home

50 Years Of Tyranny

Sure, the US embargo of Cuba should be lifted. But that does not change the fact that Cuba has suffered 50 years of tyranny during the Castro regime, which came to power on January 1, 1959.

Like most rational people, I find US policy towards Cuba to be incredibly stupid and counterproductive. Unlike many people, I do not care for pretending that the Cuban regime is not repressive and a disaster for the Cuban people.

This year, I hope to see change, in US policy towards Cuba and in the Cuban government's policy towards its own people. Realistically, I doubt I will see either.

Speaking for me only

< Misunderstanding The Blago Farce | Claiborne Pell, RIP >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Yes: (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by oculus on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 02:55:09 PM EST
    Unlike many people, I do not care for pretending that the Cuban regime is not repressive and a disaster for the Cuban people.

    I am mystified why many people do not see this.  All those Che T-shirts, found Fidel to be a hero whilst forming own opinions in college?  


    Kiss my A** (1.00 / 1) (#64)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Jan 03, 2009 at 11:08:21 AM EST
    I am not glorifying Batista at all.

    I resent the hell out of your comment and tell you you can go pi*s off for the BS.

    Keep the hell out of my threads of you are going to be a BS liar like this.

    Do not come onto my threads for a while. I am royally pi**ed about this.

    Parent

    heh (none / 0) (#30)
    by Nasarius on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 04:16:50 PM EST
    You can write most of that off as "young and stupid" syndrome. I wouldn't read too much into it, especially given that the Che-worshiping set is vastly smaller than the racist, queer-hating one. There's plenty of stupid to go around across the political spectrum, and unfortunately some of it doesn't go away with age.

    I think BTD's usage of "many people" is somewhat misleading. It's hardly a mainstream position, even among liberals. See for example here. You can find 5-10% to agree with practically anything.

    Parent

    I would have anticipated many more (none / 0) (#31)
    by oculus on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 04:25:55 PM EST
    of those polled would have indicated and interest in travel to Cuba, assuming it was legal to do so from U.S.

    Parent
    I wear my Red Che shirt (none / 0) (#36)
    by eric on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 07:25:46 PM EST
    with pride.  I am a lawyer (top 20 law school), 36 years old, married, and believe in the equality of all people.  I neither young nor stupid.  And I am sure of that.


    Parent
    am (none / 0) (#37)
    by eric on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 07:29:47 PM EST
    that is.  Just bought a new motior, typing in the mean time is a bad idea.  :)

    Parent
    Do you acknowledge Che Guevera's (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by oculus on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 08:34:30 PM EST
    extreme cruelty as a trusted member of Fidel Castro's administration?

    Parent
    It's leading murderer (5.00 / 3) (#44)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 08:52:04 PM EST
    was Che.

    a despicable figure.

    Parent

    All you have to do (none / 0) (#45)
    by Alien Abductee on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 09:06:51 PM EST
    is read Motorcycle Diaries to see what Che was about - Che.

    Parent
    Naw (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 09:16:03 PM EST
    You need to know about the thousands of people he murdered too.

    Parent
    Well, (none / 0) (#48)
    by Alien Abductee on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 09:27:45 PM EST
    then you get into issues of how the revolution brought doctors to Cuba, and the corruption of the previous regime, and whether doing awful things is sometimes necessary to better the condition of oppressed people. On the other hand, his direct words show his self-centered character. I thought his obliviousness to the actual state of the primarily indigenous people he met and how he imposed on them was shocking and despicable. And though he wrote it as a young man he revised it later. It expressed who he was, imo. I thought the movie was wonderful, but read the book later and despised him. He indicted himself.

    Parent
    Castro and Cuba (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by jhiestand on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 03:32:20 PM EST
    Castro came to power in Cuba for the simple fact that the United States government supported or at least did nothing about the dictatorship of Battista. As Harold Pinter said in his Nobel speech, "The United States supported and in many cases engendered every right wing military dictatorship in the world after the end of the Second World War. I refer to Indonesia, Greece, Uruguay, Brazil, Paraguay, Hati, the Phillippines, Guatamala, El Salvador, and Chile. The horror the United States inflicted on Chile in 1973 can never be purged and can never be forgiven."  Pinter could have included Cuba. I agree that human rights are bad in Cuba, but dictatorships like Battista are not known for human rights either. Cuba would be different if the United States had not imposed the embargo.

    50 years of excusemaking (5.00 / 3) (#21)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 03:35:21 PM EST
    is enough.

