For those who support Castro here....

[Fountain79]

would you be willing to give up things like free speech and expression for the sake of never worrying about another terrorist attack? It seems like some people here are willing to forgive Castro for his oppression as long as Cubans were getting health care and education. I am not trying to engage in any kind of fallacy here and perhaps I am mistaken but that is the vibe I seem to get from some.

[beyurslf]

1. "They who give up essential liberty or freedom to attain a little bit of

safety (or education or health care) deserve neither."

[kiki]

51. I really hate that quote...

...considering it was said by a man who had one of the world's most powerful armies standing in between him and anyone who might have tried to harm him or take away his liberty.

I generally find it disgusting when world leaders start going on about how "we" must be strong and make sacrifices, when of course they themselves are the last to be affected. Most ordinary people just want to survive and have no desire to suffer or die for vague, nebulous ideas like "freedom".

[Greyhound]

135. What are you talking about? That (mis)quote is from Benjamin Franklin

and in case you've forgotten, he was on the traitors side and, had they lost, would've been hung as such. Those "world leaders" risked literally everything to give us a chance at LIBERTY! Were there selfish motives behind many of their actions? Of course there were, but that doesn't diminish the fact that what they did was revolutionary, and set the example that millions have followed since.

[Codeine]

146. The fledgling US army was hardly "powerful."

The army standing behind Franklin was a weak, under-manned, poorly-equipped militia force that won independence for us by dint of luck, grit, and European politics. Your statement makes no sense.

And I'll take freedom over comfort any day.

[KyuzoGator]

2. Castro stole everything from my grandparents, including their dignity.

Fuck that bastard. They had to come to the United States flat broke after living a very comfortable life in Cuba. My grandmother was a college professor and my grandfather was a successful entrepreneur. When they came over, they had nothing and my grandmother's teaching credentials no longer existed.

I will verbally slaughter anyone who dares defend that son of a fuck in my presence.

[DemonFighterLives]

16. I understand your frustration

but all in all, was it better that they came here?
Just asking!

[catmother]

17. i've met many people who were like your grandparents. they had

a very comfortable life and came here and had to work.

[KyuzoGator]

21. Holy shit...you have no idea how goddamn insulting that was.

You don't know thing fucking one about my family.

[catmother]

26. excuse me. don't be so touchy. i know people who were

very wealthy and had to leave it all behind. one woman i knew, who happened to be my boss would tell us how when they came to this country and she asked her husband to put the garbage out he was insulted. everything was done for him, even as far as the servants running his bath.

get a grip.

on edit: were you talking to me or poster #16?

[KyuzoGator]

29. No, it's time for you to get a grip really fucking quick.

You have the motherfucking audacity to say that my grandparents were spoiled and somehow deserved to have everything they ever earned taken from them because you agree with the ideology of the guy who stole it?

I don't give a rat's ass about "some woman you knew." You need to get a grip and perhaps expand your beliefs beyond vague hearsay.

[catmother]

32. i never said that. i just said i knew people who left everything

behind. i have no idea how your grandparents lived except for what you said. and furthermore, i don't give a shit.

you're reading what you want to in my words. you're so full of anger. look at your language.

[KyuzoGator]

33. Your words verbatim:

"i've met many people who were like your grandparents. they had a very comfortable life and came here and had to work."

How exactly did I read that wrong?

[catmother]

36. your words verbatim

Fuck that bastard. They had to come to the United States flat broke after living a very comfortable life in Cuba. My grandmother was a college professor and my grandfather was a successful entrepreneur. When they came over, they had nothing and my grandmother's teaching credentials no longer existed.

flat broke -- a comfortable life -- college professor -- successful entrepreneur

you said it not me.

on edit: i think i'll go over to the I/P forum. there's less anger there than you're spewing.

[KyuzoGator]

38. They earned every dime of their "comfortable life" and it was stolen.

In Cuba, my grandfather owned and operated drug stores and my grandmother was a college professor. They earned where they were and everything they had.

When they came to the States, my grandfather had to bus tables at a hotel and my grandmother had to sew auto upholstery.

I'd love to see your dramatic bellyaching if the government were to take your house, livelihood and life savings from you.

[catmother]

42. the woman i talked about did not come from wealth. her

husband did. do you think they were so different from your grandparents? they had to work too. she worked her way up to a nice position and so did he and i think that's pretty hard whether you came from wealth or worked in cuba. bottom line, they left everything behind, house, money. they all suffered.

and you better believe i'd be bellyaching, i'm the first to admit it, but i'm not about to take it out on someone i don't even know whose words you misconstrued.

[deaniac21]

113. Never try to talk sense with cat people.

[Octafish]

237. So where do you stand on Batista?

That corrupt dictator -- valued friend of the American Mafia, Big Oil, the Brothers Dulles and Prescott Bush -- murdered at least 20,000 Cubans during the revolution, many of whom simply voiced opposition to his rule.

I'm sure you knew that, though.

[manic expression]

151. I expected as much

Oh, right, they "deserved" what they had while thousands upon thousands of other Cubans "deserved" to toil in poverty no matter how hard they worked? What you need to understand is that consolidation of wealth when others are being exploited and left out in the cold is wrong. When you make sure everyone's needs are met and everyone has what they deserve, that is justice.

[SPKrazy]

169. When You Work Hard And Make Money

that's bad?

oh

maybe I shouldn't work so hard

would that be better?

I'm all for justice, and see nothing wrong with equalizing through taxation

but you are on some tangient here that is like, way out of bounds isn't it?

[manic expression]

182. Work hard?

and what of the thousands and thousands of Cubans who worked their asses off just to survive? What about them? Does a rich person somehow become "deserving" of luxury while hard working people are thrown into the cold? No. Having money does not mean you work harder than others, having money does not mean you are more deserving than others. AT ALL.

Furthermore, when you make large amounts of money for yourself while others need it far more than you, that is simply selfish and unacceptable.

If you're for redistributing wealth (as I understand you are saying), what are your qualms?

(edited out unnecessary paragraph)

[SPKrazy]

203. Education Is The Great Equalizer

it sounds clearly like his grandparents had some education

it isn't their fault that anyone else didn't have education

[manic expression]

205. Why, exactly, was that?

Many others were denied a proper education, and they had one, ask yourself why that is. It was precisely because they were in an advantageous position, and that position was used to perpetuate the inequity and injustice; that is, without any doubt, unfair and wrong. Their continuation of the dire lack of parity was wrong, and it was only right to ameliorate the situation.

[SPKrazy]

208. So This Has To Do With The OP's Grandparents How?

you seem confident that they were given advantage while others weren't

how do you know this?

(that they were given advantage and didn't just work hard, and smart, to obtain the advantage)

[manic expression]

213. The OP's grandparents

were put in a position of advantage and luxury because of an unfair and unjust system. Others were in dire need and were forced to toil to survive and you have the audacity to talk of their "hard work"? Anyone with a sense of objectivity and truth can tell you that what you speak of can only be described as injustice.

I think you've read one too many Horatio Alger novels. That they had an education and others didn't (which is what you said) is an unfair advantage that they used to perpetuate that inequity for their own greed. Get a clue.

[SPKrazy]

225. Now Wait A Minute

you make several assumptions:

a) that his grandparents had a position of advantage because of an unfair and unjust system. What about the possibility that they worked hard to attain their position? (I know, the sugar cane cutters and all, but maybe they worked smarter instead of harder?)

b) capitalism always will have injustice. In fact, there is probably as much evidence that capitalism causes high blood pressure as there is that salt causes it. In a capitalistic society there is always someone that gets stepped on. That's where a good social support net to lift people up should come in. This isn't the same as a system that puts everyone on the same playing field, it is instead one that would allow them to make it to the same field if they work for it. Their are always people that had advantage because of being born into wealth. The families of the robber barons of our own country continue to suck the wealth from the workers (me, if not you too)
But the solution is not a full blown socialism because that will take away the incentive to succeed. There are some who just don't want to succeed at anything, and that is fine. But don't punish those who strive for higher education and knowledge so that they don't have to cut sugar cane, or dig ditches, or wipe dirty asses in a nursing home. There is nothing wrong with sugar cane cutters, or ditch diggers, or people who take care of people in nursing homes, in fact, society would cease to function without laborers. They should have a decent living wage.

c) despite the fact that you and I don't agree that education is a great equalizer, I'd like to know how society would function if people didn't strive to attain knowledge, and that those who do use more money as an incentive very often.

Peace

[Zynx]

65. You implied that they didn't earn what they had.

It was basically, "Well, those bourgeois bastards now have to earn an honest buck.". I can see how it could be interpreted that way.

[catmother]

74. "bourgeois bastards". where the hell did that come from? i'm

very sympathetic to the plight of the cuban people, and i've been attacked.

[SPKrazy]

171. I Think If You Go Back And Re-Read

you'll see it

if you can't, or don't want to, or if you meant it the way it is

then oh. my. gawd.

[blue2helix]

76. Exactly

That was my take on it. Very insensitive and offensive, not very progressive.

[SPKrazy]

168. I Think He May Have Had The Right To Feel That Way

your post did sound a bit like you were making a statement about being spoiled and rich and then having to come here and work.

I don't think you meant it that way, but I read it that way too.

Your responses indicate to me that a) you didn't mean it that way and can't see how he interpreted it like that; b) you meant it that way and you don't care

I want to believe that you were in the a) position and not saying what he thinks you said.

Please tell me I'm right

[catmother]

186. you're right. i did not mean it the way he interpretated. i've

been trying to say that all along.

[treestar]

88. So you are entitled to total agreement from everyone because

of your grandparents.

They are only one case.

Calm down. You are being really nasty about this. No need to take it personally.

[SPKrazy]

172. WTF?

yeah, that poster was mad

but what is your point?

Castro is okay?

[catmother]

188. i tried telling him that last night.

[lumpy]

144. The majority of Cubans supported

the revolution and a change of government. Why?

[Name removed]

165. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SPKrazy]

173. They Were Oppressed By The Wealthy

same as in any other socialist/communist revolution

since then they've lived under a dictatorship for 50 years

[manic expression]

153. Try thinking instead of reactionary drivel

Anyone who knows the actual situation will tell you that your grandparents were wrong in consolidating wealth at the expense of others. People's needs were ignored while they were forced to work extraordinarily hard and you have the audacity to suggest people were right in keeping wealth to themselves? No, your grandparents never did earn the right to deny others a decent share, your grandparents never did earn the right to live in luxury while others lived like dogs, no one has that right, and anyone with a small sense of justice can tell you that.

