Right now all the fuzz discussed in latin american media news has got to do with Fidel's anouncement of retirement as 49 years of 'president' (or, should we say, dictator?) of the Cuban government. People are discussing if this is the beginning of a long road towards democracy for the cuban people, or if Fidel's brother Raúl and his subsequent replacements will try to keep things pretty much as they are today.
And of course, there has been talk about the plans of Washington of keeping or lifting the economic embargo that has been mantained for decades against Cuba. After all, isn't it true that Washington has strong economic ties with its former foe Vietnam? Why Cuba should be the exception?
Well, so far it seems Washington has no intention whatsoever to change its policy. I don't know, maybe it's something personal, maybe they are still waiting to Fidel to leave the scene with his death; something that it's highly unlikely because it's obvious that the cubans will in the end elevate Fidel to the pantheon of legendary revolutionaries, right along Ché Guevara and Camilo Cienfuegos.
What it is disappointing is the negligence of Washington to assimilate the fact that the embargo, instead of hindering Fidel's power over the cuban people, had actually been his greatest ally.
It is an established fact that the best way to enforce and perpetuate an authoritative government is through two things: either an external threat, on an internal one (sounds familiar?).
The economic embargo became Fidel's Goldstein, turning Cuba into the most accurate recreation of Orwell's famous dystopia '1984' so far. By always having the shadow of the 'american imperialists' over their 'glorious' Revolution, the cuban regime was able to impose whatever restrictions of freedom they wanted; and the cuban people responded... by giving Fidel their inconditonal love.
Oh, yes. True, there are several opposition groups and dissenting voices (not to mention political prisoners) in Cuba, but the sad fact of the matter is a great majority of the people born after the 1950s are still genuinely convinced of the Revolution. Even sadder, the economic embargo was part of the reason this brainwash could be accomplished. Remember, the human being is infinitely malleable (again, from Orwell's recipe book).
I believe it is time to end the embargo. Not because it is the right thing to do, but because it is the SENSIBLE thing to do, lest we risk the cubans' transition to democracy (which is of course inevitable) to be as painful and messy as we have witnessed in former eastern-block countries, where today's capitalist entrepeneurs ressemble more the likes of Al Capone than Steve Jobs.
rockets and sugar
Fidel's relative success with the Cuban economy was largely financed from Russia, and indirectly from wherever Russia stole things.
As for believers, of course. When people are subjected to constant propaganda, a majority will believe what they are told all the time. Even if it is blatantly untrue. It's not the technique, it is the repetition.
As for reasons for the embargo - there is, for example, the sugar industry in Florida and Puerto Rico that has interest in keeping Cuba out of business in the US.
My guess for Cuba is that it will be business as usual for a while. There is an entrenched elite that runs the place, and they have no reason to change things quickly. The communist party there has pretty good control, and there is no wide spread revolutionary movement. So why change things?
----
wherever you go, there you are
Russian support
True, cuban economy depended a lot on russian support and financial assistance, but that's a thing you have to give credit to the cuban system: how they have managed to endure 15 years without the aid of Russia —of course, at the expense of the people, but that's the other thing: what Washington hoped for (that the people rebelled against the system) hasn't happened either. Maybe with an open economy the people would start to complain more openly and demand more things to the cuban regime.
One thing I find funny is how here in Mexico —one of the most capitalist economies in Latin America, although obviously not the most succesful— it is unconstitutional for foreign or domstic private companies to invest in the Energy sector, as a way to 'protect our national independence from alien inffluence', and yet in Cuba the energy industry receives private investment (from Europe), and you don't see anyone tearing off their clothes in indignity!
-----
It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me...
It's all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!
Red Pill Junkie
also
Also, what embargo? Everyone trades with Cuba, except for the US. We get Cuban stuff here in Canada, there is Cuban stuff in Europe. As far as I know, all of Latin America trades with Cuba. Venezuela gives them oil products at seriously subsidized prices.
So I think the "embargo" is mainly symbolic.
----
wherever you go, there you are
Not symbolic
more like phallic, if you catch my drift :-)
Yeah, we trade with Cuba, and many european companies trade with Cuba, but then there's the problem of some american associates these companies have, who try to disuade them to stop their relationships with Habana.
Nothing a little creative "fiscal laundry" cannot fix, I imagine :-)
So in the end you maybe you are right. Is all just showing off, and that's exactly what prevents Washington from lifting the embargo: because they fear Fidel's smiling picture on the newspapers showing the "V" sign; what they don't realize is that the sense of victory from the Cuban regime would be all too fleeting, because they would be too busy dealing with the new rules of open market.
What's interesting here aswell is that many european and canadian tourists find Cuba so attractive precisely because it hasn't fallen "prey" of the claws of open market. They find it very picturesque the fact that the streets of Habana are free of generic marketing ads, Starbucks coffe shops and KFC joints. If Cuba suddenly opened their doors to american investment (something completely unlikely I know) maybe those tourists would stop going because Habana would turn into yet another caribbean generic resort.
But that won't happen any time soon, for there are too many lawsuits from american companies over properties that were lost after the Cuban revolution. That's also another thing that prevents the embargo from being lifted.
-----
It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me...
It's all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!
Red Pill Junkie
tourists
I only know a few people who have travelled to Cuba. Thsy didn't like it. Apparently you can't go where you want, only where the government allows you to go. Nice resorts, but you can't go to a neighborhood bar. And the locals literally ask you to give them the shirt off your back, as if they own the shirt.
So it seems, from the little information I have, as if the only thing the tourists see is the typical Caribbean generic resort. Haven't tried it myself, maybe someone else has more information.
