NationStates Jolt Archive

2 things.

Links.

And copypasta is bad.

Your punishment will be a threadjack. Moo hoo ha ha.

End of an era...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7252109.stm

Hmm. It will be interesting to see what comes in the next few years, espescially after Raul is out of the picture.

Primary Navigation
HomeU.S.BusinessWorldEntertainmentSportsTechPoliticsElectionsScienceHealthMost Popular
Secondary Navigation
World Video Middle East Europe Latin America Africa Asia Canada Australia/Antarctica Kevin Sites Search: All News Yahoo! News Only News Photos Video/Audio Advanced

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Castro stepping down as Cuba's leader 7 minutes ago



HAVANA (Reuters) - Ailing Cuban leader Fidel Castro said on Tuesday that he will not return to lead the country as president, retiring as head of state 49 years after he seized power in an armed revolution.

ADVERTISEMENT



Castro, 81, said in a statement to the country that he would not seek a new presidential term when the National Assembly meets on February 24.

"To my dear compatriots, who gave me the immense honor in recent days of electing me a member of parliament ... I communicate to you that I will not aspire to or accept -- I repeat not aspire to or accept -- the positions of President of Council of State and Commander in Chief," Castro said in the statement published on the Web site of the Communist Party's Granma newspaper.

The National Assembly or legislature is expected to nominate his brother and designated successor Raul Castro as president in place of Castro, who has not appeared in public for almost 19 months after being stricken by an undisclosed illness.

His retirement drew the curtain on a political career that spanned the Cold War and survived U.S. enmity, CIA assassination attempts and the demise of Soviet Communism.

A charismatic leader famous for his long speeches delivered in his green military fatigues, Castro is admired in the Third World for standing up to the United States but considered by his opponents a tyrant who suppressed freedom.

(Reporting by Anthony Boadle, Editing by Eric Walsh)

Whoa.

Wow....I'd never thought I'd see the day! I'd thought he'd hold onto his position until they pry it from his cold dead hands!

By no means the worst leader in South America's storied 20th century.

Lets hope this signals the start of Cuba's liberalization and economic revitalization, so that it can take more full advantage of its resources and the lives of its people can become better.

Ron Paul 08?

on a serious note I predict no change and Castro hasn't been more than a figurehead in decades

Having survived economic embargo, over 400 assassination attempts, invasion, he truly stands as a symbol and practical action against neoimperialism and capitalism. For an example without Cuban help Angola would have been colonized by Apartheid armies. Either way, the Cuban democratic socialist system is quite good and robust, and most importantly permanent, I think the Western imperialists would like more than ever to rape the people and resources of Cuba with capitalism.

I bet the world forces of bourgeoisism are positively licking their lips are the prospect of a second Eastern Europe to exploit and devour, but the Cuban workers will surely never allow this.

:o

I expected some news on Fidel either being re-elected or not around Feb 24-08 not this soon. Fidel has still not been seen or shown in Public by the Cuban government therefore the possibility that he is dead.

How do I get on the ballot to be president of Cuba?

Finally that's over. Too bad nothing will change anytime soon.

Since I expected this news one way or the other around Feb 24, 2008. It cought me by surprise. Since I wanted to be the first to start an NS threat on this subject. I was not sure how to ask the Public Poll questions. I had to think fast.

I expect alot of Propaganda of real economic, political and social changes from the new Cuban government President, with no real changes. I hope I am wrong.
Yes, but you and people like you ultimately advocate is destroying socialism and replacing it with a bourgeois capitalist dictatorship, 'freedom' in your context is freedom to exploit, freedom for capitalism.

How do I get on the ballot to be president of Cuba?
Well you have to be a citizen, secondly you actually have be in a good standing in your local community.

Not trying to be cynical, but I bet the former plantation owners decendents are going to make sure a post Castro Cuba remains a hell.

(Until Cuba pays them the Billions 'stolen' when they seized their land)

Since I expected this news one way or the other around Feb 24, 2008. It cought me by surprise. Since I wanted to be the first to start an NS threat on this subject. I was not sure how to ask the Public Poll questions. I had to think fast.

I expect alot of Propaganda of real economic, political and social changes from the new Cuban government President, with no real changes. I hope I am wrong.

I posted a link with this Public Poll? How did you get the first post on my Public Poll thread?

Your 'poll' is incredibly biased.

I posted a link with this Public Poll? How did you get the first post on my Public Poll thread?
Sorcery.
They were helped by Castro's unholy ghost.
Just like now, where he's helping me to preempt your post.

2 things.

Links.

And copypasta is bad.

Your punishment will be a threadjack. Moo hoo ha ha.

I posted a link with this Public Poll? How did you get the first post on my Public Poll thread?

:eek:

Did not see that coming. I also had this image in my mind that Castro would be there forever, nothing getting in his way. Oh well, we can only wait as to see what effect it has on the world.

:eek:

Did not see that coming. From the looks of it, it would appear you should've looked in the post just above it first? :p
I also had this image in my mind that Castro would be there forever, nothing getting in his way.Odd, most of us had a feeling like that for a while, i suspect.

I posted a link with this Public Poll?

Oh really?

Primary Navigation
HomeU.S.BusinessWorldEntertainmentSportsTechPoliticsElectionsScienceHealthMost Popular
Secondary Navigation
World Video Middle East Europe Latin America Africa Asia Canada Australia/Antarctica Kevin Sites Search: All News Yahoo! News Only News Photos Video/Audio Advanced

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Castro stepping down as Cuba's leader 7 minutes ago



HAVANA (Reuters) - Ailing Cuban leader Fidel Castro said on Tuesday that he will not return to lead the country as president, retiring as head of state 49 years after he seized power in an armed revolution.

ADVERTISEMENT



Castro, 81, said in a statement to the country that he would not seek a new presidential term when the National Assembly meets on February 24.

"To my dear compatriots, who gave me the immense honor in recent days of electing me a member of parliament ... I communicate to you that I will not aspire to or accept -- I repeat not aspire to or accept -- the positions of President of Council of State and Commander in Chief," Castro said in the statement published on the Web site of the Communist Party's Granma newspaper.

The National Assembly or legislature is expected to nominate his brother and designated successor Raul Castro as president in place of Castro, who has not appeared in public for almost 19 months after being stricken by an undisclosed illness.

His retirement drew the curtain on a political career that spanned the Cold War and survived U.S. enmity, CIA assassination attempts and the demise of Soviet Communism.

A charismatic leader famous for his long speeches delivered in his green military fatigues, Castro is admired in the Third World for standing up to the United States but considered by his opponents a tyrant who suppressed freedom.

(Reporting by Anthony Boadle, Editing by Eric Walsh)

What link?


How did you get the first post on my Public Poll thread?


Because I did so! *lightning flashes* Moo hoo ha ha ha!

Actually, it's a trade secret. :p

From the looks of it, it would appear you should've looked in the post just above it first? :p
Odd, most of us had a feeling like that for a while, i suspect.

There are posts above you say? :p

http://www.snappedshot.com/uploads/Dictatorship/2007_06_03t013510_409x450_us_cuba_castro.jpg

Castro did always like to hug...

Serious question to all of you? How good, bad or so are my Public Poll question?. I had to think fast.

La Habana Cuba is in shock.

Expecting alot of propaganda of real changes, with no real changes at all.

La Habana Cuba is in shock.

What do you mean by 'change', change can be either forward or backward, it would be a sad day for the Cuban workers if that 'change' as a regressive movement into bourgeois dictatorship. Neoliberalism must be resisted.

Serious question to all of you? How good, bad or so are my Public Poll questions? I had to think fast.

La Habana Cuba is in shock.

Expecting alot of propaganda of real changes, with no real changes at all.

La Habana Cuba is in shock.

Serious question to all of you? How good, bad or so are my Public Poll questions? I had to think fast.

La Habana Cuba is in shock.

Expecting alot of propaganda of real changes, with no real changes at all.

La Habana Cuba is in shock.

You did fine, n/k.
This is certainly pretty important to quite a few people in the world.
I'm also expecting something similar, hopefully happily surprised.

There are posts above you say? :p

http://www.snappedshot.com/uploads/Dictatorship/2007_06_03t013510_409x450_us_cuba_castro.jpg

Castro did always like to hug...Reacharound? :p

I do not post links as such. I post articles or parts of articles directly on the post. Such as in post 5. That was supposed to be post 1.

Castro is a hero for the Cuban people, in my opinion. I just hope that the US doesn't get their greedy hands all over Cuba as they did prior to the revolution. With the way that the US economy is going, I do fear that something is cooking up to turn Cuba back into America's playground to keep the dying empire alive. Here's hoping that capitalism doesn't spread through like cancer as it has the rest of the world (except Kim Jong-Il Land, who might resist forever lol).

Unfortunately, absent a very skillful leader with fresh ideas and the interests of Cuba at heart rather than power, I think there are only three possibilities:
1) More of the same.
2) Civil war.
3) Third world corporate tourist trap.

Question: what is actual public sentiment like in Cuba?

I suspect more of the same for a few years. If Raul really had some very different ideas to those of Fidel, he would have been removed at some point these past decades.

But he's not nearly as charismatic and not as worshipped as Fidel was, so he'll have a much harder time answering the calls for liberalisation that have been heard coming from the young and educated during the meetings with student organisations and so on.

La Habana Cuba is in shock. Someone get me a straight Jacket. Someone post me a straight jacket. lol. I am having a nervous breakdown. lol.

La Habana Cuba is in shock. Someone get me a straight Jacket. Someone post me a straight jacket. lol. I am having a nervous breakdown. lol.Chillax. Get your propaganda together and prepare to swoop in and compete with outside interests for influence. Now's the time.

no one is immortal. i think castro's biggist, perhapse only, mistake, what not putting in place a proceedure of succession sooner.

my hope for cuba, and people everywhere, is that conditions won't get suddenly a lot worse in reality while cosmeticly improving as a resault of an invasion of american corporate greed.

i mean there are certainly things i would have wanted to do differently then he did. i don't know if they would have been possible or will be any time soon now either, but i seiously don't see his finally passing the torch, as some how going to magically make anything better for anyone.

=^^=
.../\...

The real question is what should become of Habanos SA when the embargo is finally dropped.

As much as the people whose property was stolen by the revolution deserve to get it back, I have to reconcile myself to the fact that mobs of angry cuban-americans might get their dirty hands on the reigns of power in the cigar business there and fuck everything up.

I would support Habanos SA remaining controlled by the Cuban government as a sovereign national resource and industry, as long as compensation of some form is paid to the otherwise rightful owners of the land and trademarks which it has appropriated.

Now is a good time for Cuba to test if they are actually a democracy (not one like Andaras said where people get shot and killed. That's not a democracy) and if they are allowed to choose their own ruler. They can choose the most rabid communist for all I like, but as long as they can manage to shift between two or three presidents in the next ten-twenty years or so, then I'll at least have more faith in the Cuban political system.

Btw, poll isn't baised - person promises change. The poll says "will there be change?" it then proceeds to ask "will this be actual change or cosmetic change?" It never at any point prefers one type of change over another.

Miami published an interesting article on him:
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/breaking_news/story/424310.html
And here is what South Florida has to say:
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/cuba/sfl-219castro,0,6887136.story

Anyway, it's early here and I have to go to class, so I'm not sure what's gonna happen today. South Florida said they would take to the streets to celebrate when he died, but I'm not sure what they'll do about him stepping down.....

Oh dear, Fidel's brother, Raul Castro, is an asshole and some even say, a sadist. Shota desu yo!
But then again, Cuba's ok, despite what the US government wants to portray to the rest of the world and despite the embargo. Medicine advances have reached levels that are unheard of in the rest of the world. Of course, that doesn't change the fact the Fidel's brother is and will always be an asshole.

His brother taking over?

*fires off fireworks*

Hopefully a change in Cuba will now occur. Down with Communism.

By no means the worst leader in South America's storied 20th century.

Lets hope this signals the start of Cuba's liberalization and economic revitalization, so that it can take more full advantage of its resources and the lives of its people can become better.

To be fair, he lasted longer than the likes of Pinochet and Galtieri.

It's a shock, the thing that could be more shocking would be when his death is announced.

Now hurry up and die you rat bastard!

I'd like to be in Miami when it happens, my Cuban-American brothers and sisters will be partying like never before :D

His brother taking over?

Does that officially make Cuba "History's Second Communist Monarchy"?

On a more serious note, Castro has survived every single President since Eisenhower, he's survived the Kennedy's, who hated him with a passion, he's survived Judy Hoover, Dulles and even the mob. Kudos to him on his insulation and maintenance of power, it's darn near unprecedented, and I applaud him for his charisma, his use of propaganda and nationalism, and his ability to make himself the single representative and the physical embodiment of the Cuban government.

Further, I applaud his ability to adapt to the changing times, yet keep himself quite securely in power, quite unlike any other East-bloc country. When the USSR fell, and his primary mode of multiple-billions of rubles of economic and military support suddenly vanished, he decentralized the economy, and permitted people a slightly greater degree of autonomy in their own personal governance.

Further, I applaud his ability to consolidate power internally. He showed utmost political tact when he kicked out Che Guevara, and acted like it wasn't an outkicking. In doing so, he managed to preserve the charismatic legend of Che, but get him the hell out of there, because he was seriously screwing shit up, oh, and challenging his power, too. I can't forget that.

I can't applaud him for his human rights record, his record of international diplomacy, the long-term sustainability of a regime built on his personality cult or the fact that he is little more than a dictator who holds sham elections every so often to "legitimize" his singular rule of the Cuban state. His crimes are legion, and his role in the CMC brinkmanship brought the world to the edge of doom. But, he's finally gone.

Oh, and George W. Bush: You can claim something that none of your predecessor's can claim: You outlasted Castro.


Wait! There's more!
It is now the appropriate time for a daylight policy with Cuba. Now that Fidel Castro is gone, we should begin to lift the embargo in a significant fashion. We already sell food and stuff to Cuba, so, the natural next step is automobiles: It's time they left the fifties in their car choices, and embraced Japanese cars. Booyah!

Oh dear, Fidel's brother, Raul Castro, is an asshole and some even say, a sadist. Shota desu yo!
But then again, Cuba's ok, despite what the US government wants to portray to the rest of the world and despite the embargo. Medicine advances have reached levels that are unheard of in the rest of the world. Of course, that doesn't change the fact the Fidel's brother is and will always be an asshole.

What the heck are you talking about?

Cuban medicine is not particularly advanced technologically, and is, in fact, quite simple in nature. Rather, the mandatory program of preventative medicine that is enforced on the populace makes it so that simple, inexpensive measures are actually effective.

If you need a complex new surgical procedure, you don't go to Havana, you go to Cleveland.

I thought he died? he's still alive? wow, after about 380 assassination attempts he's done pretty well to stay alive (see wiki if you don't believe me).

Also, that Adidas windsuit thing...totally unclass, lacking Castro's traditional sense of style and all of that. It's actually kinda weird.

