I didn't want to derail the Chavez thread- so I wanted t start a thread based on Vladimir's comments on that thread- that I will go on record saying I disagree with his conclusions- but, before I explain why- I will get the ball rolling instead?

From Vlad
"I would say they're doing extremely well for a small Carribean country that has been subject to a longterm U.S.-orchestrated hemispheric trade embargo. Their principal exports are sugar, rice and tourism, the principal market for which would be the United States, if the embargo did not exist. They did receive some help from the Soviet Union while it existed, but this was little by comparison to what would have been the simple gains of trade with the U.S. and the other nations of the hemisphere.

Futhermore, their security situation is colored by the U.S. giving safe haven to groups who actively foment disturbances in Cuba, and who even commit acts of terrorism there. Had Cuba simply been allowed to remain a participant in the hemispheric economy, and not subjected to these external threats, undoubtedly it would have made much more progress since the revolution.

1) Do you disagree that the US fomented acts of terrorism that forced Castro to become a dictator, because of the security situtation?

2) Do you agree that the US's behavior, if reversed, would be called "acts of terrorism".

3) Do you think Cuba's socialism would have been succesful if the US had just left it alone to govern as it saw fit, and we imported thier sugar etc?

1) Do you disagree that the US fomented acts of terrorism that forced Castro to become a dictator, because of the security situtation?

I didn't say that U.S. acts against Cuba forced Castro to become a dictator. I am not sure to what extent Fidel Castro is a dictator, given that there is a Communist Party in Cuba and he is responsible to it. But I have said elsewhere that I am unhappy with Castro remaining in office for so long, because this has inhibited the emergence of necessary constitutional forms.

Actually, I didn't say that the U.S. fomented acts of terrorism; only that it gave a safe haven to those who did. However I am sure that there are at least a few acts of terrorism that it did directly, namely, often-repeated attempted assasinations of Fidel Castro. And what, after all, was the Bay of Pigs? But seriously I don't think that anyone in his right mind would dispute that the U.S. has given aid and comfort to many people and groups who have carried out, or declared their intention to carry out, armed attacks on Cuba. Whether one calls these people "terrorists" depends on ones point of view, I suppose, but objectivity would seem to demand the use of that term.

Also see here:
http://www.politicalaffairs.net/article/view/5250/1/258

For a Cuban perspective, see here:
http://www.escambray.cu/Eng/opinion/Ojuly070713351.htm

And here for a Venezuelan one:
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=1288

Here at length is what Noam Chomsky, no particular friend of Cuba, has had to say on the subject:
http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/1027/noam_...errorizing_cuba

Then there is this 1997 incident:
http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/43b/073.html

This concerns a 1998 incident:
http://www.consortiumnews.com/archive/lost23.html

2) Do you agree that the US's behavior, if reversed, would be called "acts of terrorism".

Are you serious? If Cuba had done anything remotely resembling this, it would have been taken as pretext for an immediate invasion of Cuba.

3) Do you think Cuba's socialism would have been succesful if the US had just left it alone to govern as it saw fit, and we imported thier sugar etc?

Cuban socialism has been successful on many levels. Just look at their education, public health and medical care. And their armed forces have gone abroad and assisted the democratic struggles of people in Africa, most notably in Angola against the armed forces of then-apartheid South Africa. But yes, I do think that the Cuban people would be much better off today if the U.S. had not instituted the embargo. I mean, how really, is it possible to disagree with that? Just consider the effects of the tourism alone, and all the money that that would have brought in.

1) Do you disagree that the US fomented acts of terrorism that forced Castro to become a dictator, because of the security situtation?

I'm not sure how you could conclude that the US "forced" Castro to become a dictator. His government rounded up (and in some cases, killed) potential anti-government types before the Bay of Pigs invasion. Castro's Agrarian Reform Laws confiscated the property of US companies. The

2) Do you agree that the US's behavior, if reversed, would be called "acts of terrorism".

It can certainly be called meddling. The Bay of Pigs especially was an outright act of war, however Kennedy gimped the operation at the last moment and so turned it into a complete fiasco. I'm not sure it could possibly called terrorism since terrorism is the use of violence against civilians to achieve political ends. I haven't heard of the CIA rounding up ordinary Cubans and killing them.

3) Do you think Cuba's socialism would have been succesful if the US had just left it alone to govern as it saw fit, and we imported thier sugar etc?