    Parent
    Castro's initial goal was good (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by Saul on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 05:49:40 PM EST
    They were rebelling against the Batista regime which was very repressive.  Trouble is these champions of liberty and revolution then get into power and then they become the main problem for the people.  This has been the experience from Mexico to Argentina.

    New boss/Old boss syndrome... (none / 0) (#58)
    by kdog on Fri Jan 02, 2009 at 02:11:26 PM EST
    yep, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.  Its why I have my libertarian anarchist streak, when the powers of your leaders are severely limited, liberty is much more likely to thrive.  Sure, its harder to solve problems, but it beats the inevitable alternative.

    The revolution was well-intentioned, imo, and I tend to believe Castro and Guevara's hearts were in the right place at the start...ending the oppresion of the US through their stooge Batista.  Then came the power and that's all she wrote...a leftist brand of tyranny replaced the right-wing brand.  They got so focused on the end they engaged in horrible means.

    It should be mentioned in their defense when the USA has its heart set on regime change up to and including assasination, is there a way to avoid totalitarian tyranny?  

    I would argue it is better to lose the revolution the right way than to mantain it the wrong way like Castro has, but I don't have the most powerful intelligence service in the world trying to kill me and prop up a stooge like Batista in my place either.  It would have been most interesting to have seen what would have come of the revolution if the US had minded their business.  Would Cuba have aligned so strongly with the USSR?  Would the tyrannical crackdown on dissidents been deemed necessary for national security?  Shame we will never know.

    Not that I buy that socialism and/or central planning is the path to freedom and happiness or anything...I tend to think free markets (real free markets, not rigged ones) and social libertariansim is a better bet, but what do I know?

    Parent

    kdog (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by Che's Lounge on Fri Jan 02, 2009 at 06:22:13 PM EST
    "Cuba, just like here in the US, has its good and its bad, foolish to deny either.  Castro was no friend to liberty, though Cuba is not without its achievements.  

    I love liberty too much to excuse its repression anywhere..."

    I Absolutely agree. My position here is:

    1. That there is mucho misinformation being disseminated in this thread.

    2. It is hypocritical to pontificate about the actions of other governments when our representative government (no?) has committed numerous atrocities around the world, including the embargo of Cuba.


    kdog (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by Che's Lounge on Fri Jan 02, 2009 at 06:44:10 PM EST
    I will try to check out your book. You may want to check out John Lee Anderson's book "Che Guevara - A Revolutionary Life". Anderson is very objective (He also writes for the New Yorker magazine and wrote "The Fall of Baghdad".

    What many fail to understand is that the very policies of US imperialism and colonialism are why his face adorns so many walls and shirts around the world. Guevara stood up to these policies and died trying to fight them, arguably in an over idealistic manner.

    But it's not the man, it's the philosophy that people idealize. Many of us can distill what he was fighting for from the person and understand that philosophy. His detractors are too simple minded to appreciate that fact. They just want another boogeymen to justify the perpetuation of capitalism, which ALWAYS fails sooner or later.

    I just read a few days ago (none / 0) (#2)
    by andgarden on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 02:56:06 PM EST
    that for the first time, a majority of Cubans living in Florida would like to see the embargo lifted.

    Heh. (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by Fabian on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 02:59:56 PM EST
    I keep wanting the Cuban regime to change just to see if all those ex-pats will return to Cuba.

    Parent
    I expect the real fight (none / 0) (#6)
    by andgarden on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 03:01:27 PM EST
    would be over appropriated land and property.

    As to going back? Who knows? I assume many, especially the latter generations, will stay.

    Parent

    Don't you think the ex pats may (none / 0) (#7)
    by oculus on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 03:02:30 PM EST
    or may not choose to visit their relatives in Cuba and also may or may not choose to send them money?  Doesn't mean they would want to move back to Cuba and certainly their kids and grandkids wouldn't.

    Parent
    Aid to family? Sure! (5.00 / 2) (#13)
    by Fabian on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 03:17:12 PM EST
    Giving up the good life here for an uncertain future there?  Not so sure.  Getting "their" property and assets back?  After how many generations?  

    No.  I rather expect Cuba will welcome with open arms only those who bring substantial assets with them.  The last thing a new government needs is endless demands and litigation from ex-pats. A boatload of cash will encourage a warm reception from both the government and the current citizens.  (who will likely have little sympathy for their more fortunate American brethren if they come armed with lawyers instead bearing gifts)

    Parent

    I give Castro some credit. (none / 0) (#3)
    by Fabian on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 02:57:34 PM EST
    His tenure has had some successes although human rights haven't been among them.  Economically, Cuba is doing relatively well for an island whose closest mainland neighbor refuses to trade with it.