[SPKrazy]

174. Wow, Just Wow

I thought I was somewhat socialistic

but you could be Lenin reincarnated or something

blaming his grandparents for having wealth, while others didn't?

[manic expression]

181. Well

I'm radical, you're not so much, no problem.

Anyway, I am condemning the idea that since his grandparents were rich, they somehow "deserved" to live in luxury while others "deserved" to live like dogs. That idea is patently wrong and the very definition of injustice. When people consolidate wealth while others need it direly, that is simply terrible and it should be changed. When people put their own possessions before the good of everyone, that is simply unfair.

Am I expressing myself sufficiently?

[SPKrazy]

202. Yeah, I Got It The First Time

it's just that the other poster never said anyone else deserved to live like dogs or any such things did they?

that's all your interp

and you in the process deny their right to have made money because someone else didn't make money-so it should be redistibruted

that's not radical

that's thievery

[manic expression]

207. Good

So what if s/he didn't say it? His/her assertion was that his/her grandparents "earned" what they had, but if you use that logic, they then "deserve" luxury while others "deserve" abject poverty. That you then hold that people "deserve" what they do and don't have is unavoidable if you adhere to that mindset.

No, I am denying them the "right" to put their greed in front of the needs of others. I am denying them the "right" to selfishly accumulate wealth while many others need it far more. I am denying them the "right" to oppress and neglect the many. That's not thievery, that's justice.

[SPKrazy]

209. By Your Standard

people who do nothing deserve the same as those who work hard

is that what you preach?

that's called theft

[manic expression]

212. Classic argument

by my standard, no one is worth more than someone else. Don't be so naive as to think that the rich work harder than the poor, it is most usually the opposite. Oh, and what of the people who can't find a job? What of the people who find their job sent to India? They "deserve" less? Are you even listening to yourself? Get a clue: your assertion supports oppression, inequity and injustice.

It's called justice because it's justified. Theft is when you deprive someone of what they deserve, theft is when you greedily gain money on people's sweat and blood, theft is when you consolidate wealth when others direly need it, and that is what you support. Try justice.

[SPKrazy]

224. I Won't Argue That There Are Rich That Don't Work Hard

but what you advocate is not fair either.

Why should I have put myself in hock to get a master's degree, if someone who has a high school education can make as much as I can?

Why would a doctor go to medical school to only get paid what a ditch digger pays.

You're arguments are idealistic, but naive.

I can relate to those ideas, I used to have them.

I went into a field that is filled with very far left leaning individuals and thinkers.

Many of my professors advocated a socialistic system.

It sounds good. I want to take care of the poor and sick, and hope that we can see a day when everyone has access to healthcare. The wealthy are always going to have access to more healthcare than the poor I'm sure though.

Solving the problem of poverty is never as simple as just giving people money, or giving people jobs.

Not everyone will work. Not everyone will spend their money on things that help their situation.

I'm reminded of the not so distant past when alcoholics could qualify for disability under social security. The idea was that they had a disease that was disabling and could not work. What happened was a disincentive to ever take action to change their situation as they had a monthly check that got used (often) for buying alcohol and hastening their demise from their illness.

When the rules changed, many alcoholics on disability looked for other problems to try to continue their disability for.

Unfortunately today, their is a subset of people on disability (I don't think it is a tremendously large one though) that draws disability for no reason. The response from the government has been to make it harder to get (see more frustrating for people who truly need disability money)

Okay, that was a tangient, but back to the issue of parity in wages. All should be entitled to a living wage. In our "global economy" we will have to enact laws that will be perceived as "isolationist" in order to equalize the playing field, aside from that, we will have to wait and things will undoubtedly get worse for those without skills (and many who have skills like the outsourced IT people, there will be many more outsourced jobs in the future) until the wages equalize in a global economy. In some places, even China, there is a trend of outsourcing to countries with EVEN CHEAPER LABOR. At some point, a critical mass develops as 3rd world countries are moved up in economic status and wages rise.

The question now is this: Do we wait for an equalizing effect to take place? Or do we enact legislation that will raise wages more, but probably drive many industries out of the country?

Tarrifs might work to dissuade that from happening (second option) but at what cost to us as as workers and consumers.

Bottom line, is we are screwed economically thanks to the fact that we are in a new time when globalization is inevitable (economically) and socialism won't solve the problems that this includes.

Peace

[eridani]

215. I think he's saying that cutting sugar cane for not enough to live on--

--is actually harder work than managing drug stores.

[SPKrazy]

223. Not Everyone Is Able To Manage A Drugstore

and not everyone is able to cut sugar cane

nor is everyone able to be a professor

we all are not created with equal abilities or intellects

those who are able to achieve more are compensated more under capitalism

under communism, those who have power are compensated more, while everyone else is treated equally, but miserably so. One loses the drive to achieve under this system. That's why it is a failed system

It is nice to think of a utopian society where we all are treated well, have a decent wage, and are taken care of.

Taxation can answer this to some extent, but if you treat everyone the same, then those with abilities to do things others can't, lose the motivation to do them. Progress stops. The economy flattens and finally flops.

[eridani]

231. How do you account for people like Jonas Salk, then?

The three greatest medical discoveries of the 20th century were penicillin (Fleming), insulin (Banting and Best) and the polio vaccine (Salk). None made any profit from their discoveries. They were quite happy with regular salaries and the chance to go on to the next thing.

Under capitalism, the price of labor at the bottom is determined at gunpoint.

[IntiRaymi]

245. Agreed, 100%

Wealth begets wealth, which is a recognized mechanism.
This has nothing to do with a divine right to a privileged position in life. So, if you ask me, this kid is complaining that he had to face the real world, and not because of lost wealth.

[blue2helix]

68. For progressives who want a real discussion about Cuba

Some people here feel like it's their duty to personally trash Cubans who don't fit their pre-packaged romantic stereotype of what Cubans are supposed to be. As a matter of fact this is the only issue where it's OK on DU to personally trash you and your family members if you dare to relay a sensitive story about your family or friends who have suffered under Castro's despotism.

Some people don't understand that by far the MAJORITY of Cubans who come over are poor to middle class people who want a life without tyranny just like many other immigrants. Not every single successful person in Cuba was an exploitative slave driver, or that Fidel was supported by the US etc...

Do I have a problem with right-wing Cubans, Yes I do - I think that their single issue obsessiveness is idiotic and not constructive. Do I think that Batista was great, No fucking way. Do I believe that Fidel is this wonderful romantic humanistic champion, Not at all.

The truth is somewhere in the middle and would be an interesting topic of discussion, but it gets obscured by these offensive Pro-Castro knee jerk idiots who don't know shit about Cuba.

[GirlinContempt]

71. I think the argument likewise is obscured

by bourgeois motherfuckers who have no point of reference WHAT SO EVER to what they are talking about, and engage in the nationalistic "MY country is the BEST, YOU aren't like MY country, YOU are WRONG" tactic.

[blue2helix]

73. I have no idea what you are saying????

Are you trying to offend me or are you trying to defend my observation? Your post is unclear. Sorry if I'm being a little slow.

[GirlinContempt]

77. I'm saying

That while some pro-castro posters obscure the argument as you said, so do some who're posting against castro. Namely bourgeois people with an inborn sense of entitlement who can't hit near the heart of the issue and tend to respond with nationalistic rhetoric.

[blue2helix]

79. Who are these people?

And how do you know that they are bourgeois or that they have a sense of entitlement? In all honesty I haven't seen a post like that from anyone on this site. Anyone here who wants to make a point against Castro seems to do so carefully and fully expectant of being flamed at for there efforts.

Maybe you can find some on a freeper site, but I haven't seen any here.

Actually, your (initial) angry knee-jerk reaction, where you make all of these vindictive stereotypical assumptions, proves the point I was trying to make in my comment.

[GirlinContempt]

80. That wasn't an angry post

And it's no more knee jerk than you suggesting that pro-castro supporters personally trash Cubans, or referring to supporters as "Pro-Castro knee jerk idiots who don't know shit about Cuba."

How do you know they're idiots who don't 'know shit' about Cuba?

I've personally seen lots and lots on both sides, what you're saying and what I am saying.

[blue2helix]

83. For evidence read thread 2 and encompassing comments

I am commenting on an actual conversation see thread #2. I do know a little about Cuba through my family and friends. Some of which have been imprisoned, beaten and left to die in jail for political beliefs or some (poor) who risked their lives to make it into Miami and start a new life.

Not that Batista was any better.

What was you observation based on?

[GirlinContempt]

85. But, that isn't what you said.

You said, and I quote, "it gets obscured by these offensive Pro-Castro knee jerk idiots who don't know shit about Cuba."

My observation is based on my travels in latin america, work with organizations centered on latin american policy, and my conversations with people on this board. You framed your statement as a generalized comment on discussing cuba in general, not one poster in one thread one time.

I'm not spewing anger, I'm saying that both sides of this debate have total idiots saying totally stupid things. Why you personally are getting so defensive, I have no idea. Especially when you were saying nearly the exact same thing. I find it strange. I find it especially strange that you're defending your knowledge of Cuba, which I never called into question. I was responding in the same generalized way you were, which is about some people who engage in this conversation.

[blue2helix]

95. Here is what you said - "bourgeois motherfuckers"

"by bourgeois motherfuckers who have no point of reference WHAT SO EVER to what they are talking about, and engage in the nationalistic "MY country is the BEST, YOU aren't like MY country, YOU are WRONG" tactic."

Sounds angry to me.

And what do OTHER Latin American countries have to do with Cuba???? It's like saying I know about Sweden because I talk to people in Poland. What? All Latin Americans are similar in opinion, culture and political leanings?? Talk to a guy in Costa Rica and now your "in" with Cuba?

Anyway, I'm sure you are right that somewhere, sometime, A "bourgeois motherfucker" has taken a stupid stance against Castro.

But can't you just see that this guy on THIS post was just sharing a sensitive family experience about Cuba and was attacked for it?