It was Cuba that cut itself off from the United States. It was Cuba that allied itself to the Soviet Union in the midst of the Cold War. The US embargo against Cuba began in 1958, prior to Castro assuming power. At that time, it was an arms embargo and it thus helped Castro. In fact, the US armed Castro's band of "revolutionaries" in some cases. After Castro allied with the Soviets, the embargo was expanded by Kennedy by Executive Order and finally formalized into law in 1962.

Would Cuba's socialism have been successful if the US had acted differently? Somehow I doubt it since no Communist state has succeeded economically.

1) Do you disagree that the US fomented acts of terrorism that forced Castro to become a dictator, because of the security situtation?

No I agree with Amlord. He came to power as a Socialist dictator and has remained so to this day.
2) Do you agree that the US's behavior, if reversed, would be called "acts of terrorism".

No.

3) Do you think Cuba's socialism would have been succesful if the US had just left it alone to govern as it saw fit, and we imported thier sugar etc?

Never happen – in fact we are the only country with any restrictions on trade with Cuba – they have the whole world to deal with and the people are starving. Socialism is a disaster there as it has been everywhere else it has ever been instituted.



Well not really. First the healthcare system was created by and paid for by the Soviet Union as a show of “successful” Socialism in out Hemisphere. It is a sham today. The common man never sees this healthcare system only the Socialist elite.

Welcome to the workers paradise????


“Cuba's Heath Care System: The Reality
Under the Cuban government's health care monopoly, the state assumes complete control. Private, non-governmental health facilities, where ailing citizens could buy treatment, are illegal.7 As a result, average Cubans suffer long waits at government hospitals, while many services and technologies are available only to the Cuban party elite and foreign "health tourists" who pay with hard currency. Moreover, access to such rudimentary medicines as antibiotics and Aspirin can be limited, and there are reports that citizens excluded from the foreign-only hospitals often must bring their own bed sheets and blankets while in care.8”

Cuba's Health Care System in Practice

Says Canada's National Post, which assessed Cuba and its health system in a three-part series:
Even the most commonly available pharmaceutical items in the U.S., such as Aspirin and rubbing alcohol, are conspicuously absent [in Cuba]... Antibiotics... are in extremely short supply and available only on the black market. Aspirin can be purchased only at government-run dollar stores, which carry common medications at a huge markup in U.S. dollars... This puts them out of reach of most Cubans, who are paid little and in pesos.11
The same National Post story continues, quoting Jasmin, a nurse from Moron, Cuba, "We have nothing. I haven't seen aspirin in a Cuban store here for more than a year. If you have any pills in your purse, I'll take them. Even if they have passed their expiry date."12

Cuban defector Dr. Leonel Cordova told the New York Times about his experience practicing in Cuba, "[E]ven if I diagnosed something simple like bronchitis... I couldn't write a prescription for antibiotics because there were none."13

http://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA557_Cuban_Health_Care.html

A horror story can be found about any healthcare system, including our own - would you like me to dig them up for you? Cuban Healthcare system is not perfect, but the fact remains that their system is the envy of virtually all other countries in the region. Cuba exports doctors to a whole slew of Central American countries. And what is so wrong about people bringing blankets and sheets to hospitals? Everyone keeps mentioning it in some horror; personally, I would rather bring my own blankets and sheets to a hospital room instead of being charged $700+ per day for a hospital bed.

I really must renew my objection to "forced Castro to become a dictator." This is a loaded, prejudicial formulation that invites a predictable response. The question should be, did U.S. economic and military pressure, possibly including the harboring of groups engaged in terrorism, affect the development of human rights in Cuba?

Concerning the Cuban public health system, Ted is characteristically and sadly spouting ultra-right-wing rhetoric and using highly selective citations. See these complete citations for a more complete and accurate picture:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Cuba

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/review/review_...02/677cuba.html

http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/35/4/817

http://www.guardianabroad.co.uk/ngos/article/208

This graph is interesting:

http://www.pitt.edu/~super1/lecture/lec9881/pic.GIF

It is very widely accepted that public health in Cuba is extraordinary considering the lack of resources on the island. Judged by the usual meaasures such as longevity, incidence of disease, and life expectancy, there is really no question that Cuba has the best health system in Latin America and one of the best, if not the best, in the third world.

It might also be borne in mind that Cuba was an impoverished nation before the revolution. Since then, it has been subject to economic blockade by the United States. No one is suggesting that Cuba is the "worker's paradise" or that -- thanks to the direct and indirect effects of the embargo -- there are not acute shortages of many goods on the island. But what they have achieved with health care under these conditions is really quite remarkable, and it is directly due to the socialist organization of health care and public health in general. Most notably, what health care there is in Cuba is uniformly accessible to everyone at public expense.

