Cuba after Castro

[Rentonite]

Cuba will be a mess for a while when castro passes
Thats about the only future predicting I am willing to make

 

[Roadkill]

<edit>

Note to self: don't try and post on political threads when legless

 

[neprimerimye]

During the Special Period following the loss of cheap oil from the former Russian Empire the GDP of Cuba shrank by at least 35%. In more recent years what growth there has been has been in tourism. Almost all new jobs created have been in services.

This year relatively cheap oil imports from Venezuela have been guaranteed by the deal signed between Castro and Chavez. The flip aside of the deal being that Chavez gets a lot of help in the jmedical sector in which his country is sorely lacking. Quite obviously the deal is beneficial to both men and their countries and will help in keeping the USA at arms length.

What is interesting is that both Castro and Chavez lack capital and the latter is actively looking for foreign investment. Castro too needs foreign investment to mantain stability in Cuba come waht amy. But this investment, which in Cuba will be in tourism, services and possibly pharmaceuticals but not in basic industry not only confirms Cubas status as a dependent country but also creates a layer of people whose material interests are in those sectors anad their expansion.

Now it seems germane to point out that there are quite a few people, Cubans as it happens, sitting in Miami with excess capital which they will happily invest in that country once Castro drops dead. All they have to do is wait in the certain knowledge that as long as they cut the bureaucracy in on a share of the profits within a short period of time they will be back in town opening new casinos.

The loose cannon in the above scenario is the US Administration which might decide for reasons of dmoestic politics to get heavy handed rather than wait out a few months or years. But essentially I reckon the Castroite bureaucracy will do a deal with the Miaimi bourgeoisie and sanctions will be lifted. As capital will flood in for a period at least there will be no need to make cutbacks on health provision and so forth so the subaltern classes will not feel the need to fight back for some considerable period.

So as long as the yanquis keep their heads they and the gusanos should get a nominally democratic Cuba within five years of Castro dying I reckon. Which gives the working classes some time to begin preparations to begin the fight that will then be needed against both the Castroite and the gusanos.

 

[mears]

During the Special Period following the loss of cheap oil from the former Russian Empire the GDP of Cuba shrank by at least 35%. In more recent years what growth there has been has been in tourism. Almost all new jobs created have been in services.

This year relatively cheap oil imports from Venezuela have been guaranteed by the deal signed between Castro and Chavez. The flip aside of the deal being that Chavez gets a lot of help in the jmedical sector in which his country is sorely lacking. Quite obviously the deal is beneficial to both men and their countries and will help in keeping the USA at arms length.

What is interesting is that both Castro and Chavez lack capital and the latter is actively looking for foreign investment. Castro too needs foreign investment to mantain stability in Cuba come waht amy. But this investment, which in Cuba will be in tourism, services and possibly pharmaceuticals but not in basic industry not only confirms Cubas status as a dependent country but also creates a layer of people whose material interests are in those sectors anad their expansion.

Now it seems germane to point out that there are quite a few people, Cubans as it happens, sitting in Miami with excess capital which they will happily invest in that country once Castro drops dead. All they have to do is wait in the certain knowledge that as long as they cut the bureaucracy in on a share of the profits within a short period of time they will be back in town opening new casinos.

The loose cannon in the above scenario is the US Administration which might decide for reasons of dmoestic politics to get heavy handed rather than wait out a few months or years. But essentially I reckon the Castroite bureaucracy will do a deal with the Miaimi bourgeoisie and sanctions will be lifted. As capital will flood in for a period at least there will be no need to make cutbacks on health provision and so forth so the subaltern classes will not feel the need to fight back for some considerable period.

So as long as the yanquis keep their heads they and the gusanos should get a nominally democratic Cuba within five years of Castro dying I reckon. Which gives the working classes some time to begin preparations to begin the fight that will then be needed against both the Castroite and the gusanos.

Interesting post, I agreee with much of it.

What fight will the working class be engaged in 5 years after Castro's death? Where would you take Cuban society when castro is kaput?

 

[Barking_Mad]

So there must be something you approve of from Bush in his term, I mean he has been President for years. I support Bush but certainly don't agree with everything he does as witnessed by my last input on this thread. Can you come up with something?