[GirlinContempt]

154. No, more a response to

your statements with equal measure.

You're very quick to attack me based on the fact that I didn't specifically say Cuba, without knowing if I know Cubans, have been to Cuba, work with Cubans, etc. Also, you're ignoring the fact that much of Latin America faces the same difficulties and history. I don't see how you knowing people makes you an 'expert'. But you didn't claim that, and I don't really care, so I didn't try to frame your statement like that. You should try responding to what I actually say, and if you'd like further clarification, ask for it.

I know that I am right. Just as I know that you are right. Which is what I've been trying to say this whole time. You're awfully defensive toward someone who's attempting to agree with you, at least halfway.

And, frankly, I don't see the guy on this post being attacked. I saw him expecting special treatment based on his anger regarding his family, and responding to a reasonable comment with fury worthy of the most vicious personal attack. Which I don't dig at all.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

87. How long have you been here? Oh - for less than a year

Stick around - you'll see it

[blue2helix]

92. Actually since 2004

And I haven't seen a crazy Anti-Castro post.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

121. Your profile says November 2005

[blue2helix]

124. That was when I registered, not when I started reading DU posts

I've been reading DU posts for much longer. Took a while to register.

Like to read more than write, generally.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

176. okey dokey

[blue2helix]

183. Yeah, you're quite the sleuth

Profound. Was this the limit of your contribution to this topic?

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

197. ha!

Oh man.

[blue2helix]

93. dupe

[Vidar]

110. You were doing well until your final ad hominem sentence.

As dictators go, Castro is far better than most.

[eomer]

112. Who is the better murderor in your opinion...

Jeffrey Dahmer, the Unabomber, or Scott Petersen?

[Vidar]

119. Impressive all-or-nothing thinking.

[eomer]

120. Maybe you prefer a different question then:

Who is the better murderor: Jeffry Dahmer, the Unabomber, Scott Petersen, or Fidel Castro?

Apparently Castro is a better dictator than most. How does he rank as a murderor?

[AngryAmish]

125. I'm a unibomber man myself

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

145. Neither

The anonymous guy who got angry and hit some asshole in the head with a heavy object.

[Yupster]

239. He did promise elections

within 15 months so he can't be too bad.

[eridani]

216. They come here because they can--

--unlike equivalently poor Mexicans or Haitians.

[Judi Lynn]

229. They also come here because they are given a large array of

benefits NOT AVAILABLE TO ANY OTHER GROUP OF IMMIGRANTS. They are literally given U.S. taxpayer-financed Section 8 housing, food stamps, welfare, social security, instant legal status the moment they step on American soil, instant green card, financial assistance for education, and legal protected status after one year.

Other nationalities are rounded up and deported.

A Haitian and a Cuban can arrive at the same time on the same beach and the Haitian will be sent back every time, even if it means in every likelihood he will be killed by US right-wing supported death squads, just as _{George W. Bush} surrounded Haiti with a flotilla of U.S. ships to turn back every goddamned little boat with people on it trying desperately to escape, only to be fed right back into that slaughter house.

[theanarch]

236. the contention that the majority of Cubans who came here

were poor or middle class isn't entirely accurate, and one needs to look at the time-line of events. In the early years of the Revolution--before the embargo and trade/travel restrictions--most refugees were from the upper classes, and the motivation for leaving was as much ideological (anti-socialism/communism) as it was about wealth (e.g. the loss thereof). This exodus of trained professionals represented a tremendous 'brain-drain' that took years, if not decades, to replace. By the time of the Marial boatlift, almost all refugees were of the "economic" type, for whom ideology was fairly irrelevant.

Castro is a problematic figure--yes, his is a one-party dictatorship with little room for individual expression (political, religious, artistic, sexual); but his regime has done more to improve the quality of life for more ordinary citizens than all previous regimes combined, especially in terms of education, health care and nutrition. Of course, Cuban economic planning isn't perfect, but the US--with its 45 year embargo--deserves as much blame as anything the Cuban government has done. Furthermore, compared to the sorts of dictators preferred by the US, Castro's regime has been remarkably (if relatively) free of the kind of heavy-handed/police-state/death-squad/torture-chamber tactics one finds in places like Pinochet's Chile, Somoza's Nicaragua, Rio-Mont's Guatamala, the Shah's Iran or the charnel-house that was El Salvador. And the citizens of those countries enjoyed neither the 'blessings of American-style democracy' nor the social services of Cuba--the worst of both worlds.

[rman]

52. A few living comfortably, at the expense of the many

Castro reclaimed the wealth of the land for its people, threw out US corporations that caused wealth to leave Cuba, threw out the mafia for whom Cuba was safe haven under Batista.

[cgrindley]

62. I'll defend Castro

He led his people in a valiant and successful effort to depose a corrupt government, one that typified not only the worst excesses of capitalism, but which showcase exactly what the capitalist system wants to do to everyone. Castro brought peace, security and universal social programs to the Cuban people. He is a great friend of my homeland. And on the day of his death, I will mourn him.

[eridani]

217. I'd say he's far too much of a micromanager.

However much you like what he wants for Cuba, he has this crazy idea that none of it could possibly happen unless he micromanages everything. Disagree and you go to jail.

[NashVegas]

226. Oh Goodness. The Most Concise Summation of Cuban Politics I've Ever Seen

If you didn't have a star I'd give you one after payday.

[Judi Lynn]

228. Why don't you provide a link to examples of people who were imprisoned

just because they simply "disagree?"

[eridani]

232. Anarchists have not fared well

https://lists.resist.ca/pipermail/news/2003-May/000172.html

Not trying to compare Cuba to hellholes like Honduras and Haiti here, but a wider spectrum of left thought there would make things better, IMO.

[Bridget Burke]

70. Dignity cannot be stolen--but it can be discarded.

Were your grandparents forced from their homes at gunpoint? Or did they leave of their own free will? Please supply details about their departure from Cuba.

Do you equate "a very comfortable life" with dignity? Is working at a less-prestigious job somehow not "dignified"?

Your language does not indicate a great concern for dignity.

[oc2002]

97. Maybe your grandparents deserved what they got from Castro?

A whole lot of people whinning on about Castro make me sick. Certainly Castro ruled with an iron fist, but he also cleaned up after the corruption of the Batista rigime that stifled free speach and human rights, in that he was no better than Castro.

The majority of Cubans are better off than they where before Castro, and because of the embargo that your grandparents keep pushing for on Cuba to punish the people of Cuba have done more to help Castro than hurt him.

[Yupster]

240. You'd sure hope

that the majority of people would be better off 47 years later, wouldn't you?

[GreenTea]

128. Yes and Batista was a fucking pig who allowed his own people to rot

and whore themselves for Americans insatiable greed, lust and racism!!!

Yes, by all means, force a little country like Cuba to have the exact same system as the US...aren't we just so fucking great????

No poor and corruption in this country is there !!!!

[Greyhound]

138. I wonder what your G-Parents employees would say about that?

it may well be that they were among the very few that were fair and just, but if so, they were among a tiny minority of the upper-class.

[manic expression]

149. It's called justice

Your grandparents had no right to live in luxury while others were condemned to poverty. Their "very comfortable life in Cuba" was built on the exploitation of others, it was patently unjust and wrong. When you put your own GREED in front of the welfare of ALL PEOPLE, you are selfish and insane and wrong. When you value your own petty possessions over the needs of others, you are simply deranged.

Go cry on someone else's shoulder, and recognize that what happened in Cuba is justified.

[chunkylover55]

164. Its crap ideas like yours that give Democrats a bad name.

Sure, everyone here believes in the concept of social justice. But the idea that we're not allowed to work hard in our lives, keep what we earn, and live a comfortable life without worrying about the government stealing from us is just plain wrong.

What you are advocating is Communism, pure and simple. And, in case you haven't noticed, that is a failed economic/political model. Communist countries have a way of impoverishing their people and supressing their freedoms.

[manic expression]

167. Crap ideas like equity? Right

"But the idea that we're not allowed to work hard in our lives, keep what we earn, and live a comfortable life without worrying about the government stealing from us is just plain wrong."

No, what is just plain wrong is the idea that people can callously put their greed before other people's needs. The idea that people who have money somehow "deserve it", while people who don't have money just "deserve" poverty is just plain wrong. If your "comfortable life" denies someone else a decent share, respectable living conditions and basic needs, then your "comfortable life" can go to hell. It is patently unjust for someone to greedily consolidate wealth for no reason while many others need it far more.

I find your insinuation that rich people are somehow more worthy than poor people to be simply perposterous, for the poor's blood and sweat goes to producing almost exclusively for the rich. If you think for one second that your petty possessions trump someone's ability to live a decent life, that is wrong. If you think that you have a "right" to wanton gain that is more important than the common good, that is wrong.

You are putting the "I" before the "we", you are putting your own greed before the welfare of all people. THAT is wrong.

Moving on, call it whatever you will, it doesn't change the FACT that it is just and fair and right. What you are advocating is clearly oppression and injustice, and I don't even need to explain how this is completely terrible. However, the FACT is that socialist states have found great successes in many instances. Some of the examples I can give you include: Kerala, Cuba, Venezuela, Chile, El Salvador and more (unfortunately, many attempts were stomped out by imperialism and greed).

[chunkylover55]

177. Tell me then. . . .

According to your philosophy, just how much am I allowed to earn? How much of what I do earn do I get to keep?

Why should I bother going to graduate school, getting an education, and finding a well paying/rewarding job in engineering when ultimately the government is going to keep everything on behalf of the "welfare of the people"?

[manic expression]

180. According

to me, people should be roughly equal in their material worth. That answers your question.

Starvation and greed are not the only reasons people get up in the morning. To say that they are is simply wrong. People work for a variety of reasons, many of them are not selfish in nature. People do get an education and work because they know that they have a place in society, it gives them purpose, it helps people, it is just something they do.

If you think High School teachers do what they do for the money you haven't talked to enough of them; they are educated and hard working and many of them do it largely because they give a sh*t about the kids they are teaching. Teachers will often tell you that they love their jobs, and don't be so naive as to think they are talking about their paycheck.

Oh, why do people volunteer for firefighter companies and EMT service? They have to wake up in the middle of the night, help people and then go to their jobs in the morning. What fat paycheck do they get for all of this?