However handicapped Cuba's health care system may be by lack of resources, it is vastly preferable to the "health care" enjoyed by those many Americans who lack health insurance or much money to spend on their own care. This point, by the way, is dramatically underscored in Michael Moore's current movie, Sicko.

Concerning education in Cuba, here is a World Bank technical report that, while critical, reaches highly favorable conclusions:

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EDUCATI...lessonsEn00.pdf

I'm not sure that Micheal Moore movies are really that objective Vladimir. It would be as bad or worse than me using Ann Coulter or Rush as a source. I really think worse...

Anyway- basing your economic analysis on the Cuban embargo is absurd. Cuba could and should have used tourism from the rest of the world (ie. Europe and Asia) to spring board itself out of its relative poverty. Castro never gave Cuba a chance to have an open and inviting economy. Their early ties to people like Che Guevera and their violent opposition to democracy gave Cuba a bad reputation, and hence never got the traffic somewhere like Jamaica would.

They could still purchase finished goods from other S American nations and/or Europe. Sure- it would take fare more work and cost, but I don't see that the embargo on Cuba should've been as crippling as you'd make it out to be.

First of all, "Sicko" got positive reviews from conservatives and liberals alike, so do your voice your opposition to Michael Moore as a person, or the movie itself? If Pol Pot says that the sky is blue, no need to reject that notion outright...
If the embargo of Cubas wasn't cripping, it wouldn't be there in the first place. Every embargo is in place exactly because it is crippling.

Sure show me where there are hospitals full of people with no antibiotics or even aspirin! Are you joking? Cuba has 2 systems – one for the Party elite and one for the majority. Read what people there say and show me a hospital anywhere in the US with theses “problems”. This is not horror stories this is the entire system for the majority in Cuba.






Sheer nonsense. Cuba is a disaster and you cannot use the typical “effects of the embargo” crap. Cuba has free and open trade with every country in the world except the US and was heavily supported by the Soviet Union until 1991. And still they are starving.

No freedom, no elections, hunger, horrible health care for the majority – yes Cuba is no paradise – for workers or anyone else except the small Party elite.

In fact Cuba is turning to the only thing that may save the economy – Free Enterprise.

“The people of Cuba are hungry, but they are not starving, at least not yet. They are doing without a lot of things--soap, shampoo, toilet paper, toothpaste, pencils, shoes, headache pills, vitamins, and even the single piece of meat per week for which they have ration coupons. The shortages interact and compound each other. Because of the frequent electricity blackouts, food in cold storage plants and home refrigerators spoils. Even if a factory has raw materials, workers don't show up because the buses aren't running.

The Cuban economy has gone bankrupt, and every citizen in the country knows it. Fidel Castro has admitted it and has even given the bankruptcy a name, La Estapa Especial--the Special Period. His propaganda machine spins out explanations for why it has happened and promises of how the Cuban government is going to solve the problem. His treasury is so empty of foreign exchange that Fidel can't buy enough fuel and fertilizer to run his sugar industry, medicines for his much-touted health-care services, or shoes or uniforms for the children in his free educational system. Factories sit idle for lack of electric power, fuel for engines, spare parts, and raw materials.

*snip*

While Castro and his government blame this economic disaster on the withdrawal of Soviet aid, the continuing American trade embargo, and the low world price of sugar, the plain fact is that the Castro government has failed because communism always fails. Rather than trying to prevent Americans from visiting Cuba, we ought to encourage as many as possible to go see what happens when a communist system absorbs a free enterprise economy

. Castro took over one of the most vibrant, developed economies in Latin America in 1959. He destroyed the capital formation mechanism and the market incentives of the economy, and the Cuban people have been eating their seed corn ever since. Soviet charity kept them going for a while but only delayed the inevitable. Now Cuba ranks with Haiti as the poorest of the poor in the Americas.
With the collapse of the Cuban economy and the possibility of real starvation in the near future, Castro and those around him have been forced to turn to the only thing that might save their economy: free enterprise”

http://www.buildfreedom.com/tanner/evolution.shtml

(edited to confirm with forum Rules for copyright material)

Ted, I would like to recommend a good scientific article about Cuba and its health care.
Lessons from the margins of globalization: appreciating the Cuban health paradox written by Jerry M. Spiegel and Annalee Yassi.

This article clearly demonstrates that the Cuban health care system, considering all the social and econimoc problems, is indeed admirable. Comparing it with western health care and then saying it really stinks is not honest. You have to see the Cuban system within the internal socio-economic and regional (South-American) context to make an honest assessment.