Off the top of my head, no. There might be a few small things but they in no way justify the action of a man and a government hell bent on holding on to the USA's power regardless of the ramification for everyone else on the planet.

You are either for us or against us was used right after 9-11. It was a message to ME states and Pakistan that the old rules no longer apply. Try to use some context in your writing, makes it more effective. Bush doesn't use the "for us or against us" in most situations. Not in leading up to the Iraq war or the current friction over NK for instance.

Try specifics backed with examples my friend.

If the old rules no longer applied then Pakistan would be "against you". Truth is they still do apply only Pakistan has nuclearm issiles, so I hardly think Bush is going to pick a fight with them, do you?


edit anyway this is about cuba so ill leave it at that.

 

[nino_savatte]

Now it seems germane to point out that there are quite a few people, Cubans as it happens, sitting in Miami with excess capital which they will happily invest in that country once Castro drops dead. All they have to do is wait in the certain knowledge that as long as they cut the bureaucracy in on a share of the profits within a short period of time they will be back in town opening new casinos.

So a return to the days of Batista is on the cards in your view - non? Is that something that you and our dear friend mears would like to see?

 

[Streathamite]

So a return to the days of Batista is on the cards in your view - non? Is that something that you and our dear friend mears would like to see?

mears undoubtedly would, nep wouldn't, as he's a revo, and for me the key sentence in his post is the last one;

Which gives the working classes some time to begin preparations to begin the fight that will then be needed against both the Castroite and the gusanos.

gusanos = "worms" the half-mafiosi, half-oligarcicos-cum-secret-police-thugs that made people's lives miserable under batista and fled with him. this is in fact the roots of 90% of the exile community - some 10% are genuine, principled rebels.
I see what nep was saying as being "when fidel snuffs it, all to play for. unless the cuban working forces band together to defend the genuine and sizeable advances the workers made under castro, the place will be back to being Las Vegas 2, the offshore offshoot of the (pretty bent) US leisure industry within a decade"

 

[Streathamite]

Having a Presidente for life who puts his political opponents in jail is not tragic enough for you? Better for a group of unelected men in Havana to control the national assets I am sure.

Hopefully some day the Cuban people will decide if they want an open market system, sweedish capitalism, old fashioned socialism or something in between.

Because right now an unelected 70 plus year old man who speaks for hours runs the show without the bother of competing political parties.

jesus, someone take the key out of mears's back!
4 points
1) do you really wanna talk - right now - about people being interned in jail, on the island of cuba, for yeears without trial?
3) are you implying cuba was a democracy BEFORE castro's revolution (note; NOt a coup - as your heroes engineered in Chile - and not an imperialist stick-up like Iraq)? if so, you are dead wrong. It was run as an offshore centre for Vegas and the Mob, with wholehearted US support for that. There was NO democracy, and via castro's attempts at 'low-level' (i.e. local) democracy, the cuban people sure as hell had a lot bigger say in their island's affairs than they had before the revolution. The people YOU support only ever bled the place dry.
2) I challenge you to find me ANY US politician, post-WW2 with approval ratings to challenge the popularity - real, genuine popularity - that castro has amongst his people. the affection they feel for him - and their hate of the US - is genuine, and unfeigned, and can be witnessed wherever you go in cuba.
don't beklieve me? go and see for yourself.
ahh, sorry, i forgot, the US 'democratically' opposed sweeping sanctions after their pet mafiosis got swept out by a revolution, so you can't visit there!

 

[neprimerimye]

So a return to the days of Batista is on the cards in your view - non? Is that something that you and our dear friend mears would like to see?

I didn't express a viewpoint directly in my post. but I would have thought that by using the expression gusanos to describe the swine who sit in Miami that my opposition to them was clear. Or did you think that I just don't like Gloria Estafan?

Look you the Batitista regime ruled over Cuba and badly mismanaged the economy and social policy. Whatever you might say about the Castro regime it has made the economy as effective as it can be given its semi-exclusion from world markets and its inherent limitations. it has also developed a strong welfae state which cannot be popular among the subaltern classes who will defend it if it is directly attacked.

