Originally posted by sunybay@Feb 21 2008, 01:10 PM
Thank you Useful,
"most fierce blockade"
boring affair
talk us about the petrol gifted by Chavez or the support of the USSR........
Castro has doen what comunism does in everyplace
kill people
lack of liberty
and ruin the economy
one thing he has achieved is the iguality between black and white, all poor.
I was actually struck by what the Sun wrote about Castro yesterday, and to no small extent it probably sums up the grudging admiration that even the right wing has developed for Cuba and the model it's sought to introduce into the world. As I mentioned previously, Cuba doesn't really fit into any of the traditional 'isms' despite George Bush's somewhat puzzling inclusion of them on his so called 'axis of evil'. One suspects this was done purely to appease a not too uninfluential voting block mind you in the politically key state of Florida, which of course his brother just happens to be Governor of. Anyway, the Sun summarised their review of Castro;
"Castro transformed Cuba socially but struggled when its economy collapsed, hit by a US trade embargo. But he leaves Cuba with universal free health care and education".
I thought this was a quite staggeringly sympathetic synopsis from a source which you just wouldn't expect it from, and would have been inconceivable some 20 years ago.
As regards the rest of what you say Suny? if you think mention of the blockade is boring, then I'm inclined to suggest your reading of the situation is frankly too simplistic to even merit a reply, but that wouldn't be in the spirit of things would it.
So what if Hugo Chavez sells Cuba discounted oil, it hardly makes up for all the items they can't get hold off. In any event it's his choice, and last time I knew Cuba hadn't gone round invading countries to seize their reserves to try and make good their deficit, unlike others that come to mind. Far from exporting terrorism as Bush would have you believe, Cuba hasn't really done much internationally now for years. The last major campaign they leant support to that I can think of was in South Africa, where they were heavily involved in supporting the UmkhontoWe Sizwe in helping inflict the first defeats on the Apartheid military which was no insignificant achievement. The 2oth century gave us many penicious regimes, apartheid South Africa would be right up amongst them. I'm not sure that in the name moral virute Cuba doesn't come out of this with credit myself. I note also that whilst Cubans were helping fight battles and dying in the name of democracy, Reagan and Thatcher openly supported Botha, which only 20 years later finally led to an apology from David Cameron regarding his parties error in this period (which prompted Bernard Ingam to say "I sometimes wonder if Cameron is a conservative at all")
I'm sure you'll also find incidentally that the USSR doesn't exist any more and hasn't done for a long time now. Many people predicted Cuba's collapse shortly after (I'm sure you'd have been one?) but alas they're still there. Countries choose who they decide to sell what to, and on what terms they decide to do it. You'll find that the United States for instance has propped up a whole host of regimes infinately more abhorent than what they'll have you believe Cuba is, but because they're essentially Right wing dictatorships it is politically acceptable to them, and so they'll do it. Hypocracy is lovely thing, American foreign policy has bags of it.
As regards the body count. Put it in a historical context and I'm sure you'll find more people have died as a result of capitalist inequalities in health and food provision and through imperialist wars than any communist regime has ever got through.
Consider these, in 1958 Cuban life expectancy averaged just 57 years under the gloriously corrupt and US backed Batista regime. Under Castro and communism this had risen 74 by the early 90's. Infant mortality per thousand births was 60 in 1958, under Castro it's fallen to 13.3. In 1958 there was one doctor for every 5000 Cubans. Today it is less than one for every 400. The number of hospital beds has nearly trebled from 25,000 in 1958 to 65,000. Hardly the activity of the mass murderer you'd have us believe?
