show in Havana. There were quotas for Cuban sugar to be delivered to the states and many other guarantees in order to prop-up an opppressive, fascist military dictatorship. All those economic guarantees evaporated once they knew Fidel represented the people.

Snert wrote:
It's hard not to notice that even in this little side discussion, you want to discuss the evils of the U.S. instead. You're making my point for me.

You keep mentioning the USA. Apparently more than a few of us are overly fascinated with Uncle Sam. I've only just noticed it now.

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

Over the years many well-intentioned people on the left have gotten sucked into making rash criticisms of Cuba only to find out later that they had been conned into it by the lies of the huge disinformation network run by the Cuban gusanos in Miami and financed by the US State Department and the CIA. They have since learned to be much more skeptical of the stories told by the liberal human-rights organizations and the not-so-liberal MSM, and to reserve their criticism until after they have all the facts - facts which are sometimes hard to get.

Moreover, there seems to be little to be gained by adding one's voice to the chorus of Cuba-haters who get so much attention and publicity - other than to satisfy those who insist on some kind of "even-handed" political correctness, whereby the imperialists and the anti-imperialists come in for equal measures of condemnation.  

Fidel

Hear-hear!

Viva La Revolución!

 

George Victor

What is more, it would be imbecilic to suggest that Cuba could have the kind of laid-back freedoms of the petty bourgeoise  who have nothing else to pronounce on...or even to suggest that "freedom" is the litmus test of a socialist state facing this situation.

Hope that's not too pungent a description of  the necessary state of mind in this instance.

Fidel

What do you mean by freedom, George? Whose freedom and at what cost to freedoms that exist in Cuba today but very few of Uncle Sam's Caribbean island trade partners?

Pages

Topic locked