But the Miami bourgeoisie long ago abandoned direct attacks on Cuba and have developed ideologically since the Bay of Pigs. If anf when the post-Castro bureaucracy does a deal with them they are unlikely to simply scrap the welfare state provision that exists but will keep it in place. After all it means that they have an educated healthy workforce which does not exist in other caribbean nations. For that matter they will want to maintain the police apparatus in order that the country dioes not develop street gangs as in Jamaica.

All of which assumes that the USA does not do something incredibly stupid which to be honest could happen very easily. But given similar transitions in Chile I do not envisage the yanquis acting too stupidly unless driven by their own domestic political needs. Which are beyond the remit of this thread and would allow the formation of a new regime that would not be like that of Batista in its naked repression.

The new factor for me is the alliance with Chavez who is similarly and with good reason opposed to US hegemony. And the Miami bourgeoisie have no problem with said hegemony so that could delay the reconciliation of the two wings of the Cuban capitalist class. Which comment should give a clue what I think the Cuban workers will have to fight for.

 

[nino_savatte]

I didn't express a viewpoint directly in my post. but I would have thought that by using the expression gusanos to describe the swine who sit in Miami that my opposition to them was clear. Or did you think that I just don't like Gloria Estafan?

Look you the Batitista regime ruled over Cuba and badly mismanaged the economy and social policy. Whatever you might say about the Castro regime it has made the economy as effective as it can be given its semi-exclusion from world markets and its inherent limitations. it has also developed a strong welfae state which cannot be popular among the subaltern classes who will defend it if it is directly attacked.

But the Miami bourgeoisie long ago abandoned direct attacks on Cuba and have developed ideologically since the Bay of Pigs. If anf when the post-Castro bureaucracy does a deal with them they are unlikely to simply scrap the welfare state provision that exists but will keep it in place. After all it means that they have an educated healthy workforce which does not exist in other caribbean nations. For that matter they will want to maintain the police apparatus in order that the country dioes not develop street gangs as in Jamaica.

All of which assumes that the USA does not do something incredibly stupid which to be honest could happen very easily. But given similar transitions in Chile I do not envisage the yanquis acting too stupidly unless driven by their own domestic political needs. Which are beyond the remit of this thread and would allow the formation of a new regime that would not be like that of Batista in its naked repression.

The new factor for me is the alliance with Chavez who is similarly and with good reason opposed to US hegemony. And the Miami bourgeoisie have no problem with said hegemony so that could delay the reconciliation of the two wings of the Cuban capitalist class. Which comment should give a clue what I think the Cuban workers will have to fight for.

Understood.

 

[phildwyer]

The problem with Neprimerimye's analysis is that the welfare state is built on (often literally) the expropriated wealth of the gusanos. Thus they will not be able to both maintain the welfare state and reclaim their property. There being no doubt as to which they will prefer, the Cuban people will resist their return to power, by force if necessary. Since it has often been proved that the gusanos cannot beat the Communists in a fight, I conclude that the Communists will continue to run Cuba after Castro's death. As I have said before, the country has in fact been run by people other than Fidel, notably Ricardo Alarcon, for many years now.

 

[neprimerimye]

The problem with Neprimerimye's analysis is that the welfare state is built on (often literally) the expropriated wealth of the gusanos. Thus they will not be able to both maintain the welfare state and reclaim their property. There being no doubt as to which they will prefer, the Cuban people will resist their return to power, by force if necessary. Since it has often been proved that the gusanos cannot beat the Communists in a fight, I conclude that the Communists will continue to run Cuba after Castro's death. As I have said before, the country has in fact been run by people other than Fidel, notably Ricardo Alarcon, for many years now.

Not so Phil. The welfare state has not been built on the property taken from the gusanos but was built by the Cuban working classes. That sections of the gusanos will demand this or that piece of property be returned to them will be a problem no doubt but an identical problem was faced in eastern Europe without too many problems.

You also assume that the Miamia bourgeoisie would be so foolish as to wish to return Cuba to the pre-1959 status quo. But there is no evidence to support such an assumption and a considerable amount of evidence that any dea will in the first instance be made by those sections of the exile community most associatd with the social democratic current which exists in exile. Which raises the interesting question of Chavez and/or the Europeans playing the role of honest broker.