1) Do you disagree that the US fomented acts of terrorism that forced Castro to become a dictator, because of the security situtation?
No, Castro was already behaving as a tyrant prior to siezing power. Heading the gov't just gave him more opportunity and victims for his tyranny.

2) Do you agree that the US's behavior, if reversed, would be called "acts of terrorism".
Probably not, but it could certainly be called "meddling." To my knowledge, the Cuban opposition to Castro's government has not engaged in deliberate, random attacks upon the population of Cuba.

3) Do you think Cuba's socialism would have been succesful if the US had just left it alone to govern as it saw fit, and we imported thier sugar etc?
Not a snowball's chance. First off, we wouldn't have been importing their sugar after they got in bed with the Soviets. Second, calling Castro's implementation "socialism" is as honest as the claim that Playboy doesn't airbrush. Third, Cuba has had plenty of opportunity to export to everybody else, and their happy worker's paradise hasn't been able to compete on the world stage with such cutting edge luminaries as, well, anybody. The only country that went into the toilet worse over the course of the second half of the 20th Century is Zimbabwe, flushed by the same Marxist idiocy as Castro, with a bonus of virulent racism and tribalism thrown in for good measure. IIRC, Castro took over Cuba when it had the third highest standard of living in the Western Hemisphere (ignoring tiny entities like Bermuda), and now its competing for the bottom spot with Haiti. South Korea had the same standard of living as Cuba, look at them now, on your Samsung TV!

I don't believe our actions, no matter how illegal or outrageous, have determined whether or not Castro would give up power instead of becoming an all-reaching dictator. There hasn't been any conclusive evidence that he was forced to do so. Even in other hard line communist nations of the past, power changed hands and did so somewhat frequently. The Soviet Union was a great example of this, not to mention the likes of East Germany. Yes, they may not have had groups seeking to undermine them, but spying went on in those countries and they had nuclear subs off their shores and in close proximity to their borders. I believe that counts for something.



It would be and it should be considered that. We have a cozy relationship with Luis Posado Carriles, a man whom many believe was instrumental in blowing up a Cuban civilian jetliner that killed numerous people. He's also wanted for other crimes as well. It is very ironic that a nation so dedicated against terrorism, houses a terrorist. There is a criminal element in Miami. They have been involved in terrorist acts against Cuba, the watergate break in, not to mention firing a recoilles weapon at a Polish ship moored in Florida. I agree that Castro is not a good man and that he has to go, but a contigent of radical exiles in Miami aren't necessarily lovers of democracy either.

Sorry I don’t buy the data in this piece. How do we verify the infant mortality rate or anything really in a totalitarian society where the government controls all data?

The fact that Cuba build a admirable healthcare system (for some) in the years before 1990 is mentioned but not the fact that the SU primarily bankrolled it. I do not believe the data on the increase in hospitals at all.

And what good is a hospital if there are no drugs, or equipment? Not even aspirin.

And then the old saw about the US embargo being the cause as if the rest of the world had nothing Cuba could buy or trade is ludicrous nonsense.

No the reality is that Cuba is just like every other Socialist disaster started since 1917. The system has never worked anywhere in the world and never will.

A few people in Cuba have a fair healthcare system and the common man has squat.

Ted, it is very hard to debate with a person when this person talks in slogans. "The XYZ has never worked, and it never will". How can you guarantee that something will never happen? And... have you been to Cuba yourself? I would guess no, because of embargo... so if the answer is "no", how can you claim with such certainty that "the common man has squat"?
I grew up in USSR, as you may know. Some of my american friends have notions about life there... totally laughable, not even distantly close to truth. And yet, people spout that nonsense with such conviciton, simply because it jives well with their personal beliefs.

You just don't buy it, that is your answer?

Please give my some strong and clear evidence why I should accept your statement and dismiss the figures of, lets say, the U.N. (see page 2) or the CIA?

I would realy like to see you provide some unbiased, preferably scientific and peer-reviewed, articles (not the standard biased blogs and sites you have used in this thread) that explains in what way the Cuban goverment is tampering with infant mortality statistics and what the exact consequenses are in regard to the generally accepted figures as shown above.



The article clearly states that the fall of the Soviet Bloc lead to severe economic reprecussions and also lead to a deterioration of the health care system (see page 88). Read before you write.

About your statement on the increase of hospitals. Could you please provide some unbiased, preferably scientific and peer-reviewed, evidence that supports your opinion instead of simply dismissing these figures without any argument.



It getting a bit tiresome here, Ted. Here we have again a blank statement without any evidence, without any argumentation. And again please read the article more carefully. This is what the authors wrote:
(page 88)

The U.S. embargo is not the only cause for the economic state of Cuba, but it did contribute to it in a big way. To say that such a statement is ludicrous nonsense, is well .... ludricous nonesense itself.