    America has an enormous economic carrot to entice Cuban authorities to make positive changes.  It would be a shame not to use it.  

    The Cuban government is doing (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by oculus on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 03:00:22 PM EST
    relatively well and so are the "haves" in good with the government.  Ordinary people--not so much.  

    Parent
    They aren't living in Haiti. (none / 0) (#9)
    by Fabian on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 03:09:54 PM EST
    Island economies are tricky things.  If you exceed your ecosystem's capacity, you are deep trouble.  Most energy has to be imported, which makes it expensive.  The energy cost has to be paid for somehow, so you need to produce goods for export.  It's a delicate balance.  Cuba is far from a worst case scenario so they must be doing some things right.

    Parent
    If that is your standard of comparison, (5.00 / 3) (#11)
    by oculus on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 03:12:22 PM EST
    maybe.  Ordinary Cubans are assuredly doing better than people living in the Congo, Somalia, any number of places.  But, they are not living in communist nirvana--one for all and all for one.  

    Parent
    Never claimed it was a nirvana. (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by Fabian on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 03:28:12 PM EST
    A stable and apparently sustainable economy for decades indicates a pragmatic, if tyrannical, government.

    One political theory holds that economic stability is required for a representative government to be successful.  Cuba has that stability, which means conditions are favorable for a transition to a true representative government.  

    Parent

    From 1940-1952 (5.00 / 2) (#17)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 03:31:01 PM EST
    Cuba had a representative democracy.

    Parent
    As did Guatemala from 1944-1954 (none / 0) (#38)
    by MKS on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 07:37:04 PM EST
    Latin America was building its own organic democracies before McCarthyism took over....That they did not favor U.S. economic policies across the board was not good for them.

    Parent
    Define representative (none / 0) (#40)
    by Dadler on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 07:52:12 PM EST
    The Batista regime could hardly be called democratic, but I could believe it represented SOMEthing, just not the Cuban people.  

    Parent
    Brush up on your Cuban history (5.00 / 2) (#41)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 07:56:55 PM EST
    You will find that the years 1940-1952 are not the same as 1952-1959.

    Parent
    It was only the embargo (none / 0) (#8)
    by Repack Rider on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 03:09:31 PM EST
    That kept Castro in power.

    Kind of counterproductive, if you ask me.

    Castro government's repression of (none / 0) (#12)
    by oculus on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 03:14:19 PM EST
    Cuban people has kept Castro in power.  No embargo by other many other countries. Until Soviet Union collapsed, lots of subsidy from there.  Now Chavez is jumping into the breach. Raul Castro has developped eonomic ties with other countries.

    Parent
    U.S. policies in Latin America (none / 0) (#39)
    by MKS on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 07:39:00 PM EST
    have aided the dictators.....By ignoring and infringing on Latin American nationlism,  the U.S. allows demagogues to garner support.  Old as Machiavelli.

    Parent
    Full disclosure (none / 0) (#10)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 03:10:23 PM EST
    I am a Cuban-American.

    What jumped out at me was (none / 0) (#14)
    by oldpro on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 03:27:00 PM EST
    this:

    "I do not care for pretending that the Cuban regime is not repressive and a disaster for the Cuban people."

    Sort of a mirror of their next-door neighbor these days...just substitute 'American' for 'Cuban.'

    The parallels and contrasts are even more stark when you consider public policy and results, ie. healthcare, education.

    And poverty?  Homelessness?  Hunger?  I dunno...'disaster' seems to have become a relative term...perhaps a political judgment rather than a physical fact?

    Did I understand you correctly (none / 0) (#16)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 03:30:09 PM EST
    Did you just say that the Us has a government that is repressive in the style of the Cuban government?

    Please clarify this for me. So I know whether I want to engage this discussion.

    Parent

    No. Hadly "in the style of"... (none / 0) (#19)
    by oldpro on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 03:33:49 PM EST
    we have our own version of repressive.

    Just finished reading Greenwald's latest editorial on civil liberties.

    Am I overreacting?  Is he?

    Parent

    Hardly. Not 'Hadly.' Sheesh. (none / 0) (#20)
    by oldpro on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 03:35:01 PM EST
    I did not see him compare the US to Cuba (none / 0) (#22)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 03:35:58 PM EST
    If he did, then he is full of it.

    Parent
    No. He didn't. (none / 0) (#28)
    by oldpro on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 03:52:51 PM EST
    A great roundup of 2008, tho, and a cleareyed look at the slippery slope we're on, repressionwise.

    Parent
    Indeed (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 03:54:18 PM EST
    The problem is not that we are like Cuba, but rather that we are not different enough from Cuba.