You are right that it is individuals other than castro who run the country day to day but it is his role as figurehead that is so vital in unifying the country. Can alarcon or any other play a similar role? It would seem unlikely. In which case his demise is of importance for what it means to the consciousness of the other players in the drama.

 

[phildwyer]

Not so Phil. The welfare state has not been built on the property taken from the gusanos but was built by the Cuban working classes. That sections of the gusanos will demand this or that piece of property be returned to them will be a problem no doubt but an identical problem was faced in eastern Europe without too many problems.

You wot? Not too many problems in eastern Europe? As I suspect you must know, the welfare states of eastern Europe were largely dismantled or collapsed during the 90's, causing enormous problems of every kind. But there was no-one in eastern Europe willing to fight for socialism, understandably enough, and so the process was unchecked. In Cuba there are of course millions of people willing to fight for socialism. Incidentally, when I was in Cuba people often pointed out schools and museums that had been private houses before the revolution, and specifically mentioned how unthinkable it would be to return them. The question really is whether the gusanos are willing to accept this situation, and my experience of the people in Miami leads me to doubt it.

 

[neprimerimye]

You wot? Not too many problems in eastern Europe? As I suspect you must know, the welfare states of eastern Europe were largely dismantled or collapsed during the 90's, causing enormous problems of every kind. But there was no-one in eastern Europe willing to fight for socialism, understandably enough, and so the process was unchecked. In Cuba there are of course millions of people willing to fight for socialism. Incidentally, when I was in Cuba people often pointed out schools and museums that had been private houses before the revolution, and specifically mentioned how unthinkable it would be to return them. The question really is whether the gusanos are willing to accept this situation, and my experience of the people in Miami leads me to doubt it.

You are making some very foolish assumptions about the gusnao community. Now I'm sure that you are correct that the gusanos one might meet in Miami bars are gung ho right wing thugs who would happily shoot dead each and every commie ever born. But they don't count for shit Phil it's the bourgeoisie that count and they will strike a deal if they can even if it means sacrificing their camp followers in the process.

Now imagine for a moment you had loads of dosh and experience in running hotels and casinos, as the Miami bourgeoisie does, and you were offered the choice between a deal which netted you a big slice of a hotel/casino and the return of a run down mansion. Which woukld you choose? Now imagine you are a Cuban worker and the choice is between unemployment and a job in that hotel/casino development.

Not sure who would fight for socialism in Cuba. To the best of my knowledge anybody advocating socialism in Cuba is jailed or driven into exile.

Asw for eastern europe well i agree that the economies of those countries were damaged by being integrated into the world market. But inefficient enterprises are always damaged and defeated by competition with ore effective and/or larger enterprises. And the welfare states were certainly cut back but they have not been abolished anymore than the welfare state has been here in britain.

 

[phildwyer]

You are making some very foolish assumptions about the gusnao community. Now I'm sure that you are correct that the gusanos one might meet in Miami bars are gung ho right wing thugs who would happily shoot dead each and every commie ever born. But they don't count for shit Phil it's the bourgeoisie that count and they will strike a deal if they can even if it means sacrificing their camp followers in the process.

Now imagine for a moment you had loads of dosh and experience in running hotels and casinos, as the Miami bourgeoisie does, and you were offered the choice between a deal which netted you a big slice of a hotel/casino and the return of a run down mansion. Which woukld you choose? Now imagine you are a Cuban worker and the choice is between unemployment and a job in that hotel/casino development.

First of all, how dare you suggest that my experience of gusanos is derived from "Miami bars?" I have met many gusanos in nightclubs too. Secondly, for a Communist you certainly stick closely to the Hobbesian rational self-interest model of human motivation and behavior--as do many Marxists, but they call it "economic determinism." One of the many ironies etc. Well, I'm sure we'd all be very happy if life were really so simple, but the *fact* is that peoples motivations and behavior are a good deal more complicated than you make out. I believe that, given the choice you describe, both gusano and trabajador would choose to duke it out and bugger the economic consequences. And that is *exactly* what members of both groups have often told me after the second Cuba libre. Interestingly, the "Cuba libre" is called this in both Havana and Miami, although the significance of the term must clearly be very different.