You are correct. Socialism has not worked to date and cost the lives of over 80 million in the process but there is always the chance it could work someday.


I have not been to Cuba but depend on the testimony of people who have lived there and visited there as I have posted. If, as I have posted, the hospitals for the common man don’t even have aspirin how would you describe it? No one disputed the economic disaster in Cuba? Do you? Cuba has free trade with the entire world except the US – so if you try to tell me we are the cause of their economic disaster and not the system I say – nonsense.


More here:
“The big minus sign of the Cuban economy is that it is not self-sustaining in the indispensable paraphernalia of modern life. Cuba is totally dependent for the uninterrupted flow of vital supplies; oil, coal, iron and steel, trucks and buses, cars, chemicals, sophisticated machinery etc. And it was precisely this hopeless and impossible attempt to make Cuba a highly industrialized country without these vital resources, that just about wrecked the Cuban economy. Cuba has not yet recovered from this catastrophic, totally unpardonable miscalculation, taken against the advice of qualified economic experts. Castro and his staff of fumbling amateurs, were forced to abandon this suicidal policy, but they still persist in meddling with things the know absolutely nothing about.
Distribution of the national income was not balanced. The lower standard of living of the agricultural laborers was particularly atrocious, especially during the "dead season" between sugar harvests:

. . . the standard of living of the privileged classes of the cities [writes Dumont] was in violent contrast with the misery of the peasants . . . who were unemployed an average of 138 days a year . . . the unemployed numbered 250,000 even in the middle of the harvest season on the sugar plantations. . .(Cuba: Socialism and Development, p. 14)”

http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/anarchist_archi...n/chapter7.html



What years? My wife and I have 2 friends who grew up in Russia and left in1990. We had an Au Pair that grew up in East Germany and several friends who visited Russia for professional conferences in the 80s.

If you are telling me you had consumer goods, toilet paper, cloths that fit, and didn’t have to spend half you life waiting in line you were not a “common man” in Russia. The system did not work well - of that there is no doubt.

1) Do you disagree that the US fomented acts of terrorism that forced Castro to become a dictator, because of the security situtation?
Well Castro and Che were committed Marxists when they came to power. If the US had normalized relations with Cuba and made it clear that they respected its sovereignty who knows how the political situation would have evolved. But the US didn't and Cuba now has the longest ruling dictator in the world. Democracy needs security as we are learning in Iraq and like Al Qaeda we have done much to undermine that security.

2) Do you agree that the US's behavior, if reversed, would be called "acts of terrorism".
Absolutely and justifiably so.

3) Do you think Cuba's socialism would have been succesful if the US had just left it alone to govern as it saw fit, and we imported thier sugar etc?

Oddly American hostility seems to part of Cuba's success such as it is. Our hostility helped Castro consolidate power which might have been harder with a more lenient policy. Now they are more self-sufficient and have a medical system that has become a model for much of the 3rd world. It appears they obtained greater social equity and independence at the expense of democracy in the higher echelons and material wealth.

Ted, this is precisely what I was talking about. No toilet paper? No clothes that fit? So ridiculous. Riight, we used poison ivy leaves instead of toilet paper, builds character . I lived in USSR during 70s, 80s, and early 90s, if you are curious. Instead of telling me whether I was a part of "common man" family or not, can even imagine, just concieve a possibility, that some of the notions that you have about life in other countries could be wrong? Yes, I probably had worse clothes (not fitting though? Where did that come from?) than my American contemporaries, and less toys, and my family didn't have a car. But my childhood was very happy and I had opportunities - for free - such as music school, tennis lessons, etc. - which far from every American parent can afford. Anyway, this is not a thread about Soviet Union, it's about Cuba. You still haven't answered why you "don't buy" figures provided by UN and CIA in the report that Renger cited?

Past evidence is that Ted will never debate such questions as these, only spout his opinions, because the idea that socialism could succeed on any given terms is antithetical to his belief system. At least, I don't know how else to explain his bloviations here.

Ted, did you check any of the sources to which I pointed concerning the Cuban health system? They are all Western. Also Ted, you never responded to my point that the Cuban health system is vastly better than is the U.S. system for those many Americans who have no insurance. One of the reasons indeed that the Cuban system has been so successful is that its universality facilitates treating many problems on a public health basis instead of offering piecemeal curatives to those who can afford it (e.g. to help people avoid getting AIDS in the first place, rather than striving so hard for cures of those who already have it).