----
wherever you go, there you are
My parents went
They went a couple of years ago. I think Compay Segundo was still alive, and the day after they left he was going to give a presentation at the hotel they were staying.
Anyway, they liked it. I think they went to Al Capone's house, and to that pier where Hemingway used to get his drinks, plus other places like "La Bodeguita de Enmedio". Of course they witnessed the misery, but the people was very nice to them. I suppose it has something to do with the fact that there are very strong cultural and emotional ties between Mexico and Cuba; the cubans know that mexicans have stood up for them throughout the years, it was only with our last president Fox that the diplomatic relations became sour.
So, if you are planning on going, maybe I can serve as your cultural attachè ;-)
-----
It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me...
It's all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!
Red Pill Junkie
GIve it time
This isn't a topic I'm particularly well versed on, but Obama created quite a stir in the Texas Democratic debate last week when he said he'd be willing to talk to Raul without preconditions. Several of the political pundits were questioning how well that statement would fly in south Florida, with the significant population of Cuban ex-patriots there.
The concerns in Washington are based on human rights abuses practiced by the Cuban regime, but frankly, our government has appeared to abandon the high ground of morality with their behavior in the 'war on terror'. (Just one citizen's humble observation).
We'll see what transpires in the general election - if Obama wins the general, I'd think there's a chance for a dialog, but I'd be surprised if trade will be established until Cuba makes some significant progress with their treatment of their own citizens and takes steps towards democracy. If it's McCain or HRC, there won't even be preliminary conversations. From the standpoint of the US, opening trade would have much a more positive effect on Cuba's economy than the reverse - it's a major carrot for Cuba, and Washington's aware of that. There's no interest anywhere in Washington to help Raul maintain Fidel's regime under a new name.
But that's the point
There's no interest anywhere in Washington to help Raul maintain Fidel's regime under a new name.
But that's my point! Washington HAS HELPED the Castro brothers with their stupid macho blockade. They're either too dumb or too proud to acknowledge that.
And apparently I'm not the first one to take notice of this. This british gentleman, Hugh Thomas, came to the same conclusion in 1971 with his book 'Cuba or the Pursuit of Freedom'.
Obama says he would talk to the cubans, aswell as the iranians and the syrians, and frankly I think that's a great thing since is better to insult your foe with words than shoot him bullets; but I'm not getting my expectations too high, for all politicians say one thing during their campaign, and act differently once in office.
-----
It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me...
It's all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!
Red Pill Junkie
The thing about Obama . . .
. . . is that he is quite different from any presidential candidate I've seen, in that he's quite visionary, more about big picture, out-of-the-box thinking than specifics. It could be a very refreshing change with positive worldwide implications if he surrounds himself with the right people. The campaign he's pulled off indicates he's capable of doing so - he's a consensus builder.
I think Hillary's done following next Tuesday, and the question then will be whether McCain can convince the electorate that reacting to fear (real and imagined) is the proper course of action. A significant terrorist success prior to the election would almost certainly throw the voters to McCain in droves.
I'm strangely optimistic about Obama somehow, and I've been cynical about the politics here for most of my life. All we can do is focus our thoughts on the best, and see what happens. There's a chance that the right outcome could have positive repercussions that extend far beyond the Cuba question.
Let's hope for the best then :-)
I'm not that convinced Hillary is defeated yet, as she has (apparently) the support of the latin vote. Nevertheless, the election of Obama would be a very interesting change —before "interesting" I had written "great", but as I told you, history has taught me not to get my expectations too high when it comes to politicians, just look what happened to us with former president Fox.
And somehow I do not doubt there will be some sort of video message or audio tape from Osama bin Laden during the election, seems to me those just manage to pop up in a very convenient timing —at least they did during Bush's period :-)
-----
It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me...
It's all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!
Red Pill Junkie
Obama doubts
I'm a little sceptical about Obama being that out-of-the-box. He has a tremendous amount of campaign money. Who gives it to him? Independent thinking young people, or the usual organizations who support politicians?
And I am really not sure about the consensus builder part. He is against NAFTA, he is against space exploration. He seems to project isolationist views. And he has not cooperated with even moderate Republicans. I don't see how that suggests consensus building. Looks more like he gathers support from the left wing of the Democrats, and the people who don't trust the Clinton block, and of course from those who don't trust the current president.
He seems to have some kind of charisma. People have compared him to JFK, in that he generates excitement and warm fuzzy sentiments.
But then, JFK escalated the Vietnam war, wrecked the relationship with Cuba, and got the world within less than an hour of nuclear war. He is a hero of peace movements now.
----
wherever you go, there you are
NAFTA, LOL!
That's so funny, both Hillary and Obama are against NAFTA, and the same thing happens here in Mexico with our leftist politicians! Guess the only ones benefiting from it are those damn canadians! ;-)
Obama has charisma, there's no qestion about it. Although we have also to take in consideration the people that support him, because they are tired of the handful of families that keep taking turns for the presidency: The Bushs, the Clintons; it's almost like a nobility, although the irony ere is that the Kennedys support Barack
:-)
It's so sad when you see politicians that you really feel that they want to make a difference, but the horrible truth of the matter is that politics is a self-regulated beast, that only permits the most corrupt and "reliable" people to climp to the top. So by the time those idealist leaders get to the desired position to change things, their hands are so tied by under-the-table handshakes that they barely manage to do anything but perpetuate the beast.
-----
It's not the depth of the rabbit hole that bugs me...
It's all the rabbit SH*T you stumble over on your way down!!!
Red Pill Junkie