Well, though I think that comrade Fidel has performed above the average as leader, I'd say it was about time. Resigning - let's say - 20 years ago would have been even better; socialism and democracy must go together, or at least tovariš Gorbačëv used to say so. Having always the same people in power isn't the best thing for democracy or for socialism.
This is going to be the real test for Cuba: can the cuban system work without the strong figure of the lider maximo? I think it there are good chances it can. The next months will tell us.

What the heck are you talking about?

Cuban medicine is not particularly advanced technologically, and is, in fact, quite simple in nature. Rather, the mandatory program of preventative medicine that is enforced on the populace makes it so that simple, inexpensive measures are actually effective.

If you need a complex new surgical procedure, you don't go to Havana, you go to Cleveland.

Let this article explain my post.:rolleyes:

Cuba and international healthcare
Cuba has entered into agreements with United Nations agencies specializing in health: PAHO/WHO, UNICEF, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), and the United Nations Development Fund (UNDP). Since 1989, this collaboration has played a very important role in that Cuba, in addition to obtaining the benefits of being a member country, has strengthened its relations with institutions of excellence and has been able to disseminate some of its own advances and technologies.

Because the education of physicians came to exceed the country's internal requirements, Cuba has been able to export primary care practitioners and specialists for periods of service in other Third World nations. Cuban doctors have therefore played a role in many regions of the world. Cuba's missions in 68 countries are manned by 25,000 Cuban doctors, and medical teams have assisted victims of both the South Asian Tsunami and the Pakistan earthquake. Cuba currently exports considerable health services and personnel to Venezuela in exchange for subsidized oil. Nearly 2,000 Cuban doctors are currently working in Africa in countries including South Africa, Gambia, Guinea Bissau and Mali. Since the Chernobyl nuclear plant exploded in 1986, more than 20,000 children from Ukraine, Belarus and Russia have traveled to Cuba for treatment of radiation sickness and psychologically based problems associated with the radiation disaster.

Cuban doctors play a primary role in the Mission Barrio Adentro (Spanish: "Mission Into the Neighborhood") social welfare program established in Venezuela under current Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez. The program, which is popular among Venezuela's poor and is intended to bring doctors and other medical services to the most remote slums of Venezuela, has not been without its detractors. The Venezuelan Medical Association has criticised the appointment of Cuban doctors to high-ranking positions, and protests have taken place in the capital Caracas by Venezuelan medical staff who fear that the Cubans are a threat to Venezuelan jobs. Questions have also been raised by protestors about the level of Cuban medical qualifications, and there have been claims that the Cubans are "political agents" who have come to Venezuela to indoctrinate the workforce.


Operación Milagro
Operación Milagro (Operation Miracle) is a joint health programme between Cuba and Venezuela, set up in 2005. The initiative is part of the Sandino commitment, which sees both countries coming together with the aim of offering free ophthalmology operations to an estimated 6 million people in Latin America and the Caribbean. The project is also part of ALBA (Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas). Under the agreement, patients from Venezuela and other Latin American nations, are flown to into Cuba for eye surgeries and other major treatments. This is part of a package which includes the Cuban personnel sent to Venezuela (see above) and the fact that Venezuela sent 90,000 barrels of crude oil per day at preferential rates. In late 2005, Operación Milagro was extended to Panamanians, and in June 2006 to Nicaraguans. All flights, accommodation and food are funded by the Venezuelan government. The scheme was intended to expand to 500,000 operations a year in 2006.

Opponents of the Cuban government accuse it of sending the doctors to Venezuela for political motives.


Health tourism and pharmaceutics
Cuba attracts nearly 20000 paying health tourists, generating revenues of around $40m a year for the Cuban economy. Cuba has been serving health tourists from around the world for more than 20 years. The country operates a special division of hospitals specifically for the treatment of foreigners and diplomats. Foreign patients travel to Cuba for a wide range of treatments including eye-surgery, neurological disorders such as multiple sclerosis and Parkinsons disease, cosmetic surgery, addictions treatment, retinitis pigmentosa and orthopaedics. Most patients are from Latin America, Europe and Canada, and a growing number of Americans also are coming. Cuba also successfully exports many medical products, such as vaccines. By 1998, according to the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, the Cuban health sector had risen to occupy around two percent of total tourism. Some of these revenues are in turn transferred to health care for ordinary Cubans, although the size and importance of these transfers is both unknown and controversial. At one nationally prominent hospital/research institute, hard currency payments by foreigners have financed the construction of a new bathroom in the splanic surgery wing; anecdotal evidence suggests that this pattern is common in Cuban hospitals.

Alternative Healthcare
Economic constraints and restrictions on medicines have forced the Cuban health system to incorporate alternative and herbal solutions to healthcare issues, which can be more accessible and affordable to a broader population[1] In the 1990’s, the Cuban Ministry of Public Health officially recognized natural and traditional medicine and began its integration into the already well established Western medicine model. Examples of alternative techniques used by the clinics and hospitals include: flower essence, neural and hydromineral therapies, homeopathy, traditional Chinese medicine (i.e. acupunctural anesthesia for surgery), natural dietary supplements, yoga, electromagnetic and laser devices. Children begin studying the multiple uses of medicinal plants in primary school, learning to grow and tend their own plots of aloe, chamomile, and mint, and later they conduct scientific studies about their uses. Radio and Television programs instruct people on how to relieve common stomach upset and headaches by pressing key points.[53] Cuban bio-chemists have produced a number of new alternative medicines, including PPG® (policosanol), a natural product derived from sugarcane wax that is effective at reducing total cholesterol and LDL levels, and Vimang® a natural product derived from the bark of mango trees.


Medical research in Cuba
The Cuban Ministry of Health produces a number of medical journals including the ACIMED, the Cuban Journal of Surgery and the Cuban Journal of Tropical Medicine. Because the U.S. government restricts investments in Cuba by U.S. companies and their affiliates, Cuban institutions have been limited in their ability to enter into research and development partnerships.

In April 2007, the Cuba IPV Study Collaborative Group reported in the New England Journal of Medicine that inactivated (killed) poliovirus vaccine was effective in vaccinating children in tropical conditions. The Collaborative Group consisted of the Cuban Ministry of Public Health, Kourí Institute, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Pan American Health Organization, and the World Health Organization. This is important because countries with high incidence of polio are now using live oral poliovirus vaccine. When polio is eliminated in a country, they must stop using the live vaccine, because it has a slight risk of reverting to the dangerous form of polio. The collaborative group found that when polio is eliminated in a population, they could safely switch to killed vaccine and be protected from recurrent epidemics. Cuba has been free of polio since 1963, but continues with mass immunization campaigns.

In the 1980s, Cuban scientists developed a vaccine against a strain of bacterial meningitis B, which eliminated what had been a serious disease on the island. The Cuban vaccine is used throughout Latin America. After outbreaks of meningitis B in the United States, the U.S. Treasury Department granted a license in 1999 to an American subsidiary of the pharmaceutical company SmithKline Beecham to enter into a deal to develop the vaccine for use in the U.S. and elsewhere.


Praise for the Cuban Healthcare System
In 2006, BBC flagship news programme Newsnight featured Cuba's Healthcare system as part of a series identifying "the world's best public services". The report noted that "Thanks chiefly to the American economic blockade, but partly also to the web of strange rules and regulations that constrict Cuban life, the economy is in a terrible mess: national income per head is minuscule, and resources are amazingly tight. Healthcare, however, is a top national priority" The report stated that life expectancy and infant mortality rates are pretty much the same as the USA's. Its doctor-to-patient ratios stand comparison to any country in Western Europe. Its annual total health spend per head, however, comes in at $251; just over a tenth of the UK's. The report concluded that the population's admirable health is one of the key reasons why Castro is still in power. In fact, a recent poll carried out by the Gallup Organization's Costa Rican affiliate — Consultoría Interdisciplinaria en Desarrollo (CID) — found that about three-quarters of Cuban citizens are positive about their country's education and healthcare systems.

In 2000, Secretary General of the United Nations Kofi Annan stated that "Cuba should be the envy of many other nations" adding that achievements in social development are impressive given the size of its gross domestic product per capita. "Cuba demonstrates how much nations can do with the resources they have if they focus on the right priorities - health, education, and literacy." The Kaiser Family Foundation, a non-governmental organization that evaluated Cuba’s healthcare system in 2000-1 described Cuba as "a shining example of the power of public health to transform the health of an entire country by a commitment to prevention and by careful management of its medical resources". President of the World Bank James Wolfensohn also praised Cuba's healthcare system in 2001, saying that "Cuba has done a great job on education and health", at the annual meeting of the Bank and the International Monetary Fund. Wayne Smith, former head of the US Interests Section in Havana identified "the incredible dedication" of Cubans to healthcare, adding that "Doctors in Cuba can make more driving cabs and working in hotels, but they don't. They're just very dedicated". Dr. Robert N. Butler, president of the International Longevity Center in New York and a Pulitzer Prize-winning author on aging, has traveled to Cuba to see firsthand how doctors are trained. He said a principal reason that some health standards in Cuba approach the high American level is that the Cuban system emphasizes early intervention. Clinic visits are free, and the focus is on preventing disease rather than treating it. Furthermore, London's The Guardian newspaper lauded Cuba's public healthcare system for what it viewed as its high quality in a Sept. 12, 2007 article.


Studies of the Cuban health system in the United Kingdom
In 2001, members of the UK House of Commons Health Select Committee traveled to Cuba and issued a report that paid tribute to "the success of the Cuban healthcare system", based on its "strong emphasis on disease prevention" and "commitment to the practice of medicine in a community".

The Parliament of the United Kingdom also drew up an analysis of the key features of Cuba's healthcare system, drawing comparisons with the state funded National Health Service (NHS). The overall conclusion was that many of the features identified would not have occurred had there not been an obvious commitment to health provision demonstrated by the protection and proportion of the budget given the health care. The study concluded the following.

There appeared to be little evidence of a divide between the prevention/proactive response and the disease management/reactive response within Cuban healthcare.
By far the biggest difference was the ratio of doctors per person. In Cuba it was one doctor per 175 people, in the UK the figure was one doctor per 600 people.
There is a commitment in Cuba to the triple diagnosis (physical/psychological/social) at all levels.
Extensive involvement of "patient" and the public in decision making at all levels.
Integration of hospital/community/primary care via polyclinics.
Team-work that works is much more evident both in the community and the hospital sector and the mental-health and care of the elderly sites visited were very well staffed and supported.

Cuban medicine is not particularly advanced technologically, and is, in fact, quite simple in nature. Rather, the mandatory program of preventative medicine that is enforced on the populace makes it so that simple, inexpensive measures are actually effective.


Yep. A friend of mine interviewed some months ago dr.Aleida Guevara (daughter of Ernesto 'Che', working as paediatrician in Cuba) for our party's weekly. Dr.Guevara complained that the embargo it cutting Cuba off from the most advanced drugs and medical techniques, so they have to cope with that with lots of prevention, generalised screening, and low-tech, but locally producted drugs. Cuba can't afford the same drug factories and research of Switzerland: anyway they have developed quite an efficient health system.

Let me re-iterate my disappointment when I first found out that cubans were not shaped like cubes. :(

Let this article explain my post.:rolleyes:
[/snip]


Unlinked copy-pasta sucks balls. I don't even know who put that piece out.

But, beyond that, your piece provides little evidence for anything more than the use of physicians as propaganda tools abroad, and an elite tier of the health care system reserved for paying foreigners and high-level party officials.

Let me re-iterate my disappointment when I first found out that cubans were not shaped like cubes. :(

That has to be the funniest comment i've seen you make.:)
For all the crap you come out with, sometimes your comments are worth more than all the diamonds in the world put together.

I tihnk it is a little of both. Cuba's healthcare system works, like it or not, but the point is that cheaper and yet more effective procedures as massive preventive measures have been proved to be better than massed advanced surgical procedures.

Indeed, Cuba doesn't have the resources, human or technological, to advance in superior surgical and medical treatments, as those applied in both the European Union and the United States, but that kind of patients have been minimized by the excellent preventive medicine they practice, and long term public and national health plans.

As far as you all know that I do oppose my goverment, so far the cubans working in Barrio Adentro have done an amazing job in our poorest communities with their preventive measures, even if form time to time a case of malpractice appears. What I do critic of Barrio Adentro is not the program per se, that is really succesful, but the lack of integration with the venezuelan health system. Using both cuban and venezuelan medics could give better results. Plus, a serious amount of resources is redirected to Barrio Adentro from our own health system, so the doctors in hospitals have almost nothing to work with in the standard institutions, meanwhile the cuban doctors of Barrio Adentro have surplus of materials and medicines for their simple, if wonderful, preventive programs.

Let me re-iterate my disappointment when I first found out that cubans were not shaped like cubes. :(

xD!

As always, blaming the 'eb1L' Americans. It seems to be a national pasttime in Cuba, to write off the failings of their system on the United States. Nevermind that even its (long dead) patron, the resource rich and powerful Soviet Union, never managed to successfully develop major medical advancements, or manufacture advanced medical materials. No, it's clearly not the fault of the system that the Cuban government embraced, it's the fault of those evil foreigners. :rolleyes:

Finally, someone that makes sense of what I've been trying to explain. Thanks, Andaluciae.

As always, blaming the 'eb1L' Americans. It seems to be a national pasttime in Cuba, to write off the failings of their system on the United States. Nevermind that even its (long dead) patron, the resource rich and powerful Soviet Union, never managed to successfully develop major medical advancements, or manufacture advanced medical materials. No, it's clearly not the fault of the system that the Cuban government embraced, it's the fault of those evil foreigners. :rolleyes:

Sorry, but here, he has a good point. The embargo has deprived Cuba of the most advanced pieces of equipment and medicines, and yet they have been bright enough as to apply long term plans based on preventive medicine to improve the levels of their public health. And it has worked.

They can blame the americans on this one, because there is noone else to blame, you can't expect that the cuban researchers will develop all the advances of the western world on the last 50 years without external access to materials and medicines.

American and European doctors have worked together, retrofeeding on each others' discoveries, alongside with the japanese, brazilian, chinese, and the rest of the world's doctors. The cuban were left by themselves. And they managed to solve the problems in alternative ways.

Yep. A friend of mine interviewed some months ago dr.Aleida Guevara (daughter of Ernesto 'Che', working as paediatrician in Cuba) for our party's weekly. Dr.Guevara complained that the embargo it cutting Cuba off from the most advanced drugs and medical techniques, so they have to cope with that with lots of prevention, generalised screening, and low-tech, but locally producted drugs. Cuba can't afford the same drug factories and research of Switzerland: anyway they have developed quite an efficient health system.

As always, blaming the 'eb1L' Americans. It seems to be a national pasttime in Cuba, to write off the failings of their system on the United States. Nevermind that even its (long dead) patron, the resource rich and powerful Soviet Union, never managed to successfully develop major medical advancements, or manufacture advanced medical materials. No, it's clearly not the fault of the system that the Cuban government embraced, it's the fault of those evil foreigners. :rolleyes:

Nononononononooo!!!!! Fidel!!! You can't resign now, outlast at least one more US president or pope.

