Mass Protests in Cuba

[Velasco]

I think there's no incompatibility in supporting the right of peaceful demonstration in Cuba, while opposing the economic strangling of the country implemented by Trump and advocated by reactionaries in Miami. Repression of protests is always a bad idea, either in Cuba or in Colombia. Freedom is not only a matter of holding fair elections, a key element of democratic regimes. Consider the excercise of freedom and the individual fulfilment advocated by liberalism are not possible in contexts of gross inequality, which is the usual on Latin America. I'm not justifying the Cuban regime in saying this

[Velasco]

"The literacy rate is good" is the "They made the trains run on time" of the left.

It will be always preferable literacy to illiteracy. On the other hand, people endorsing racist and authoritarian regimes elsewhere is not entitled to give moral lessons

[Velasco]

[
Cuba indeed has a very high literacy rate, and that is great - but so do many other countries (...)

You (well, maybe not you specifically) might well say that my criticism is just shallow consumerism and communist countries balanced this out by being more advanced in other areas. They did indeed have unprecedented levels of equality - in the sense that it didn't matter if you were a factory worker or an accountant, a tractor driver or a manager, you could always be sure that almost every Western European was better off than you. But yes, there was equality.

I think your criticism of communist regimes is legitimate and agree almost in everything with you. No doubt the Cuban regime is as failed as the communist regimes of Eastern Europe. However, I'd like to point out that Cuba is in Latin America. The literacy rate and the levels of well-being in that island must be compared to those of Haití, Perú or Guatemala. Living standards in Cuba are far from being extraordinary, but still it's possible that many Latin Americans living in extreme poverty could envy an average and impoverished Cuban worker. I don't pretend to be an apologist of failed undemocratic regimes, but rather say there's no freedom without acceptable levels of social justice. Maybe some developed countries in Western Europe meet the standards, but that's not the case for Latin America. We shouldn't be so surprised when someone like Pedro Castillo emerges from out of nowhere and wins a presidential election in Perú

[Velasco]

Cuba was one of the richest countries in Latin America before Castro. It's not like they went from desperate poverty to wealth, they went from one of the top countries in the area in terms of living standards in the 50s (albeit with a repressive dictator and corruption) to one that's about average, and that's if you believe their massaged numbers. For comparison, the Dominican Republic in 1950 was only slightly richer than Haiti and today is considerably wealthier than Cuba even by their own numbers.

Before Castro Cuba was virtually a colony or a protectorate that exported sugar cane to the US, as well as a resort for some mafia bosses (see The Godfather, Part Two). No doubt Cuban elites and the friends of Batista thrived and profited from that trade, but not the Cuban people. If the average Cuban under Batista was so prosperous and happy, the success of the eevolutionary movement would have been more difficult (Castro was initially a nationalist, the conversion to communism came later). On the other hand, it's undeniable that US blockade has greatly contributed to impoverish Cuba, besides other factors like mismanagement or the demise of the USSR. I hope that you are not seriously vindicating that era, or mean that Cuba should become again a colony or a casino

Cuba must be a poor country in terms of GDP (it does not appear in the list, due to the lack of economic data) and the living standatds are low. But my point is that most of Latin America is afflicted by gross inequality, so the Cuban model (that I don't support) has appeal to some impoverished Latin Americans. For instance, Maradona was a great admirer of the Cuban Revolution.  Maradona became a millionaire due to his immense talent to play football, but his origins are in a poor slum of Greater Buenos Aires (a breeding ground for the loathed peronist populism)

Finally the sharp differences between Haiti and the Dominican Republic are a separate issue. The reasons to explain why Haití is so poor, while the Dominican Republuc is relatively prosperous, are related to deforestation (there exists a correlation between that and poverty levels) and the different colonial models implemented by the French and the Spanish.  The exploitation of natural resources in Haiti was intensive, in order to produce sugar cane for export. The French colony was once the richest in the Americas, a wealth built on the backs of African slaves brutally mistreated. After independence, Haiti was forced to pay a huge "compensation" to France, in order to avoid international ostracism. Those payments burdened the econony, while the process of deforestation continued and aggravated in the XX century. The Spanish Empire had more interest in the silver and gold mines located elsewhere in Mexico or Peru. The exploitation model in the Spanish side of Hispaniola was far less intensive and currently the Dominican Rrpublic is vegetated, while Haiti is a barren wasteland (the contrast is visible in satellite images) and is the poorest nation in the continent.