Why do Cuban doctors bother going into medical school (Cuba has the highest doctor to patient ratio in the world and they send many overseas)? Why do they bother giving Cuba extraordinary rates of infant mortality? Why are Kerala minerals reaching record production levels?

That also answers your question.

[blue2helix]

184. Che was PLAYED by Castro

Used him up and left him to dry in the wind. Castro was by far the more intelligent political manipulator. I'll give the ornery bastard at least that much credit.

[manic expression]

199. How so

look at what Cuba has achieved. There is every reason to think that if Che saw Cuba today, he would approve.

[eridani]

219. Because engineering is fun and empowering

--and scrubbing floors is not.

[eridani]

218. Nobody earns anything all by themselves

Somebody else educated them and provided the infrastructure without which no individual achievement could take place.

[IntiRaymi]

247. It is red herrings like yours that give fish a bad name.

[catmother]

187. i'm back and i'm angry now. what makes your grandparents

so special? the same thing happened to a lot of cubans. are you saying that your grandparents were above the others?

[NashVegas]

227. If You're Going to Use Threats and Draw Lines In the Sand

Prepare to be compared to the fascists who made a guy like Castro a necessity for ordinary Cubans.

While your grandparents were enjoying success, others were enslaved. If your grandparents and others like them had the decency to refuse to stand idle, while their fellow countrymen were treated to miserable conditions, you might this day be sitting in Havana smoking a cohiba.

[Codeine]

3. It's very easy to support a system

from a distance when it represents a romantic ideal; we're insulated from the ugly, day-to-day realities of the system.

[Jim Warren]

122. You're talking about the US right? nt

[Yupster]

241. That's what I've been thinking too

How can any of us in the US have any wealth when there are so many living in such utter poverty.

I have quite a few professors in my family. I didn't realize they deserve to have their lands confiscated and their wealth stripped from them as others do not enjoy similar wealth. That will teach them for voting for Nader.

[skipos]

4. As a Cuban, I can tell you that everyone in my family thinks Castro

blows. There was so much hope in the beginning, but then it went wrong so quickly.

[Cascadian]

25. Like all other despots, Castro had a lust for power.

Many Cubans who fought along side Fidel and his brother Raul only wanted to have a better future. Unfortunately, they were betrayed by the Castro brothers once the fighting ended. It is a very sad story. I hope one day, there will be a free and democratic Cuba. Who knows? Maybe that day won't be far away.


John

[rman]

53. You mean to say there are no elections in Cuba?

I know for a fact there are.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

60. In name only, though.

Campaigning is banned, there is not freedom of speech, and there is only one candidate per seat, and voters get to choose to vote "yes" or "no".

In practice, Cuba remains a repressive dictatorship.

[Mika]

89. Not true

You are completely misrepresenting the Cuban system.

There are multi candidates for most every seat in all 3 parliamentary levels. They do campaign. After an election to any seat (from among multiple candidates) there is a process called a Ratification Election - where 50% +1 of the voters must ratify the elected candidate to his/her seat with a yes or no vote.

I have been in Cuba for an entire election season and observed it.



You can read about it here..

Democracy in Cuba and the 1997-98 Elections
Arnold August
1999
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0968508405/qid=1053879619/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/102-8821757-1670550?v=glance&s=books

[Nederland]

94. Interesting Spin

I noted that you used the phrase "multi-candidate", not "multi-party". Why? Could it be because Cuban elections are a complete and utter farce where 98% of the races offer only Communist choices?

Take your spin elsewhere. Cuba is not a Democracy and support for it has no place in the Democratic party.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/46399.stm

[Mika]

96. Not spin. Just obvservation from someone who has actually seen it.

I know that what I have said is contrary to what so many DU Cuba "experts" who have never set foot on the island have said.

No party offers up a slate of candidates in Cuba. Candidates are selected in fully open nomination sessions. I've attended such sessions and observed them.

Cuba switched to a variant parliamentary system in 1976, and it has been evolving ever since.

Now I know that my experiences in Cuba don't compare to so many of DU Cuba "experts", because I've actually been there many times (before and after 1976) and have observed elections.


--

on edit: I see that you have added a link that mentions the 601 candidates who were proposed for the national assembly, they were "proposed" by an election process. Then came the Ratification process. They were elected "unopposed" as in the elected candidates were ratified in the Ratification Election by 50%+1 of voters in their district.

[Nederland]

98. Question

Has any election in Cuba included a candidate that opposed Castro?

[Mika]

100. Where?

Are you talking about Mr Castro's selection as Head of State, or his running for a seat in the Cuban parliament representing his home district in Santiago de Cuba (district #7)?

(Maybe you didn't know that Mr Castro holds a seat in the parliament representing his home district.)

Mr Castro is elected to HoS from the parliament (the Cuban National Assembly), where any parliamentarian is elegible. So, technically, he runs against 600 other elected reprentatives. In his home district Mr Castro has been opposed by members of the Cuban Christian Democratic Party, who don't do well in any district in Cuba and hold no seats in the National Assembly - although a few do hold seat in regional assemblies.

[Nederland]

101. Anywhere

Any election. Any time. Any political district. Any office.

Anywhere.

It's a simple quesiton, why don't you just answer it?

[Mika]

103. Sorry, I edited my previous post.

By your not defining your question, I suspect that you don't know that much about Cuba's political system.

Why not pick up the book..

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0968508405/qid=1053879619/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/102-8821757-1670550?v=glance&s=books


.. for a detailed description of how Cuba's democratic system started, functions, and is evolving.

[Nederland]

105. I've read that book

...and it's a joke just like Cuban elections. The author never even interviews Cuban dissidents living in Cuba. Like Cuban elections, this book pretends that an opposition doesn't exist.

Regardless, its clear that you really want to avoid the issue of whether or not Cuba has multi-party elections, because you know in fact that it does not. You simply want to hide behind the semantics of what constitutes "election" and "party". The reality is that the Cuban Constitution declares that the Communist Party, and ONLY the Communist Party, can rule Cuba. Sure, on occasion they throw the opposition a bone so they can tell people like you that there is political freedom when in fact there is none, but the reality is clear for anyone who hasn't already bought into the whole charade hook line and sinker like apparently you have.

Tell me, when you went to Cuba to "observe" the elections, where you guided around and your schedule planned out by a member of the Party? :rofl:

[Mika]

106. Nope.

People are free to travel around Cuba as they desire. No one follows travelers around. No one guides those who don't want a travel guide. One can simply rent a car and drive around Cuba if one desires.

Cubans invite tourists to watch the process. No one guides you. Visitors can even watch the ballots being counted in public.

I LOL at your ignorance wrapped in hubris.

_________

Here's a small sampling of political parties in Cuba FYI,

http://www.gksoft.com/govt/en/cu.html

* Partido Comunista de Cuba (PCC) {Communist Party of Cuba}
* Partido Demócrata Cristiano de Cuba (PDC) {Christian Democratic Party of Cuba} - Oswaldo Paya's Catholic party
* Partido Solidaridad Democrática (PSD) {Democratic Solidarity Party}
* Partido Social Revolucionario Democrático Cubano {Cuban Social Revolutionary Democratic Party}
* Coordinadora Social Demócrata de Cuba (CSDC) {Social Democratic Coordination of Cuba}
* Unión Liberal Cubana {Cuban Liberal Union}

[Nederland]

107. Whatever

For the rest of you on this thread who have an open mind, I ask that you read the following Article from the Cuban Constitution:

ARTICLE 5. The Communist Party of Cuba, a follower of Martí’s ideas and of Marxism-Leninism, and the organized vanguard of the Cuban nation, is the highest leading force of society and of the state, which organizes and guides the common effort toward the goals of the construction of socialism and the progress toward a communist society,

Now I ask, why does a society that desires free, fair and multi-party elections need to specify, in its Constitution, that only one specific party is considered the "leading force"? What purpose could this article possibly serve? Why is it necessary?

[manic expression]

150. Read this very slowly

NO PARTY IS ALLOWED TO PARTICIPATE IN ELECTIONS.

Does that make sense or do I need to draw you a picture.

[Nederland]

189. In effect, that is not true

The actual election process works like this:

1) The National Assembly puts together Candidacy Commissions made up of representatives of trade union officials and other representatives of workers, youth, women, students and farmers.
2) The Candidacy Commissions produce slates of candidates for elections that it believes are suitable for office.
3) The people vote on the candidate slates.
4) Winners (candidates must win more than 50% of the vote) form the National Assembly.

Do you see the circular nature of the process? The National Assembly picks the people, that pick the people, that the people get to pick, to make up the...National Assembly. The result is, surprise, surprise, a National Assembly that is 98% Communist.

Anyone who thinks this is democratic needs to have their head examined.

[Mika]

195. Not so.

What you describe just isn't how a "slate" of candidates are selected.

See post #194 for an explanation of the process.

I've been to Cuba during an entire election season and have seen how it works.

[AlphaCentauri]

155. "Open mind" = "Miami mind set" n/t

[Mika]

158. Nowhere does it state that the Communist party is the absolute power.

Nowhere in this Article does it state that the Communist Party has absolute or perpetual power over the nation and the State. In fact, it only states that the Communist Party is a "guiding" force. Actually, the Spanish word "dirigente" (the Cuban constitution is written in Spanish) should be translated as "directing" or "guiding" as opposed to "governing". I'm guessing you weren't aware of the subtle, yet very important, difference. In addition, if you had bothered to continue reading the constitution, you would have come across the following Articles:

Article 69 states that the National Assembly, which represents the sovereign will of the people, is the organism of supreme power of the State.
Article 70 states that the National Assembly is the only organism with constitution and legislative power of the Republic.
Article 71 states that the National Assembly is composed of officials that are elected by free, direct and secret vote of the electors.
Article 72 states that the National Assembly is elected for a term of five years.
Article 73 states that the National Assembly elects from its rank its President, Vicepresident, and Secretary.
Artilce 74 states that the National Assembly elects from its rank the Counsel of State which is composed of a President, a First Vicepresident, five Vicepresidents, a Secretary and 23 memebers. The President of the State Counsel is the Chief of Staff and the Chief of Government. The State Counsel is responsible to the National Assembly and must account for all of its activities.