Sorry, but here, he has a good point. The embargo has deprived Cuba of the most advanced pieces of equipment and medicines, and yet they have been bright enough as to apply long term plans based on preventive medicine to improve the levels of their public health. And it has worked.

They can blame the americans on this one, because there is noone else to blame, you can't expect that the cuban researchers will develop all the advances of the western world on the last 50 years without external access to materials and medicines.

American and European doctors have worked together, retrofeeding on each others' discoveries, alongside with the japanese, brazilian, chinese, and the rest of the world's doctors. The cuban were left by themselves. And they managed to solve the problems in alternative ways.

Cuba hasn't been isolated from the rest of the world for the past fifty years, though. They were closely tied into the East bloc, and the Soviet Union lavished the Castro government with billions of rubles, all the way up to its collapse in 1991. Cuba was deeply connected to the system that the Soviet Union had constructed, and last I checked, the USSR wasn't exactly weak during much of that time period.

To say post-Revolution Cuba was isolated for the entirety of its history is incorrect. It most certainly was not, merely isolated from the US and Western Europe.

As always, blaming the 'eb1L' Americans. It seems to be a national pasttime in Cuba, to write off the failings of their system on the United States.
(anticuban rant snipped...)

Re-read my post, this time not through ideological glasses, please.
I didn't wrote "she blames the evil Americans for their failings". I stated that she said that, since there is an embargo, they had to work with local resources and local techniques.

Btw, place an embargo on America and let's see how much time your economical system will keep working. Less than six months, I guess from the petrol import figures.

Cuba hasn't been isolated from the rest of the world for the past fifty years, though. They were closely tied into the East bloc, and the Soviet Union lavished the Castro government with billions of rubles, all the way up to its collapse in 1991. Cuba was deeply connected to the system that the Soviet Union had constructed, and last I checked, the USSR wasn't exactly weak during much of that time period.

To say post-Revolution Cuba was isolated for the entirety of its history is incorrect. It most certainly was not, merely isolated from the US and Western Europe.

And, of course, the best medical tech has always been Soviet, right? :rolleyes:

OK, I'm neither a Communist apologist nor a Castro-hating fanatic, so I will respect that Castro has done some good things for Cuba (mainly that exceptional healthcare system) while still condemning him as an oppressive dictator. I don't know much about pre-Castro Cuba, but from what I've heard, it is possible that Castro was an improvement, though I still maintain that democracy is preferable.

It is my hope that Cuba will transition to democracy peacefully, without the violence and destruction that frequently accompanies the aforementioned transition. Fortunately, there is precedent for nonviolent transition between communist dictatorship and democracy - ie, the collapse of the Soviet Union.

And, of course, the best medical tech has always been Soviet, right? :rolleyes:

Could you, please, elaborate on this? I'm interested.

Re-read my post, this time not through ideological glasses, please.
I didn't wrote "she blames the evil Americans for their failings". I stated that she said that, since there is an embargo, they had to work with local resources and local techniques.

Unless, of course, that medical treatment is for a paying foreigner, or a high government or party official.

With a rigid, multitiered and segregated system of preventative medicine, that is ill equipped to handle major health emergencies, I'd hardly call the system the most desirable solution.

Btw, place an embargo on America and let's see how much time their economical system will keep working. Less than six months, I guess from the petrol import figures.

Let's see how long everyone else's economy keeps functioning without us, too. Unlike Cuba, we've integrated into the world economy, autarky is not a virtue in the 21st century.

And, of course, the best medical tech has always been Soviet, right? :rolleyes:

The USSR was a superpower, the factors that held back the development of their healthcare system were political and motivational. It's not the fault of the US that Cuba chose to align themselves with the USSR.

Soviet medical science was ghastly-awful. It was a two-tiered system in which a handful of party elites managed to get tolerable healthcare, whilst the vast bulk of society was fundamentally deprived and relegated to tsarist-era hospitals, receiving treatments dating from roughly the same time frame.

Further, research into biology and medicine was permanently crippled by the leadership's penchant for the biological theories of Lysenko, a slimy party apparatchik, who falsified his research, questioned the most basic concepts of Mendelian genetics and used his political standing to make his ridiculous theories as to inheritance the official Soviet party line for over two decades. When western scientists were embracing the revolutions of molecular genetics, the USSR was putting wheat seeds in freezers to try to get them "acclimatized" to the cold weather in the USSR.

Further, scientists whose research received praise in the west were often persecuted, and the incentives for radical success were essentially non-existent.

Nevertheless, the Soviet Union had direct access to a massive resource base, and without the failings of the political and (motivational aspects of) the economic system, could plausibly have played an important role in the medical revolutions of the last century, like they did in physics and rockety.

Thanks.:)

Cuba hasn't been isolated from the rest of the world for the past fifty years, though. They were closely tied into the East bloc, and the Soviet Union lavished the Castro government with billions of rubles, all the way up to its collapse in 1991. Cuba was deeply connected to the system that the Soviet Union had constructed, and last I checked, the USSR wasn't exactly weak during much of that time period.

To say post-Revolution Cuba was isolated for the entirety of its history is incorrect. It most certainly was not, merely isolated from the US and Western Europe.

The Soviet Union was a failed system, indeed. The Soviet Union did poured millions of...Rubles? What was Cuba going to do with rubles anyway? Change them to who? and about medical systems, the Soviet healthcare system was a failure, they weren't able to trust in cooperation with that one. What Cuba did in the health department, they did it by themselves, because they were either isolated, or with an useless friend. I am not speaking about economics here as in the broad sense, I am speaking about healthcare in particular.

Btw, place an embargo on America and let's see how much time your economical system will keep working. Less than six months, I guess from the petrol import figures.

True.

Unless, of course, that medical treatment is for a paying foreigner, or a high government or party official.

With a rigid, multitiered and segregated system of preventative medicine, that is ill equipped to handle major health emergencies, I'd hardly call the system the most desirable solution.

Oh, no. The preventive measures of the cubans affect the population as a whole, it is not segregated, or those massive long term plans wouldn't have any effect at all. It has to be everyone or noone.

The surgical procedures are indeed relegated to tourists, foreigners or officials. Yet, as you by yourself explained, the main goal is to make preventive procedures, not surgical ones. For those, you go to Cleveland, Paris or Berlin. And thanks to the success of the cuban preventive system, only a few of the patients need those expensive procedures in the end.

Let's see how long everyone else's economy keeps functioning without us, too. Unlike Cuba, we've integrated into the world economy, autarky is not a virtue in the 21st century.

Indeed, but the cubans managed to create a good health care system being isolated on that department, even although their economy was blown. We are not discussing economics here, but healthcare policies.

Could you, please, elaborate on this? I'm interested.

Soviet medical science was ghastly-awful. It was a two-tiered system in which a handful of party elites managed to get tolerable healthcare, whilst the vast bulk of society was fundamentally deprived and relegated to tsarist-era hospitals, receiving treatments dating from roughly the same time frame.

Further, research into biology and medicine was permanently crippled by the leadership's penchant for the biological theories of Lysenko, a slimy party apparatchik, who falsified his research, questioned the most basic concepts of Mendelian genetics and used his political standing to make his ridiculous theories as to inheritance the official Soviet party line for over two decades. When western scientists were embracing the revolutions of molecular genetics, the USSR was putting wheat seeds in freezers to try to get them "acclimatized" to the cold weather in the USSR.

Further, scientists whose research received praise in the west were often persecuted, and the incentives for radical success were essentially non-existent.

Nevertheless, the Soviet Union had direct access to a massive resource base, and without the failings of the political and (motivational aspects of) the economic system, could plausibly have played an important role in the medical revolutions of the last century, like they did in physics and rockety.

Fidel is alive. For certain values of alive.

With modern medical tech, it is possible to keep a body alive for pretty much forever, as long as you count brain dead alive. I can't see them letting Fidel die until the power has safely changed hands.

With a rigid, multitiered and segregated system of preventative medicine, that is ill equipped to handle major health emergencies, I'd hardly call the system the most desirable solution.

As the saying goes, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. I doubt Cuba could afford the pound in any case.

Cuba hasn't been isolated from the rest of the world for the past fifty years, though. They were closely tied into the East bloc, and the Soviet Union lavished the Castro government with billions of rubles, all the way up to its collapse in 1991. Cuba was deeply connected to the system that the Soviet Union had constructed, and last I checked, the USSR wasn't exactly weak during much of that time period.

To say post-Revolution Cuba was isolated for the entirety of its history is incorrect. It most certainly was not, merely isolated from the US and Western Europe.

Do you have a source for the bolded part? And even if the USSR supported Cuba between 1965 and 1985, that still leaves about 25 years, or half of Castro's time, without any Soviet support. It must really irk you that a developing country with a socialist economy can have a healthcare system that rivals the US one, and does it on a shoestring budget.

Unless, of course, that medical treatment is for a paying foreigner, or a high government or party official.

With a rigid, multitiered and segregated system of preventative medicine, that is ill equipped to handle major health emergencies, I'd hardly call the system the most desirable solution.

Let's see how long everyone else's economy keeps functioning without us, too. Unlike Cuba, we've integrated into the world economy, autarky is not a virtue in the 21st century.

Do you have any sources showing that Cuban healthcare is as you desrcibe it? Becuase if it were, we would expect to see Cuba rank somewhere close to other Caribbean nations in terms of healthcare, yet we see that Cuba consistently ranks higher. It also does not correspond to my observations of the Cuban health care system while I was in Cuba.

Cuba did not choose autarky. Autarky was the best possible option for Cuba when faced with the US embargo.

The USSR was a superpower, the factors that held back the development of their healthcare system were political and motivational. It's not the fault of the US that Cuba chose to align themselves with the USSR.

Yes it is. Cuba never would have made the famous sugar for oil deal with the USSR if it hadn't been for the US embargo. If the USA had dealt with Castro when he came to visit, then history may have turned out very differently.

It's funny that Bush's harshest critics are always the fiercest Castro apologists. Much as I despise him, I can't help but say that he must have some good points.

49 years? Guess he just didn't have it in him to get to the big 50.

It's funny that the first thing I thought about was my reaction to Tookie Williams finally being executed. It should have happened decades ago The CIA should have killed Castro in the late 50's.

Unfortunately, absent a very skillful leader with fresh ideas and the interests of Cuba at heart rather than power, I think there are only three possibilities:
1) More of the same.
2) Civil war.
3) Third world corporate tourist trap.

Question: what is actual public sentiment like in Cuba?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7252109.stm

The BBC's Michael Voss reports from Havana that most Cubans will be saddened by news of their leader's retirement but many hope the political transition will bring economic improvements.

Third world tourist trap seems most plausible scenario with worsening average standard of living but chances of making it big.

Could you, please, elaborate on this? I'm interested.

Re-read the posts:


Originally Posted by Andaluciae
Cuba hasn't been isolated from the rest of the world for the past fifty years, though. They were closely tied into the East bloc, and the Soviet Union lavished the Castro government with billions of rubles, all the way up to its collapse in 1991. Cuba was deeply connected to the system that the Soviet Union had constructed, and last I checked, the USSR wasn't exactly weak during much of that time period.

To say post-Revolution Cuba was isolated for the entirety of its history is incorrect. It most certainly was not, merely isolated from the US and Western Europe.

Looks like Andaluciae is saying that "it's Fidel's and the communism's fault that the Cuban health system cannot access to western tech: the embargo didn't prevent Cuba from getting help and tech from the socialist bloc"

(apart from the small fact that the embargo also blocked soviet vessels - remember the missile crisis)

Here comes my sarcastical reply:

And, of course, the best medical tech has always been Soviet, right?


This is to say:

either you claim that Soviet medical tech was better than US and Western medical tech - and still Castro chose not to buy it, hence the lower technological level of Cuba's health system (and of course Andaluciae would NEVER dream of claiming Soviet technological superiority)

either you claim that US and EU medical tech is better than Soviet medical tech - here follows logically that Cuba has access to lower medical tech only, because of the embargo.

Dialectic and sarcasm go a long way.



By the way, don't you find it ironical that the same country that claims to have the better technology and goes "free trade yeah!" as unofficial motto... places an embargo on another country and THEN blames that very same country for having lower technology levels?

(apart from the small fact that the embargo also blocked soviet vessels - remember the missile crisis)

Apart from the fact that the blockade of Cuba was temporary and was a negotiating tool used by JFK to make Kurschev blink, which worked. The embargo was only done by the United States anyway.

Apart from the fact that the blockade of Cuba was temporary and was a negotiating tool used by JFK to make Kurschev blink, which worked. The embargo was only done by the United States anyway.And to date, pretty much still only is. US citizens are the only ones I know of that can't freely travel to Cuba (Guantanamo Bay excluded).

And to date, pretty much still only is. US citizens are the only ones I know of that can't freely travel to Cuba (Guantanamo Bay excluded).

That's my understanding as well.

Apart from the fact that the blockade of Cuba was temporary and was a negotiating tool used by JFK to make Kurschev blink, which worked. The embargo was only done by the United States anyway.

The Helms-Burton law also penalises any foreign (Not USian) company that deals with Cuba. It does so by threatening to exclude them from the US market. Consequently, companies have to choose between the US market and the Cuban one. In this respect, it is more like an economic blockade than an embargo.

And to date, pretty much still only is. US citizens are the only ones I know of that can't freely travel to Cuba (Guantanamo Bay excluded).

If a European businessman goes to Cuba and does business there, he could legally be barred from doing business in the USA.

So this does not only affect US citizens.

The Helms-Burton law also penalises any foreign (Not USian) company that deals with Cuba. It does so by threatening to exclude them from the US market. Consequently, companies have to choose between the US market and the Cuban one. In this respect, it is more like an economic blockade than an embargo.

If people actually read the Act, it deals with American Company assets that were seized by Cuban authorities. Meaning that other company assets that were not American are not covered by said act.

Edit: Also, nations passed their own laws stating that said act has no jurisdiction with their own trading to Cuba thus rendering said act, useless.

Apparently you haven't read my post very well. The Helms-Burton Act lets the US government punish other foreign nationals from doing business with Cuba. The act itself clearly states that nonUSians can be punished for 'trafficking in seized US assets'. The fact that US assets were frozen is merely the justification for the law.

Here's the link:

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=104_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ114.104

Here's the relevant quote:



Those who are functionally literate will note that it does not say that only US citizens and corporations can be held to this.

ANd those who do a bit of research will know that nations reject this and have passed laws limiting the reach of said act thus rendering it ineffective anyways so the point is rather moot.

If people actually read the Act, it deals with American Company assets that were seized by Cuban authorities. Meaning that other company assets that were not American are not covered by said act.

Apparently you haven't read my post very well. The Helms-Burton Act lets the US government punish other foreign nationals from doing business with Cuba. The act itself clearly states that nonUSians can be punished for 'trafficking in seized US assets'. The fact that US assets were frozen is merely the justification for the law.

Here's the link:

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=104_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ114.104

Here's the relevant quote:

SEC. 302. <<NOTE: 22 USC 6082.>> LIABILITY FOR TRAFFICKING IN
CONFISCATED PROPERTY CLAIMED BY UNITED STATES NATIONALS.