 

[friedaweed]

Cuba will be a mess for a while when castro passes
Thats about the only future predicting I am willing to make

And so says Urban's very own nostradamus

 

[neprimerimye]

First of all, how dare you suggest that my experience of gusanos is derived from "Miami bars?" I have met many gusanos in nightclubs too.

 

[lewislewis]

There are also younger elements in the Castro regime who may not be willing to cut a deal with the Miami lot as Neprimerimye suggests (although i do mainly agree with your overall prediction Nep). Most of Castro's Lieutenants are faceless yes-men, but there are a few charismatic figures that are well-known and dare I say it liked amongst the ordinary Cubans (i'm thinking Felipe Perez Roque).

 

[neprimerimye]

There are also younger elements in the Castro regime who may not be willing to cut a deal with the Miami lot as Neprimerimye suggests (although i do mainly agree with your overall prediction Nep). Most of Castro's Lieutenants are faceless yes-men, but there are a few charismatic figures that are well-known and dare I say it liked amongst the ordinary Cubans (i'm thinking Felipe Perez Roque).

Yes a good point that divisions within the bureaucracy. An important factor in the disintegration of the comecon states too which may be of some relevance.

Whats Roques background and record? I'm sure that some of the bureaucrats are liked by sections of the masses given that in some cases they will have fought together in Angola and such episodes breed loyalty.

 

[Divisive Cotton]

There's an article in todays Morning Star which I want to share with you.

There has been a long series of pieces by Ron Ridenour - who used to the the Morning Star's Cuba correspondant back in the day.

It's not about 'Cuba after Castro' but it does provide an illuminating look at contemporary Cuban society.

It will have to be cut'n'paste because the website it subscription only:

The big challenge
(Tuesday 11 July 2006)
RON RIDENOUR on Cuba
RON RIDENOUR asks how can communism be sustained in a capitalist world of greed?

"PERHAPS one of the most complicated dilemmas that the socialist revolution faces is how to achieve economic efficiency without renouncing the objective of creating a communist consciousness."

That is how Cuban central bank president Francisco Soberon Valdes described a central issue facing the country during his December 22 address to parliament.

"Certain actions committed during the special period, some imperviously necessary and others inexcusable errors, remove us from the strategic objective. The principal consequence of this situation has been greater levels of inequality and the waste of state resources."

Soberon asserted that corruption, fraud and theft are rampant and that "the majority of human beings are in the habit of not feeling satisfied with what they have and aspire to have more."

The "aspiration for more" is what capitalism's cynical ideologists count on to unrestrainedly sell their products, creating "needs" where they don't exist, making us sick from consumerism, which "minimises the human spirit," he argued.

Immediate gratification is, perhaps, a universal craving, one which Buddhism's ascetic philosophy seeks to curb. Are we human beings, as a whole, capable of becoming communists?

This dilemma is not only Cuban but one that faces us all. But what is it that hinders the forging of communist consciousness in Cuba besides imperialism's omnipresent penetration?

"Greater production is necessary to overcome scarcity and the special period. But how to stimulate the workers?" asks University of Havana economist and state adviser Omar Everleny.

"They are more removed from the economy than in other economies, because most property and means of production are state-owned."

Does that mean that they do not identify with the state, with the collective ownership?

"You can't stimulate people with morality, with revolutionary propaganda, with anti-imperialism for a lifetime. People get tired of this and they must eat. Sure, everybody goes to the plaza for the marches, but, when they return home, they demand that the state provides them with their needs.

"That is why the state is now investing so much in economic improvements and in electricity savings."

My personal experiences back up Everleny's position. Many Cubans sell their rationed goods, purchased at below cost, to others for a profit. This waste of national resources is prompting the state to find a way to end the rationing of all goods, which has been a safety valve for the entire population since the beginning of the blockade in 1961.

Many Cubans rent and even sell their residences under the table for high sums. The state builds and sells all residences at cost. Most Cubans own their homes, but are not allowed to sell for profit. Speculation and profit-mongering are, after all, contrary to socialism.