I'm suprised that you, being one of DU's Cuba "experts", would try to push that canard over on other DUers who aren't such "experts" as you. Seems as though it is you who has bought the US propaganda anti Cuba charade hook line and sinker.

I'm sure that is just why the US government has dictated that Americans can't go to Cuba easily to see the place for themselves. It makes it so much easier to pull the wool over the eyes of the uninformed and inexperienced as you appear to be (unless you are deliberately pushing the US anti Cuba agenda here on DU).

[Nederland]

191. You forgot the bit

...about how the National Assembly decides the candidate slates that the people get to vote on.

A slightly important piece of information, don't you think? How would you feel about US elections if the slate of candidates that you got to vote for was determined by the Senate? Don't you think the result would be a Senate that never changed party hands?

[Mika]

194. That just isn't the process.

Neither the Assembly nor any party nominates/selects candidates.

The candidates are selected at open nomination sessions in the district. Then comes the election between the various candidates nominated at those open sessions.


http://members.allstream.net/~dchris/CubaFAQ002.html

Nomination meetings are open to all members of the public, including foreign visitors. Any resident of the nomination area who is present at these meetings may nominate any other resident of the same constituency. Voting by a show of hands, residents select one nominee who will be on the ballot for their constituency in the upcoming municipal election. There must be at least two candidates nominated from each constituency.

Then, those elected representatives for the assembly become the "slate" of candidates that move on the the Ratification Election. The people in their respective districts vote for candidates, the winners of those elections form the "slate". Then the citizens of that district vote again to ratify the elected candidate for their seat representing the respective district.

This extra step in Cuba's system (the ratification vote) is often confused for a 'one candidate' election, or confused with an 'assembly selected slate'. Deliberately confused by anti Cuba propagandists, IMO.

The Ratification step assures that the majority (50%+1) of citizens in their district approve of the elected candidate with a simple majority of the electorate. If said elected candidate does not get 50%+1 of the total vote in their district in the Ratification Election, then the entire process starts over within 6 weeks in that district.


What you claim would be an important piece of information IF IT WERE TRUE. But, its just not so.

[Nederland]

201. That description does not match my sources

http://www.ipu.org/parline-e/reports/2079_B.htm

Candidacy requirements:
- according to law, up to 50% of the Deputies must be delegates chosen in each municipality. Parliamentary candidates are otherwise proposed by nominating assemblies which comprise representatives of workers, youth, women, students and farmers as well as members of the Committees for the Defence of the Revolution. The final list of candidates, which corresponds to the number of seats to be filled, is drawn up by the National Candidature Commission taking into account criteria such as candidates' merit, patriotism, ethical values and revolutionary history.

[U4ikLefty]

178. ...and YOU went to Cuba when??? n/t

[Zynx]

66. Just like Eastern European countriest had elections too....

I don't think we need to go there.

[eridani]

220. There was a reason why things went wrong

They didn't go wrong in Kerala, because the US was unable to attack a subunit of a big country like India. OK, it helps that Kerala could never have become a one-party state because there are two major Communist parties there. Still, constant US terrorism directed toward Cuba brought out the worst in their government.


http://www.kucinich.us/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=8932

[oc2002]

99. As a Cuban, I disagree that Castro is as evil as you say.

My parents where trying to leave Cuba way before Castro, because another guy there, called BATISTA was a corrupt monster, that murdered, raped, tortured the Cuban people that spoke out against his rampant corruption.

but he was ok, because he was the US puppet in Cuba.

[skipos]

104. Show me where I used the word "evil." I said he blows.

He is a disappointment. Batsista and Castro are both bad, but in different ways.

[lumberjack_jeff]

131. You read DU in Cuba?

Seems like the totalitarian thing is implemented differently than in our big trading partner China.

:shrug:

[BeTheChange]

5. When did Castro become the new Che?

There is too much shit to keep up with.

[catmother]

20. from what i remember it was Che who was behind castro's

moves during the revolution. Che was the smarter one.

[EFerrari]

82. It might have been when Reagan set up all those death squads

all over Latin America. Not sure.

[Codeine]

147. You're *way* behind.

Castro is the new Chavez. Chavez was the new Che. Do try and keep up. ;-)

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

6. For most people, anywhere, the freedoms you mention are ignored.

Including the freedom-loving USA.

Most people never exercise their freedom of speech, press, religion, or assembly in any meaningful way. Nor do they concern themselves with their loss if they ever had them.

To most people the concerns about making a living, staying healthy, and educating their kids are far more important than idealistic notions of freedoms they never exercise.

It is only when a crisis in their living conditions occurs that they begin to value them and use them.

Don't believe it? I give you the support for the "Patriot Act", censorship, the suppression of the press, and "free Speech zones".

As Tip O'Neil observed - "All politics is local".

[catmother]

30. okay talk about freedoms. why are we not allowed to go to

cuba if we're so free? do they think fidel will brainwash us.

it really bugs me. seems like a place i'd like to visit.

[Clarkie1]

7. I doubt anyone here supports Castro.

Of course, I could be wrong. I hope not, though. Anyone who supports Castro is by definition a fool.

[Fountain79]

9. See the "Castro is a coward? polll" n/t

[killbotfactory]

10. So if you don't think he's a coward you support him?

bullshit.

[Fountain79]

11. No...never said that...just merely pointing out that

there are post on that thread that seem to show support for him. Care to try again?

[killbotfactory]

13. He is a complex and controversial figure

and part of a complex and controversial history with baffling amounts of bullshit and propaganda thrown about. You're going to get a wide variety of opinions, however I don't think anyone has or will back the repression of free speech and political organization he has overseen.

[H2O Man]

15. He also has a beard.

You socialists always try to smooth over that one. Deny it all you like, but he has a beard.

[Minstrel Boy]

49. "I like Fidel Castro and his beard"

Rita looked offended
But she got out of the way,
As he came charging down the stairs
Sayin', "What's that I heard you say?"

I said, "I like Fidel Castro,
I think you heard me right,"
And ducked as he swung
At me with all his might.

[H2O Man]

50. Al Gore wore a beard

during the phase of his being brain-washed by environmeanies who want to steal Dick Cheney's hard earned fortune. J Edgar Hooter warned America about these bearded masters of deceit.

[Minstrel Boy]

86. J Edgar Hoover said it best

"The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a beard so monstrous he cannot believe it exists."

[Vidar]

109. Speaking of dictators who last for 50 years

[H2O Man]

118. Sayings such as that

went a long way in keeping this nation safe. He was a great man. Let us hope he had a great attorney, knowing where he went.

[Minstrel Boy]

12. Nevermind me,

I'm Canadian.

[SidDithers]

55. And don't forget, at Trudeau's funeral...

Castro, along with Jimmy Carter, was an honorary pallbearer.

Sid

[cgrindley]

63. That's reason enough to love Castro

He was a great friend to Trudeau.

[Minstrel Boy]

114. And it was enough reason to love Trudeau

More photos here

[cgrindley]

117. He was a great great man

I cannot even now think about Trudeau without getting all misty eyed. He represented the best my country will ever offer to the rest of the world. I miss him so much.

[EstimatedProphet]

132. Yet so many Canadians hated Trudeau in the 80's

[Minstrel Boy]

139. he always provoked extreme feelings

By the time of his death, after the examples of his successors, everyone knew he was something special.

[diamidue]

163. Trudeau

I was lucky enough to be living in Canada when Trudeau was in office. I thought he was wonderful. And I get misty-eyed thinking of him too.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

43. Hear Fucking Hear!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[treestar]

90. Yep. This accusation is like the "supporter of Hezbollah" one

Black and white, either or thinking, and taking it personally.

[diamidue]

162. I doubt anyone here supports Castro.

I do have a certain admiration for the man. So count me as a fool.

[Vinnie From Indy]

8. I am no defender of Castro but...

it is fantasy to believe that Cuba was some Shangri-La of freedom and equality PRIOR to Castro. Batista and a very small group of wealthy people owned most of the country prior to Castro.
Flame away!

[jaysunb]

18. STOP ! Only "certain" truths will be tolerated !

BTW, why is it that I never see any Afro-Cubans trying to get to the US ????
just asking...:shrug:

[catmother]

24. good question. there are many of them too.

[jaysunb]

44. hmmmm about 70% of the population

I'm told....

[RagingInMiami]

46. I don't know where you live

But I know plenty of them who live in Miami

[AngryAmish]

129. Jose Contreras?

I know, he came over for the money but I am messin' with you.

[Warren Stupidity]

27. "a very small group of wealthy people "

as in the traditional latin american spanish elites and of course our own mafia who had invested heavily in Cuba and Batista.

Castro certainly has problems and I am no great fan of marxist leninist totalitarin communism, but as far as communist states go Cuba is a pretty good one.

[Meshuga]

45. Good for castro

Who had a pretty good standard of life.

[AnOhioan]

37. All financed by the US mafia n/t

[LostinVA]

58. "Godfather II" is very accurate with all of that n/t

[LostinVA]

57. Cuba was a frigging slave system for most people

My grandfather, a very conservative man, was in the Navy for many years, and used to go to Cuba alot. He also said how he would see the Cubans marched under armed guard and in shackles into American fruit fields, would watch the poor people scavenge for food, would turn away in shame and disgust because 10 year old girls were selling themselves to American military and busuiness... while around this, Batista and his cronies lived the high life. He, a man who had voted for every conservative ever to hit the ballot, says he would have grabbed a gun and joined Castro if he had been a Cuban. This man, who has railed against Communism all my life, never EVER says anything bad about Castro. Because he says he was there, and he understands.

I don't know about the families of the posters on this board, but the HUGE majority of people in Cuba who had wealth at that time had it because they supported Batista, who was quite the evil Fascist. And, THEY and their kids are the ones who freak out about Castro now. Like Gloria Estefan, Andy Garcia, etc. They don't want a Free Cuba, they want BATISTA'S Cuba. Ugh.

Castro and Cuba are far from perfect, but things are MUCH better under him than under Batista... and some quality of life issues are better than the US.

No flames from me.

[eomer]

59. They're not the only ones who freak out about Cuba.

Most Cubans that I know who came out of Cuba in the early days came from middle class backgrounds and had professional jobs like teaching and accounting.