(a) Civil Remedy.--
(1) Liability for trafficking.--(A) Except as otherwise
provided in this section, any person that, after the end of the
3-month period beginning on the effective date of this title,
traffics in property which was confiscated by the Cuban
Government on or after January 1, 1959, shall be liable to any
United States national who owns the claim to such property for
money damages in an amount equal to the sum of--
(i) the amount which is the greater of--
(I) the amount, if any, certified to the
claimant by the Foreign Claims Settlement
Commission under the International Claims
Settlement Act of 1949, plus interest;
(II) the amount determined under section
303(a)(2), plus interest; or
(III) the fair market value of that property,
calculated as being either the current value of
the property, or the value of the property when
confiscated plus interest, whichever is greater;
and
(ii) court costs and reasonable attorneys' fees.

Those who are functionally literate will note that it does not say that only US citizens and corporations can be held to this.

ANd those who do a bit of research will know that nations reject this and have passed laws limiting the reach of said act thus rendering it ineffective anyways so the point is rather moot.

Canada has passed a law saying that a Canadian company can sue a USian company for damages if it charged under the Helms-Burton law. This does not render the law ineffective, as the US government could still continue to punish Canadian businesses anyway.

By the way, don't you find it ironical that the same country that claims to have the better technology and goes "free trade yeah!" as unofficial motto... places an embargo on another country and THEN blames that very same country for having lower technology levels?

Oh yes, I find it very ironical (and sad), specially the part where it is not recognized that Cuba has had medical advances, regardless of the embargo and poor (or null relations with the mighty US of A).

Point in case, my nephew was born with catarachts. When the doctors examined him, they said that we either had to spend an inordinate amount of money on a series of operations in Madrid (operations that could span the better bart of his childhood), go to the US, Boston I think it was, and spend even more money (with the same amount of procedures) or go to Cuba.

In Cuba, the doctors have developed an easy and safe way to operate on newborns's eyes, specially when the problem is catarchts. I don't have the details, but they remove the problem and prepare the eyes to recieve an intraocular lense as soon as the eyes develop, by age ten. In between, the child only has to use special lenses to excersise and develop the eye muscle and then undergo the operation. If my nephew had stayed in Spain or gone to the US, he would still be going through painful operations, whereas the Cuban method saved him several years of torture.

Needless to say, he's a healthy 10 year-old, he uses glasses for the moment, but his eyes are ready for the surgery and he has had a normal childhood despite having problems with his eyes. He'll be having the intraocular lenses placed at the end of this year. Of course, we'll go to Cuba, again, for this event.

So, whoever tells me that Cuba has a mediocre and poor health system, to me, is sorely mistaken and biased.

Unfortunately, absent a very skillful leader with fresh ideas and the interests of Cuba at heart rather than power, I think there are only three possibilities:
1) More of the same.
2) Civil war.
3) Third world corporate tourist trap.

Question: what is actual public sentiment like in Cuba?

The best way to answer that question would be asking a Cuban himself/herself. Of course, ask a Cuban who just left the Island recently, don't bother asking Cubans who live in Florida, or in other parts of the US. Most of the Cuban families that you'll encounter in the US, have been living there for decades after they left Cuba in the 50s, and were rich propietors in Cuba before Fidel Castro came to power. They despise the regime and despise Fidel for "taking" their land and their money. It all depends whom do you ask.

Castro 49, United States 0.

The man was no saint- hell, he was a dictator after all and did all sorts of shit to political dissidents, but he retires undefeated even when one of the world's superpowers kept on trying to squeeze him out or knock him off. Celebrating his demise long after he retired from rulership is merely empty masturbation.

While La Habana Cuba is still in shock. Someone get me a straight jacket. Someone post me a straight jacket. I am having a nervous breakdown. lol.

I have taken an overdose of tranqualizers. La Habana Cuba is in stable condition at best.
As I stated before what shocked me was not that he resigned. What shocked me was, I was expecting either he be elected or resigned around feb 24-08. I was not ready for it. As I wanted to be the first one on NS to make a thread on the subject. As I was. I now understand what happened with the thread posts. I was too shocked to understand at first.

While Fidel has in effect resigned as President. He was still officially elected to the National Assembly Parliment. So he might be elected to some other office post. Where he will be the power behind the power. Either way the power behind the power. And nothing officially changes.

As he states he will continue to write in Granma and offer his advice and experiences. But yet never be seen in public again? Just in government videos?

Fidel has still not been seen in public for almost 2 years now. Therefore the possibility that he has died.

I expect alot of propaganda of real changes, and no real changes at all. More of the same.

My favourite dictator has chosen the best exit. I hope someone younger and a bit more democratic-minded will take over. I hope Cuba will be better for it.

Finally! We can now continue in trying to make it a new US state..Only a hundred years too late.

While La Habana Cuba is still in shock. Someone get me a straight jacket. Someone post me a straight jacket. I am having a nervous breakdown. lol.

I have taken an overdose of tranqualizers. La Habana Cuba is in stable condition at best.
As I stated before what shocked me was not that he resigned. What shocked me was, I was expecting either he be elected or resigned around feb 24-08. I was not ready for it. As I wanted to be the first one on NS to make a thread on the subject. As I was. I now understand what happened with the thread posts. I was too shocked to understand at first.

While Fidel has in effect resigned as President. He was still officially elected to the National Assembly Parliment. So he might be elected to some other office post. Where he will be the power behind the power. And nothing officially changes.

As he states he will continue to write in Granma and offer his advice and experiences. But yet never be seen in public again? Just in government videos?

Fidel has still not been seen in public for almost 2 years now. Therefore the possibility that he has died.

I expect alot of propaganda of real changes, and no real changes at all. More of the same.

i expect substantial change over the next few years. when an overwhelmingly powerful person like castro goes, things have to change.

just what those changes will be will be up to the cuban people.

and perhaps the choice of US president in november. i can see a democrat scrapping the embargo in recognition of this change.

Or sent the troops to Cuba instead of Vietnam. Be a very different world.

Finally! We can now continue in trying to make it a new US state..Only a hundred years too late.

no kidding!

we should have let the phillipines go and kept cuba!

(apart from the small fact that the embargo also blocked soviet vessels - remember the missile crisis)

There is a very stark difference between the American embargo against Cuba, and the American Quarantine during the Missile Crisis. The Quarantine locked out foreign shipping from the Soviet Union, and was a temporary measure that was lifted after the end of the crisis. The embargo is a loose policy preventing American trade with Cuba. The first elements, specifically the arms embargo, were put into place while the Batista government was still in control. It was increased in size as a punitive measure after increasing expropriations of American property by the Cuban government, and the increasing alignment of Cuba with the Soviet camp. The embargo was merely solidified by the CMC, an event that was seen as an unforgivable act in the eyes of the US government.

At the same time, the USSR provided Cuba with preferential aid status, and special prices for their purchase of sugar, and sale of oil.

It does not ban all trade, and as such, Cuban imports from the United States equaling $467 Million dollars, come from the US.



either you claim that Soviet medical tech was better than US and Western medical tech - and still Castro chose not to buy it, hence the lower technological level of Cuba's health system (and of course Andaluciae would NEVER dream of claiming Soviet technological superiority)

No one could ever claim Soviet technological superiority, in virtually any broad field. Limited areas, such as high pressure welding, sure, but not in any broad based systematic field.

either you claim that US and EU medical tech is better than Soviet medical tech - here follows logically that Cuba has access to lower medical tech only, because of the embargo.


You totally missed the nuance of the argument, but I wouldn't expect anything else from you.

We talk a lot about how the actions of the United States, in the Middle East, especially, have grown resentment, and that a degree of the blame for the current situation actually rests on our own shoulders. A similar case is to be had in regards to Cuba and the embargo. As a state that received direct military support, permitted the stationing of the offensive weapons of a foreign power on its territory. As such, it was also forced into the arms of Soviet science and technology. It found itself tied to technological incompetence because of the decisions of the Castro government, and not because of some arbitrary American decision.

Dialectic and sarcasm go a long way.

Unfortunately, you didn't use either of them particularly well, because of the fact that you ignored the nuance of the argument.



By the way, don't you find it ironical that the same country that claims to have the better technology and goes "free trade yeah!" as unofficial motto... places an embargo on another country and THEN blames that very same country for having lower technology levels?

The embargo was placed on Cuba as a result of the actions of the government of Cuba, not merely out of spite.

Or sent the troops to Cuba instead of Vietnam. Be a very different world.

The USA did send troops to Cuba. They failed there too.

i expect substantial change over the next few years. when an overwhelmingly powerful person like castro goes, things have to change.

just what those changes will be will be up to the cuban people.

and perhaps the choice of US president in november. i can see a democrat scrapping the embargo in recognition of this change.

I can even see an increasing daylight policy on the part of the Bush government, if Raul decides to play a somewhat nicer game.

The best way to answer that question would be asking a Cuban himself/herself. Of course, ask a Cuban who just left the Island recently, don't bother asking Cubans who live in Florida, or in other parts of the US. Most of the Cuban families that you'll encounter in the US, have been living there for decades after they left Cuba in the 50s, and were rich propietors in Cuba before Fidel Castro came to power. They despise the regime and despise Fidel for "taking" their land and their money. It all depends whom do you ask.

And you're not going to be able to get ahold of a Cuban currently residing on the island, either.

Hopefully now the U.S. and Cuba can start getting along.

And you're not going to be able to get ahold of a Cuban currently residing on the island, either.

Why not? The BBC managed to find some:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7252937.stm

What the heck are you talking about?
If you need a complex new surgical procedure, you don't go to Havana, you go to Cleveland.
True, but that's just a matter of being cut off from technological resources rather than anything else, Cuba's 'health' system is socialist because it's not like anything the bourgeois world associates with 'healthcare', rather than a centralized hospital model it's a decentralized local 'care in the community' model where every street (literally) has a doctor who knows the health of everyone in their street, it's truly an altruistic model where everyone looks after each other.

OK, I'm neither a Communist apologist nor a Castro-hating fanatic, so I will respect that Castro has done some good things for Cuba (mainly that exceptional healthcare system) while still condemning him as an oppressive dictator. I don't know much about pre-Castro Cuba, but from what I've heard, it is possible that Castro was an improvement, though I still maintain that democracy is preferable.

It is my hope that Cuba will transition to democracy peacefully, without the violence and destruction that frequently accompanies the aforementioned transition. Fortunately, there is precedent for nonviolent transition between communist dictatorship and democracy - ie, the collapse of the Soviet Union.


^^^

This

The USA did send troops to Cuba. They failed there too.

When was this? And were they American troops?

^^^

This

Sounds like apologism for bourgeois dictatorship to me, some people need to understand what class warfare is, or in other words:

O, pardon me, thou bleeding piece of earth, That I am meek and gentle with these butchers!

When was this? And were they American troops?
Proxy forces, they did live in Florida.

Yes, but you and people like you ultimately advocate is destroying socialism and replacing it with a bourgeois capitalist dictatorship, 'freedom' in your context is freedom to exploit, freedom for capitalism.

Wow. Bourgeois. Big word. Hollow. It's just a demonized term. I dare you to show me a socialist society as productive as a free market and with possibility for social mobility. If you are the type of person who loves social freedoms like press and trial, I would advise you support a free market. "Equality" means stamping out the individual and crushing dissent through control. No means to make your life better, no incentive to work to produce quality. Socialism is what requires a dictator ship. You are extremely... ill-informed if you think that Cuba or Eastern Europe are/were free and productive.

When was this? And were they American troops?

April 1961 done by Cuban Exiles but planned by the United States

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

April 1961 done by Cuban Exiles but planned by the United States

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

...and, according to Oliver Stone, a possible reason for the assassination of JFK. :)

Having survived economic embargo, over 400 assassination attempts, invasion, he truly stands as a symbol and practical action against neoimperialism and capitalism. For an example without Cuban help Angola would have been colonized by Apartheid armies. Either way, the Cuban democratic socialist system is quite good and robust, and most importantly permanent, I think the Western imperialists would like more than ever to rape the people and resources of Cuba with capitalism.

I bet the world forces of bourgeoisism are positively licking their lips are the prospect of a second Eastern Europe to exploit and devour, but the Cuban workers will surely never allow this.

LOL, right because all Cubans are so happy with Castro and his enlightened communist rule.

Why not? The BBC managed to find some:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7252937.stm

I was making a reference to internet censorship, and the unavailability of computers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship#Cuba).

I dont expect major changes as long as fidel is alive.

He is still alive.

His brother will make the appearances and the day to day responsibilities of the dictatorship.
The US ought to open a line of communication to raoul though. When fidel is dead,I'm sure raoul could be influenced to do business with us.

The tourism alone would double their GNP in less than a year, not to mention us buying a little sugar and tobacco from them.

A few more cubans would be employed and they could start buying parts from us for their 50 year old cars.

It's funny that Bush's harshest critics are always the fiercest Castro apologists. Much as I despise him, I can't help but say that he must have some good points.

49 years? Guess he just didn't have it in him to get to the big 50.

It's funny that the first thing I thought about was my reaction to Tookie Williams finally being executed. It should have happened decades ago The CIA should have killed Castro in the late 50's.

Why? I fail to see how Castro/Cuba has ever been that big of a threat to the U.S.

LOL, right because all Cubans are so happy with Castro and his enlightened communist rule.

Actually yes, the popularity of Castro personally is phenomenal, actually overall popular support for socialism is more surging and massive than ever before. I am sure the US would love to turn Cuba back to the old days when it was a playground for the Mafia, rampant crime, corruption, prostitution and a playground for the West to exploit while the common people labored in unbearable conditions. When the US talks about 'economic reform', what is really means is reversing the debt-free status of Cuba and it's gains in social relations, and instead making it a export-orientated 'free enterprise zone' just like China.

The US bourgeois want their United Fruit Company back.

Actually yes, the popularity of Castro personally is phenomenal, actually overall popular support for socialism is more surging and massive than ever before. I am sure the US would love to turn Cuba back to the old days when it was a playground for the Mafia, rampant crime, corruption, prostitution and a playground for the West to exploit while the common people labored in unbearable conditions. When the US talks about 'economic reform', what is really means is reversing the debt-free status of Cuba and it's gains in social relations, and instead making it a export-orientated 'free enterprise zone' just like China.

The US bourgeois want their United Fruit Company back.

Is Cuba a worker's paradise now? There is no rampant crime or corruption there?
Are the people that have jobs working under bearable conditions?

Ahhh No, that's just more right-wing propaganda for you.

I think most people in Cuba-from the wealthy to the common man will benefit from trade with the US.
I dont think the majority of Cuba's citizens have been flourishing under castro.

Ahhh No, that's just more right-wing propaganda for you.

*dies of laughter*

Is Cuba a worker's paradise now? There is no rampant crime or corruption there?
Are the people that have jobs working under bearable conditions?
Ahhh No, that's just more right-wing propaganda for you.