Stealing whatever one can get one's hands on is so common that it is not considered theft, but simply "resolving a problem."

When I was in Havana, I noticed five men sitting under bushes in front of a ministry of education building. They explained that they were guarding a parked school bus donated by US group Pastors for Peace. The men were chauffeurs who drove ministry workers to and from work. When not driving, they guarded the bus.

One told me why this is necessary. "Nobody works hard in Cuba. We are either students, chiefs or guards. Production? Forget it. We must guard the bus because we are 11 million thieves." The others nod in agreement.

OK, they exaggerated, but they spoke what they felt. The fact that the state has employed many more policemen in recent times to watch out for criminal activities is proof of general concern.

Seven out of 10 times, when I paid for something with a convertible currency bill that more than covered the price, the employee did not return any change. When this was pointed out, the reply was always: "You are right. Excuse me," and the correct change was then delivered.

On two exceptional occasions, the worker followed me to return change when I had overpaid and walked away.

Then there are the innumerable people who refuse to see any moral infringement in wearing Yankee T-shirts bearing capitalist-imperialist slogans.

Some read: "I want to be a millionaire" next to a US dollar symbol, "I'm proud to be an American," "US army," "US marines," "US air force," "Someone went to Miami and all I got was this T-shirt" and, of course, the US flag.

Double-talkers will glibly say anything that they think you might want to hear, whether they believe so or not. They will also make promises and appointments with no intention of keeping them - part of the pre-socialist culture of "facilismo," an easy come, easy go attitude which the state, the political party and mass organisations have not managed to eradicate in half a century.

Perhaps the most controversial point that I could make involves state employees who render services to foreigners, either the more wealthy visitors to Cuba or poorer people in Third World countries.

The Historic Old Havana revitalisation project employs black women to dress in colonial garb and walk about Spanish-style squares with large cigars between their red-painted lips. When I first saw this, I felt like puking.

Here are people liberated from colonialism, slavery and racist discrimination earning a living by portraying how it once was, but without any condemnation. They take "alms" from tourists who wish to photograph them. In fact, some of these women also offer their bodies for a price.

When I asked opinions about this of four acquaintances, only one shared my view. Three black friends said that they understood the "need" to perform. Again, it was for "survival."

But there are many other jobs these people could find or train for. No-one is starving in Cuba. No-one is forced to take on immoral tasks.

I end with the exporters of "human capital," as Fidel likes to call tens of thousands of fine Cubans who offer their education, hard work and caring for millions of people in scores of poor countries. They are the doctors, nurses, teachers, sports instructors and technicians working to save lives and improve the lives of millions.

How could I find fault with these good people? Certainly most truly want to be helpful, want to act in the solidarity spirit of revolutionary morality. Yet many also have a more selfish, albeit understandable motive. This aspect is one that I heard many Cubans complain about or speak of in envious terms.

"Resolving a problem" is the answer - that of buying home appliances or automobiles not realistically available for them on their Cuban peso wage at home. The price of a new automobile, for instance, would take a Cuban doctor or factory or field worker a lifetime to pay for.

Cuba sends abroad its best educated at no cost to the individual recipient, but the governments of these countries pay hard currency for the "volunteer" workers, who then purchase expensive items and transport them to Cuba or they buy such items at the "dollar shops" in Cuba.

This is not corrupt or "wrong," but this case of mixed motivations indicates that revolutionary morality is not so easily discerned.

Many of us left-wing Cuba supporters - especially those of us who are frustrated by living in the richest lands where we have not convinced our working classes to engage in overthrowing capitalism - seem to expect Cubans to actually be Che's "new man." Those who point out that it is not so are often seen as "traitors."

Cubans and leader Fidel Castro are practical beings. Che, as minister, was also a practical man. But tens of millions remember him best and honour him most as our idealist, our utopian dreamer, because many of us want to be like him. This is the essence of what Cuba's youth pioneers sing, "Be like Che."

Philosopher Juan Mari Lois wrote an essay on ethics for Prensa Latina in 1995 which I translated. It illustrates what I think about forging communist consciousness.