[Velasco]

Before Castro Cuba was virtually a colony or a protectorate that exported sugar cane to the US, as well as a resort for some mafia bosses (see The Godfather, Part Two). No doubt Cuban elites and the friends of Batista thrived and profited from that trade, but not the Cuban people. If the average Cuban under Batista was so prosperous and happy, the success of the eevolutionary movement would have been more difficult (Castro was initially a nationalist, the conversion to communism came later). On the other hand, it's undeniable that US blockade has greatly contributed to impoverish Cuba, besides other factors like mismanagement or the demise of the USSR. I hope that you are not seriously vindicating that era, or mean that Cuba should become again a colony or a casino

Cuba must be a poor country in terms of GDP (it does not appear in the list, due to the lack of economic data) and the living standatds are low. But my point is that most of Latin America is afflicted by gross inequality, so the Cuban model (that I don't support) has appeal to some impoverished Latin Americans. For instance, Maradona was a great admirer of the Cuban Revolution.  Maradona became a millionaire due to his immense talent to play football, but his origins are in a poor slum of Greater Buenos Aires (a breeding ground for the loathed peronist populism)

Cuba was a corrupt, autocratic country under the thumb of a foreign empire while Batista reigned and it still is right up to this day. The embargo (there hasn't been a blockade since the 60's and the difference is enormous) certainly hurt the Cuban economy but the Soviet Union compensated by giving Cuba over a billion dollars (not inflation adjusted) every year into the 1980s, a bigger subsidy than the entire Marshall Plan. When that money dried up they went into a full on decline until Chavez briefly took the Soviet Union's place, but as soon as the Venezuelan oil money stopped so did growth in Cuba.

I can understand why a poor person in GBA, the Cuzco highlands or Nicaragua might consider Cuban style Communism to be preferable to being ruled by an American backed warlord in 1960. I can even kind of see the case that could be made in the 80s in many countries. But in 2021 there are many examples of poor countries that reduced poverty dramatically and they aren't the socialistic ones. Even the absolute "best" examples of socialism like Cuba (until this week) are frozen in time. Meanwhile Venezuela went from one of the safest and most prosperous countries in Latin America to being more dangerous than active warzones like Mali or the C.A.R.

It's also worth noting that in Cuba (can't say for Venezuela) if you grow your own food without authorization from the state or even if you catch some fish it can be seized and you could be tossed in jail. That's not something that can be blamed on the Americans. There might be poverty in Latin America but you generally don't have to worry about getting sent to a concentration camp for trying to feed your own family from the land around your own house.

The USSR collapsed 30 years ago and Venezuela was never able to replace it, while the US embargo continued despite the shy attempts of normalization during the Obama's presidency. I didn't say the US administrations are solely responsible for the economic situation in Cuba, but they bear a good part of it and their attitude must change. The point is, you can't establish a comparison between the economic situation in Cuba under Batista and nowadays ignoring the reality of the embargo. That's simply deceitful. Consider the geographic situation of Cuba and tell me if it's possible to have prosperity with the hostility of your powerful neighbor.  I'm not even trying to defend the Cuban regime, which survived for decades subsidized by the USSR and styled itself a standard bearer of anti-imperialism worldwide. My opinion on this question is similar to that tweet posted by AOC: demand openness to the Cuban government and put an end to embargoes and sanctions damaging the Cuban people.