Why must you refer to the bourgeois as if it were something similar to the borg collective, who all have exactly the same views and are all rampant on world domination. Do you not see how insanely retarded and childish that is? On top of how childish it is to constantly use such a retarded blanket term like 'bourgeois' in the first place?

Not to mention, outdated.

Why must you refer to the bourgeois as if it were something similar to the borg collective, who all have exactly the same views and are all rampant on world domination?
Because that’s the only way the Marxist-Leninist model can work, by reducing society to non-existent groupings.

The same reason nonsense words such as 'intelligentsia', 'kulak' and 'counter-revolutionary' get bandied about by Andaras and others like him who can't get past the lessons of the 1900s; the Marxist-Leninist model of society simply doesn't exist and doesn't work, so all those people in society that don't fit the 'scientific' model have to be reduced to mere aberrations.

The US bourgeois want their United Fruit Company back.

Why must you refer to the bourgeois as if it were something similar to the borg collective, who all have exactly the same views and are all rampant on world domination. Do you not see how insanely retarded and childish that is? On top of how childish it is to constantly use such a retarded blanket term like 'bourgeois' in the first place?

Wow....I'd never thought I'd see the day! I'd thought he'd hold onto his position until they pry it from his cold dead hands!

Perhaps they did. *spirit fingers*

Why must you refer to the bourgeois as if it were something similar to the borg collective, who all have exactly the same views and are all rampant on world domination. Do you not see how insanely retarded and childish that is? On top of how childish it is to constantly use such a retarded blanket term like 'bourgeois' in the first place?
Bourgeois is such a bourgeois word.

Why must you refer to the bourgeois as if it were something similar to the borg collective, who all have exactly the same views and are all rampant on world domination. Do you not see how insanely retarded and childish that is? On top of how childish it is to constantly use such a retarded blanket term like 'bourgeois' in the first place?

Not to mention he doesn't even use the terms properly. "Bourgeois" is an adjective. "Bourgeoisie" is a noun, and it is merely a French word to denote capitalists that has hence been adopted into many other languages. In English, it has an entirely prerogative meaning.

It's ultimately a lot more constructive to talk about the upper class than the bourgeoisie anyway.

And of course, Andaras and other Stalinists only want to topple the bourgeoise so they can replace them with a new bourgeoise (themselves).

Which is something they do not understand.

And of course, Andaras and other Stalinists only want to topple the bourgeoise so they can replace them with a new bourgeoise (themselves).

To be fair, they want to replace the bourgeoisie with coordinators-themselves of course. :p

And of course, Andaras and other Stalinists only want to topple the bourgeoise so they can replace them with a new bourgeoise (themselves).

Which is something they do not understand.

True.

End of an era...

Good thing too. Worst era in Cuban history. About frickin' time, too. Lets see some real democracy and freedom.

Anyone who thinks communism can actually work is:

A) Deluding themself.

B) Doesn't know shit.

C) Is smoking something that's probably illegal.

D) Deserves to be shot.

E) Any combination of the above.


Marx was a pothead. Stalin was paranoid and homicidal to his own people, and was just as bad as Hitler. Castro was a lying, dirty douchebag, not unlike Mussolini. Kim Jung Il needs to be thrown in a mental hospital. Chavez needs to go f*** himself.

To be fair, they want to replace the bourgeoisie with coordinators-themselves of course. :p

:D

D) Deserves to be shot.


How very freedom-loving of you. Thoughtcrime much?
And when you say "worst era", what do you mean? Could you please elaborate?

Good thing too. Worst era in Cuban history. About frickin' time, too. Lets see some real democracy and freedom.


I'm still going to go with Batista for having the Worst Era in Cuban History. Doesn't make Castro's oppression anymore justified, but it doesn't excuse his own crimes either, or who supported him in power.

Since I know nothing of Cuba besides the fact that they are dirty cigar smoking communists run by military dictators... :D

How has Cuba survived all these years as a communist country since communism is completely unworkable in any way, shape or form? Who has been propping them up?

What is crime like there? Homelessness?

Why do I hear good things about their school and health care systems?

*noobish snippet*

:rolleyes:

"In place of the old bourgeois society, with it's classes and class antagonisms, we shall have an association, in which the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all." ~ Karl Marx, Manifesto of the Communist Party

Straight from the horses mouth. How about another one.

"Freedom consists in converting the state from an organ superimposed upon society into one completely subordinate to it" ~ Karl Marx, Critique of the Gotha Programme

I am convinced that this argument would be best served if both sides actually took the time to read Marx.

How very freedom-loving of you. Thoughtcrime much?
And when you say "worst era", what do you mean? Could you please elaborate?

Ok, the "deserves to be shot thing" was a major exageration. I still wouldn't trust anyone like that with the reins of government, though.

When I say worst era, it's largely tinged by the fact that I carry a general family hate for Castro. My family is Cuban-American, and left because Castro effectively derailed the life they had. Castro changed practically nothing. He just changed the flavor of the dictatorship. All he did was spread the poverty around more evenly. So instead of some people in Cuba being poor, everyone in Cuba is poor. He has also stifled freedom of religion, which even Batista didn't do. And Batista was pretty bad.

I'm still going to go with Batista for having the Worst Era in Cuban History. Doesn't make Castro's oppression anymore justified, but it doesn't excuse his own crimes either, or who supported him in power.

Batista didn't spread the poverty around, and he didn't stifle freedom of religion in addition to all the other freedoms he stifled; Castro repressed all the same freedoms, and even supressed a few more. And yes, under Castro, everyone was economically equal; equally poor. At least there was something that resembled a free market under Batista. That's not to say that I don't think Batista was an evil git, I merely think Castro was even worse.

:rolleyes:

"In place of the old bourgeois society, with it's classes and class antagonisms, we shall have an association, in which the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all." ~ Karl Marx, Manifesto of the Communist Party

Straight from the horses mouth. How about another one.

"Freedom consists in converting the state from an organ superimposed upon society into one completely subordinate to it" ~ Karl Marx, Critique of the Gotha Programme

I am convinced that this argument would be best served if both sides actually took the time to read Marx.

What, I'm not entitled to my own rant? There are plenty of people who have gone off on worse ones then that.
Engels (or whatever his name was, I forget. The other guy who worked on the communist manifesto) was the smart one. I do agree that people will only take getting crapped on (figuratively) before they go do something about it; the whole classless society stuff is total bull, though. Anyone who had a basic grasp of human nature would know that something like that is completely impossible. Fine ideal, but it just ain't happening, and, to anyone who says otherwise: take a nice long look at the last 200 years. Humans are jerks by nature when it comes to that sort of thing. You can't change it.

On another note entirely: was Marx actually dirty enough to compare parts of his anatomy to a horse? That's pretty bad.

Go read the Spanish Falange Manifesto while we're all handing out pamphlets. Or better yet, the constitutions of any actually democratic countries (Cuba, Iran, Venezuela, Russia, etc. DO NOT COUNT): the US, France, Spain, Germany, Japan, Mexico, etc. (I'd say Britain, but they don't actually have a single, written constitution, per sey. There's a whole bunch of documents instead that do the same job when added together.)

Who are "the People?" I've met nice people, strong people, weaklings, jerks, bullies, etc. But I have never met "the People."

What, I'm not entitled to my own rant? There are plenty of people who have gone off on worse ones then that.
Engels (or whatever his name was, I forget. The other guy who worked on the communist manifesto) was the smart one.

Engels was Marx's friend and patron, but he did very little writing himself. As such, there is a reason it is called Marxism and not Engelsism.

I do agree that people will only take getting crapped on (figuratively) before they go do something about it; the whole classless society stuff is total bull, though. Anyone who had a basic grasp of human nature would know that something like that is completely impossible. Fine ideal, but it just ain't happening, and, to anyone who says otherwise: take a nice long look at the last 200 years. Humans are jerks by nature when it comes to that sort of thing. You can't change it.

Whatever. Get back to me when you can actually scientifically define what constitutes "human nature" and what is "opposed" to it.

When I say worst era, it's largely tinged by the fact that I carry a general family hate for Castro. My family is Cuban-American,

What a surprise.

So instead of some people in Cuba being poor, everyone in Cuba is poor. He has also stifled freedom of religion, which even Batista didn't do. And Batista was pretty bad.

He made general education and health care accessible to most Cubans. Contrary to your apparent belief, the vast majority of Cubans were dirt poor under Batista, not just "some".

But I'm rambling. To ze bed.

Do the myths about and praise for free outdated health care in Cuba ever end?

49 years of dictatorships is excusable because he's a leftist and the people who need free health, meaning of course the LCD are able to get it.

Yeah, I love the socialist utopian dream.

Do the myths about and praise for free outdated health care in Cuba ever end?

49 years of dictatorships is excusable because he's a leftist and the people who need free health, meaning of course the LCD are able to get it.

Yeah, I love the socialist utopian dream.

Let's see, you can take Cuba under Castro, where the people are clothed, fed, have health care and homes to live in and an inkling of civil rights.

Or you can take Cuba as it was before, where the people were starving, dying of disease, and had absolutely no rights.

I'm not a Castro apologist, but clearly things have improved for the majority of Cubans.

Let's see, you can take Cuba under Castro, where the people are clothed, fed, have health care and homes to live in and an inkling of civil rights.

Or you can take Cuba as it was before, where the people were starving, dying of disease, and had absolutely no rights.

I'm not a Castro apologist, but clearly things have improved for the majority of Cubans.

Yeah, but improving from 1958 conditions in the caribbean isn't that hard. The question I think that's relevant is, compared to other caribbean nations, have things improved more for the Cubans compared to...say...grenada or St. Lucia or Barbados, or less? Not "have they gotten worse" but rather "have the improved less or more?"

And if things are not as good for the average cuban as they are compared to the average non cuban caribbean person, compared to how they were 50 years ago, it can probably safely be said that Castro's administration has hurt cuba, if, even if it didn't make it worse, prevented it from improving on pace with the rest of the caribbean.

That is complete nonsense. The worst kind of propaganda.

Cuba was no worse off than most of the other countries in Latin America and a lot better than some with its ability to harvest its resources and infrastructure that was created by the evil wealthy and middle class Cubans that didn't join the communists.

Batista was corrupt, but stealing the wealth from one group of people and stealing the assets of foreign investors who developed the country to get the LCD free health care is not an improvement. Castro and his ilk are thieves, there's no other term for it. The same thing with all communist revolutionaries in history.

Cuba lived off the charity of its brutal fellow communist states that he supported for long enough where there was no opposition at all powerful enough to throw out the communists. That's Castro's legacy. Turning his people into international dependents after they robbed their successful countrymen. Regressive human behavior.

Instead of learning from the Chileans. Now that was an example of a dictator actually advancing and improving his country. Chile is the most stable and prosperous South America because of Pinochet. Hopefully that doesn't get changed around too much by the socialist politicians there now.

Yet South America never learns. Instead they elect people like Chavez and Morales who represent nothing but failed systems and more of the same.

Having survived economic embargo, over 400 assassination attempts, invasion, he truly stands as a symbol and practical action against neoimperialism and capitalism. For an example without Cuban help Angola would have been colonized by Apartheid armies. Either way, the Cuban democratic socialist system is quite good and robust, and most importantly permanent, I think the Western imperialists would like more than ever to rape the people and resources of Cuba with capitalism.

I bet the world forces of bourgeoisism are positively licking their lips are the prospect of a second Eastern Europe to exploit and devour, but the Cuban workers will surely never allow this.
Sure....

That is complete nonsense. The worst kind of propaganda.

Cuba was no worse off than most of the other countries in Latin America and a lot better than some with its ability to harvest its resources and infrastructure that was created by the evil wealthy and middle class Cubans that didn't join the communists.

Batista was corrupt, but stealing the wealth from one group of people and stealing the assets of foreign investors who developed the country to get the LCD free health care is not an improvement. Castro and his ilk are thieves, there's no other term for it. The same thing with all communist revolutionaries in history.

Cuba lived off the charity of its brutal fellow communist states that he supported for long enough where there was no opposition at all powerful enough to throw out the communists. That's Castro's legacy. Turning his people into international dependents after they robbed their successful countrymen. Regressive human behavior.
Sad thing is, the advocates of Cuban 'change' are advocating the same return to Batista-style capitalism, that is the natural result.

Real 'democracy' can only be achieved under communal social relations, which can only be achieved once the working masses conquer political power and become the ruling class, and liquidate the propertied social parasites.

That is complete nonsense. The worst kind of propaganda.

Cuba was no worse off than most of the other countries in Latin America and a lot better than some with its ability to harvest its resources and infrastructure that was created by the evil wealthy and middle class Cubans that didn't join the communists.

And who were also the sole beneficiaries of it. The average Cuban did not benefit from this infrastructure and foreign trade. You seem to conveniently omit that part.

The pattern of development was uneven and downright criminal, and you see it all over the Caribbean. Ports to ship off the goods owned by the wealthy. Good schools, nice homes and fancy shops for the wealthy urbanites. Ragged, disease infested slums for the average worker. No schools for them. Not even clean water.

I am reminded of Rousseau: It is contrary to the laws of nature "that an opulent minority is glutted with superfluities while the starving multitude lack necessities."

Batista was corrupt, but stealing the wealth from one group of people and stealing the assets of foreign investors who developed the country to get the LCD free health care is not an improvement. Castro and his ilk are thieves, there's no other term for it. The same thing with all communist revolutionaries in history.

Cuba lived off the charity of its brutal fellow communist states that he supported for long enough where there was no opposition at all powerful enough to throw out the communists. That's Castro's legacy. Turning his people into international dependents after they robbed their successful countrymen. Regressive human behavior.

It gave the average Cuban better wages, more food, cleaner drinking water and educational opportunities, so I think that it was overall an improvement. People still had no civil or political rights under Batista unless they were wealthy. So we have a net gain here.

Neither capitalism nor socialism nor communism is inherently evil. Its how its practiced that determines its effect on others.

Which leads to mob rule, which causes people to want a ruler, which leads to dictatorship.

Read "Animal Farm", bud.
Why would I read right-wing propaganda from an anti-communist state informer like Orwell? Anyone who gives away the names of socialists to the capitalist state is scum of the lowest order.

Read "The Communist Manifesto", bud.

Which leads to mob rule, which causes people to want a ruler, which leads to dictatorship.

Read "Animal Farm", bud.

If you remember, there never was democracy in Animal Farm. Napoleon promised it, but continued to seize more of the reigns of power for himself and his ilk while the rest of the animals trusted them to do right.

Orwell was a democratic socialist, and he carefully tailored Animal Farm to show that the conduct of revolution must be undertaken in a democratic fashion or else it will be lost.

Real 'democracy' can only be achieved under communal social relations, which can only be achieved once the working masses conquer political power and become the ruling class, and liquidate the propertied social parasites.

Yeah, because anything close to that has worked so well. Starvation killed more peasants under "socialist" ideals about economics than any kind of capitalist system.

Which leads to mob rule, which causes people to want a ruler, which leads to dictatorship.

Read "Animal Farm", bud.