Many of them took jobs like cleaning crew for a hotel or office when they first arrived but then worked their way back to professional positions over a period of decades. Typically their credentials weren't accepted here so accountants became bookkeepers, doctors became nurses, &c.

Younger people who came later are a different story since they couldn't have been part of the Batista crowd if they weren't born yet.

I know there are people here who were wealthy and connected before they left Cuba but I believe that group is a small minority.

Unfortunately it is true that most Cubans here are die-hard Republican supporters. The reason for this seems to be mostly because they are single-issue voters where the single issue is taking a hard line against Castro. I don't believe many of them are {would-be} wealthy fascists or neocon fundies. Maybe some of them are even redeemable if Cuba ever has a government that is not despotic.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

192. What is true of middle-class Cubans is true of middle-class Latvians

after World War II and middle-class Somalis today, just to name two ethnic groups whose educated people fled their countries.

People with educational credentials in their home countries have had to start out on the bottom in the States. My grandfather, a Latvian who came here in 1908, helped the wave of Latvians who came after World War II. He knew doctors who started out by milking cows on a farm, concert pianists who cleaned hospitals, and clergy who did day labor.

When I tutored the women of an extended Somali refugee family, I found at that the family, despite their then-poor lifestyle (seventeen people in a rather small house), had been wealthier than avereage by the standards of Somalia. The men all spoke English (one of them had been a high school English teacher, and another a computer programmer), and the family had owned cars in Somalia.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

190. Years ago, I knew a couple who spent their honeymoon in Cuba in

the early 1950s. This was not unusual at the time. There's a trip to Cuba in the musical Guys and Dolls, and an episode of I Love Lucy has a flashback that tells how Lucy supposedly met Ricky while traveling in Cuba with a friend.

They said that if you stepped outside the immediate area of the resort hotels, you saw appalling poverty.

I don't think you can compare Cuba with the U.S. You have to compare it with other Caribbean and Latin American nations.

Back when I still subscribed to The Economist, the magazine that thinks "free" trade is the cure for everything, they did a feature issue on Cuba, in which they kept saying things like "It's too bad that an island with such potential riches doesn't open its markets to free trade and join the Western capitalist economic system. It would really prosper."

The next issue, someone wrote in, "You mean it would prosper like those other Caribbean nations that are part of the Western capitalist economic system, such as Haiti and Jamaica?"

I once heard a talk by a Catholic priest who had worked with Salvadoran refugees in Mexico. He said that when he first went down there, he tried to convince Salvadorans not to support the guerillas, because they were "Communists" who would put them under a dictatorship.

One after another, they just laughed in his face. They already DID live in a dictatorship, where up to 200 people per month were being killed by those elusive death squads, which no one ever seemed to be able to catch. (Hmmm. As one commentator said, "If 200 people were being found dead by the side of the road in Poland every month, Reagan would nuke the Soviet Union.")

Anyway, the people explained to him that they had no political freedom anyway, and they also had no schools or health care, and quite often, not enough food or clothing. From that perspective, Cuba looked pretty good.

I'd like to ask the rabid anti-Castro types to think in terms of the rest of the Caribbean basin. Would you rather be the average Cuban, or the average Haitian? Would you rather be the average Honduran, or the average Cuban?

[cgrindley]

64. A Massive Redistribution of Wealth

Needed by most nations.

[Yupster]

242. Why would anyone flame you

for saying Batista was bad?

Isn't that pretty much universally agreed to? But geeze, 47 years later should we still be saying "at least Fidel isn't as bad as Batista."

In 47 years shouldn't there be a third choice?

[Cascadian]

14. My view on Castro is mixed.

The good side of Castro is that he did raise the quality of the education and health system of Cuba. Cuba has the most highest literacy rate in all of Latin America and their universities are free. Also, at least Cubans can go see a doctor without having to get stiffed with high medical bills. To be honest, I wished we had those things here in America. The bad side is his human rights record is horrible. We can all agree that a person ought to be able to speak their mind in a free and just society. Sadly, Cuba isn't that way. It would be nice to see a Cuba that was more Democratic Socialist than Communist Socialist.

John

[Nutmegger]

19. Why do you hate Cuba?

;-)

[Fountain79]

22. Cause I am envious of Castro's beard...

I can grow one but never have I been able to stand it long enough to get it to his level of beardiness. It's not human...he's beard will outlive him.

[DemonFighterLives]

23. What I will say is Castro is only one side of the equation.

Without him, Cuba would have been used by the US.
Watch out for rash moves by dubby and his little bro jebby now. They smell blood in the water.
In my mind, the US could have been more friendly with Cuba for years and perhaps Castro could have loosened his grip. Ane then, maybe I'm dreaming.
:dem:

[EstimatedProphet]

134. You bring up the best argument yet, IMO

The US has this black and white view that all Communist attempts at governing have to be fought tooth and nail, and they say it is because the Communist governments will show no concern for human rights. Then we go and force embargoes on those countries, which usually hurts their human rights.

Something tells me human rights aren't first and foremost in concerns...

If we really want to help the citizens of these countries, we could do so by working with their governments rather than trying to pretend they don't exist.

[DemonFighterLives]

140. Thanks for your input

I thought I would be getting flamed. The US chooses to keep Cuba downtrodden to make Castro squirm.
:dem:

[EstimatedProphet]

142. Yes, and as an example to the rest of Latin America

We likes our bananas cheap.

[creeksneakers2]

28. I hate all dictators n/t

[KyuzoGator]

31. Good summary. nt

[manic expression]

152. What dictatorial powers does Castro have? n/t

[cigsandcoffee]

156. The power to make his brother succeed him as President-for-life

This is what's known as "feudalism."

[manic expression]

159. The power to appoint a successor

is not exlusive to Cuba. In fact, US presidents can appoint a vice-president if the office becomes vacant in the midterm, effectively appointing a successor.

Furthermore, the fact is that in every level of government, Cubans have an ample and strong voice that is well represented. Cuban elections arguably involve the people more than those of the US.

http://members.allstream.net/~dchris/CubaFAQ.html

And also, Castro did face an election, sorry.

http://members.allstream.net/~dchris/CubaFAQ.html

[cigsandcoffee]

160. Alright, you obviously have some romantic notion of the revolution...

...and are all hepped up on how wonderful Che and Castro were, and "stick it to the man," and all that stuff. Lots of young people are.

In my opinion, Che was a murderous scumbag, and Castro is an oppressor who has essentially established a monarchy. You're not going to change my opinion with an apologist's obscure Castro fan site, and I doubt anything I could say would change yours. I'm happy to leave it at that.

[manic expression]

161. Obviously, you are unable to grasp the reality of the situation

I really don't care what your opinion is, because your opinion is patently wrong and insipid. If you knew ANYTHING about Cuba, you'd know that the revolution was something which helped the people of the country. Che and Castro established a future that has shown itself to be a good one for Cuba, and that is something the neo-cons and people like yourself hate.

Oh, so the facts aren't going to change your opinion? I should've known. It seems that you're happy with your blind ignorance.

[chunkylover55]

166. You failed to mention the very obvious and important fact that,

the president appoints a vice president. The two of them must be elected by the people. If the president dies, the vice president succeeds him ONLY FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE PRESIDENT'S TERM.

Castro is appointing his brother as succsessor FOR LIFE. The people have no choice and are never given the chance to elect their President.

And don't post links to some BS propoganda site for Castro. Any idiot can put up their own site advocating whatever ridiculous political position they favor. . . that doesn't give it any legitimacy or accuracy.

[manic expression]

170. Doesn't change that it is a similar measure

"The two of them must be elected by the people."

That's not true at all. They are elected by the electoral college.

"If the president dies, the vice president succeeds him ONLY FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE PRESIDENT'S TERM."

If you looked at my point, that is meaningless. The point was that American presidents can appoint successors, which is very similar to what has happened in Cuba.

"Castro is appointing his brother as succsessor FOR LIFE. The people have no choice and are never given the chance to elect their President."

In such a system, it is a given that the people would not elect their President. Why, you ask? Because in this sort of system, the head of state is elected by the National Assembly, not directly by the people. This system, in which the people do not directly elect their head of state, is used by many countries, Canada and the UK are two examples (the Prime Minister is elected by the Parlaiment).

Oh, and Castro was elected through an acceptable process.

"And don't post links to some BS propoganda site for Castro. Any idiot can put up their own site advocating whatever ridiculous political position they favor. . . that doesn't give it any legitimacy or accuracy."

Not every idiot can put up their own site in which the things presented are supported by the Cuban Constitution. That does give it accuracy, because it is accurate to Cuba's system of government.

[dflprincess]

34. We forget that Batista (sp) was no prize either

there wasn't any free speech then and a good many people fled Cuba while he was in power. At least Castro has brought education and medical care to the "peasants".

Castro did ask the U.S. for help with the revolution first, but was turned down. No doubt because of the economic interests we had in Cuba at the time - all of which were shining examples of democracy and free enterprise. :sarcasm:

[Bassic]

54. Batista was clearly a paw of Washington, just like

the Somosas in Costa Rica, for example.

[cigsandcoffee]

157. Batista is dead, and no longer the alternative. n/t

[Hardrada]

35. What about Poland?

We don't want to turn Cuba into Poland!

[bowens43]

39. The Cuban people have a long history of ousting oppressors

if they didn't want Castro, he would have been gone long ago.

[RagingInMiami]

47. The Cuban people have a long history of being oppressed

[Yupster]

243. Cuba and Puerto Rico

were the only places still in Spanish hands at the time of the Spanish American War.

I think the opposite of what you said is true.

Cuba is one of the few Latin American nations which did not oust its oppressors.

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

40. You so funny! Thanks for the laugh!

[Crunchy Frog]

41. I neither support nor oppose Castro.

I do think that our country's Cuba policy is absolute insanity, as is the bizzare fixation that we seem to have on Castro. I'm in favor of normalizing relations with Cuba ASAP.

[catmother]

48. me too.

[EstimatedProphet]

136. Agreed

What we've been doing isn't working.

[Blue_Tires]

206. +1

[Yupster]

244. The book I just read "After Fidel"

predicts that Raul will go far in normalizing relations and will be willing to move on key issues to get more normal relations.