As far as I know, Cuba is the only communist regime in the Americas. Even Maduro's Venezuela is a capitalist country, despite all the socialist rhetoric. On the other hand, Bolivia is a good example of a country that managed to reduce poverty during the last two decades. The governments of Evo Morales and the Movement Towards Socialism (MAS) had bright and dark spots, but I'd say the balance is positive in what concerns improving living standards. Bolivia is still a country with a market economy,  ruled by a leftwing government.

I think that Cubans should be permitted to grow their own food, but I didn't know Cuba had still concentration camps. Anyway ir's undeniable there is repression: humanitarian organizations have found disturbing evidence thar Cuba abuses labor rights in its prisons. There were camps in the 1960s, disguised as "military units to aid production".  Sadly I have to say there are historical precedents: concentration camps were invented in Cuba by general Weyler, who was in the island during the last years of the Spanish rule.

Biden doesn’t have the votes in Congress to repeal the embargo even if he wanted to. It also can’t be legally repeal before Cuba has paid compensation for or returned nationalised American property

What a beautiful example of colonialist mentality

[Velasco]

The USSR collapsed 30 years ago and Venezuela was never able to replace it, while the US embargo continued despite the shy attempts of normalization during the Obama's presidency. I didn't say the US administrations are solely responsible for the economic situation in Cuba, but they bear a good part of it and their attitude must change. The point is, you can't establish a comparison between the economic situation in Cuba under Batista and nowadays ignoring the reality of the embargo. That's simply deceitful. Consider the geographic situation of Cuba and tell me if it's possible to have prosperity with the hostility of your powerful neighbor.  I'm not even trying to defend the Cuban regime, which survived for decades subsidized by the USSR and styled itself a standard bearer of anti-imperialism worldwide. My opinion on this question is similar to that tweet posted by AOC: demand openness to the Cuban government and put an end to embargoes and sanctions damaging the Cuban people.

Yes. Have you heard of Georgia? Or Taiwan?

If anything the biggest impact of the embargo is to give an excuse for the failure of socialism in Cuba. Much like how the US Air Force is Al Qaeda's best recruiter, the CIA and the State Department are unmatched in creating socialists where previously few to none existed. It would be great if the embargo were ended but that wouldn't solve any of the fundamental issues that led to the protests.

I think that Cubans should be permitted to grow their own food, but I didn't know Cuba had still concentration camps. Anyway ir's undeniable there is repression: humanitarian organizations have found disturbing evidence thar Cuba abuses labor rights in its prisons. There were camps in the 1960s, disguised as "military units to aid production".  Sadly I have to say there are historical precedents: concentration camps were invented in Cuba by general Weyler, who was in the island during the last years of the Spanish rule.

I guess you could call sending people to the supermax for handing out pro-capitalist leaflets repressive.

The Cuban Communist government is absolutely murderous and I hope they're removed as soon as possible. Without American interference.

Let us get a couple of things clear

a) I don't support the Cuban regime

b) I oppose imperialism by default and that includes China, Russia and the USA. Maybe that's the reason why I'm able to understand the anti-imperialist appeal of the Cuban regime. Like it or not, many people saw Cuba as an example of resistance against the world's largest suoerpower

Said this, removing the Cuban government "without American* interference" sounds like an empty phrase, becausr that's an impossibility.  Actually I think a change in Cuba will require inevitably the US intervention. The point is that the US can use its immense power both for the good and for the bad. So far, the US administrations have resorted ro blockade, embargo, sabotage and failed attempts of invasion or assasination. Obama tried another approach to the Cuban question,  but then came Donald Trump and reversed the timid advances made in theprevious presidency. A pesceful transition to democracy would be a desirable outcome and the US could use its influence in a positive way

* Cubans are Americans, too (and Peruvians, Argentinians, etc)

America also forced Romania among others of the old Eastern Bloc o pay compensation for U.S. property nationalised by the communists after the Iron Curtain finallly fell and they were white.