Not neccessarily. Read "Nicaragua, San Marino, and some other country whose name I really can't actuallly think of but its actually democratically communist today"

Generalzation FTW

Real 'democracy' can only be achieved under communal social relations, which can only be achieved once the working masses conquer political power and become the ruling class, and liquidate the propertied social parasites.

Which leads to mob rule, which causes people to want a ruler, which leads to dictatorship.

Read "Animal Farm", bud.

Precisely what Castro did to Cuba. Any democracy was there in name only.

I understand that fact.

Of course there are exceptions, but stereotypes exist for a reason.

Of course - because all black people are inclined to steal, Irishmen to drink, Arabs to be billionare oil sheiks, Jews to be bankers and have big noses, etc.

Oh.

Well, no offense, sometimes I don't understand what side your posts support.

It's the mark of a freethinker. ;)

I get it a lot, actually.

If you remember, there never was democracy in Animal Farm. Napoleon promised it, but continued to seize more of the reigns of power for himself and his ilk while the rest of the animals trusted them to do right.

Orwell was a democratic socialist, and he carefully tailored Animal Farm to show that the conduct of revolution must be undertaken in a democratic fashion or else it will be lost.

Precisely what Castro did to Cuba. Any democracy was there in name only.

Not neccessarily. Read "Nicaragua, San Marino, and some other country whose name I really can't actuallly think of but its actually democratically communist today"

Generalzation FTW

Of course there are exceptions, but stereotypes exist for a reason.

Yeah, because anything close to that has worked so well. Starvation killed more peasants under "socialist" ideals about economics than any kind of capitalist system.
Any time a leader has advocated that level of communism, by which I mean showing no willingness to compromise, it has led to oppression and poverty.

I understand that fact.
Oh.

Well, no offense, sometimes I don't understand what side your posts support.

Any time a leader has advocated that level of communism, by which I mean showing no willingness to compromise, it has led to oppression and poverty.

Hey, get on Yahoo IM.

I actually should change that. I deleted my Yahoo messenger.

Of course - because all black people are inclined to steal, Irishmen to drink, Arabs to be billionare oil sheiks, Jews to be bankers and have big noses, etc.
Note I didn't say all stereotypes are right, I said they have a grain in truth of them usually. Do I think all black people are inclined to steal? Of course not. I know that most of the Middle East lives in poverty. I know many Jewish people, only a small percentage have large noses, about the same percentage I would find in any population.

However, communist governments tend to be dictatorships.

Sounds like apologism for bourgeois dictatorship to me, some people need to understand what class warfare is, or in other words:

O, pardon me, thou bleeding piece of earth, That I am meek and gentle with these butchers!

Somebody needs to learn that class warfare ended some hundred years ago+

Starvation killed more peasants under "socialist" ideals about economics than any kind of capitalist system.

Nonsense.

In both Maoist China and the Soviet Union, there were large, short-term famines that killed millions of people.

But in both Maoist China and the Soviet Union, economic reform and development also increased life expectancy massively over the long term.

Edit: My intention is not to defend either country's policies.

Cuba is fine as it is. It just needs a few economic reforms, specifically the ending of the embargo.

Kim Jung Il needs to be thrown in a mental hospital.

North Korea, communist, lol...

Complete and under totalitarian despotic tyranny, yeah, but it's a far cry from any sort of economic system that resembles either communism or capitalism.

Nonsense.

In both Maoist China and the Soviet Union, there were large, short-term famines that killed millions of people.

But in both Maoist China and the Soviet Union, economic reform and development also increased life expectancy massively over the long term.

Edit: My intention is not to defend either country's policies.

Lol, I'd like to see your sources on China, (lets face it you have none, that information has been locked up for decades in China), the only source for 'communist atrocities' are dubious claims made in 'The Black Book of Communism' and other pseudo-intellectual lying garbage.

Lol, I'd like to see your sources on China, (lets face it you have none, that information has been locked up for decades in China), the only source for 'communist atrocities' are dubious claims made in 'The Black Book of Communism' and other pseudo-intellectual lying garbage.

This is holocaust denial.

This is holocaust denial.

I have nothing to add except 'yup'.

lets hope the next prez doesn't go mad with power (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qff098NCNDE) :p

This is holocaust denial.

'THIS IS XYZ DENIAL!!!111'

Anything else to add, other than more emotional garbage?

What I said is correct, the only 'evidence' for your claims are vile right-wing tracts which have no fact.

Also, Godwin.

'THIS IS XYZ DENIAL!!!111'

Anything else to add, other than more emotional garbage?

What I said is correct, the only 'evidence' for your claims are vile right-wing tracts which have no fact.

Also, Godwin.

Holocaust denial isn't dignified by being argued against in earnest, as shall be demonstrated in this thread.

Holocaust denial isn't dignified by being argued against in earnest, as shall be demonstrated in this thread.

So, what you mean is, 'I give up'.

...

Fascinating, I'm sure!

HAVANA (Reuters) - Ailing Cuban leader Fidel Castro said on Tuesday that he will not return to lead the country as president, retiring as head of state 49 years after he seized power in an armed revolution.

Andaras, New Granada, just reminding you of the actual topic, mkay?

Andaras, New Granada, just reminding you of the actual topic, mkay?

Oui oui mon frere.

At any rate, I smoked a Romeo y Julieta Short Churchill last night by way of celebrating this glorious step in Cuba's history.

I wonder if Habanos SA ought not to sell cigars in the US exclusively through its La Casa Del Habanos stores. This would certainly allow them to maintain the exclusivity and aura of luxury and scarcity which their brand enjoys in the US, while at the same time protecting the cigar industries of other south American countries by not interfering with the relationships they have with established retail tobacco shops.

As an added bonus, the cachet of being an experienced consumer of fine havana cigars would remain similarly rarefied.

Most importantly though, it would protect Habanos SA from compromising quality to increase quantity to supply the vastly increased and largely ignorant demand from US consumers.

No one could ever claim Soviet technological superiority, in virtually any broad field. Limited areas, such as high pressure welding, sure, but not in any broad based systematic field.


I think for the most part, Soviet rocketry beat US rocketry for quite a while, and after the moon race, it settled into a more or less equal parity.

Lol, I'd like to see your sources on China, (lets face it you have none, that information has been locked up for decades in China), the only source for 'communist atrocities' are dubious claims made in 'The Black Book of Communism' and other pseudo-intellectual lying garbage.

Well we do have Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, etc.

Well we do have Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, etc.

Yeah, but they're ebul French Word For Town-Dwellers :D

Why not? The BBC managed to find some:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7252937.stm

Ditto. As far as I know, Cuba isn't a deserted island. Cubans still live there.:rolleyes: Check the link Gift-of-god provided. And the ones I know personally, have left for economical reasons, not because they have a problem with the regime or with Fidel Castro. They love their country, they're proud of it. As always, it's the US policies (the embargo has done a lot of damage, but the country has prevailed, it hasn't damage it's spirit and I admire them so for that) and warped ideas (Bush Jr: Castro is the boogeyman!!) what tend to affect the idea and vision other countries have of the Caribbean island. I've been to Cuba, and it's gorgeous, it's people seem content, despite the shortages, they're elegant, they're industrious, they live.

And they have the most wonderful of saying: En Cuba, se aprende a bregar., meaning, in Cuba, you just learn how to deal. The US should learn a bit from that, and deal. Despite the embargo, the mighty democracy that they presume to represent, was unable to defeat Cuba.

As for the rest of you: Don't condemn what you've never known. Don't presume to understand, specially if you live in the US, what it's like to live in a Communist country. Don't prentend that you know something just because you've read a few books. History isn't possible to understand through the pages of a book and through the analysis of a few "experts". To know history is to live in it.

Ditto. As far as I know, Cuba isn't a deserted island. Cubans still live there.:rolleyes: Check the link Gift-of-god provided. And the ones I know personally, have left for economical reasons, not because they have a problem with the regime or with Fidel Castro. They love their country, they're proud of it. As always, it's the US policies (the embargo has done a lot of damage, but the country has prevailed, it hasn't damage it's spirit and I admire them so for that) and warped ideas (Bush Jr: Castro is the boogeyman!!) what tend to affect the idea and vision other countries have of the Caribbean island. I've been to Cuba, and it's gorgeous, it's people seem content, despite the shortages, they're elegant, they're industrious, they live.

So, what? How about progress matching that of the rest of the Caribbean. I know of people who were described as meeting their demise with dignity. And, anyways, people continue "to live" under the most brutal and horrifying conditions. That's not a sign of success or of a decent and just society and governmental system.

And they have the most wonderful of saying: En Cuba, se aprende a bregar., meaning, in Cuba, you just learn how to deal. The US should learn a bit from that, and deal. Despite the embargo, the mighty democracy that they presume to represent, was unable to defeat Cuba.

Because we treated Cuba with kid gloves, because we agreed to lay off Cuba in 1963 and because Cuba really isn't that important, we didn't truly try or need to defeat Castro.

As for the rest of you: Don't condemn what you've never known. Don't presume to understand, specially if you live in the US, what it's like to live in a Communist country. Don't prentend that you know something just because you've read a few books. History isn't possible to understand through the pages of a book and through the analysis of a few "experts". To know history is to live in it.

What a ridiculous proposition.

To "live history" is to merely collect a series of anecdotes, and base your ideas off of this incomplete information.

So, what? How about progress matching that of the rest of the Caribbean. I know of people who were described as meeting their demise with dignity. And, anyways, people continue "to live" under the most brutal and horrifying conditions. That's not a sign of success or of a decent and just society and governmental system.



Because we treated Cuba with kid gloves, because we agreed to lay off Cuba in 1963 and because Cuba really isn't that important, we didn't truly try or need to defeat Castro.



What a ridiculous proposition.

To "live history" is to merely collect a series of anecdotes, and base your ideas off of this incomplete information.


You truly hail from the US. Your arguments are so disappointing...

You truly hail from the US. Your arguments are so disappointing...

That's not even an argument.

"You're from America, you can never understand it." What a load of bull.

That's not even an argument.

"You're from America, you can never understand it." What a load of bull.

Let me correct you in one tinsy, winsy detail. The fact that you're assuming the US is the only place that has a right to call itself "America", is such a mistake. America, the Americas include Green Land, Canada, The US, Mexico, Central and South America and the Caribbean. If you're from Chile, you're American. If you're from Aruba, you're American. Not because you're from Mighty USA does that give you the sole right to call yourself an American. Ask why, simple. These places are called America for the mere fact that the person who drew the maps outlining the shores of this new Continent was called Americo Vespucci, an Italian cartographer.

And once again, your words disappoint. And your reaction is even more dismal. Good day.

Irony in motion...

You truly hail from the US. Your arguments are so disappointing...

Man this is a very stupid post.

I was making a reference to internet censorship, and the unavailability of computers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship#Cuba).

I guess those reporters who spoke to local Cubans about their political opinions had to use other technology. No one was censored.

I dont expect major changes as long as fidel is alive.

He is still alive.

His brother will make the appearances and the day to day responsibilities of the dictatorship.

The US ought to open a line of communication to raoul though. When fidel is dead,I'm sure raoul could be influenced to do business with us.

The tourism alone would double their GNP in less than a year, not to mention us buying a little sugar and tobacco from them.

A few more cubans would be employed and they could start buying parts from us for their 50 year old cars.

Cuba has been willing to deal with the USA since 1959. It's the US governments that have rejected any sort of relationship. I would guess that most Cubans are hoping that the US government will take a more realistic position now that Castro's stepped down.

Yeah, but improving from 1958 conditions in the caribbean isn't that hard. The question I think that's relevant is, compared to other caribbean nations, have things improved more for the Cubans compared to...say...grenada or St. Lucia or Barbados, or less? Not "have they gotten worse" but rather "have the improved less or more?"

And if things are not as good for the average cuban as they are compared to the average non cuban caribbean person, compared to how they were 50 years ago, it can probably safely be said that Castro's administration has hurt cuba, if, even if it didn't make it worse, prevented it from improving on pace with the rest of the caribbean.

Good point. Cuba has progressed quite well in certain regards, like healthcare, but has lagged behind in others. I'll look for some staistical information in a second, as my first attempt at this post died when I crashed my local server by opening a gazillion pdfs.

Instead of learning from the Chileans. Now that was an example of a dictator actually advancing and improving his country. Chile is the most stable and prosperous South America because of Pinochet. Hopefully that doesn't get changed around too much by the socialist politicians there now.

Yet South America never learns. Instead they elect people like Chavez and Morales who represent nothing but failed systems and more of the same.

Yes. Those South Americans sure are stupid. The nice thing about your racism is that it's so obvious.

On to more intelligent matters...

Pinochet embezzled millions of dollars from the Chilean economy.

Moreover, the economic impact of Pinochet,s legacy is questionable at best.

Here are some well researched articles showing how Pinochet's free market approaches raised inflation, higher unemployment, stagnating exports and negiligible income growth:

http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/42a/086.html
http://www.gregpalast.com/tinker-bell-pinochet-and-the-fairy-tale-miracle-of-chile-2
http://dollarsandsense.org/archives/2004/0904cypher.html

So, what? How about progress matching that of the rest of the Caribbean. I know of people who were described as meeting their demise with dignity. And, anyways, people continue "to live" under the most brutal and horrifying conditions. That's not a sign of success or of a decent and just society and governmental system.

Source? And while you're at it, can you provide these (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=13464776&postcount=73) sources too?

Because we treated Cuba with kid gloves, because we agreed to lay off Cuba in 1963 and because Cuba really isn't that important, we didn't truly try or need to defeat Castro.

Bay of Pigs: failed. Embargo: failed. 638 attempts to assassinate Castro: failed. To me, it looks like the US governments of the time did see a need, tried often, and failed consistently. To a developing nation.

What a ridiculous proposition.

To "live history" is to merely collect a series of anecdotes, and base your ideas off of this incomplete information.

But personal experiences do provide empirical observations. Consequently, if you someone who has been to Cuba to believe your theories about Cuba, they would have to agree with these observations.

Man this is a very stupid post.

Dont be rude.

What we have here is clearly a very interesting and original idea.

This specimen of enlightened youth has the potential to one day be a college professor and write a book on the subject of his post.

I envision it being called:

"Divergence and Disappointment: Conflict and Credence in Alternative Voices in Americocentric Discourses, a Postdeconstructionist-Neofoucaltian Analysis"

Dont be rude.

What we have here is clearly a very interesting and original idea.

This specimen of enlightened youth has the potential to one day be a college professor and write a book on the subject of his post.

I envision it being called:

"Divergence and Disappointment: Conflict and Credence in Alternative Voices in Americocentric Discourses, a Postdeconstructionist-Neofoucaltian Analysis"

I have to laugh. Your post's awesome. I don't know if you'll mind but, may I use it in my signature?:D

Source? And while you're at it, can you provide these (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=13464776&postcount=73) sources too?

As for Cuban-Soviet Relations, the relationship was quite tight, the wikipedia article on the matter provides a succinct summary of the condition. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban-Soviet_relations) Further, Soviet support for Cuba endured from 1961 through to 1991, not 1965-1985. Castro was a vocal supporter of the Brezhnev doctrine, hardly something an truly independent actor would do.