[jpkenny]

56. Haven't we already given these things up without anything in return?

[rniel]

61. Can you imagine

Having to deal with a leader that was never fairly elected and then goes on to ruin a country.

Oh wait a minute sounds exactly like our problem in america.

[1932]

67. Cuba does worry about terrorist attacks...from Miami Cubans

In America's Prisoner:: The Memoirs of Manuel Noriega Noriega describes a trip to Cuba during which he was running an errand for the US. He asked Castro to release to the US a terrorist who rode a boat up on the shore at a Cuban fishing village and slaughtered innocent civilians with machine guns. The US wanted him back because he was supported by the US.

Cuba agreed because Panama convinced Cuba that doing that favor for the US would give Panama leverage in the Panama Canal Treaty negotiations (which would be more imnportant for the future of Latin America than trying the terrorist), which turned out to be the case -- at least insofar as it produced a reasonably fair treaty. However, the treaty was undone when Bush invaded Panama because George Schultz's student from his U of Chicago days was removed from the presidency for engaging in Washington Consensus economic policies which were ceding sovereignty to Wall Street.

[Judi Lynn]

221. Thanks for pointing out this info. concerning Manuel Noriega.

I've heard of "exiles" lurking by the shore, in the ocean, and shooting up the place, but never knew this particular event.(Cuba has NEVER been free of these murderous scum from Florida.)

Took a quick look to see if I could see it mentioned in google. This link refers directly to it:

One reason might have been that the U.S. owed Noriega a favor for a mission that he had recently undertaken in Cuba at the request of the CIA. His job had been to persuade Fidel Castro to release the captain of a ship that helped Cuban exiles attack villages on the coast of Cuba. Noriega takes great pride in this success, which he achieved by persuading Castro that such a favor would help Panama in its Canal Treaty negotiations with the U.S.
(snip)

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1316/is_n6_v29/ai_19482857/pg_4

Thank you for your great reading habits. Now you've mentioned another book many of us will feel we'd better read!

[Strawman]

69. I don't "support" Castro, but we've constructively engaged with worse

It just seems like a hypocritical counterproductive, policy that caters to the group that shouts the loudest. If we can trade with China, why not Cuba also? Our policy is a Cold War relic and politicians just don't want to deal with the shitstorm of pissing of anti-Castro Cubans in Miami.

[Bridget Burke]

72. I met some Cuban artists who had freedom of expression....

Their works didn't say "Let's Kill Castro" but often critiqued the bureaucratic system. Back in the 90'2, Lazaro Saavedra came to Houston for a seminar & to show his art; he's mentioned here: www.universes-in-universe.de/car/havanna/opinion/e_mosqu.htm

However, these artists are no longer allowed to visit the USA. OUR government closed the cultural "loopholes" that allowed limited travel in both directions.

The Cuban system is not perfect but our government has supported far worse. Pinochet? The Argentine generals? These and others murdered far more of their countrymen than Castro ever did.

Let the Cuban people determine how to rule their own country. Not Bush & not the Cuban "exiles" who helped him steal Florida in 2000.

[GirlinContempt]

75. You know

I was going to ask if Americans would be willing to give up things like health care, education, food and housing in exchange for the freedom to possibly maybe someday but probably never become millionaires, or even just to have the uh 'freedom' to not pay into it. But then I realized, that question has already been answered. Some people are willing to forgive the deaths of hundreds of thousands so that they can have whatever they happen to want.

Every country can fall under similar scrutiny. Personally, it's not terrorism that would cause me to make that choice. But to the best of my ability I've pondered the idea of having a choice between crushing, possibly deadly poverty and oppression based on class and slave labour-esque conditions, VS limited freedoms but none of the rest. And I think in such a desperate situation I'd pick the food, shelter, health care and reduced 'freedom'.

[eomer]

78. I'm not sure which I would choose if I had to. But it's a false dichotomy

anyway.

The best choice is somewhere in the middle. Forget door #1 and door #3 -- pick door #2.

[GirlinContempt]

81. It's false to say those are the only two choices ever

I agree. Wasn't what I was trying to say. But given those two choices, which if we look at the situation and what it was, and what I think it would be likely to become, those are the choices I see. That's all.

[eomer]

84. Fair enough.

I'm trying to envision another alternative somewhere in between a totalitarian fake communist dictatorship and a fascist fake Christian imperialism.

I hope I am right that there is such a possibility. Lord (if there is one) help us if I am wrong.

[tarkus]

91. It isn't easy being so close to the United States

The United States pursues its own interests vigorously in Latin America, and for a Latin American government to protect the interests of its people (access to food, healthcare, education) against those of the United States (profit for American corporations) is a difficult thing indeed. I think it is better for everyone (except, perhaps, US corporate interests) if the US does not succeed in installing another Pinochet in Cuba, and while I do not support oppression in Cuba or elsewhere I do believe that it may be necessary to minimize the channels available to the United States for regime change.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

102. No need for dictatorship. Not being a US lapdog is enough.

Re: Venezuela, France, Spain (after Aznar got the boot), Brazil (I love this place).

[Swamp Rat]

115. Tudo bem rapaz?

:hi: Como está o governo de Lula agora?

[FooFootheSnoo]

108. I'm not a supporter of Castro

but, I'm pretty neutral. I'm sure life is not as rosy under his rule as he would have us believe, but it's not as bad as the US portrays it either. I think the health care and education standards are commendable. Their human rights record seems pretty dismal.

[catbert836]

111. That's a pretty big assumption to make.

You'll be hard pressed to find any active Castro supporters here, but let me say this: there are plenty of despotic regimes around the world that care nothing for their people. That is usually the rule among oppressive regimes. Many of the oppressive regimes who care nothing for their people are allies of the US, because they are supposedly vital to the WoT. Cuba has committed the cardinal sin of being communist, which is really irrelevant as Marxism is essentially dead as a force f any real strength in this world. Castro's government is the exception to this rule: as you admit, they get good health care and education; both systems better, in my view, than those of the United States and many other free-market countries.

It seems that among Castro's most virulent detractors, a free-market economy is more important than the government taking care of its people.

[citizen snips]

116. I don't like Castro

but the US should keep it's imperialist arm out of Cuba.

[Jim Warren]

123. As Ch. Mao said, Away with all pests nt

[Anarcho-Socialist]

126. I don't support Castro, or his authoritarian system

I hope Cuba doesn't get to suffer "regime change" imposed from without. I hope Cuba will become a democratic country but it will require change from within.

[Jim Warren]

127. democratic country

like which example: iraq, us or uk....... all thriving democracies that they are. LOL

[Anarcho-Socialist]

130. I realise that the term "democracy" means different things to different

people.

An appreciable democracy would involve multi-party free elections, held in an environment of a free press and without interference. The legislature would be a representative and accountable one, and the Head of Government would be accountable to the legislature, and the people.

I admire the Nordic social democracies, they're a good pick from the democratic systems currently in use.

I can't say I'd recommend the US, UK or Iraqi style democracies,

[Jim Warren]

137. Yes then

I agree with all three of your points.
Seems as though the limited sanity is in the northern tier at this time.

As to your first point, I cannot think of anything further from the truth than what we currently enduring here in the us.

[LWolf]

133. Polarized, narrow thinking.

It seems that people have been trained to think of everything in polarized terms: black/white, right/wrong, left/right, them/us, etc..

In reality, things are never that simple. There are always layers and nuances. In reality, I've yet to encounter ANYTHING that comes in such simplistic terms as:

"You are either for or against Castro," or, "I recognize that some postive things exist/ed in Cuba, the U.S., Iraq, etc., so that must mean everything Castro, the U.S. Congress, or Saddam does is good," or "I recognize that some negative things exist/ed in Cuba, the U.S., Iraq, etc., so that must mean everything Castro, the U.S. Congress, or Saddam does is bad."

I don't know about forgiveness. I haven't really thought about condemning, or forgiving, Castro. I'm more concerned with my own political leaders.

Many Democrats and DUers advocate forgiveness for every congressional lapse for any rep that carries a "D" next to the name, because that positive erases any negative. Others do the same in reverse, condemning a rep for even a single error in position. In reality, a true judgement will fall somewhere in between. If we are anxious to hold Castro accountable, and judge him fairly, then whatever he achieved, both positive and negative, have to be included in the judgement. I suggest that before we rush to that judgement, we might want to ponder, discuss, and decide how we hold the elected leaders of our party accountable right here at home, and make sure we use the same ruler for those outside our borders.

[GirlinContempt]

185. Holy crap that was

reasonable :)

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

198. well said

:thumbsup:

[warrens]

141. The hatred of Castro never fails to amuse me

Yeah, he's a dictator. But we're best buds with people a FUCK of a lot worse than he is. The Saudis, just for one. The Pakistanis. Colombia. El Salvador. I could go on and on and on about places that are a fuck of a lot worse than Cuba.

Compared to the guy he replaced, Fidel is a benign presence in Cuba. That thug should have been strung up by his balls. And most of the people in Miami throwing rocks were plutocrats, getting fat off the labor of the poor, and get absolutely NO sympathy from me. Fuck em.

[JackDragna]

143. Castro is a dictator, to be sure.

We, however, have done much to cause the current state Cuba faces, politically speaking. When Castro took power, we basically refused to have much of anything to do with him because he kicked out the wealthy upper crust with whom our government was so cozy. If there's anything the United States cannot stand, it's a leftist government, even if it overthrows a brutal dictatorship. It was only after this Castro went looking to the Soviets for economic and political support. We could have likely made Cuba into a more democratic state over the years, but we've instead kept up our hard-line and used Cuban expatriates in Florida as a source of terrorist muscle in Central America. We really don't want Cuba to be democratic, not when we have those nice Cuban-Americans in Miami who do nice things like smuggle drugs for the CIA and carry out bombings on behalf of the Contras. We'll only settle for a "democratic" Cuba when we can control its political system and economy, as we always try to do with our neighbors to the south. As with many political things, there's more to what's going on than meets the eye.

[Joe Bacon]

148. At least Cubans get education and health care

In Christian America, millions of people get NOTHING!

[NotGivingUp]

175. how about this vibe: what fucking free speech are you talking

about here in this country???? where the f! are you seeing free speech???? It does not exist here. We have no newspapers that will print what we think...we have no news on the tv...we are the FUCKING silent majority.