    Parent
    Style of repression (none / 0) (#42)
    by Andreas on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 08:34:29 PM EST
    The US government uses a different style of repression. Just look at what happened during the last years in Iraq and in Guantanamo. The US government consists of war criminals.

    Parent
    The Buena Vista Social Club (none / 0) (#23)
    by Saul on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 03:38:29 PM EST
    documentary made by Cooter and the Dutch film maker was an amazing documentary.  Cooter was going to do a film on some Africans and their music coming down to Cuba and somehow they could not make it.  So he said what do I do now.  So to salvage his trip he decided to make a documentary on the old timers who were musical legends in Cuba in the 30 and 40s.  He gather them together and the Buena Vista Social Club was created.  They went all the way to Carnegie Hall. Love that documentary so I bought it.  

    "Cooter"? (none / 0) (#32)
    by shoephone on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 05:24:13 PM EST
    Uh, I think you mean Ry Cooder.

    Parent
    Yeah, I knew I had his last named misspelled (none / 0) (#34)
    by Saul on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 05:45:40 PM EST
    Thanks

    Parent
    It was a great film... (none / 0) (#59)
    by kdog on Fri Jan 02, 2009 at 02:15:36 PM EST
    Compay Segundo (sp?) is one of the coolest mofos who ever walked the planet in my book...the interviews with him made a lasting impression on me.

    And the music was awesome.

    Parent

    Repression-uh huh (none / 0) (#24)
    by Che's Lounge on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 03:42:41 PM EST
    Still haven't got the hubris to admit that the US is exponentially more repressive than Castro ever was. With the things our government is doing, it's galling to read criticizism of Castro.

    Yet it's tough to exist as a role model for egalitarian societies when the colonial imperialists won't let you buy IV catheters for your pediatric wards. And yet Cubans are healthier than either the Iraqis or us. They are smarter too. Their kids can READ. They are vaccinated. They are cared for.

    We have a far far larger prison population per capita than Cuba. How many taser deaths occur each year in Cuba? How come we don't EVER read about roving death squads grabbing people in the dead of night? You can't hide that from the folks in Miami, and they'd be screaming it from the rooftops if it existed.  

    How many homes does Castro own? How many palaces? Oh yeah, right. He's not a US puppet.

    And JFYI Hurricane Katrina slammed Cuba also. How many refugees did Katrina leave in Cuba?

    The list goes on and on.

    Cuba is not repressive. It's POOR.

    Discuss the embargo all you want, but don't preach about repression.

    Indeed (5.00 / 2) (#25)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 03:44:16 PM EST
    A representative comment of what I abhor.

    I thank you for that.

    Parent

    Cuba is both repressive and poor. (none / 0) (#26)
    by oldpro on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 03:50:11 PM EST
    We, on the other hand, are repressive and rich.

    As a country.

    Parent

    Our church had a (none / 0) (#49)
    by hairspray on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 09:35:42 PM EST
    hospitality program with Cuba.  We had Cuban physicians stay in our homes in Cincinnati while they took courses.  They were
    poor.
    But they had a committment to provide medical care as a moral obligation that did and does not yet exist in this country. The same with education.  Of course they are repressive in political liberties as we are not.  On the other hand, you can die without healthcare, just like you can die without civil liberties.

    Parent
    Che my friend.... (none / 0) (#60)
    by kdog on Fri Jan 02, 2009 at 02:30:51 PM EST
    ever read "Before Night Falls" by Reinaldo Arenas?  Really opened my eyes to the social repression that went down in Cuba.  

    Unless Arenas made it all up..but he sure as hell convinced me.

    Cuba, just like here in the US, has its good and its bad, foolish to deny either.  Castro was no friend to liberty, though Cuba is not without its achievements.  

    I love liberty too much to excuse its repression anywhere...

    Parent

    Not any more (none / 0) (#27)
    by Che's Lounge on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 03:52:27 PM EST
    Repressive and ARMED.

    Who say that Castro is great? (none / 0) (#33)
    by koshembos on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 05:30:24 PM EST
    Those people are my fellow leftists. They adored Stalin, think that Castro is the second coming, say that Hamas seeks peace and Saddam not such a bad guy.

    They didn't got sophisticated enough to say, don't attack Iraq without loving Saddam, opposing the embargo without also lauding the virtues of Castro and opposing the US, EU and Israel joint blockade of Gaza without calling a Taliban like group such Hamas nice guys.

    Evantually these people hate the Clinton for not being left enough and view the centrist Obama as the messiah.