"Our principal social exaction is the transformation of an alienated human into a free one ... having at its core a system of values that make this person free in their social behaviour.

"If we accept the idea that socialism is an ethical option and, above all, an alternative culture, then the educative action of all social agents, including formal education, must be to create and consolidate the formation of a collectivist ethic, an attitude of solidarity which negates and transcends bourgeois individualism. There must also be school programmes relating to the ethics of citizenship.

"Our sovereignty, our true independence, also means full liberation, free from old and new forms of alienation, in each Cuban. This collection of freed individualities could then sustain, voluntarily and as aggregated soldiers, the independence and sovereignty that more than one heroic generation supposedly constructed."

• Ron Ridenour is the author of Cuba at the Crossroads and Backfire: The CIA's Biggest Burn (Editorial Jose Marti, 1991) two other books and many articles about Cuba.

WEB LINK:
www.ronridenour.com

 

[mears]

Off the top of my head, no. There might be a few small things but they in no way justify the action of a man and a government hell bent on holding on to the USA's power regardless of the ramification for everyone else on the planet.



If the old rules no longer applied then Pakistan would be "against you". Truth is they still do apply only Pakistan has nuclearm issiles, so I hardly think Bush is going to pick a fight with them, do you?


edit anyway this is about cuba so ill leave it at that.

So, name one. What action policy of the Bush administration was a good idea, you support, etc...

 

[mears]

jesus, someone take the key out of mears's back!
4 points
1) do you really wanna talk - right now - about people being interned in jail, on the island of cuba, for yeears without trial?
3) are you implying cuba was a democracy BEFORE castro's revolution (note; NOt a coup - as your heroes engineered in Chile - and not an imperialist stick-up like Iraq)? if so, you are dead wrong. It was run as an offshore centre for Vegas and the Mob, with wholehearted US support for that. There was NO democracy, and via castro's attempts at 'low-level' (i.e. local) democracy, the cuban people sure as hell had a lot bigger say in their island's affairs than they had before the revolution. The people YOU support only ever bled the place dry.
2) I challenge you to find me ANY US politician, post-WW2 with approval ratings to challenge the popularity - real, genuine popularity - that castro has amongst his people. the affection they feel for him - and their hate of the US - is genuine, and unfeigned, and can be witnessed wherever you go in cuba.
don't beklieve me? go and see for yourself.
ahh, sorry, i forgot, the US 'democratically' opposed sweeping sanctions after their pet mafiosis got swept out by a revolution, so you can't visit there!

Than name a poll, give me some data concerning the reservoir of warmth the Cuban people have for Fidel. Not first hand accounts, we all have first hand accounts.

Suffice it to say Michael Moore made a moving attacking the Bush administration. The film was played in the United States and Cuba.

Lets say I want to make a similar film about Castro. I might begin the film with footage from the Cuban missle crisis. The world teetering on nuclear holocaust, Krushchev and Kennedy huddled with their advisors. And than show Fidel, drinking beer and eating sausages on the beach, oblivious to the affairs of the big boys. I might portray him as naive and clueless.

Could I make such a film on Castro in Cuba?

You hear that? Listening to the sounds of silence...

 

[nino_savatte]

You hear that? Listening to the sounds of silence...

You are mistaken: that is the sound of the wind rushing through your empty head.

I speak your weight. Insert coin.

 

[colacho]

jesus, someone take the key out of mears's back!