As to what you are asking for support in regards to in this post, I was making the broad argument that people will suffer a long train of abuses, and continue to live their lives, not that Cuba and the Cuban system is one of the most brutal and terrifying in the world. Even in the Jewish ghettos in Poland, life carried on.



Bay of Pigs: failed. Embargo: failed. 638 attempts to assassinate Castro: failed. To me, it looks like the US governments of the time did see a need, tried often, and failed consistently. To a developing nation.

The reason why these things failed is because the US was playing with kid gloves with Cuba. American policymakers could not use direct military intervention, or even many overt types of intervention.


But personal experiences do provide empirical observations. Consequently, if you someone who has been to Cuba to believe your theories about Cuba, they would have to agree with these observations.

And I can recite similar personal experiences relayed through contacts who have been to Cuba, incidents such as the "Jiffy Pop" story, emergency healthcare nightmares and others. I too, am not without these sorts of amusing, but useless anecdotes.

I guess those reporters who spoke to local Cubans about their political opinions had to use other technology. No one was censored.


They also spoke to members of the exile community, in case you didn't read the headings. In fact, half of the people cited there were not actually in Cuba when they were interviewed, and you'll notice that the responses from the individuals are different. Those actually living in Cuba either barely touched the edge of criticism, sticking mainly to an amateur analysis of why Cuba is led by the brother's Castro, or outright recitation of the party line.

Sounds a touch fishy to me.

More than that, is it any wonder that we don't have any in-country Cubans on this forum? We've got people from all over the place, Mexico, Venezuela, Brazil, the EU, Japan, the United States, Canada, Bolivia and beyond. None from Cuba.

As for Cuban-Soviet Relations, the relationship was quite tight, the wikipedia article on the matter provides a succinct summary of the condition. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban-Soviet_relations) Further, Soviet support for Cuba endured from 1961 through to 1991, not 1965-1985. Castro was a vocal supporter of the Brezhnev doctrine, hardly something an truly independent actor would do.

As to what you are asking for support in regards to in this post, I was making the broad argument that people will suffer a long train of abuses, and continue to live their lives, not that Cuba and the Cuban system is one of the most brutal and terrifying in the world. Even in the Jewish ghettos in Poland, life carried on.





The reason why these things failed is because the US was playing with kid gloves with Cuba. American policymakers could not use direct military intervention, or even many overt types of intervention.




And I can recite similar personal experiences relayed through contacts who have been to Cuba, incidents such as the "Jiffy Pop" story, emergency healthcare nightmares and others. I too, am not without these sorts of amusing, but useless anecdotes.

On the last lines, one question: Have you been to Cuba yourself? Or are you just venting on account of what your government tells you?

On the last lines, one question: Have you been to Cuba yourself? Or are you just venting on account of what your government tells you?

WOW!! So you are saying that we need permission from the government to vent?

On the last lines, one question: Have you been to Cuba yourself? Or are you just venting on account of what your government tells you?

Or are you just venting because you don't have any actual facts to back up your claim, and are adhering to a ridiculous concept of where expertise is derived from.

Further, personal experience is not a sign of expertise, it does not make one an expert, and anecdotal evidence is of little use for anything other than drinking stories.

I have not been to Cuba, and I have had access to far more literature and firsthand experience on the matter than merely "what [my] government tells [me]." I have friends who have been to Cuba for extended stays (One guy, on a quest to "experience a revolutionary state" went on a trip there with positive preconceptions, for instance, he's the one who gave me the Jiffy Pop story.

Oh, yes, the Jiffy Pop story. My friend, to whom we shall refer as Edward, went to Cuba for the above stated reason. His visit was planned so that he could avoid the touristy things, and spend his time living "in the homes of peasants and workers". He brought some things with him, just basic things, one of them being a container of Jiffy Pop popcorn.

The family he was with had gathered for the evening, and they were talking and stuff, he produces the container of Jiffy Pop, and offers to share it. He pops the popcorn over the fire in their kitchen, as the family watches intently, cheering everytime there was a pop. (It must have been great fun, a major change of pace) When it was done, he opens it, and starts sharing it with the family, and they love it, the Jiffy Pop is an amazing treat. The father asks him how much it costs, and he reveals the price: $1.40. A cheap little treat...the father, though, promptly forbids his family from eating the Jiffy Pop. Edward asks why this is the case, and the father responds by telling him that he will not permit his family to eat food that is too ridiculously far beyond their economic reach, and he explains that Jiffy Pop is beyond their reach because he doesn't even make the equivalent of $1.40 in a full week of work.

How about that for uplifting?

Edward came back more than slightly disillusioned by what he saw in Cuba, and I never held it over him.

Let me correct you in one tinsy, winsy detail. The fact that you're assuming the US is the only place that has a right to call itself "America", is such a mistake. America, the Americas include Green Land, Canada, The US, Mexico, Central and South America and the Caribbean. If you're from Chile, you're American. If you're from Aruba, you're American. Not because you're from Mighty USA does that give you the sole right to call yourself an American. Ask why, simple. These places are called America for the mere fact that the person who drew the maps outlining the shores of this new Continent was called Americo Vespucci, an Italian cartographer.

Besides the fact that in the English language colloquial meanings and common use are acceptable in providing the definitions and meanings of words... :rolleyes:

NSG has had this argument a thousand times, and, face facts, in common use the term "American" can legitimately specifically refer to someone from the United States.

And once again, your words disappoint. And your reaction is even more dismal. Good day.

"Your words disappoint"? That's not even an argument.

I am truly sorry that Fidel is not dead he has opposed the people of Cuba for far to long I can only hope that his brother might (just maybe) will eliminate communism from Cuba if this sounds a little Capitalist I am sorry the way I am raised allows me not to accept communism as a suitable neighbor for a country like the U.S.A.

:confused:

WTF is that supposed to mean?

I think it means that a communist nation is not a suitable neighbor for the United States.

I am truly sorry that Fidel is not dead he has opposed the people of Cuba for far to long I can only hope that his brother might (just maybe) will eliminate communism from Cuba if this sounds a little Capitalist I am sorry the way I am raised allows me not to accept communism as a suitable neighbor for a country like the U.S.A.

:confused:

WTF is that supposed to mean?

As for Cuban-Soviet Relations, the relationship was quite tight, the wikipedia article on the matter provides a succinct summary of the condition. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban-Soviet_relations)

And your source has this to say about your claim of billions of rubles:

It has been said that the Soviets were secretly giving billions in aid and support to Cuba on a daily basis.[citation needed]

So, you don't have a source.

Further, Soviet support for Cuba endured from 1961 through to 1991, not 1965-1985. Castro was a vocal supporter of the Brezhnev doctrine, hardly something an truly independent actor would do.

So it's thirty years out of fifty instead of twenty five? Still pretty impressive about the Cubans having a healthcare system comparable to the USA.

As to what you are asking for support in regards to in this post, I was making the broad argument that people will suffer a long train of abuses, and continue to live their lives, not that Cuba and the Cuban system is one of the most brutal and terrifying in the world. Even in the Jewish ghettos in Poland, life carried on.

Actually, you were making very specifc claims about Cuban health care. Now, when I ask you for sources to back them up, you are claiming to be arguing something else. That's cool. As long as we're clear that your claims about Cuban health care are simply your opinion.

The reason why these things failed is because the US was playing with kid gloves with Cuba. American policymakers could not use direct military intervention, or even many overt types of intervention.

USian policy makers still failed. Over and over again. You can make excuses about 'kid gloves' all you want.

And I can recite similar personal experiences relayed through contacts who have been to Cuba, incidents such as the "Jiffy Pop" story, emergency healthcare nightmares and others. I too, am not without these sorts of amusing, but useless anecdotes.

The difference being that my anecdotes are corroborated by independent studies:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/5232628.stm
http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/43b/185.html
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/castro/sfeature/sf_views_uriarte.html

They also spoke to members of the exile community, in case you didn't read the headings. In fact, half of the people cited there were not actually in Cuba when they were interviewed, and you'll notice that the responses from the individuals are different. Those actually living in Cuba either barely touched the edge of criticism, sticking mainly to an amateur analysis of why Cuba is led by the brother's Castro, or outright recitation of the party line.

Sounds a touch fishy to me.

More than that, is it any wonder that we don't have any in-country Cubans on this forum? We've got people from all over the place, Mexico, Venezuela, Brazil, the EU, Japan, the United States, Canada, Bolivia and beyond. None from Cuba.

What are you talking about? You claimed that it's impossible to talk to Cubans from Cuba. I showed you that it's quite easy. It doesn't matter if they also spoke to expats. And I don't care if it sounds fishy to you. It would sound fishy if one assumed that Cuba is a hell hole. If Cubans were to say diffirently and challenge your assumptions, it would be incongruous with your assumptions.

We have no one here from Chile, either. Can we now claim that Chileans are being censored from the internet?

We have no one here from Chile, either. Can we now claim that Chileans are being censored from the internet?

It must be true, if they weren't then they'd be here. :D

First of all...I lol'd to myself when I saw someone not trolling and actually using the word "USian" as if it was a real word. :D

Second of all...tales of Cuba's healthcare system are highly exaggerated.

In depth examination of WHO statistics for Cuba reveals that these statistics are prepared by each government[105] and published unchanged by WHO; thus they have been called into question.[106][27][copyvio source?][28][copyvio source?] Nevertheless, the CIA World Factbook cites life expectancy and infant mortality rates that are similar to those for the USA.[107] It is not clear what sources the CIA used for this, since the data presented seems to be equivalent to that published by the Cuban government; this has led to suggestions that material prepared by Ana Belen Montes (a convicted Castro government agent) is still being used by the CIA. [108].

Not to mention:

The San Francisco Chronicle, The Washington Post, and NPR have all reported on Cuban doctors defecting to other countries. [29], [30], [31] According to the San Francisco Chronicle, one of the reasons that Cuban doctors defect is because their salary in Cuba is only $15 per month. [32]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuba#Public_health

Let me correct you in one tinsy, winsy detail. The fact that you're assuming the US is the only place that has a right to call itself "America", is such a mistake. America, the Americas include Green Land, Canada, The US, Mexico, Central and South America and the Caribbean. If you're from Chile, you're American. If you're from Aruba, you're American. Not because you're from Mighty USA does that give you the sole right to call yourself an American. Ask why, simple. These places are called America for the mere fact that the person who drew the maps outlining the shores of this new Continent was called Americo Vespucci, an Italian cartographer.

And once again, your words disappoint. And your reaction is even more dismal. Good day.

Do not bring this argument on this forum again.

I am tired to say the same thing, defending that the correct translation from spanish to english of their nationality is "United Stater", and not "American". Although they defend the point that the correct word is "American", and not "United Stater", and that the latter term is somewhat...offensive, (I don't know why), they do not have any problem in "advise" the "hispanics" to say "Americanos" as the US nationality in spanish.

However, I concede a point, as in english "Alemán" is "German" and not "Allemand", I think all the germans here could bash us both for not calling them "Deutsch" in our both respective languages.

Drop the argument, however, as you might summon a moderator swinging a banhammer...

And your source has this to say about your claim of billions of rubles:

So, you don't have a source.

http://www.jstor.org/view/00205850/di012387/01p0415v/0

If you'd like, here's an academic paper on the matter. Was I being lazy earlier? Yes, yes I was, but a quick google search provides some info.

I can't believe you're disputing that Cuba received substantial financial aid from the Soviet Union throughout its duration. That's somewhere between obvious and common knowledge.

So it's thirty years out of fifty instead of twenty five? Still pretty impressive about the Cubans having a healthcare system comparable to the USA.

The Cuban healthcare system has results comparable to the results of the American healthcare system (one that is dangerously flawed, I might add), but the methods by which are ethically questionable and bear a significant cost on the rest of society.



Actually, you were making very specifc claims about Cuban health care. Now, when I ask you for sources to back them up, you are claiming to be arguing something else. That's cool. As long as we're clear that your claims about Cuban health care are simply your opinion.

It's a reference to the content of this wikipedia article, one that is well sourced. Specifically take a look at the sections on black-market healthcare, criticisms and health tourism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Cuba



USian policy makers still failed. Over and over again. You can make excuses about 'kid gloves' all you want.

Kid gloves and the restrictions of the Cold War. To refer to Cuba as a "third world" country is decidedly a misnomer, not only was it one of the most advanced countries in all of Latin America prior to the revolution. Further, the "third world" refers to members of the non-aligned movement, a movement of which Cuba was decidedly not a member.



The difference being that my anecdotes are corroborated by independent studies:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/5232628.stm
http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/43b/185.html
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/castro/sfeature/sf_views_uriarte.html

http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm200001/cmselect/cmhealth/30/30ap91.htm

And the criticisms that I expressed also have value.


What are you talking about? You claimed that it's impossible to talk to Cubans from Cuba. I showed you that it's quite easy. It doesn't matter if they also spoke to expats. And I don't care if it sounds fishy to you. It would sound fishy if one assumed that Cuba is a hell hole. If Cubans were to say diffirently and challenge your assumptions, it would be incongruous with your assumptions.

We have no one here from Chile, either. Can we now claim that Chileans are being censored from the internet?

I have linked to evidence that access to the internet in Cuba is tightly controlled by the state, as the article I linked to evidenced, and that for us on NSG to gain ready access to someone from Cuba on our forum is impossible. The BBC has the resources and capability to go on the ground in Cuba, and interview people there. We do not.

I think it means that a communist nation is not a suitable neighbor for the United States.

And despite 900 assassination attempts, an invasion, 50 years later it's still not America's choice.

I hope the cubans get what they want, not what the Yanks want.
Give that a dictatorship that supresses freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of movement and any political/social freedoms it deems "unrevolutionary", you'd be wanting exactly what the Yanks AND the Cubans want..... a change in government.

IF we are tlaking about what the Cuban governemnt and not what "the Cubans" want...then that's another story.
And despite 900 assassination attempts,
Nice conservative number there sport.

Give that a dictatorship that supresses freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of movement and any political/social freedoms it deems "unrevolutionary", you'd be wanting exactly what the Yanks AND the Cubans want..... a change in government.

IF we are tlaking about what the Cuban governemnt and not what "the Cubans" want...then that's another story.

Nice conservative number there sport.
By 'freedom' you obviously mean bourgeois freedom, as in freedom for an economic elite to have those 'freedoms' and use them to exploit the vast working majority beneath them.

You are horrified at our intending to do away with private property. But in your existing society, private property is already done away with for nine-tenths of the population; its existence for the few is solely due to its non-existence in the hands of those nine-tenths. You reproach us, therefore, with intending to do away with a form of property, the necessary condition for whose existence is the non-existence of any property for the immense majority of society.

Is there Any Nation the US doen't try and rule?

I hope the cubans get what they want, not what the Yanks want.

Also, I use USian instead of American because 'American' plays into the imperialist 'we own the continent' exceptionalist idea.

Actually, we don't look at it as "the continent", but as two...north and south america...and then usually we also say central America.

Thus, Americans are also North Americans as Canadians are North-Americansm, but Canadians are not Americans.

