Safe for tourists, at least in 1999. Fidel told his people that tourism is good for the island. If you “mess” with tourists, you will die, or worse go to prison. I wish more people in power would say that. In 1999, you could safely hitchhike in Cuba.
When Fidel came to power, one of his priorities was that everyone will know how to read. And he was very successful in that endeavor. I believe the island has the highest rate of literacy in the world. The downside is that you can’t read everything. The internet is not the norm there.
Yes, it’s nice to know that several people might be executed or imprisoned without trial so you can be an oppression tourist. Are you one of those people who wants Cuba kept as a slave camp so that no McDonalds blight the landscape?
Cuba is one of 71 countries worldwide with a literacy rate of 99 to 100 percent. Somehow Finland, New Zealand, France, the U.S., and 66 others got there without mass executions and forbidding the population from leaving.
If you have information to countermand their ranking of Cuba as having no freedom of the press or other civil liberties whatsoever, then I’m sure both this thread and anyone who studies Latin America would be interested in hearing it.
And which Castro do we hold accountable for the murder of Archbishop Romero? Fidel, or Raul? The death of thousands of “disappeared” in Argentina’s “dirty war”, was that on orders from the Cuban Communist Central Committee? Pinochet? A communist, was he?
Perhaps it is best explained as an example of American exceptionalism, where everybody is to blame except the Americans.
Truly, it’s justified to run a frozen-in-time slave state as long as anyone else has done something wrong ever. Thank you for sharing the wisdom of Infallible Marxist-Leninist Science.
Examples of Cuba’s corruption are just more reasons to open them up. Its a fact that the embargoes haven’t worked to transform the country into a bastion of freedom. If people want to hold a grudge and refuse to participate in helping the Cubans because the Castros are still alive, that’s just stubbornness. So what if they may benefit? They’re both almost dead. If we can change Cuba by allowing money and our culture to pour into it, then we should take every opportunity to do so. In the process some unsavory people may benefit, but a lot of regular Cubans will too
Certainly, it is possible that if Cuba had the power to support such monstrosity, they might very well have done so. But they didn’t, and we did, so we did. Far too often I have watched as my flag is used to sop up the blood of the innocent, once was too many. Old Gory.
“Marxist Leninist”? Oh, Hegel, please! I have a sentimental and affectionate attachment to old-fashioned leftism, the Wobblies, the Weavers, Tom Joad, Pete Seegar, “red diaper babies”, that old shtick. But that’s about it. Maybe your problem is that you’ve never actually met any flag-waving, red blooded all American radical lefties? Well, now you have. Welcome to the Boards.
One of the other ideas is that it would partially serve to quarantine Cuba so that Marxism wouldnt spread to the rest of Latin America, and also to impoverish Cuba so that it wouldnt be able to afford to spend funds on spreading communism.
However I agree- it’s time for the Embargo to go, even* if* the original concept was worthwhile.
But one thing I love is when Cuba simultaneously would say that the Embargo is useless and not doing anything- then from the other side of their mouth use it to blame America for all their problems.
Obviously they are biased towards a certain vision of freedom. And they were founded by, and still run by, Americans. As for strictly non-partisan, they don’t have a half-Democrat, half-Republican rule, if that’s what you mean by strict. Glancing at their board of trustees, it looks to me a bit GOP-leaning. But just looking just at US representation, it’s almost surely more bipartisan than Amnesty International or Human Rights Watch. And I believe their priorities are similar to those back when liberals like Eleanor Roosevelt and Wilkie were in charge.
They rate Cuba as less bad than Saudi Arabia. If a Republican view, it’s not what I’ve heard from the various President Bushes.
Maybe it did that, but I’m not so down on Marxism that I’d embargo a whole country for it. I’m rather unperturbed at the thought of more countries joining Cuba’s political system.
Well, admittedly South Africa was a different situation. No one (outside an irrelevant core of stone racists) was saying other countries should adopt apartheid, but people had various reasons for making alliances of convenience with the pre-1994 South African government. It’s not the same as the evangelizing worldwide menace of communism.
It’s true that people on the left who opposed the Cuban embargo supported the South African one, but that’s not a huge surprise when you consider they think the Cuban system of dictatorship is good and the South African one wasn’t. The only hypocrisy would be if people like myself who have the moral sense to oppose communism but see the embargoes are pointless made an exception for South Africa. My belief is that anything which impinges on the freedom of Americans to trade with whomever they wish is undermining the very system we wish to promote, and furthermore that it’s the worst-off in society (e.g. the black South Africans under apartheid) who suffer when we artificially depress their economy. You’ll have to ask someone who opposed the Cuban embargo, opposed the Cuban government, and supported the South African embargo to explain themselves.
Pinochet, Batista, Trujillo, the architects of Argentina’s “Dirty War”…which variety of communist were they? Were they Trotskyites, or Stalinists? The people who murdered those nuns, and Archbishop Romero, were they more of the “Euro-communist” stripe, or strict adherents to the Soviet Politburo line?
When was our virginity restored? When, exactly, were our hands cleansed of blood, and we were freed of any responsibility for the actions of a bunch of vicious thugs with stupid military hats and aviator sunglasses?
When we had our revolution, and turned to France to save our collective bacon, was France “evangelizing” for republican democracy? Or simply sticking their thumb in England’s eye?
Suppose you were unfortunate enough to be a citizen of one of our client states in Central and South America. If you came to the conclusion that only armed revolt could free you from intolerable oppression, where would you go for weapons? Would you refuse Cuban help because it was tainted by guys who talk about “dictatorship of the proletariat” like it actually meant something? Considering that if you lose, you die.
People can be very ideologically flexible when it comes to that. Can you blame them?