Absolutely no point arguing with mears as he never answers any substantive points. He's just a troll. Better to get on with the discussion amongst those who are willing to debate. That morning star artic seemed to make sense of me in so far as it describes a great deal of disaffection with a life of underemployment and boredom, all under what remains an authoritarian regime. I don't doubt that there is support for Castro, but I don't recognise your portrayal of it at all. Makes you sound like a "brigadista". Out of interest, do you speak Spanish?
It's wrong to generalise from personal experience but in the case of Cuba there AREN'T any opinion polls so I'm going to do the same thing. I don't know many Cubans who privately support the old bastard, which is not to say that they don't support many of the things that have been done under the revolution. But my concern is that Cubans' perceptions of their own situation have been warped by the years of isolation (in itself a fucking disgrace both as far as the blockade is concerned and the Cuban government's ridiculous controls over its citizens' right to travel) and their constant exposure to state bullshit.
Habaneros, for example, live in a society in which the ability to consume is the ultimate mark of status- and many of them are fantasising about a Miami-like life style without seeing either the problems in Miami itself, or the glaringly obvious fact that left to the devices of the neoliberal order Cuba is going to end up like the Dominican Republic, not Florida.
But they desperately want what they think is theirs, and are fed up with waiting. They are also fed up with being told what to do. There is a lot of barely suppressed violence in Havana, which has burst out onto the surface several times already. When the old fuckers pops his clogs that is likely to come back in a big way.
Another problem is this constant search for "charismatic" or modernising figures to replace Fidel or to lead a transition. Whatever happened to Roberto Robaina, who preceded Felipe Perez Roque? Everyone said the same thing about him. But he got on the wrong side of Fidel and that was that. The nay sayers get replaced by yes men (in this case Perez) and as for potential rivals well, we know very well what has happened to them.
So I don't see a measured transition because the party is full of mediocre hacks who have no credibility with the people. (Incidentally, not many black faces up there at the top, are there?). And regardless of what those shits in Miami want, there are tremendous tensions within Cuba itself that will tear the old system apart within months. I hope I'm wrong.

 

[mears]

Red, I can hear it.

Its the sound of silence...

 

[nino_savatte]

Red, I can hear it.

Its the sound of silence...

Do I have to repeat myself?

You are mistaken: that is the sound of the wind rushing through your empty head.

I speak your weight. Insert coin.

 

[lewislewis]

Than name a poll, give me some data concerning the reservoir of warmth the Cuban people have for Fidel. Not first hand accounts, we all have first hand accounts.

Suffice it to say Michael Moore made a moving attacking the Bush administration. The film was played in the United States and Cuba.

Lets say I want to make a similar film about Castro. I might begin the film with footage from the Cuban missle crisis. The world teetering on nuclear holocaust, Krushchev and Kennedy huddled with their advisors. And than show Fidel, drinking beer and eating sausages on the beach, oblivious to the affairs of the big boys. I might portray him as naive and clueless.

Could I make such a film on Castro in Cuba?

You hear that? Listening to the sounds of silence...

You wouldn't be allowed to broadcast such a film in Cuba, the official party line against subversion is that such moves would strengthen the United States' position against the island, threatening Cuba's independence. So to make such a film would threaten Cuba's independence and sovereignity, and would be illegal.

 

[Streathamite]

Than name a poll, give me some data concerning the reservoir of warmth the Cuban people have for Fidel. Not first hand accounts, we all have first hand accounts.

Suffice it to say Michael Moore made a moving attacking the Bush administration. The film was played in the United States and Cuba.

Lets say I want to make a similar film about Castro. I might begin the film with footage from the Cuban missle crisis. The world teetering on nuclear holocaust, Krushchev and Kennedy huddled with their advisors. And than show Fidel, drinking beer and eating sausages on the beach, oblivious to the affairs of the big boys. I might portray him as naive and clueless.

Could I make such a film on Castro in Cuba?

You hear that? Listening to the sounds of silence...

here's an amazing suggestion mears; why don't you actually visit the country, and find out for yourself, first hand? y'know, actually find out something about life in Cuba?
generally, i find that to be the best way to find out what a country is like.

 

[mears]

here's an amazing suggestion mears; why don't you actually visit the country, and find out for yourself, first hand? y'know, actually find out something about life in Cuba?
generally, i find that to be the best way to find out what a country is like.

Yes, just don't try to make a movie about castro in cuba.

Unless you are willing to work with some government approved editors, just so, you know, its up to standards.

 

[mears]

You wouldn't be allowed to broadcast such a film in Cuba, the official party line against subversion is that such moves would strengthen the United States' position against the island, threatening Cuba's independence. So to make such a film would threaten Cuba's independence and sovereignity, and would be illegal.

In other words artisitc freedom is severly curtailed.

But its all part and parcel of a single party dictatorship.