    BTD (none / 0) (#47)
    by Che's Lounge on Thu Jan 01, 2009 at 09:20:11 PM EST
    Links please.

    full disclosure BTD: (none / 0) (#50)
    by cpinva on Fri Jan 02, 2009 at 12:49:04 AM EST
    i really could not be any more disinterested in your ethnicity. the same goes for everyone else's on this site. i feel the exact same way about gender. were it not for the fact that "jeralyn" is usually a female name, and you and TChris have been identified as males, i wouldn't know or care.

    that's the great thing about the internet, in the absence of clearly identified ethnicity or gender, you're forced to focus solely on the facts and logic the individual brings to bear in their posts. it almost brings a level of intellectual purity to the discussion.

    batista was tyranical thug, so is castro. che' was a hypocrite of a dr., fortunately killed before he could murder more innocents. no great loss to mankind. i remember when he was still alive, even his peers weren't all that impressed with him. a legend in his own mind.

    cuba is both politically repressive and dirt poor, with basic necessities subsidized by the gov't. yes, all are entitled to free health care and education. a good thing, no doubt.

    of course, they have a population smaller than texas, for an entire country. i haven't seen a reverse migration to cuba lately, so i reasonably assume it's not the marxist paradise so many "useful idiots" would have you believe.

    of course, these same "useful idiots" wouldn't be caught dead actually living in cuba, or any other "marxist paradise".

    funny thing about that.

    Disaster? (none / 0) (#51)
    by bernardab on Fri Jan 02, 2009 at 06:27:03 AM EST
    "Unlike many people, I do not care for pretending that the Cuban regime is not repressive and a disaster for the Cuban people."

    Apparently the massive slums in all those Latin American cities in countries supported by the U.S. are not disasters. Or peasants thrown off their land for big indigenous farmers or multi-nationals are not a disaster.

    Tens of thousands of Central Americans killed by repressive American-puppet regimes and the Contra terrorists are not a disaster? Sure Castro has imprisoned and executed people unjustly, but the numbers are on a much smaller scale than those the U.S. is responsible for.

    I am one of the few Americans who has visited Cuba, that was back in the Carter days when it was legal. I saw the government and social control, but ordinary Cubans approached me to talk to me even when they knew they would be observed. Of course, maybe there was a government informer among them from time to time.

    I didn't see people living in dire poverty though. At the time there were special stores for foreigners and I bought some goods there to give to people who had befriended me.

    Yes Marxist societies (none / 0) (#52)
    by Che's Lounge on Fri Jan 02, 2009 at 11:36:41 AM EST
    are expected to be paradise, otherwise they are labeled repressive governments. Of course, we have paradise here in the US because we can buy our cars in any color we choose while our military converts other countries sufficiently distant into prison states. Such double standards are one of many reasons that billions of people (aka "useful idiots") around the world hold this country in such contempt.

    Still waitin' on them links (none / 0) (#53)
    by Che's Lounge on Fri Jan 02, 2009 at 11:47:30 AM EST
    I understand it's not easy to refer references to THOUSANDS of people "murdered by Che". Google shows two or three people being executed (none by Guevara). The vast majority of those executed by the revolutionary courts (in the hundreds) were themselves torturers, murderers and rapists. The anticuban sites shows fabricated crosses and a link to merchandise to buy. The rest of the links are to Bautista's murderous regime.

    Donald (none / 0) (#55)
    by Che's Lounge on Fri Jan 02, 2009 at 12:48:47 PM EST
    We are encouraged to forget Bautista and remember the years before him, even though Cuba was expropriated (taken) by the US after the Spanish American war of 1898, and the Platt Amendment established our military dictatorship over Cuba in 1903. Bautista was a PRODUCT of that dictatorship. Ah paradise.

    Che (none / 0) (#63)
    by Slado on Sat Jan 03, 2009 at 10:54:51 AM EST
    Here is the link that will not change your opinion.

    Che was a murderous thug and Castro a disgrace.   Cuba will only be free again when Castro is dead and the Cuba opens itself up to free elections again.   It won't take long to bring that country up to speed with it's natural resources and tourisim industry.

    Too bad it had to suffer through a 50 year purgatory of Communist dictatorship.

    Slado (none / 0) (#65)
    by Che's Lounge on Sat Jan 03, 2009 at 03:37:47 PM EST
    So what your link boils down to is 180 people.

    Sure (none / 0) (#66)
    by Che's Lounge on Sat Jan 03, 2009 at 03:39:43 PM EST
    "It won't take long to bring that country up to speed with it's natural resources and tourisim industry."

    Just like Haiti?