In German, an American is called "Amerikaner", in Italian "Americano" in Spanish "Americano" in Dutch "Amerikaaner".

It is the word that English uses for the people, it is the word that the people use for themselves and is is the word that other Germanic (and some Romance languages) use for it....

Thus, nobody really cares about if you don't like what it stands for or not. USian is not a word. It's a product of stupid ultra-leftist anti-American's insanity.

By 'freedom' you obviously mean
No, actually..I mean exactly was I said....not economic freedoms but:
freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of movement and any political/social freedoms it deems "unrevolutionary",

Also, I use USian instead of American because 'American' plays into the imperialist 'we own the continent' exceptionalist idea.

No, actually..I mean exactly was I said....not economic freedoms but:
freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of movement and any political/social freedoms it deems "unrevolutionary",
Freedom of religion!?! Freedom to be deluded? lol

Also, I use USian instead of American because 'American' plays into the imperialist 'we own the continent' exceptionalist idea.

So you basically use it to insult?

Freedom of religion!?! Freedom to be deluded? lol

1. That is a freedom.

2. Its more of a freedom to believe in a higher power. There is nothing wrong with freedom of belief.

Their is with me, promoting fantasy-based ideas as reality is dangerous, people should based their thinking wholly in reality.



So you wish to control peoples thought.


That makes you closer to a facist (or evil) than TAI.

You know when Im defending TAI against you, youve fucked up.

So you wish to control peoples thought.


That makes you closer to a facist (or evil) than TAI.

You know when Im defending TAI against you, youve fucked up.
No, on the contrary religion seeks to control people's thoughts by putting foregone conclusions on real-life issues into their heads.

1. That is a freedom.

2. Its more of a freedom to believe in a higher power. There is nothing wrong with freedom of belief.
Their is with me, promoting fantasy-based ideas as reality is dangerous, people should based their thinking wholly in reality.

No, on the contrary religion seeks to control people's thoughts by putting foregone conclusions on real-life issues into their heads.


But if you choose to believe those conclusions, you are still free to make your own choices.


Allowing religion is freedom of thought. Not allowing it is limiting freedom of thought. I really dont see how you can argue otherwise.

About time, I'd say.

Their is with me, promoting fantasy-based ideas as reality is dangerous, people should based their thinking wholly in reality.

You should try following your own advice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andaras View Post
Their is with me, promoting fantasy-based ideas as reality is dangerous, people should based their thinking wholly in reality.

You should try following your own advice.

EPIC :D:D:D

Their is with me, promoting fantasy-based ideas as reality is dangerous, people should based their thinking wholly in reality.

Pot, I'd like to introduce you to Kettle.

Communism is a theory that only works perfectly on paper, like capitalism or socialism.

I hope you truly are not as deluded as you sound. Part of me thinks everything you say is meant as a joke.

That part of you would, unfortunately, be wrong.

Why would I read right-wing propaganda from an anti-communist state informer like Orwell? Anyone who gives away the names of socialists to the capitalist state is scum of the lowest order.

Read "The Communist Manifesto", bud.

Communism is a theory that only works perfectly on paper, like capitalism or socialism.

I hope you truly are not as deluded as you sound. Part of me thinks everything you say is meant as a joke.

That part of you would, unfortunately, be wrong.
Yes, that does seem to be the case.

So you wish to control peoples thought.


That makes you closer to a facist (or evil) than TAI.

You know when Im defending TAI against you, youve fucked up.
I'm not evil or anything close to fascist...:rolleyes: I favor a MUCH smaller government than a Fascist would and I'm not big on "all power to the state" and such...I also don't think government knows best.
Freedom of religion!?! Freedom to be deluded? lol
If they would like to, yes (not that I think religion is delusion)....who are you to say what we can and cannot belive? If it were up to you everyone would be brainwashed with the communist manifesto (which I have at home and it sucks ass).

If they would like to, yes (not that I think religion is delusion)....who are you to say what we can and cannot belive? If it were up to you everyone would be brainwashed with the communist manifesto (which I have at home and it sucks ass).

But, but, but Marx says that religion is the opiate of the masses, and he is infallible

There is no god but Marx and Stalin is his prophet:p

I'm not evil or anything close to fascist...:rolleyes: I favor a MUCH smaller government than a Fascist would and I'm not big on "all power to the state" and such...I also don't think government knows best.

I know, but I was speaking in a language he would understand.


Im on your side in this bud, dont get defensive;)

Freedom of religion!?! Freedom to be deluded?
Yes, actually.

If you truly want to grant the workers total freedom from oppression, why would you grant them economic freedom yet not the freedom to believe what they wished to believe, no matter how silly that belief was?

Yes, actually.

If you truly want to grant the workers total freedom from oppression, why would you grant them economic freedom yet not the freedom to believe what they wished to believe, no matter how silly that belief was?

See this :D (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=13469544&postcount=225)

I know, but I was speaking in a language he would understand.


Im on your side in this bud, dont get defensive;)
But, but, but.....

*needs a reason to argue*

:p
Yes, actually.

If you truly want to grant the workers total freedom from oppression, why would you grant them economic freedom yet not the freedom to believe what they wished to believe, no matter how silly that belief was?
What he believes in is not economic freedom....

If they would like to, yes (not that I think religion is delusion)....who are you to say what we can and cannot belive? If it were up to you everyone would be brainwashed with the communist manifesto (which I have at home and it sucks ass).

So, what you mean to say is, you have nothing to contribute so you'll flame.

Move along troll.

If you truly want to grant the workers total freedom from oppression, why would you grant them economic freedom yet not the freedom to believe what they wished to believe, no matter how silly that belief was?
Economic freedom is the freedom not to be employed by wage-slavery, where your value-labor is eaten up by the bourgeois social parasites. 'Economic freedom' is freedom for the few to exploit the many. In short, capitalism is freedom for slave owners.

You notice how is 'answer' completely fails to, well, answer your question Chumbly?

Yes, actually.

If you truly want to grant the workers total freedom from oppression, why would you grant them economic freedom yet not the freedom to believe what they wished to believe, no matter how silly that belief was?
Economic freedom is the freedom not to be employed by wage-slavery, where your value-labor is eaten up by the bourgeois social parasites. 'Economic freedom' is freedom for the few to exploit the many. In short, capitalism is freedom for slave owners.

You are horrified at our intending to do away with private property. But in your existing society, private property is already done away with for nine-tenths of the population; its existence for the few is solely due to its non-existence in the hands of those nine-tenths. You reproach us, therefore, with intending to do away with a form of property, the necessary condition for whose existence is the non-existence of any property for the immense majority of society.

In need, freedom is latent.

So, what you mean to say is, you have nothing to contribute so you'll flame.

Move along troll.

I thought his answer was a valid rebuttle, complete with a nice little dig at your bible at the end.


If you get to insult someones sacred book, why cant they insult yours, eh?


ps- Tell us more about how Chavez is a champion of freedom.

Economic freedom is the freedom not to be employed by wage-slavery, where your value-labor is eaten up by the bourgeois social parasites. 'Economic freedom' is freedom for the few to exploit the many. In short, capitalism is freedom for slave owners.



In need, freedom is latent.



Nice cue-card answer.


Now answer Chumbly's question.

Economic freedom is the freedom not to be employed by wage-slavery, where your value-labor is eaten up by the bourgeois social parasites.
Yes... I understand the Marxist-Leninist position on economic theory, but my question was as to why you should scoff the freedom of having religious faith or no faith at all?

Why do you scoff at the freedom of thought if you wish to increase freedom overall?

What he believes in is not economic freedom....
I’m not contending that Marxism-Leninism is.

You notice how is ‘answer’ completely fails to, well, answer your question Chumbly?
It’s a start.

I rarely even get a reply to my critiques from Andaras.

I rarely even get a reply to my critiques from Andaras.

Its ok neither do any of us.

I thought his answer was a valid rebuttle, complete with a nice little dig at your bible at the end.


If you get to insult someones sacred book, why cant they insult yours, eh?


ps- Tell us more about how Chavez is a champion of freedom.

Again, you talk as if your 'freedom' is an abstract 'good', as if it's absolute and just because you believe it is automatically true. In short, selfishness lies at the heart of support for libertarian positions.

Again, you talk as if your 'freedom' is an abstract 'good', as if it's absolute and just because you believe it is automatically true. In short, selfishness lies at the heart of support for libertarian positions.

Sounds like something a Communist also supports. I mean...if you look at the history of the leaders of the Soviet Union, you will see that they only kept their lavish lifestyles if they stayed in power. When Krushev was ousted, he lost all that lavish lifestyles.

Selfishness goes across all the economic and political spectrums.

Again, you talk as if your 'freedom' is an abstract 'good', as if it's absolute and just because you believe it is automatically true. In short, selfishness lies at the heart of support for libertarian positions.

And once again you fail to actually answer a question.

So, what you mean to say is, you have nothing to contribute so you'll flame.
Actually..I told you that "I tihnk they should be able to beleive in religion...even if it is, in your words, a delusion."

PLEASE...you call that a flame? Report that and we'll see if anyone but you and Uncle Stalin would call that a flame....

And the Communist Manifesto is shit. I read that and Mein Kampf when I was taking AP Euro a few years ago in high school, the two big ideologies of the 20th century. Both were written by raving lunatics who believed in awful ideas, but atleast (being myself Jewish) Mein Kampf was interesting to read...the Communist Manifesto was just filled a false reality that is unapplicable to real life, which ALSO happens to be a dull read.

To answer your religion question, in the Marxist question the abolition of religion, as in the abolition of all eternal bourgeois truths such as morality, is how socialism is constituted. Marxism is inherently objective because it holds that nothing can be empirically true.

I agree with the Marxist analysis on religion, in ancient times paganism was used to enforce the slave economy. While Christianity was used to enforce the hierarchical feudal mode of production. And rational atheism and 'deism' was used to justify bourgeois capitalism at the present time. You'll note that some aspects of feudal Christianity, namely conservative politics, still remain though, but will eventually die out. So will socialism, as a force of march of modern history, abolish bourgeois 'religion' and any feudal religious remnants that remain after the revolution.

My position is not about 'being tyrannical' and I do not subscribe to your abstract liberalism, religion is a product of material conditions, and Marxist atheism will be used once the workers conquer political power to uphold the worker state, just as such institutions have been used in a like way to uphold the socio-economic system of the day.

And the Communist Manifesto is shit. I read that and Mein Kampf when I was taking AP Euro a few years ago in high school, the two big ideologies of the 20th century. Both were written by raving lunatics who believed in awful ideas.
Oh please...

The Communist Manifesto may or may not be flawed in some ways, but is nowhere near on the nutty stakes as Mein Kampf; the two are incomparable.

Like it or not, The Communist Manifesto is one of the most influential political treatises ever written, and whether you agree or disagree with Marx and Engels’ position, dismissing it as the nonsensical ravings of a paranoid and delusional mind is just plain silly and frankly politically immature.


I agree with the Marxist analysis on religion, in ancient times paganism was used to enforce the slave economy. While Christianity was used to enforce the hierarchical feudal mode of production. And rational atheism and ‘deism’ was used to justify bourgeois capitalism at the present time.
You’re confusing (among other things) the belief with the institution. I agree that religious institutions have often a malign influence on society, but the individual’s belief about the existence of a god(s) or not is far from oppressive per se.

Freedom of thought is as important as the freedom from slavery.

My position is not about ‘being tyrannical’ and I do not subscribe to your abstract liberalism
More reactionary denouncements...

Care to show how I, as a green anti-capitalist anarchist in the vein of Murray Bookchin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murray_Bookchin) or Alan Carter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Carter_(philosopher)) (who, incidentally, is one of the professors I study philosophy under at Uni), display support for any of the tenets of liberalism?

Marxist atheism will be used once the workers conquer political power to uphold the worker state, just as such institutions have been used in a like way to uphold the socio-economic system of the day.
The above is a pure statement of your opposition to liberty.

You wish to replace tyranny with tyranny; to replace the domination of oppressive religious institutions with domination of oppressive atheistic institutions; to replace fear of the Boss with fear of the Party.

In short, comrade, you are supportive of a society as bad as the one we live in now, if not worse.

[Marxism] holds that nothing can be empirically true.


Marxism is inherently objective...

That's one mighty contradiction!

That's one mighty contradiction!

:eek:

And it's in the same sentence too!

That's one mighty contradiction!

No, because Marxism is a method.

No, because Marxism is a method.

When we talk about what is objective, we are inherently talking about "truth". Hence why Randian "Objectivists" love to blather on about what is Truth with a capital T.

When we talk about what is objective, we are inherently talking about "truth". Hence why Randian "Objectivists" love to blather on about what is Truth with a capital T.

Marxism in essence is the analysis that reality is determined by material forces, can you possibly argue against this? The only criticisms of the Marxist method always come from the religious, philosophic and ideological perspective, that's the way it can be criticized.

Marxism in essence is the analysis that reality is determined by material forces, can you possibly argue against this? The only criticisms of the Marxist method always come from the religious, philosophic and ideological perspective, that's the way it can be criticized.

I'm not arguing against that. I'm noting that your characterization of Marxism is not entirely true.

There are still subjective assumptions that are inherent in Marxism as it exists today. Complete objectivity is impossible in any theory, because complete objectivity would require omniscience, a capacity that humans lack.

This does not diminish Marxism's utility as a means of understanding the world, but rather encourages us to view Marxism itself scientifically. The assumptions of Marxism can be tested like any other scientific theory, and we can use the knowledge we gain to revise and improve.

It is worth noting that Quantum Mechanics has cast into doubt some of the fundamental assumptions of dialectical materialism. It would be worth reading up on these articles, since they can illuminate us on the past failures of Marxian praxis.

I'm not arguing against that. I'm noting that your characterization of Marxism is not entirely true.

There are still subjective assumptions that are inherent in Marxism as it exists today. Complete objectivity is impossible in any theory, because complete objectivity would require omniscience, a capacity that humans lack.

This does not diminish Marxism's utility as a means of understanding the world, but rather encourages us to view Marxism itself scientifically. The assumptions of Marxism can be tested like any other scientific theory, and we can use the knowledge we gain to revise and improve.

It is worth noting that Quantum Mechanics has cast into doubt some of the fundamental assumptions of dialectical materialism. It would be worth reading up on these articles, since they can illuminate us on the past failures of Marxian praxis.

Lol, well I am no believer in dialectics as some would have it, certainly none of that 'economic determinism' crap, yes reality is decided by material conditions, but that doesn't mean revolution will happen without an active worker movement, Marx actually rejecting almost entirely any Hegelian influences in Capital.

Lol, well I am no believer in dialectics as some would have it, certainly none of that 'economic determinism' crap, yes reality is decided by material conditions, but that doesn't mean revolution will happen without an active worker movement, Marx actually rejecting almost entirely any Hegelian influences in Capital.

Hmm, that's interesting. You have been, to my knowledge, a Marxist-Leninist for as long as you've been on this forum, yet you don't subscribe to dialectical materialism. I find that very interesting, since you're the first Marxist-Leninist I've met to say as much.