It is NOT as simple as EVIL WHITEY AND POOR BROWNEY and never has been.

You have two modes: Palestinians Band and Brown people bad. If you aren't going to say anything worthwhile please refrain from posting

This is Sunrise’s s•••posting account, so he will keep on going.

Colonialist mentality, advocacy of abhorrent apartheid states and double standards are relatively common here

[Velasco]

Good article from a podcaster I listen to:

https://thinkabouthistory.medium.com/thoughts-on-the-cuban-protests-c79051dd90a4

Kinda balanced and insightful, thanks for sharing. This quote about Cuban migrants in Florida and the failure of the embargo made me think a liitle

What is a matter of fact is that the Cuban embargo has failed. The Helms-Burton sanctions from the 90s have failed. It is an objective fact that it has not fulfilled its goal, and it has only exacerbated misery and provided the Cuban government an excuse. The only reason the embargo is still on the books is because of a series of coincidences within the American electoral process. It happens we have an electoral college, it happens Florida became a swing state after the Cold War, and it happens that recent national elections have been decided by narrow margins. If Cubans had decided to settle in California, like the South Vietnamese did after their loss, this would be a dead issue. Same if they had settled in a deeply red state. But they came to Florida, and they have plenty of reasons to hate the island.
Cubans in Florida are mainly economic migrants. But it’s harder to find a government that treats it’s foreign population (you cannot renounce Cuban citizenship) with more disrespect than Cuba- where they are called “gusanos” (worms) and traitors. The Cuban government functions with the knowledge that emigres send money back to their friends and family. From their so-called treasonous population, the regime extracts everything it can. Remittances in 2012 brought in more money than the export of sugar, nickel, medications and the tourism sector combined. The regime’s hypocrisy is why you see Cuban-Americans support the embargo despite it being a complete failure. It’s also why right now, as Cuba is on the brink of a humanitarian crisis, Cubans abroad want to keep the American boot firmly on the island’s throat. Because it’s personal to them,political second, and it’s always a potent cocktail when you can find a political home for a justified hatred.
This is why there is no reasoning with the Cuban-American community, because it is a politics of grievance, insult, and revenge. It’s an enclave full of inconsistencies of belief. The belief that the Cuban government should fall by violent protest vs. not wanting their younger relatives to participate in said demonstrations and stay safe (...)  

Revenge is not a good basis to build the future

[Velasco]

Muhammad only turned his cult into a new religion after the Jewish leadership in Mecca rejected his claim to be a prophet. An article in The Times of London at the time of the ISIS crisis said that given what would happen in later centuries, maybe they should have accepted him…

Not many Jews or Muslims in Cuba, is the thing about bringing this up in this thread.

Some people have one track minds.

Some people would do well to become a decent person and not taint the memory of people such as Leon Klinghoffer by uncritically swallowing “Nakba” propaganda.

I'm mixed to tepidly pro-Israel on ~The Conflict~. That's not the issue. The issue is it's simply not relevant to this thread.

Some people has one track minds, other is denialist and turns a blind eye. Apartheid Israel is everywhere poisoning discussions in this forum, it seems. Shame on you. Mr Natphali Bennett is a rashist scum and makes me feel sick. But here the topic is Cuba and the Cubans, not the apartheid state and its victims

[Velasco]

I invite you to continue this fascinating discussion in the Israel thread.

 Cuba for the Cubans

* To Nathan: I realized you were trying to imitate olawakandi. MR KAYNE WEST is MR NATPHALI BENNETT. "Nat" means "nationalist" and "phali" concerns his virility

[Velasco]

Any relevant updates? Can you discuss Cuba, please?

Tbh, this forum sucks. Right now I would feel grateful if someone was reporting novelties,  for I'm lacking the time or feeling too tired to read news from different sources. But here I only read  nonsense about UK Labour or the Grand Mufti. What a,shame