The alleged lack of liberty is another myth of sorts. Unlike some of the Stalinist states dissention and questioning is allowed in Cuba, and in certain formats encouraged. The only people however who the dissidents can find who'll give them the oxygen of a hearing tend to be foreign news agencies. Even the hystrical free cuban campaigns in Florida are increasingly sounding desperate with some of the logic and figures they invoke. Cuba acknowledges 55 detainees (these are people who are trying to over throw the state lets not forget) we imprison these type of people too, it's just that we call them different names, such as terrorist, as this is much more right wing politically correct. Ironic really, that America holds more prisoners in Cuba with aspirations to over throw America, than Cuba does of people with aspirations to over throw Castro :laughing:
America has long tried to pedal stories about mass detentions and lack of freedom. You might like to cast your mind back to April 1980 and the Mariel boatlift?. In response to America, Castro allowed 125,000 to leave, (try and put this in the context of the cold war, and what happened to people seeking to leave East Berlin at this time). Again, I think you'll find it very difficult to sustain the argument that this is some kind of repressive regime trying to surpress its people in sufference and human bondage. Castro simply said that if anyone didn't want to be a part of the revolution they were free to leave, and that he'd got an agreement that they could all go to America where they'd be well looked after and catered for, (this included prisoners incidentally) who the Americans thought were held for political believes. 125,000 out of a population of 10.3 million left fort he States, this is about 1.2%. I'd be very interested to see just what percentage of the population would leave the UK if made a similar offer?
Anyway, I thought I'd take the liberty of telling you the full story as Ronald O Reagan ended up with egg all over his face. The prisoners duly landed in America where they were greeted warmly, told that they were free now, and to denounce Castro and laud America etc This they duly did as America paraded them around. Unfortunately though, America had completely miscalculated just why they were imprisoned in the first place, and they duly set about starting a major crime wave all over Florida. It ended up with the Americans complaining to Cuba that they'd been sent a whole load of "undesirables" which prompted Castro to respond by asking them why they thought he'd locked them up in the first place!!! :laughing: Eventually in December 1984 (after the Americans had similarly imprisoned them for criminal activities) Cuba (rather honourably I'd suggest given that they didn't have to) agreed to have 2,700 repatriated. Strangely enough, the United States hasn't made that offer again to empty all Cuban prisons of its political dissidents. The simple fact, is there is hardly anyone who could be described thus, that is held there. Even radio Marti (renowned for its hysterical propoganda and exaggeration) only estimates about 300 and their track record suggests they're likely to be wrong by a factor of about 5 or 6.
I would mention the ruined economy, but that would have to involve talk of the the boring blockade, and I realise that this is tedious for you, as well as perhaps getting uncomfortably in the way of the notion that the global Champion of free trade and beacon for economic liberty has actually been repsonsible for prosecuting the most sustained and comprehensive anti competitive practice against something no more defenceless than a Carribean island for years. I'd be very interested to see what the UK economy looked like, and how our standard of living would fare if we were subjected to American led, western sanctions for nearly 50 years.?
The idea that Cubans have been driven into abject poverty by Castro does make the mistake of assuming they were rich in the first place. They had a rich elite, largely those who ran the casino's and brothels when decadent Americans used Havana as their own personal playground whilst the locals made up the prostitutes for them. Before that of course it was the Spanish who raped the country.
All of which brings us nicely back to what the Sun said.
I'm increasingly detecting that there is a growing admiration for what Cuba's achieved largely because it isn't the archetypal Stalinist state. Somewhere along the line one also detects that America is actually quite fearful of Cuba. Why else have they spent literally billions of dollars speculating against them, often involving some fairly extravagant ventures such as the genetic modification of a sugar cane eating beetle, and even contemplated shooting down one of their own jets carrying school children on vacation in order to blame the Cubans (its called operation Northwood if you want to google it). My God the Americans have even sunk ships in the Thames estuary because they had British Leyland trucks on them bound for Cuba!!! (MV Magdeburg 1964). Cuba by contrast has kept a dignity and just tried to get on with things. I think there's amnay lessons that down trodden countries could learn from Cuba, and it must be this that so frightens the Americans.
America could also learn the odd thing too, in any event, Cuban literacy rates are higher than those in both the US and UK, and almost certyainly Spain for that matter too
