This morning I heard interviewed the wife of one of 75 dissidents convicted last year by the Cuban government in an effort to reduce “complications” were Castro to die or retire soon.The woman, using her full name and without her voice disguised, spoke against Castro’s government to an American reporter in Cuba with no apparent fear of any more reprisals than, well, her husband getting thrown in the klink. If past patterns are followed her husband will be eventually freed and will go back to bitching about the government. The next time the Cuban government wants to make a point the process will be repeated.
I am not going to suggest that Fidel Castro is a great humanitarian but I would like to point out one salient fact: neither the husband nor the wife has or is likely to “disappear.” In this regard, at least, Cuba has a better record than some, aw, hell, make it MANY of the governments the US has supported the past few decades, yet many Americans point to Castro as an inhuman monster on the level of a Saddam Hussein. Why is that? The complaints I hear center around two points: his human rights record and the confiscation of property. Cuba’s human rights record of the past two decades, though obviously not good, is better than (let’s pick a seemingly inoffensive country’s Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch reports) Bolivia’s and pales by comparicon with that of Colombia or, dare I say, possibly even the US. Confiscation of private property, though not a way to win over the hearts and minds of your former residents, just doesn’t have cachet required when you want to inspire the troops for an invasion. “Let’s go to Cuba and get back the house in Havana of a guy who has been a dentist in Miami for the past forty years!” doesn’t cut it as a battle cry.
So, tell me why Castro is so bad that we have to keep up an embargo on Cuba and threaten to invade when we don’t do the same for Mexico, Argentina, Peru, etc.
Castro is no great humanitarian, but certainly better than many despots that have American support. The only reason that the embargo continues is that Cuban Americans are a significant voting block in Florida. The president that ends the embargo will forfeit Florida’s electoral votes.
I agree totally with you. Castro is a light dictator at best now… we do have to keep in mind that he shot thousands of people in the past. Ugly past. Some reasons:
Pride: Castro made a fool of the US. A sucessor might be more acceptable.
Politics: Cuban voters in Miami and Florida will go crazy with any suggestion to lighten the embargo.
Age: Fidel is old… and there is always the temptation to keep the embargo just a few more years.
Reality vs. Speech: Americans might go to Cuba and figure out its not that bad. If its not that bad then the political leadership might appear hard headed.
Others possible… not sure. Drugs trafick through an open Cuba would be easier ? Cuba was an american playground before Castro… Cassinos, prostitution and general fun.
Confiscation of assets belonging to large US Companies when Castro & Co. overthrew Batista.
The large Cuban-American voting bloc, mainly in Florida and New York don’t like him.
He’s certainly no angel, and Cubans have to some degree or another, suffered under him, but they’ve also built a pretty decent medical system. He’s no Stalin or Hitler or Pol Pot, either.
Who cares about that any more? The Zapatista rebels in Mexico don’t even bother to call themselves Communists or Marxists. If their rebellion had started 20 years earlier they certainly would have as a matter of course. The name of Marx has lost its power to conjure. Hugo Chavez is cozy with Castro but, SFAIK, doesn’t talk much, if any, about Marx.
That might not have been a just or wise decision, but it was well within what are generally acknowledged as the legitimate powers of any sovereign government.
So then why does Castro hold such sway with voters outside of southern Florida? For the rest of us he should be no more than the tinpot dictator of a “banana republic,” no worse than many and better than some, with considerably less real power over the lives of most Americans than Hugo Chavez. So why do we let his importance get totally blown out of proportion by a few thousand Cuban Americans in Miami?
Because, for the vast majority of Americans, there is little to be gained by a change in the status quo. Almost no one* is going to change his/her vote for his/her Congressperson over the Cuban issue EXCEPT those Cuban-Americans who are passionate about it in the first place.
It’s a common problem in government-- a minority can get their pet issue enacted as long as it doesn’t greatly affect the average voter.
*discounting those of us who’d love to get our hands on some Cuban cigars w/o doging the law.
Also, Florida is the fourth-largest (in population) state in the Union and those “few thousand Cubans in Miami” might tip the balance to determine how our electoral votes go.
CaptainAmazing
You lot seem to have had a differant view when the Suez was seized and the UK and France tried to get it back.
…and if we had, would Egypt have been able to attack Israel, would Jordan have separated Palestine from their state, and would we have the intifada now?
Yup, we were the big bully boys, see how history has unwound, and now Islam is more radicalised than ever in this region.
Since always. Eminent domain is one of the basic powers of a sovereign state. The Fifth Amendment (no seizure without compensation) is an American invention and not every country has copied it.
Happened 19 years before I was born, so you can’t pin Suez on me. Besides, I think Eisenhower was wrong in not backing the UK, France and Israel during Suez.
If you think the Arabs hate us now, they’d hate us even more and probably for longer if we hadn’t forced the UK and France to back down. Eisenhower did the right thing.
Trying to maintain what amounted to a holdover of colonialism, requiring an indefinite military occupation of a canal within the territory of a sovereign state entirely hostile to the occupation, would have been neither the right thing nor the practical thing.
The main problem with Fidel:
-he is a doctrinaire Marxist…his slogan ought to be “Socialism and death!”-he is quite content to see Cuba rot into nothing as long as it is communist!
-the bum has a brother (Raoul) who is worse than him!
-the europeans don’t like to acknowlege it, but the Castro regime is like Cuacescu’s Rumania: it is being kept alive by european tourists (seeking cheap whores) and remittances from Cuban-Americans
What has he (Castro) accomplished? He has turned Cuba into a very poor country. In the bad old days of Batista, Cuba EXPORTED food! Now the average Cuan gets along on a very limited diet.
As soon as the old bastard croaks, I hope the Cuabn-Americans take over, and bring the island back to prosperity!
Well, that’s partly the Soviets’ fault. They decided every country in the Soviet Bloc should specialize in something, and in Cuba’s case it would be sugarcane. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Cuba:
