Well, he’s going.
The concert is on Sunday and the lineup, according to a statement released by Juanes and the Cuban music institute and published in Granma, is impressive:
Amaury Pérez (Cuba), Danny Rivera (Puerto Rico), Cucú Diamante y Yerbabuena (Cuba-Venezuela), Juan Fernando Velasco (Ecuador), Jovanotti (Italia), Juanes (Colombia), Luis Eduardo Aute (España), Miguel Bosé (España), Olga Tañón (Puerto Rico), Orishas (Cuba), Silvio Rodríguez (Cuba), Van Van (Cuba), Carlos Varela (Cuba), Víctor Manuel (España) y X Alfonso (Cuba)
The statement also says that the concert will be broadcast on Cuban television and the signal will be available “without restriction” to broadcasters and websites in any country. In the
The statement also says, “There will not be presenters on stage,” just the musicians.
If you’re keeping score of the politics of this event, that means
“
And “
Just to make sure, a program will air on Cuban television tomorrow night showing “all the people who opposed the Cuban people having a good time on September 20.” That’s according to Amaury Perez, in an interview last week. Consider the program Vigilia Mambisa’s gift to the central committee’s propaganda team. Sadder still.
When I first wrote about this concert, I recognized some of the criticisms. But then and now, I side with those who decided not to make the perfect the enemy of the good, and who simply support a great musical event. For example, check out this young and wise Cuban American’s view on the “right to be inspired.” For all their years, those who warned the loudest about a Castro victory have handed him one on a silver platter.
Last week, Yoani Sanchez went out and recorded Cubans’ opinions of the concert on video, and put it on her blog with a brief comment that she’s happy to be in tune with her people.
100 comments:
Peters, to some people standing up for principle is more important than whatever propaganda "victory" is supposedly accrued by this decrepit regime. A music concert arranged by the regime, controlled by the regime, dictated by the regime....where does it all end?
chingon
chingon -- it ends when you and your type stop the fantasy. it is only a propaganda victory because those who oppose it made it so, not the cuban government. you gave it on a silver platter.
you can never convince any reasonable person of the harm this concert would do -- unless you are against the cuban people. which is exactly how it is seen once again, to the rest of the world. you maintain a position that is simply on the wrong side of everything -- and you try and wrap it into a moral stand where you have no morality.
what principle is there in opposing this, unless you are against the cuban people. only the most cynical and manipulative type would object to a concert that would be enjoyed by all those who attend, showing once again your true attentions. take your CANF and buy something nice you poor useful idiot
mitio
Stupid, when Lenin coined the term Useful Idiot it was describe credulous sycophants who would defend every crime and injustice committed by a "dictatorship of the proletariat." Sound familiar?
For me, I want to see the Cuban people have the freedom to decide for themselves who can perform in Havana, when and where...without the regime's permission and control. I guess that's the difference. Moral retards like yourself are perfectly willing to countenance the Cuban people's lack of freedoms as long as you don't have to live there and the situation perpetuates your ideological fantasies.
chingon
We need to keep the Cuban people as miserable as possible or they will never ever rise up.
I'm thinking another 50 years or so.
so you want to deprive the cuban people of the concert? just like the embargo, hurt the people and surround it with moral superiority. the worst type of gusano there is. and then add insults on top. disgusting
I'll tell you what's disgusting, people who again and again defend and apologize for an unrepentant dictatorship as long as they don't have to live under it.
chingon
the only thing that's disgusting is for your types to want to deny the concert to the cuban people,
it has nothing to do with defending the regime you jerk, it's about the cuban people which you don't care about.
and how do you know where i have lived. so again, if you don't know what you're talking about STFU
you are the one who is dictating, deciding what's good or bad. you are the dictator
useful idiot -- cubanologists who don't have a clue what they are talking about, incredulous sycophants who defend every gusano position at the behest of CANF and the multi-million dollar anti-cuba industry. it's time you useful idiots moved aside and let reality sink in
wow, such a lack of communication. listen, as much as one can be in favor of cultural exchanges (between enemies even) and as much as one is capable of putting politics aside, juanes has politicized this concert by calling it a concert for peace. peace between whom and under what conditions? juanes is extending that mantle of peace to a regime that doesn't deserve it. that's what drives the opposition on this side of the florida straits! and to equate opposition to this concert to a disregard of the cuban people is absolutely ludicrous. cuban american exiles, even the most crotchety, love their country and their people with all their hearts. and to conclude, it's hard to take comments made anonymously seriously.
anonymous, we are able to make a clear distinction between the cuban people and its government (which, after all, controls everything on the island and stands to benefit the most from this concert). we can get into this if you'd like, but the embargo has as much moral force behind it as the 80s anti-apartheid boycott. prove me wrong. and the facts are that fidel has been able to trade with whomever he likes for 50 years, so responsibility for the people's deprivations rest squarely with fidel and his cronies. as chingon points out, what is sad is the large number of apologists still available for one of the most repressive regimes in the western hemisphere. amazing!
Marielito, as I have said before, there can be no reasonable comparision with the South African sanctions. In apartheid South Africa, all the mass organizations of that country requested a cultural boycott. In Cuba, I don't think one person has come out against this cultural exchange.
leftside, i laughed so hard i almost fell from my chair. "mass organizations of that country"? wow! all the mass organizations in cuba that are allowed to breathe are controlled by the government. go to http://blog.marielito.com to find out what happens to anyone that attempt to say the slightest thing that contravenes the wishes of the government. do you have another argument for me because that one fell flat on its face. mass organizations! i am STILL laughing! oh, as opposed to the "cuban people's" unanimous consent on the elian gonzalez case? please!
leftside, i checked out your profile. a proud socialist = faithful apologist for one of the world's most repressive regimes. based on what you state on your own profile, dubbing you a socialist is an insult to real socialists (the ones that are democratically elected in western europe).
Well I am just glad all sides as exemplified by this post and the attached comments are just going to kick back, enjoy the music, and forget about politics... NOT!
Vecino de NF
PS In the last century every October Revolution parade in Red Square was adorned by at least one banner reading MIR MIR which translates as Peace to the World. Eastern Europeans usually translated it as a Soviet Desire to take over the World, the World!
hey, leftside. i will kick back and enjoy the music with a full stomach, voting rights, and first amendments protections (which is more than can be said for the cuban people on the island). fyi, the playlist on my iphone include silvio rodriguez, los van van, orishas, and (yes) juanes. i have no intention of removing any of them. as stated earlier, i hate it when music become politicized! and the facts is that juanes is the one that provoked the overwhelming response from the exile community by choosing to make this a concert for peace at la plaza de revolucion. the real political implications of his actions cannot be overlooked. but i love music (and enjoy his), so i'll be kicking back!
leftside, the cuban government would love nothing more than for the US to declare unilateral, unconditional peace (which might happen despite the objections of the cuban american community). i have no use for that brand of peace because it leaves the status quo (no political freedom and economic misery for the average cuban) intact. oh, and don't tell me that trade with the US will usher in a new era of prosperity for the cuban people. i was there in the days of the russian subsidy and we could barely scrape by.
On Planet Leftside, Cuban mass organizations exist.
Marielito and Chingon, you both have made me so very proud today. I could kiss the both of you. What more can I add? Leftside has taken shelter. Unless Juanes and his cohorts incite a riot upon stage, yielding a great act of insurrection against the existing powers of Cuba, I wish for him to choke on the microphone. Neither will likely take place. But isn't it a beautiful thing to think so? Everything will go as planned, as Juanes has undeniably been briefed on his presupposed duties and behaviors. For many from the Leftside faction, the concert will be simply perceived as being a peaceful event. The thick gray smog of oppression suspended over the crowd will have to be shunted. But who needs a musician to stimulate an uprising? To the passive masses: You will never read this.
The Hate
Marielito, judging from your laughter, I guess you did not understand that your logic was ripped to shreds. You tried comparing South Africa's massive domestic support (led by the ANC) for sanctions and cultural embargoies with the pittance of support the embargo has on the island of Cuba. Maybe you can clarify whether there are 4, 5 or 6 "dissidents" who have come out in support of the US sanctions on the island? I've lost count. Or if you want an ever greater challenge, try to give us the name of ONE Cuban who opposes this Juanes concert. Then you can compare those 4 or 5 people to the moral position of the ANC - who was persecuted, repressed and labeled a terrorist organization by the racist South African government in close collusion with the US Government (Cuba was the ANC's main international supporter at the time, something Mandela has not forgotten. Fidel was awarded their country's highest honor).
cuba fought against the apartheid regime, unlike american policy. you gusanos just don't ever get it. i couldn't believe it when you objected to the concert being for peace -- yeah you all love the cuban people, just keep supporting policies that hurt them economically, if you were really Cubans, not gusanos, you'd be fighting for the end of the embargo, not for the continuation. but then it's so much easier to scream from the sidelines. what crap
and now we have the hate wanting to kiss his gusanos in arms, wonder if he uses tongue?
Leftside, the Cuban people have no means to express an independent opinion about the embargo or the Juanr concert or anything else without risking prison. If you don't get that I can't help you. The fact that you think there are only 4 or 5 dissidents in Cuba (no quotes required because many of them are really in jail for doing no more than opposing the government) is proof that the people's will does not prevail there. There is something wrong in a country where only a few disagree with the government. I love peace. I have fought in a war and can tell you that peace is a wonderful thing. What I object to is the use of peace movements, non-aligned movements, etc to justify 50 years of repression. I lived in Cuba, leftside, and know what I speak of and the steady stream of refugees from the island since 1959 is proof that there is something seriously wrong with your socialist paradise.
And your gusano label has no effect. If it's meant to describe those of us that wish to see the end of the Castro regime and pray for a democratic Cuba, count me in! How you arrive at the conclusion that we hate Cuba, I have no idea. Like exiles throughout history, we weep for our homeland daily.
The difference is that your kind wont stop in any means to achieve their goal, even hurting the cuban people. The history of US-Cuba relationships is filled with people of your kind that didn't hesitate to execute terrorist actions, biological warfare, economical strangle, military invasion and whats not in order to achieve that goal.
Did you hurt the Cuban government with all that? Sure thing. But how many Cuban citizens not related with the government were hurt and killed in the name of that goal? How is possible that after all the real or fictitious evil deeds of Castro your support in Cuba is almost non-existent?
In Cuba lots of people disagree with the government and are eager to try something different, but even between them, your position is seen as a pathetic opportunistic and demagogue bunch that only care of profiting of the divide and don't think at all about Cuban people wellness.
You weep for your homeland, thats for sure, but are a selfish bunch that don't care about what happens to the Cuban people at all.
Luckily not all the exiles think the same way and moderation seems to be gaining a foothold lately.
"Leftside, the Cuban people have no means to express an independent opinion about the embargo or the Juanr concert or anything else without risking prison."
This is one of the most silly things I've read lately. If the Cuban people disagree with the Juanes concert the will simply are not going to go. And I doubt that they will end in prison for not going.
Please, stop insulting the common sense.
"The fact that you think there are only 4 or 5 dissidents in Cuba (no quotes required because many of them are really in jail for doing no more than opposing the government) is proof that the people's will does not prevail there."
Dissidents, as what the word implies there are a lot. Dissidents as the meaning the term is being used lately, very little. Even the number of "political prisoners" is around 50 now, if those are "many of them" they are a small force indeed in Cuban society and the chances of making changes are non-existent.
"and the steady stream of refugees from the island since 1959 is proof that there is something seriously wrong with your socialist paradise."
Cuban emigration is nothing compared with the Mexican on (just to put an example). Following your own logic there is something seriously wrong with your neoliberal paradise. And thats correct, is is called poverty. Most of the Cuban migration from the last 20-30 years is for economic motives.
And if those Mexicans could become legal in one year, the illegal immigration would be 10 times greater than is now.
But you know? Is really funny that those Cubans escaping from the communist dictatorship arrive illegally to the US, spend a year to get their residence permit and the first thing they do is go back to Cuba to visit parents and friends. Interesting, huh?
the whole basis for the gusano comments is to point out the hypocrisy of their position -- they say they weep for the cuban people, but support policies that do nothing but harm them. and in context to cuban-american historical relations it is only seen as self-serving.
if they were really concerned for the people, and not potential future position, they would work against the travel restrictions and embargo.
they would work towards reform instead of destruction. but 50 years hasn't taught them anything and that's why there is no patience for these people when they say such ridiculous things as they do, eg the concert comments.
for them cuba needs to be strangled, isolated and punished, and then they say they are doing it for the people. don't sell me bullshit and tell me it's perfume.
The real punishers of the Cuban people are those who day after day argue for their continued entrapment in a system designed to control every facet of their lives: no freedom to work, to dream, to build better lives for their children. You think the lives of the Cuban people would be better off with an extra ration of rice or chicken parts at the end of each month. Some of us think they deserve a bit more...like freedom to make choices on how they want to live their lives.
chingon
Phil, you are right, the concert is a significant advance toward Peace. But there is a fly in the ointment. Amaury Perez just gave an interview which threatens to disturb the tranquility of the triumphant Concert for Peace.
Breaking with his past support for the Revolutionay Authorities, this Perez guy had the gall to say that all Cubans, even the gusanos in exile, should have a "right" to sing at the concert! Can you imagine? What can we do to shut this guy up before he wrecks the event?
"Some of us think they deserve a bit more...like freedom to make choices on how they want to live their lives."
Agreed, but the methods you are promoting restrict more their freedoms and make their life miserable with the ONLY goal to force them to revolt against their government.
Is an hypocrite position at best and completely cynical from any rational POV.
the embargo and hostility including the pubic stated aims at overthrowing the regime is the prime reason why the cuban govt continues its restrictions on civil liberties (which any nation would and has done historically)
it is disgusting for these gusanos to say we want to continue to punish the cuban people because we want them to be free. if you want them to be free leave them the hell alone and let them advance on their terms, not restricted under your terms.
but you'll just never let that truth sink in.
and your extremism only helps to undermine your position as we know that what you say is a lie -- because you just don't have a fricking clue what the other side is trying to say.
wow, chingon. this is like talking to a table. you know, it's easy for individuals with no stake in the game (i.e., haven't lived through it, don't have any relatives on the island) to express their wholehearted support for a repressive regime with a fairly consistent track record of squashing dissent and starving its own people (again, responsibility for cuba's economic problems rest with fidel, che, and the rest of those incompetent barbudos that haven't a clue how to run the country). this gusano is all about getting rid of the embargo not because there is anything morally reprehensible about it (if it was good for south africa, it's good for cuba), but because it takes away the excuse fidel has been using to starve and repress his own people. once that boogeyman is gone, what else will they have left?
but getting back to the concert, did amaury perez really say that? why would anyone object to those statements? again, if this isn't an event totally controlled by the cuban authorities, what's wrong with a little difference of opinion. then again, your desire to quell this sort of dissent is right in line with the approach fidel himself would take. i see your true colors.
and who was it that said that the people wouldn't attend the concert if they didn't approve of it? first of all, from the perspective of the average cuban, this is just an opportunity to listen to good music and have a good time. if (and this is a big if) they happen to be aware of the controversy brewing over this overseas, they wouldn't care. their lives are so miserable, they'd be willing to sit through a million fidel speeches to listen to a little juanes, van van, orishas, and silvio. it's obvious to me that whoever made the comment about cubans opting out hasn't lived there. don't you realize that the government ensures attendance to these propaganda events by bussing people there? again, my issue is with juanes, not with the cuban people. if the concert is to go forward, let them enjoy it. i am disappointed that he is promoting as a concert for "peace without borders" when peace is the last thing that the average cuban (both here and there) has ever experienced. to extend the mantle of peace to a regime that has done nothing to promote it shows a level of political naivete that's astounding. that's why i think musicians should stay out of politics. you know, if juanes had gone to cuba for a regular concert (without any political overtones), we wouldn't be having this discussion.
and listen, the presence of danny rivera, a puerto rican trovador that supports the violent elements of puerto rico's independence movement, speaks for itself about the overt pro-revolutionary tone of this concert. for juanes to pretend otherwise is disingenous.
and listen, the presence of danny rivera, a puerto rican trovador that supports the violent elements of puerto rico's independence movement, speaks for itself about the overt pro-revolutionary tone of this concert. for juanes to pretend otherwise is disingenous.
"and who was it that said that the people wouldn't attend the concert if they didn't approve of it? first of all, from the perspective of the average cuban, this is just an opportunity to listen to good music and have a good time. if (and this is a big if) they happen to be aware of the controversy brewing over this overseas, they wouldn't care."
This is the whole point. You guys are trying to deny the Cubans to have a good time with this concert.
And yes, they are aware because the authorities happily pointed to all the idiotic fuss in the other side of the pond, while keeping themselves in a more agreable position.
As for peace... You are wrong. You might want to promote political freedoms and whatsnot, but since the bay of pigs there has been peace in Cuba.
And again, the political overtone is from the contra-revolution. Cuban government has used only the fanaticism over there to point out the wrongs of the opposition. They even allowed the artist to express freely themselves at the stage, so what exactly are the political overtones you are talking about?
i am not trying to deny the cuban people anything. there are many artists that go to cuba, put on a concert, and no one says a peep about it in miami or elsewhere. why? because they are going to cuba to entertain and let the music speak for itself.
political overtones? i thought i'd pointed them out. first, there is the "peace without borders" label. having a concert with this label endorses the host as a promoter of peace. the fact is that the regime has done nothing of the sort. it has imprisoned its dissenters or force them into exile. that is not peace by ANY definition. by YOUR definition, south africa has had peace since the Boer War, which is the last time a foreign power set foot in the country. second, there is the musical lineup (only acts friendly to the regime allowed). and finally, danny rivera's presence is the clincher. i remember this guy from my time in cuba and he is a huge supporter of the violent arm of the independence movement there. that speaks volumes as to the concert's message.
i say again, if juanes were organizing a run-of-the-mill concert in cuba without any of these obvious nods to the regime, no one would be saying anything. and i am with amaury perez. let's have gloria estefan or willy chirino up there! willy is willing to go as long as he can sing ya viene llegando!
wow! i just caught the twisted logic forthcoming from ac on the reasons why cuba has had to crack down on civil liberties. ac, the embargo HAS been a rather convenient excuse for the government to repress its people. that's one of the reasons i would argue for its removal. to get rid of the excuse. you won't see ANY chance in the civil liberties pictures. as to attempts to overthrow the government by violent means, the kennedy administration forswore that effort as part of the deal with khruschev. why the cuban government choose to act as if that hasn't happened, i don't know. again, i would suggest this is a convenient excuse to repress the people. history might show us many examples of this, but we don't have to accept them as positive developments. the bush administration's attempts to do the same here in the US post 9/11 were equally misguided and reprehensible. no excuse, ac. no excuse.
wow! i just caught the twisted logic forthcoming from ac on the reasons why cuba has had to crack down on civil liberties. ac, the embargo HAS been a rather convenient excuse for the government to repress its people. that's one of the reasons i would argue for its removal. to get rid of the excuse. you won't see ANY chance in the civil liberties pictures. as to attempts to overthrow the government by violent means, the kennedy administration forswore that effort as part of the deal with khruschev. why the cuban government choose to act as if that hasn't happened, i don't know. again, i would suggest this is a convenient excuse to repress the people. history might show us many examples of this, but we don't have to accept them as positive developments. the bush administration's attempts to do the same here in the US post 9/11 were equally misguided and reprehensible. no excuse, ac. no excuse.
Yet the rationale to keep the embargo is "trade with the enemy". As long as US considers Cuba an hostile country, Cubans has the right to consider US the same and prosecute and imprison those who work for a foreign power.
Do you see a magical circle there?
AC, Fidel has charmed you, hasn't he? Yes, he has done that to many. He is like a god of sorts, a supreme King: He has reared and inoculated his people with a great fear in him. They must love him. They must fear him. He has denatured them; rather reformed their nature and castigated those who could not adopt such a nature. It is a matter of human-programming, a basic tenet of the socialist movement. None of these occurences are novel, but rather recurrent modes of fascism or autocracy--existent since the origins of humanity. Fidel's Revolucion had only to do with personal gain. You fail to recognize this.
With or without the lifting of the embargo, I do not believe the mass and silent majority of the Cuban people have it in them to do anything but support their King. Those who had it in them have already left, as they lost hope in this mass majority (it was not in their nature and nurture to accept an imprisoned life; they were, in the end, intelligent and fortunate Cubans). And yes, it has been fifty-years. You must know, I do not care for the majority of the Cuban people, as I cannot aid those who fail to fight for their own freedoms. They are, in many ways, worse than Fidel; they are his foundation, his true sons and daughters, and they will be absent of progress until they manifest their discontent, that is, if they truly carry such a quality. Prove me wrong, I say to them. But I do feel a deep sense of gloom and despair for those who have been sentenced to 25 years (that was always the chief difference between Fidel and Batista). I have come to terms with knowing I may never see a free, democratic and populist Cuba.
You are deluded pal and if you care to notice, your are using a straw man argument, so my apologies if I don't take you seriously. Nevertheless, here we go.
I have not shown any kind of support for Fidel in my posts, I just stated a point of view that is rather neutral (a concept hard to grasp in these topics).
At least you are honest and clearly states that you don't care for the majority of the Cuban people, so please, complete the argument making clear that you supported and still supports policies that have affected and affect them directly, making their lives worse of they could be.
And following your reasoning, if the majority of the Cuban people are Fidel's true sons and daughters and don't care about regime change, if a few of you living outside the island want it against the will of that majority, then you are not better than Fidel reasons for the revolution, you are fighting for your own selfish reasons, it does not have anything to do with the well being of the Cuban people.
Can we continue from those premises?
luis p, there is no doubt that fidel's socialist paradise has enthralled a good number of those (like ac and leftside) that see it as a constant source of annoyance to the imperial overlord they truly despise(yes, the very one that grants them the right to express themselves as they see fit). however, i am not in agreement with the notion that the cuban people feel the same way about fidel and his regime. after all, people STILL leave the first chance they get (and by any means necessary). any acquiescence forthcoming from the cuban people has either been purchased or coerced. that's my observation from speaking to recent arrivals and from return trip to the island. as evidenced by the presence of home-spun (and in no way propelled by either the US or the exile community) dissident movement, there are still plenty of people that won't leave and won't be quiet either. My uncle, sentenced to 20 years in 2003, is among them. See http://blog.marielito.com/ for more on him.
as much as i cringe every time i see un acto de repudio and am temporarily enraged by the depravity of certain elements of the cuban people, i have to recognize that the great majority are ordinary people whose will to fight has been stunned by the government's intolerance of even the most innocuous form of dissent (see the case of Panfilo, sentenced to two years in prison for saying that Cubans need food in front of a camera). it takes EXTRAORDINARY people to fight that (and some have and are now in prison). those of us that are over there enjoying the fruits of freedom and prosperity don't count (excepting those that have literally taken up arms to attempt to do something about the castro brothers).
ac, you are parroting the same sorts of arguments that those of us that have to live with the cuba issue daily have heard time and time again from those that openly support the regime. so don't try to fool anyone here. case in point is the claim that ANY dissent in cuba HAS to be "working for a foreign power." that is very much NOT the case, yet you are repeating EXACTLY what the cuban government claimed in my uncle's trial (although they were unable to prove it by any internationally recognized rules of evidence). you claim that the embargo is hurting the cuban people. again, you parrot what every billboard in cuba also claims. again, this is NOT SO because cuba has the freedom to trade with any other country in the world and has regressed in its economic status from its position in 1959. the blame for this sits with the regime. you claim that cuba has to be in a constant state of war because of the enmity of the US. again, hostilities ended in 1962. the cuban armed forces could have easily squashed any subsequent freelance efforts WITHOUT resorting to emergency measures. if that excuse is no good here in the good old US and A, it's no good in cuba either.
how would it be possible to conclude that you are a staunch apologist for the castro regime? that's ALL you've been doing in this thread?
"It takes EXTRAORDINARY people to fight that"
I don't have a gripe for fighting the government, I just don't like the means. I won't complain as long as you recognize that the fight is against the government, not the people.
Supporting the blockade just does things harder for the Cuban people, government officials won't even notice.
And what I find abhorrent is the rationale besides that policy: to make things as bad as possible for the Cuban people to drive them to desperation force them to revolt against the government.
You can chew and reinterpret the argument all you want, but thats the naked truth.
ac, to take a step back and look at this embargo thing objectively, it's totally ineffective (with its goal being primarily to starve the cuban government of resources) the second country like spain, venezuela, mexico, etc., trade with cuba. on that basis alone we should chuck it. the moral argument for its existence, however, i believe stands up to the test. engaging in trade with a repressive dictatorship (and it's the government i am referring to here because a cuban individual/company can't set up shop and trade with a company in the US or anywhere else) is reprehensible. it was the case with south africa and remains the case for cuba. again, i don't know how many times i have to tell you that the embargo doesn't starve anyone. fidel has been starving the cuban people by choice. if you want to remain blind to that reality, i can't help you. yet i have another reason to get rid of the embargo. without the embargo, what excuse will the cuban government have for being unable to deliver economic prosperity and political freedoms to its people? i think it's time to call the bluff!
"hat ANY dissent in cuba HAS to be 'working for a foreign power.'"
I didn't state that, it was you. And thats the rationale the Cuban argument used, if you want to finish that, remove the cause. Is not that hard, just stop considering Cuba an hostile country.
"this is NOT SO because cuba has the freedom to trade with any other country in the world"
Then you don't have a clue of the implications of the embargo.
"how would it be possible to conclude that you are a staunch apologist for the castro regime? that's ALL you've been doing in this thread?"
Because you are answering to the image you have in your mind instead of paying attention to what actually I said.
btw, i don't know where you got that rationale, but it's certainly NOT my intention to starve anyone in cuba with the hopes of revolt. that's an incredibly indirect means of achieving that result. if you find statements from cuban americans to back up your rationale, i challenge you to point me in that direction. last i checked, the rationale (which is a moral one) is that it's not right to do business with a guy that has enslaved his people. of course, the cold war had something to do with it as well. oh, and let's not forget that the embargo was ORIGINALLY put in place in response to uncompensated appropriations of US-owned property and businesses on the island. under those circumstances, a trade embargo is a reasonable response. THAT particular issue remains to be addressed as well.
"ac, to take a step back and look at this embargo thing objectively, it's totally ineffective"
Has been totally ineffective from the point of view of promoting regime change. It has affected to a fairy large degree the Cuban population and has been used as a pretext to restrict the freedoms and keep the status quo.
"engaging in trade with a repressive dictatorship (and it's the government i am referring to here because a cuban individual/company can't set up shop and trade with a company in the US or anywhere else) is reprehensible"
Then don't be a hypocrite and don't trade with dictatorships anywhere in the world, not only Cuba. Nor promote them when you don't like legit governments. If USA actually did that, it could deal with Cuba from a superior moral standpoint, but the fact is that it can't.
"yet i have another reason to get rid of the embargo. without the embargo, what excuse will the cuban government have for being unable to deliver economic prosperity and political freedoms to its people?"
Agreed, Cuban government is responsible for the economic situation in Cuba, I never stated anything different. But the blockade has make things harder and has contributed to a certain degree to make things worse for them. Remove the embargo and let them face the responsibilities from their own shortcomings.
Who knows, perhaps thats the swiftest way to promote regime change over there.
"but it's certainly NOT my intention to starve anyone in cuba with the hopes of revolt. that's an incredibly indirect means of achieving that result."
It doesn't matter if it was your intention or not, is the rationale behind it. Think a little bit for yourself and tell me what other conclusion we can derive from this policy.
'As long as US considers Cuba an hostile country, Cubans has the right to consider US the same and prosecute and imprison those who work for a foreign power.'
i am quoting YOU! there are two fallacies here. first, the assumption that ALL local dissent MUST be working for the enemy. second, the premise that having hostilities with a foreign power is an excuse to repress civil liberties across the board.
listen, ac, if it looks like a duck and walks like a duck, it's a duck! like i said, i have more at stake when it comes to the topic of cuba than you could possibly have. i can only assume that your staunch support of the cuban regime (which is well documented in this thread without the need for me to highlight it) is born out of your deep hatred of the US. Assuming you live in the US, don't forget that it's the very place that allows you to express yourselves in opposition to the government in power. My uncle got 20 years for doing even less than that. See http://blog.marielito.com/ for more information.
I never said that Cuba was doing right by treating the dissidents as mercenaries, but by considering Cuba a hostile state the US is openly declaring its hostility towards Cuba. And since Cuba has the right to defend itself they can shamelessly apply that argument and lock down the opposition.
And your second argument is sooo naive that it doesn't needs and answer. At war time and war-like situations civil are repressed in terms of the greater good.
"i have more at stake when it comes to the topic of cuba than you could possibly have"
I like your medium-like attitudes, honestly.
"i can only assume that your staunch support of the cuban regime (which is well documented in this thread without the need for me to highlight it) is born out of your deep hatred of the US"
I've been fairly neutral in my comments. I don't have a shred of hatred towards the US and I have not been supporting the Cuban government in any way.
"Assuming you live in the US, don't forget that it's the very place that allows you to express yourselves in opposition to the government in power"
Well, your medium skills needs more polishings, there is more to the world that US. And as for Cuba, I was there recently and had the chance to verify lots of things by myself.
My advise? Do the same. Cuba is not heaven nor hell and the amount of crap floating around regarding Cuba is abysmal, so go there and see how thing are by yourself.
ac, i was born and raised in cuba, have sustained my ties with the country since leaving, and have gone back myself. you would not be the first castro regime sympathizer (nor the last) to go to the island with rosy-colored glasses, see what you want to see (or are shown), and come back convinced of your previous convictions. the only cuba i have ever known has been one steep in poverty and repression, and for you to argue that the regime is innocent of this and the entire blame rests with an ineffective embargo and non-existent hostilities is preposterous. so you are telling me that, for 50 years, the cuban government has been SO ineffectual that it hasn't been able to extricate itself from the allegedly devastating consequences of a unilateral embargo. That kind of incompetence is usually dealt with at the ballot box. the problem is that the cuban ballot boxes all point to a single party and a single leader. and when anyone has even tried to PROPOSE change....SQUASHED! like a bug.
my medium skills have been polished from 30 years of dealing with the likes of you (i.e., people with no stake in the matter interjecting their own agendas into our affairs). again, if i am wrong about your lack of stake in this conversation, identify yourself!
AC, you know nothing of man's reputation on this earth. You are a contemporary American, who wishes to deal with recalcitrant men through non-forceful means. Concerning the nature of Cuba's regime, there is only one invariable method for acquiring liberty as we know it.
Luis P, you are a damn a cynic, but I believe you sound quite sane and sophisticated, though I am sure there is a premise behind your despair. Cubans who came subsequent to the failings of the Revolucion fathom this despair.
Marielito, I commed you as well. It is my sworn duty as a Cuban-American to take up arms with those who yearn for liberty and reside in the island, against the powerful hand of the Revolucion. But do not fool yourself with your perceptions of the Cuban people's abilities. It only takes one kind of individual to rise up against the flames: That is the fearless men like your uncle, who would rather die in his attempts at freedom than face another day of imprisonment on the island. He is in a prison within a prison. Just like the balseros, life on the island is like a slow death. But what does this all mean? It means the righteous are simply outnumbered by the masses. So what does this infer about the Cuban people? It all hurts me very much, but you must not shroud yourself with such false pretenses that the people carry. Do not let them fool you. I know them all to well.
The Hate
and as pertains a government right's to self-defense during wartime, i am not naive. however, peace has prevailed in cuba since october 1962. its sovereignty hasn't been threatened by anyone. an economic embargo is not an act of aggression. it's an unilateral act meant to express disapproval with the actions of the embargo's intended target. i say again, if it was good for south africa (and believe me, THAT one was a bit MORE widespread and DID effect the south african people), it's good for cuba. but getting back to this supposed state of emergency in cuba. a 50-year emergency? give me a break! post 1962, the emergency was over. after THAT year, this can only be considered an excuse to monopolize power, plain and simple.
What I am or from were I come is my own business. The best you can do is guess.
Again, either you are speaking with yourself or you seriously believe that not being antagonistically against the Cuba government means that I supported them. There is something called neutrality that is missing in the US-Cuba divide and its a good time to discover it for your own amazement.
"the only cuba i have ever known has been one steep in poverty and repression"
Hmmm... thats a wide statement that seems to be true at any point after 1492.
"and for you to argue that the regime is innocent of this"
Where did I argued that the government was innocent? I've clearly stated that the Cuban government was responsible for the economic situation there, didn't I?
"That kind of incompetence is usually dealt with at the ballot box"
This is a tricky statement, a ballot box putted George W. Bush TWICE in the presidency chair. Ok, no more American bashing (note that making fun of Bush Jr is not necessarily bashing America), lets try a different example: "Democracy is two wolves and a lab deciding whats today dinner".
But thats just for fun, I don't have anything against democracy, republics nor even constitutional monarchies. Just don't forget that ballots are not a magical solution and every government system has problems of its own.
As for the incompetence... is to be expected from a country the size of Cuba standing in the way of a superpower as US. As a matter of fact, they long resilience is not precisely a sign of incompetence, just the opposite.
"my medium skills have been polished from 30 years of dealing with the likes of you (i.e., people with no stake in the matter interjecting their own agendas into our affairs). again, if i am wrong about your lack of stake in this conversation, identify yourself!"
Sadly that amounts to nothing. You still don't have the slightest idea of what the likes of me are trying to say. Please, keep yourself cool and reread again my arguments and try to figure out were I stand.
"AC, you know nothing of man's reputation on this earth"
I don't have use for reputation. I deal with facts, thats the only thing that counts.
"You are a contemporary American"
Nope, I'm not.
"who wishes to deal with recalcitrant men through non-forceful means."
If it can be avoided, yes. Besides, what right do you have to forcefully remove a government you don't like against the will of the majority?
"Concerning the nature of Cuba's regime, there is only one invariable method for acquiring liberty as we know it."
Yes, If the Cubans choose that method I can eagerly can lend them a hand. But things are different if forceful change is promoted from the outside, isn it?
"...against the powerful hand of the Revolucion."
Again, how long have been since your last visit to Cuba? The hand of the revolution is not that almighty as you think, and there are lots of fissures you can see with the naked eye. At some point in the past repression might be present, but right now what you call repression is just inertia.
But again, if you take arms against the government as the situation is now, the only thing you will achieve is to polarize the society towards the government. Your rebellion will be squashed and the government will radicalize further, so you are advised. Do it at your own risk.
"however, peace has prevailed in cuba since october 1962. its sovereignty hasn't been threatened by anyone."
Wrong. Cuba has been constantly under siege by the US government, first because of its alignment in the cold war, later because the fall of the eastern block also looked like the end of Cuba government, so instead of attempting alternate ways they went head-on strengthening the blockade and promoting subversion.
Cuba government can't help but feel themselves threatened. And yes, in more than one sense, Cuba has been in an emergency situation for the last 50 years.
Or to be more accurate, Cuba never let go the emergency situation and built their society around that.
"If it can be avoided, yes. Besides, what right do you have to forcefully remove a government you don't like against the will of the majority?"
When was the will of the majority last known in Cuba? Oh, and spontaneous expressions of government support at the Plaza de la Revolución don't count. Again, let's get back to those ballot boxes (which can spawn mistakes like GWB, I grant you, but have self-correcting tendencies).
"At some point in the past repression might be present, but right now what you call repression is just inertia."
Let me tell you, that inertia is taking quite a toll on my uncle. It certainly feels like repression to him.
AC, I am glad you are able to examine this issue with such cool detachment. It's evidence enough that you have no stake in this. So we've established that you are not an American, yet you enjoy some of our same freedoms to express yourself as you see fit. Just don't forget that Cubans aren't as lucky as you are. They go to prison for expressing the sort of views you've shared with us.
"later because the fall of the eastern block also looked like the end of Cuba government, so instead of attempting alternate ways they went head-on strengthening the blockade and promoting subversion."
What are you referring to?
Again, all neat excuses to cover up for the Cuban government's own failings. There is no doubt that Cuba was kept under strict surveillance (my dad used to be a radar operator in the Cuban armed forces and can vouch for this) because of its open alignment with the Soviet Union, but there was no naval blockade in place post 1962 and no concerted effort on the part of the US government to overthrow the Castro regime. The embargo has been the only expression of disapproval, and look how ineffectual that has turned out to be.
AC, I am intrigued. What's your stake in this? You are so adamant to defend the Castro regime. I am curious!
"When was the will of the majority last known in Cuba? "
Well, at least I don't witness any massive and spontaneous expression AGAINST the government. It happened only once in 1994 (if I recall correctly), never since.
"Let me tell you, that inertia is taking quite a toll on my uncle. It certainly feels like repression to him."
Agreed, but "felt like repression" does not mean that there is actually repression.
"They go to prison for expressing the sort of views you've shared with us."
I went recently there and I found loud individual expressions of discomfort (to put it blandly) to be of common occurrence. Never witness any kind of repression against the perpetrators.
It seems that how and where you said things there matters.
ac, it looks like we are getting somewhere! it SHOULDN'T matter how or when one complains against one's government. or do you object to that principle? if you do, you could hardly be called a democrat. then again, if you are not american, it's possible that you are not accustomed to our much robust degree of political discourse. we can call our presidents nazis and get away with it. can you?
let me not mince words this time, ac, because you seem to enjoy playing verbal acrobatics. it IS repression when someone goes to jail for proposing change WITHIN the bounds of the regime's own constitution. that is precisely what happened to my uncle and there is no other way to describe it. how many relatives do you have rotting in cuban jails? what's your stake in this debate?
and you don't see demonstrations because the last one in 1994 was crushed like a nut! even minor demonstrations, such as those organized by the damas en blanco, were squashed by government-sponsored goon squads. how is dissent to be expressed in that context? i am familiar with the constant griping you are referring to, but, even when i return to cuba in 2001, one had to be VERY careful about unguarded comments. that's a terrible way to live! how do you sleep at night as you defend that sort of repression? again, your comments speak volumes. your subsequent claims of neutrality notwithstanding. you've been nothing but quite partisan in this debate. yet i still don't know what you gain by this!
AC, as an American tourist there are matters you will never understand. As we can see, perceptions between both sides remain unaltered. And the war will continue. May you continue with your travels to Cuba; and may you continue to believe you have immersed yourself in the culture and political ideals of the country. This is all very typical and predictable of men like yourself. You believe you are a carrier of peace, but you do not truly know your true identity. Perhaps you will find it in Cuba, a country that relishes the arrival of men of your nature, for you are, after all, their agent of dissemination. They will treat you well for your services.
I think AC earlier stated he wasn't American, which makes every bit of sense, since his worldview begins with hating America's success, prosperity, and power and then working his way from there. He looks around at his own forlorn surroundings and gnashes his teeth as to why his own country could never attain the heights enjoyed by the American people, especially since he perceives his intellect to be superior to that of the average American. Thus, he can only partially sympathize with the plight of the Cuban people -- he must remain "neutral" -- lest anyone believe he is siding with the United States, horror of horrors. Yes, he knows the regime in Cuba is despicable and he would certainly never live there, but the regime is virulently anti-American by its nature and thus he has to make compromises. Yes, he knows the Cuban people are living in misery, but what better way to reconcile this with his worldview than to ultimately blame the United States. Perfect all the way around, right AC? Let's even tie a little bow around it...
chingon
"ac, it looks like we are getting somewhere! it SHOULDN'T matter how or when one complains against one's government. or do you object to that principle?"
Yes it does depending in HOW you are going to achieve your goals. Try to overthrown the US government by violent means to see how far it will take you.
"that is precisely what happened to my uncle and there is no other way to describe it."
I've taken your word for this because I don't know enough of his particular case to have an unbiased opinion myself. (Yes yours is biased, sorry if I take it with a grain of salt)
"even when i return to cuba in 2001, one had to be VERY careful about unguarded comments."
I've been witnessing LOTS of people not only voicing loudly their discomfort, but shouting err... ugly things of their leaders. In crowded places, like bus stops, the buses themselves, while doing lanes at several shops and more. And at least in one of the instances there was a police in the bus and he didn't do nothing.
Also bystanders provoking further the people shouting is the norm. No repression whatsoever. As a matter of fact in some cases the bystanders seemed to have witness the same person doing similar stuff previously.
"yet i still don't know what you gain by this!"
I already gained something if some people rethink their arguments from a rational point of view. Nothing wrong can arise from that and when one side see a little bit of the other all won something.
"AC, as an American tourist there are matters you will never understand."
Well, it seems that we have several mediums that didn't read the posts. Just for the records (once more) I'm not American.
"And the war will continue."
There is not war, is just a huge divide fueled by intolerance and mistrust that eventually will close. Even if it must wait until the extremist of both sides die of age, but it will eventually happen.
"; and may you continue to believe you have immersed yourself in the culture and political ideals of the country."
My beliefs are mine to judge, as for being predictable ask Vecino.
"...They will treat you well for your services."
This is truly a jewel. Caught in the act, judged and condemned in a single expression based on a distorted image created from thin mist. No ballots needed, justice was served.
"I think AC earlier stated he wasn't American, which makes every bit of sense, since his worldview begins with hating America's success, prosperity, and power"
Wow, here arrives the ugly side of the hate. Welcome board nevertheless.
"He looks around at his own forlorn surroundings and gnashes his teeth as to why his own country could never attain the heights enjoyed by the American people, especially since he perceives his intellect to be superior to that of the average American."
It might be the case if you were representative of the average American. Luckily I know better and don't make a fool of myself.
I truly enjoyed the rest of your argument, it was sooo deep that I almost shred a tear.
AC: Another Communist
"AC: Another Communist"
Another insightful argument
ac, I'll second chingon's characterization of you. It's spot on! Another communist is another plausible description. There is plenty of evidence to support that assertion in this thread. I would add "Apologist for Castro" as another possibility. Again, that's all you've done here. Neutral my ass! You know, Neville Chamberlain was also neutral, but history remembers him as a spineless coward. And to expect me to remain unbiased after my uncle was thrown in prison and my grandfather barely survived ending up in front of one of Che's (another asshole you probably worship) firing squad, well, that's asking a bit much!
this is the historical fiction that has to be overcome; these gusanos sitting on the sidelines, claiming ownership of tragedy over everyone else, denying any other POV, disclaiming and discrediting all other thoughts, and desperately wanting no easing of the travel restrictions. all to maintain the illusion of control.
such hate, step aside as the world passes you by, hands still shaking, impotent. such a waste, losers. all you have is your accusations and fury. the hate says and represents it all.
Fidel, is that you?
chingon
You paint a broad brush, Anonymous. It's a dated charicature. I am all about lifting the travel restrictions. As a matter of fact, I plan to take advantage of it. As to my POV, it's much more relevant than yours when it
comes to the subject of my beloved homeland.
"ac, I'll second chingon's characterization of you. It's spot on!"
Sure, since everyone who disagree with you is a commie. I'll take that as a compliment, but just for the record, can you take care of the evidence?
Make it simple, something like
evidence supporting that ac is another communist
-he said this (exact quote, please)
-he said this (exact quote, please)
-he said this (exact quote, please)
ergo he is communist
evidence supporting that ac is apologist for castro
-he said that (exact quote, please)
-he said that (exact quote, please)
-he said that (exact quote, please)
ergo he supports castro
I put neutral (in your ass it seems) and you did not like the term, so replace it by objective.
I don't expect you to be unbiased. jackass that would be something stupid. I accepted your word in your uncle situation as anecdotal evidence, but I don't consider you an unbiased witness because of your personal relationship with your uncle. Please, point what is wrong with that argument and I gladly apologize.
I olso accept as a working hypothesis that chingon was the author of that anonymous post, and the fact that you know it was him as as a (weak) proof of your medium skills. Stills it won't impress me yet.
Let's see! Well, ac, if you go through my comments, I have already pointed out why I think you are a Castro apologist. The Communist thing was a bit gratituous but not entirely farfetched since you have been steadfast in your support of a regime run by the PCC (Partido comunista de Cuba). And your assertion that those that disagree with me on Cuba are all communists is way off base. In fact, I often criticize others for adopting that attitude, so, to be accused of the very thing I abhor is humorous.
That is the point you fail to grasp. I might be a castro apologist if you take in account your comments -mostly unfounded and poorly argumented. I have pointed several times that you are commenting to what you think I'm saying instead of what I actually said, thats why I requested the original quotes supporting the "evidence".
From my point of view, you seem to have discussed this topic with many people many times in the past, to the point that just because someone else said something similar you are inferring the what he said, what he mean and his hidden intentions from gut alone and you build your position from there.
And I bet those discussions ended in shouting and name callings and without any honest attempt to understand each other other position.
Please, reread carefully my posts from the beginning and support your affirmation or take back the name calling. Seems fair to you?
Ac, time to develop a thick skin. In this thread, I have called plenty of names. I have even been told that I hate my own people! But I've remained unflappable. Shouting and gratuituous name calling lead nowhere so your new set of suppositions about me are way off again. I am not going to reinvent the wheel and pore through all your comments to ID the many ways in which you made ludicrous excuses for the Cuban regime's ghastly behavior toward its own people. Frankly your callousness toward the Cuban people appalls me and you deserve to be called more than an apologist. But I shall leave there and your own comments speak for themselves. I seek no apologies and offer none. I will, however, retract my support of the Communist comment. That claim is, for the most part, unfounded. The level of rigor you require of me is entirely lacking in your own responses. You seem to be fond of cherry picking others' comments and ignoring the main theme of their statements. Therefore, I've determined that I shan't repeat myself.
ac; i commend you on your attempts at rationality
it is next to impossible to talk to these cuban birthers. they are beyond all hope.
if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem, step aside.
chingon; your last comment, very good. no pidgen (sic) english. ok, who wrote it for you?
hows come you never answered, just cant be man enough to admit an error.
cuban birther? wow! i didn't see that one coming! that's a pretty lame attempt to dismiss us by equating us to a wacky, conservative, fringe element that MUST be dismissed out of hand for making a preposterous assertion. Oh, and course, the anonymous commentator just throws up his hands and doesn't even bother to engage in any sort of discussion on this topic. I am sorry. I have no time for the intellectually lazy. That doesn't include you, AC. I DO have to commend you for sticking to your guns in the defense of castro's regime. i do have to hand it to you for THAT!
oh, and anonymous, what solution are you proposing? please state and i will let you know if i am on board. again, just too lazy to participate in a debate. you'd rather just feel superior to us because we are "beyond all hope." if what you mean by that statement is that we will never agree that the last 50 years of castro's rule have been generally beneficial to the cuban people, then count me in as hopeless! if you have the objective facts to prove the opposite, please share. but you are right, chances are you won't succeed. you see, i've lived in revolutionary cuba and know of what i speak. have you? have any of you staunch defenders of the castro regime? not likely. so, what does that mean? you have no stake in this matter and also lack the firsthand experience to be able to offer any sort of valuable insight. if folks from the island had access to the internet and were free to speak their minds (which i have proof is not possible in cuba), you'd see that i know of what i speak.
"Shouting and gratuituous name calling lead nowhere so your new set of suppositions about me are way off again."
Which are? I don't know you and it seems that you take for yourself my remarks to other people and situations. The fact that I've been arguing with you is proof that I found your comments somewhat deserving an answer, thats more that other posters can say.
My arguments never come from any personal suppositions about you, you I just followed your own ideas and reply tho those I don't agree.
"I have even been told that I hate my own people!"
Not by me. When I'm argumenting something I never attack the person, only the idea. This is elementary etiquette in any constructive discussion and I never carried the arguments to their final conclusion when they might hurt your feelings, just for respect even when I don't know you.
"I am not going to reinvent the wheel and pore through all your comments to ID the many ways in which you made ludicrous excuses for the Cuban regime's ghastly behavior toward its own people."
If you pay attention I carefully avoided siding with the Cuban government in this thread. I even stated clearly that I only care for the Cuban people, if you feel otherwise please point to the exact quote. It should not be that hard.
"rankly your callousness toward the Cuban people appalls me and you deserve to be called more than an apologist."
Yep, more vaporware.
"But I shall leave there and your own comments speak for themselves."
That much I hope.
"he level of rigor you require of me is entirely lacking in your own responses."
I've been giving concrete evidence for my arguments since my first post, including examples when I deemed necessary. You and others keep commenting on things I never said or reinterpreting my words as you see fit.
"Therefore, I've determined that I shan't repeat myself."
Or you can't back your affirmations. Because most of time it weren't opinions, just affirmations.
hey, here is a little something everyone of this post can enjoy. it's one of the featured artists at the upcoming juanes concert. one of my favorite songs ever. and proof positive that art can trascend politics.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMg67lyKMaI
"I DO have to commend you for sticking to your guns in the defense of castro's regime."
I appreciate your commend, BUT I NEVER HAVE DEFENDED THE CASTRO REGIME IN THIS THREAD.
I've criticized the embargo and some related policies, BUT I NEVER SUPPORTED THE CUBAN GOVERNMENT OR ANY INDIVIDUAL CUBAN LEADER IN ANY WAY.
My criticism of the US policy against Cuba has been interpreted as tacit support for the Cuban government, and every time I demand the logic behind that affirmation the best I get is "I already did that plenty of times"
"if folks from the island had access to the internet and were free to speak their minds (which i have proof is not possible in cuba), you'd see that i know of what i speak."
The last time I was there I did make some experiments and I find that Internet sites regarding politic issues were not being actively blocked. by the government, so in principle a few millions of cubans have access to Internet and can speak their minds freely.
And I'm not talking about second hand experience, I went there and checked things myself. See the post with the Spanish text of the Internet resolution for more details.
And please, don;t call me liar until you go there and check things yourself.
no doubt i can back my affirmations, ac. it's disingenuous of you to hide behind the fact that you've never actually stated straight out that you support the regime. the statements you HAVE made have the same material effect. for every indictment of the regime, you've been ready with some exculpatory response, some justification as to why the regime is compelled to act in the manner it does. does that not describe an apologist? i don't see why you are so uncomfortable with that characterization if you are willing to back the castros every step of the way. embrace it! i make no apologies for my opposition to them. you haven't said that you support the cuban government but all your comments support that hypothesis. you have your prepared statements (many of which i have heard before from folks that are at least brave enough to admit support for the administration) on the root cause of cuba's economic dysfunction and suffocating political environment. in fact, the regime ITSELF makes similar statements. so you are either not as bright as i think you are and just parrot propaganda or you've actually thought this through and, for reasons yet unknown to me, have made a conscious decision to parry every thrust made against a government that seems to compel about 1/10 of its population to want to leave the country on a regular basis! as my handle suggests, i came to the states during the 1980 mariel boatlift. that was 125,000 people (many of them average people like my parents) in one shot! and that was back in the good old days of the soviet subsidy. it's only failed states that generates such massive exoduses. why you defend it is beyond me. but it's your perogative, ac. i just call as i see and you smell to me like an apologist. you don't have to like it, but so be it. i've been called a birther (hilarious!) even thought i voted for the guy whose qualifications to be president is being called into question by that movement. explain that one!
Wow, quite an answer here. If you had spent half of the time it took to write all that in reading my posts you will notice that you are wrong.
Apologist for the government? I've clearly stated that Cuban government:
-Is responsible for the economic situation in Cuba.
-Uses the pretext of the embargo to divert attention from their own economic failures and keep the status quo.
-Uses the argument that US considers Cuba an hostile state to lock down the opposition with the pretext of collaborate with the enemy.
Amongst other things not particularly friendly towards Cuba government.
If that sounds apologetic to you, be my guest, you are free to think whatever you want.
"for every indictment of the regime, you've been ready with some exculpatory response, some justification as to why the regime is compelled to act in the manner it does. does that not describe an apologist?"
Nope, thats cause and effect. The relationships between Cuba and US are entangled in a deadlock, the magic circle I mentioned long time ago in the thread.
US wont change politics until Cuba improve their rights record, and by doing so keep considering Cuba an hostile state. Cuba see itself threatened by that position and uses this situation as a pretext to keep the opposition at bay, because an outburst of the opposition can have hard repercussions (some say that it can be used as a pretext for armed intervention). And so the circle closes, because Cuba can't left the opposition unchecked, and thats enough evidence to keep the same politics.
As you see, its a nice circle.
Apologetic for pointing to the obvious? Ok, I can live with that.
"Apologist for the government? I've clearly stated that Cuban government:
-Is responsible for the economic situation in Cuba.
-Uses the pretext of the embargo to divert attention from their own economic failures and keep the status quo.
-Uses the argument that US considers Cuba an hostile state to lock down the opposition with the pretext of collaborate with the enemy."
If this is what you honestly believe, then there is no way I can insist on calling you an apologist. We are in complete agreement on these topics. I haven't the energy to go through your comment to check the facts (i.e., compare these statements with your previous ones). Therefore, having better things to do with my time (like listen to good music by Silvio Rodriguez and Amaury Perez), I henceforth absolve of the apologist charge.
No need to call you a liar. I have no monopoly on the facts and intend to go check this out soon enough. I can tell you from speaking to recent arrivals (such as my cousin) that Internet access is closely monitored and not readily available to all. For starters, if there is even the slightest suspicion that one is not in alignment with the government, access is cut off.
marielito
the problem is you and your extreme comments are based on living in Cuba more than 20 years ago, and the assumption that because of that it gives you the right to reserve to some sort of legitimacy above others. there are others who are cuban, lived under the revolution, and have a different opinion. it is the inability to accept that, to moderate, that diminishes your opinion, almost to the point of meaninglessness.
ac has made his side clear and reasonable.
but that doesn't discount the impact the consistently hostile American policies have had on cuban society, economy and politics. How would you have a government react to a situation where the most powerful nation on earth has invaded, terrorized, embargoed and publicly stated regime change to the point of stating who the Cuban people can and can't have as president?
There are a thousands historical examples to demonstrate what Cuba is doing has been done before -- but your side never recognizes the impact (maybe in an offhand way) but nothing serious to discuss how to bring Cuba up to your standards while still under threat. I would be interested to know your opinion what would happen to Cuban society if the American side ended its hostility.
Anonymous, i'll address your points paragraph by paragraph.
First paragraph
If I'd left the island and had completely disconnected from its reality, I'd concede that my opinion is worthless. But that hasn't been the case at all (and isn't for most Cuban Americans I know). Furthermore, our ranks are filled every year by individuals from every walk of life, many of whom used to be true believers of the Revolution (yours truly included). Suffice it to say that my sampling of the Cuban population (both recently arrived and still on the island) tells me that most Cubans are basically fed up with the Revolution and its lack of achievement. As stated earlier, most are too apathetic to do anything about it. The ones that are vocal are now in jail and the ones that STILL support the Revolution are very much vested in its survival because of some meager financial advantage it grants them. And even THOSE ranks are constantly depleted! That's the reality I've witnessed. Assuming that you are NOT Cuban, haven't lived there AS a Cuban, and don't have any relative on the island, NO, your opinion on this topic doesn't carry nearly as much weight as that of those of us that REALLY have a stake in this game.
your point about the cuban people's CHOICE is laughable. cubans haven't had choice since 1952. that's the date batista took power by force. subsequently, fidel took power by force and hasn't relinquished it. by any definition of CHOICE, what cuba has experienced is something entirely different. what has been forthcoming from the white house is an insistence that the cuban people be granted that CHOICE and that those cubans that are calling for it be released from prison. as far as the embargo is concerned, the US has the freedom to choose with whom it trades and i am tired of pointing out in this thread the many OTHER avenues cuba has for economic development. so STOP blaming the US for cuba's problems! it's cuba's fault that it's in the position it is. and frankly, most of the hostility between the US and cuba has been forthcoming from havana. for as long as he has been politically active, fidel has never ceased to crap all over the US. do you expect the US to be in a conciliatory mood with a guy like that?
as to your last point, nothing will change when the embargo is lifted. i say when because i think it's just a matter of time. although i believe the embargo passes the test on the moral scale, it has failed miserably when it comes to the desired outcome of bringing about democratic change to the island. in fact, it's a problem because, as ac will admit, it's become an excuse for cuba to do nothing about its own problems. so let's get rid of it so that we can confirm that a) cuba (and cubans in particular) will not progress anyway because it's run by kleptomaniacal ideological incompetents and b) lifting the embargo will bring no end to political repression because the PCC (as fidel himself established back in 2002) is interested in keeping its monopoly on the political reins.
but you know, it's obvious to me that, in your mind, anti-castro = extremist. so i don't know why i bother. you are a true believer and will defend castro until the bitter end (for reasons that mystify me because i don't see what stake you have in this).
"as to your last point, nothing will change when the embargo is lifted. i say when because i think it's just a matter of time. "
Yes, it will. At least the ball will be completely in the Cuban side, they can not longer apply the same rationale used now to restrict the opposition nor blame the Embargo of their economy woes.
"although i believe the embargo passes the test on the moral scale"
It doesn't. It singles Cuba government from others far worse in matters of human rights that US not only not harass, but happily trade with. Its called double standard and won't put anyone in the upper moral ground.
"but you know, it's obvious to me that, in your mind, anti-castro = extremist"
Nope, there are people all the way from an extreme to the other. I've stated several times that I don't have a problem with anyone being anti-castro or wanting regime change, but I disagree with some of the methods used.
Supporting the embargo = Support worsening situation of Cuban People = soft extremist
Supporting military action and violent disposal of the Cuban government = true extremist
And yes, you can be anti-castro without supporting the embargo (it seems that you don't support it) and without promoting violence.
You can be a more efficient anti-catro agent by promoting openness with Cuba and show the Cuban people that there is a wide world beyond their shores and contrasting their own situation with yours.
And by removing the harassment they will need to reckon that their shortcomings are their own fault and that something is wrong with their government.
"you are a true believer and will defend castro until the bitter end (for reasons that mystify me because i don't see what stake you have in this)."
So, I went from being another communist to be an apologist of castro, to not being a communist, to not being a apologist of castro to be a true believer and defendant of castro.
Somehow I got lost in the details but your point got through.
And thorough your medium powers you arrived to the conclusion that I don't have an stake in this, supposedly based in the fact that I can keep my feelings out of the discussion (otherwise known as having a rational behavior), ergo you think that the only possible way of have a debate about the US Cuba relationship is being emotional.
Priceless.
ac, i've love to impose embargoes on a whole host of bad actors worldwide, but, alas, certain business interest have gotten in the way to prevent this. i hope you are enough of a realist to recognize this. in the case of cuba, the cold war made it a special case and, until recently, it wasn't perceived as a lucrative enough business opportunity to bother to change its status. this is now changing, of course, and the embargo will fall. and let's not forget our (cuban-american) effective lobbying in washington! those are the reasons this particular embargo has remained in place, although i'd support you with any trade restrictions you'd like to impose on any nasty players out there.
i oppose the embargo on practical grounds because it does a lot more political harm to the cause of cuban freedom than any negative impact it might have on the regime.
more on your response later. i need to go lunch.
i like you, ac. your rational approach is indeed refreshing, even if we disagree.
"ac, i've love to impose embargoes on a whole host of bad actors worldwide, but, alas, certain business interest have gotten in the way to prevent this."
So in practical terms you reckon that business interests have more weight that moral principles, Cuba has been single out more due to the small size of their economy and their geographic position than anything else, right?
I added geographic position to the mix because I do believe that if Cuba were in New Zealand geographic position the confrontation would be negligible and a normalization of relationships would had happened long time ago.
Bon appetit
ac, small size of the economy and (during the cold war in particular) certainly its geographic location and alignment with the enemy. don't forget the political influence of a small, vocal (and, yes, emotional) exile community.
as to strategy vis-a-vis castro, i have to confess that i am at a loss as to what would work (short of sending in a brigade combat team, which i don't condone mostly on US national interests basis). exposing the cuban people to the rest of the world is a great idea. if the castro brothers were to allow cubans to travel openly, it would be a great idea. we (cuban americans) can now travel there. and mail service is about to be restored. all great ideas. however, whenever this openness has given the cuban people ideas about political change or private proverty rights and the like, fidel has cracked down hard. i am just not that hopeful that this would work unless raul makes a conscious decision to move away from the current model.
"all great ideas. however, whenever this openness has given the cuban people ideas about political change or private proverty rights and the like, fidel has cracked down hard."
It is changing little by little since Fidel left power. Right now I believe he is the main reason of the slow changes, Raul seems more prone to a china-like mixed economy.
"if the castro brothers were to allow cubans to travel openly, it would be a great idea."
Most Cubans can travel openly but I do agree that still more work needs to be done regarding this issue.
Before you will come back with the apologetic stuff, let me clarify my statement. Cubans require the exit permit to leave the country, but for most of them this is just a silly (and expensive) bureaucratic formality. The only people that have problems to exit the country are:
-People wanted by the justice
-Health workers and officers from MINFAR and MININT and in general people with access to classified information
-Underage children requesting temporary visas
-People that government don't feel like granting the permit (some prominent members of the opposition and perhaps some family members of defectors)
As far as I can tell, that pretty much covers most of the cases. As we can agree, there is still unfairness and stupidity involved, but this is a small portion of the whole population.
Most people that want to exit the country and can't do it is because they never get a visa, not for the exit permit.
marielito, your perceptions of the cuban people are embarrassing, it's 2009 not 1965
give the people you seem to care so much about more credit. otherwise all you do is perpetuate the cubans not ready for government myth the Americans imposed after 1898.
if you think the cold war was the prime justification for the embargo you really don't have a grasp of the history of your own country nor of the American-Cuban relationship since the war of independence.
you are right on the political influence of this small vocal community that has tried to strangle their own people for years. thank god it's coming to an end.
and your policy is to embargo the hell out of everyone you don't like, very insightful.
really, end the embargo, put cuba in the position they have to shut up about blaming it for all their ills. what are you guys afraid of?
also, wanted this to be the 100th comment. whoo hooo
Post a Comment