[Nederland]

193. Simple

Try a little experiment.

Go to Washinton DC and stand on a corner with a sign that says "Fuck Bush" and see what happens.

Then go to Havanna and stand on a corner with a sign that says "Fuck Castro" and see what happens.

I'd be curious...

[Nutmegger]

196. Maybe the DoD will look into it. [nt]

[Bridget Burke]

200. Please--begin the experiment.

Stand on a prominent corner in DC with your "Fuck Bush" sign. Let us know what happens.

If you can't make it to Havana--go to Miami with a "Viva Castro" sign.

[Judi Lynn]

222. Go to the Versailles restaurant in Little Havana and yell "Elián should

be with his dad."

Oh, wait: we saw a good example when a man wearing that basic message on a shirt appeared in Little Havana near to the house where Elián Gonzalez drunken, obnoxious, pointless old great-uncle lived, and the Cuban "exile" loud, ignorant, crude, vicious crowd attacked him, forcing a cop to come to rescue him.

We get a good idea of freedom of speech in Miami from all the bombings of places where Cuban singers were scheduled to perform, or art galleries where their work was displayed, or some Cuban immigrants expressed differing views on "dialogue" with Cuba etc., etc., etc.

We know about freedom of speech from the example set by the Cuban "exiles" when the Miami Herald, under the control of the publisher, David Lawrence, dared to print an article which wasn't totally favorable to them, and Jorge Mas Canosa of the Cuban American National Foundation started raising hell and rented signs on city buses saying "I don't believe the Herald," and the newspaper vending machines ALL OVER TOWN started becoming smeared with human feces. What an elegant people.

This man and his wife and his staff were bombarded with death threats and bombing threats, and he and she had to start using people to start their cars for them every day before they dared to drive them.

Speaking of freedom of speech, Miami Cuban "exile" style, here is a photo of Cuban immigrant and radio personality, Emilio Milián, lying on the ground, his legs taken from him, shattered by yet another car bomb, after stating on his radio program the Cuban "exile" community needed to get its violence under control in Miami.

These scums really love their bombs they can detonate from a hiding place, completely out of sight.

[RadiDem]

179. Viva Fidel! Get well soon, Amigo Mio!

:-)

[McCamy Taylor]

204. Question is fallacious. Terrorism is a tool of fascism, they go together.

Lots of starving people in the world who have no rights at the moment because they live in abject poverty under the thumb of totalitarian governments and victims of economic and social oppression would jump at the chance of living in a communist country like Cuba for a generation or two if it meant that their children would be born and grow up with entitlements such as health care, government sponsored education, and other social services plus jobs that pay a living wage.

Compare the standard of living in Cuba to that in Haitii and then ask which people have more freedom, those living under Castro and those living under Papa Doc and the various governments that have come after him? Who has had a better standard of living?

Eventually, those nurtured under communism will want more, but it is a good stepping stone up fromm poverty.

[killbotfactory]

214. I just watched "My Home in Havana" on LinkTv

One of the main greivences of a man on the beach they interviewed was that he didn't have access to clothes for the Disco.

One of the main greivences of the lady who fled Cuba and returned, and after the visit opposed the Embargo, was that they didn't keep up the old Yacht Club grounds.

[Judi Lynn]

234. I'm so glad you saw that. It's a real eye-opener. isn't it?

It would be great for anyone of any political position to see.

Yeah, I agree: it was almost too much to bear seeing how much they had let the old Yacht Club deteriorate. How much pain can one woman take?

It was very interesting seeing that when she started thinking about the embargo back in the States, re-evaluating it, some of her friends started questioning her about whether she might be becoming a communist. Ah, ha ha ha ha haaaaaa.

Interesting that she decided to start calling people she knew in government to discuss the embargo. Wasn't one of them JEESE HELMS? (It's been so long since I saw it I can't be sure...)

What a bunch of creeps they were. She boasted that the clothes she used to wear were imported from Italy.

Here's a site for the documentary:
http://www.pbs.org/pov/pov2000/ourhouseinhavana/

Here's a site with some reviews of the movie:
http://www.globalinsightmedia.com/pages/reviewsohh.html

I hope to see this again. I'll bet it will be shown again on PBS sometime.






Her house, revisited

[truth2power]

210. Ahem....Cuba under Batista

was a playground for the idle rich and the Mafia. The Cuban people had damn little.

IMO Castro has done a damn good job, considering that the US government has been trying to oust him, assassinate him, invade his country and any other dirty trick they could pull ever since he came to power.

Bush has been telling us for 5 friggin' years that the terists are gonna get us. And on the basis of a FAKE "threat to our national security" he's wiped his ass on our Constitution and made himself a dictator in all but name.

For 50+ years, Castro has had a bona fide threat to his government and his people.
It's reasonable to ask how he would have governed if the US hadn't been meddling where they had no business all these years. And IMO, a significant number of those whining about Castro are descendents of the idle rich who are pissed because he took their stuff.

Oh, and BTW...how come Americans aren't allowed to travel to Cuba? If it's such a fucking cesspool, how come we can't go and see for ourselves? Jesus Bush wouldn't lie to us about that would he? Would he?... Shit!

[catmother]

211. i've been asking that question for years. why can't we go to

cuba? it looks like a beautiful place with nice people. i'd feel very safe there too.

[SammyWinstonJack]

230. More and more since the bush mis Administration, I am not a friend

of capitalism, especially "Bush style". Free health care and free education seems like a good thing to me, but then I will never be on MTV "Cribs" Those greedy bastards don't need a tax cut, much less five in a row! Viva Castro! And I never had an opinion on him or his regime until we got our own oppressive dictator!

[ausus]

233. Fidel Castro: Worlds biggest PIMP

That's right. So many educated, not hard-bitten, but desperate women selling themselves to tourists. Teachers, doctors, engineers even. Educated women, but they were just tired of being broke for themselves, for their families.

Castro, in fact, was bragging about it a few years ago, trying to entice those Euro, Canadio (Trash) tourists (Sex toursits) over to Cuba to gin up some hard currency that the great socialist experiment can't generate otherwise. He remarked about how slim the Cuban woman were compared to oafish North Americanas. Well you would be slim if you were constantly hungry too.

Amongst other things, that is Castro's legacy. 50 years ago he threw the American mafia out (How much of a presence was there anyway? Isn't it largely myth, ex-post justification for his own terroristic grip? From my experience Latin society doesn't give much ground to mafia criminal enterprises.) only to take over their rackets in prostitution, protection and shakedown. That's your man, all you who support this bastard.

Some of you talk as if, at best, the Cuban people are children. As if they are not capable of deciding their own affairs, electing their own leaders, setting their own course. Well, Castro believes that (famously, he said to Richard Nixon, of all people, that Cubans don't have the head for liberal democracy), and so do too many of you.

Supporting Castro. Where's your shame.

[Judi Lynn]

235. Do you have links to sources for your "how slim the Cuban women were"

quote, or your "don't have the head for liberal democracy" quote, by the by? It would be tremendous to see they really exist, and educational.

It might cause some people to see Fidel Castro in a whole new light!

Just post those links when you get them.

[GirlinContempt]

248. I *love* stuff like this.

Too funny.

[Codeblue]

238. What will happen when Castro's government falls/fails?

The U.S. has laready prepared troops to go there when just such an event occurs. Here's my take on what will happen to that little country.

The Cuban exiles in Miami will return to their "homeland" and begin demanding all sorts of things they have no right to have. The new U.S. military presence in the country will use one of these exiles as a puppet who they will prop up to the Head of State position in Cuba.

Once this puppet is in place, the shit will really hit the fan. Promptly, anything that looks vaguely socialist in nature will be repealed. Free health care? Gone. Free education? Gone. Meanwhile, the former Miami exiles will regain their high status positions in the government and become filthy fucking rich while they use the lower class Cubans or Castro supporting Cubans to work their shit ass jobs at a wage of $1 dollar a day.

After the takeover, Cubans will have the freedom to stand on street corners and whore themselves out to American tourists and rich Cubans because they're too poor to pay for anything without becoming prostitutes. They'll also have the freedom to print in their newspapers and speak their minds about how bad the new government is without their voices really mattering because the new government is just a dictatorship posing as a democracy. Nothing will ever change no matter much the freedom the Cubans have to bitch about their new Capitalist government.

[Yupster]

249. Here's a different take

The transition from brother to brother will go smoothly as Raul is supported by the army. The top generals and colonels have been put in charge of running resorts and hotels, and therefore must protect the regime to keep their newfound hard currency coming in.

The power struggle will come after Raul dies as there is no # 3 guy. That's when the generals will fight it out if they can't work out a shared emperor arrangement. It will be kind of like the Roman Empire except those shared Emperor situations always ended in Civil Wars.

[Codeblue]

251. Well if that's the case

and Raul manages not to die sometime shortly after he takes power, I'm sure he'll get a #3 man quickly. Whether or not this new #3 man is supported by the army or not is the question but that means there is a possibility of Cuba remaining a Communist country for a very long time.

The other question is, will the new U.S. allow that to happen?

[Swamp Rat]

246. What do you mean "give up things like free speech and expression?"

Try wearing a anti-Bush shirt on an airplane.

Try protesting against the Iraq war in front of the Lincoln memorial.

Try wearing a t-shirt that says "peace" in a veterans hospital.

Try carrying a sign that says "Stop the War in Iraq" to a NFL football game.

[jerry611]

250. You can do all that....

Free speech is a two-way street. You have every right to say what you want. And people have every right to counter what you say.

In Cuba or other 3rd world countries... you bash the government and you go to jail for a long time. And that's the end of it.

[evox]

252. Technically ...

3rd world countries were planned to work that way. If people bash their governments, people take over their governments, people oppose the U.S.

Hint: Think, Iran after their revolution.

[Judi Lynn]

253. Regarding that area in front of the Lincoln Memorial, you can't protest

there as it's reserved for the Lords of the Dance, the _pResident and Ricky Martin.



Shaking what his mama gave him. :eyes:

[Swamp Rat]

255. Holy shiiiii.......... LOLOLOL!!!!!!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Generic Other]

254. My question is why do governments have to force the rich

to agree to provide every member of society free medical care and education?