The 81-year-old leader of the island nation quietly resigned, ending nearly 50 years of rule. More after the jump.“I will not aspire nor accept — I repeat I will not aspire or accept — the post of President of the Council of State and Commander in Chief.”
– Fidel Castro’s letter, published this AM in the online edition of the Communist Party daily Granma.
I am sure there will be partying in the streets of Miami. (MSNBC):
NBC News’ Mary Murray, reporting from Havana, said that although Castro had announced his retirement as president and commander in chief of the military, for the time being he remains head of Cuba’s ruling Communist Party.Castro’s #2, his elderly brother Raul (77) takes the reins; he has in effect run the country since July 2006 when Fidel underwent surgery. The question is how will the U.S. policy change toward Cuba, if at all. Here is a telling sign about the desires to give “assistance” emanating from the Bush White House:Over the decades, the fiery guerrilla leader reshaped Cuba into a communist state 90 miles from U.S. shores and survived assassination attempts, a CIA-backed invasion and a missile crisis that brought the world to the brink of nuclear war. Since his rise to power on New Year’s Day 1959, Castro resisted attempts by 10 U.S. administrations to topple him, including the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion in 1961.
The United States’ discovery of nuclear-armed missiles on the island led to a showdown of the world’s then-superpowers before the Soviet Union agreed to remove them.
Monarchs excepted, Castro was the world’s longest ruling head of state.
His ironclad rule ensured Cuba remained among the world’s last few remaining communist countries, long after the breakup of the Soviet Union and collapse of communism across Eastern Europe.
But the United States, bent on blocking Fidel Castro’s plans for his younger brother to succeed him, built a detailed plan in 2005 for American assistance to ensure a democratic transition on the island of 11.2 million people after his death.…Castro and other Cuban officials long insisted “there will be no transition” and that the island’s socialist political and economic systems will live on long after he is gone.
95 Responses to “Castro steps down”
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
I hope there won’t be riots along with the partying in Miami!
There were some nutters who tipped the local radio stations that Castro died some 5 months ago. Thankfully it was a hoax. It’s strange living here how people glue their eyes and eyes to the MSM whenever Castro does something. You have to be careful what you say, as quite a few people don’t appreciate if you remind them Castro is in any shape or form human. Anyway, I hope this brings some positive change for the Cubans in Cuba. What I worry more are the “free” Cubans here and the paranoia— it’s sort of like that scene of Castro as the devil from Moore’s Sicko.
As long as the Cubans are commies, I doubt the U.S. will lift the embargo. Unless of course, they’re in need of good ol’ democracy…
Sloppy editing:
“eyes and eyes” to “eyes and EARS” unless accounting for four eyes.
The question now is: how long until the U.S. invades?
I don’t think there will be much celebrating today. Amy grew up down here and thinks that the exile community wants him dead, not resigned, not leaving under his own power. They want him hanging by his heels, and their lands restored, and their economic dominance returned.
And nothing will change–Raul’s been in charge for a year and a half, and will stay in charge.
“As long as the Cubans are commies, I doubt the U.S. will lift the embargo. Unless of course, they’re in need of good ol’ democracy…”
Sorry, no oil in Cuba. And you can get Cuban cigars anywhere outside the US…
No fucking kidding, Brian. Although I doubt they’ll stop at Fidel.
NPR interviewed Raul when he was temporarily stepping in for Castro during his stomach surgery. Raul avoided most of the reporter’s questions by answering “I cannot answer this right now.” making for a bizarre non-interview. My memory’s a bit fuzzy beyond that.
So, how many of our political leaders are going to claim credit for this turn of events, I wonder?
Is W going to get credit for defeating Castro, like his daddy always gets credit for being President when the Soviet Union collapsed? Or is Jr. too radioactive, so the claim goes to Republican Congressional leaders?
Lets hope Cuba gets some much-needed political and economic reforms sometime soon.
You know, I had a friend who spent some time in Cuba. She loved it. One of the things that really struck her was their view on the arts. The cost of a ticket to the Cuban Ballet was the equivalent of a few pennies, the arts were something that should be available to everyone.
Cuban Exiles literally think of Castro as a super-boogeyman who the worst criminal of the 20th century, Hitler and Stalin be damned. I’ve yet to talk to my dad today (I’m second generation Cuban American), but I already know what he’s gonna say- this is all a ruse, he’s still pulling the strings, this doesn’t change anything and he’s still Satan’s child on earth.
Hysterical ravings of exiles aside, Cuba is still run by a repressive government based on a cult of personality. The difference between Cuba and South Korea is that Castro was at least borderline sane- he still ran a horrific, repressive regime that persecuted any voice of dissent that dared speak out. I’m not going to be doing any cha-cha’s when he dies, but I will be hoping for some genuine, grassroot democratic movement- which is still several decades off, I’m afraid.
Quietly? Fidel “Motormouth” Castro?
Do you mean *North* Korea?
The difference between Cuba and South Korea is that Castro was at least borderline sane- he still ran a horrific, repressive regime that persecuted any voice of dissent that dared speak out. I’m not going to be doing any cha-cha’s when he dies, but I will be hoping for some genuine, grassroot democratic movement- which is still several decades off, I’m afraid.
My impression from living down here in south Florida is that there are no angels in this story. Fidel is a sack full of lose, but so is much of the hard line exile community. I can’t say I’m rooting for either side in this.
I hardly think even W is obtuse enough to try to take “credit” for an 81-year-old’s decision to retire. Yup. Communist Cuba was never even close to the threat that the wingnuts claimed. (I’m amazed that JFK gets so much credit for the missile crisis. How sad it is when not blundering into a completely unnecessary war is seen as great statesmanship.) But I get pretty impatient with the peaches-and-cream view of certain liberals. Communism is indeed based on government repression, and it doesn’t pay to lose sight of that fact.When certain liberals talk about how great Cuba is for healthcare or literacy, it reminds me of when right-wingers praise Pinochet for Chile’s economic growth. Sometimes the end doesn’t justify the means.
“Lets hope Cuba gets some much-needed political and economic reforms sometime soon. ”
Oh, they will, Ben. It will be in the form of unrestrained capitalism, or what W and company like to call “democracy” and “liberty.” Yes, soon Cubans will be able to shop at Walmart, and make those ever important choices between Pepsi and Coke, McDonald’s and Burger King etc etc.
“It will be in the form of unrestrained capitalism, or what W and company like to call “democracy” and “liberty.” Yes, soon Cubans will be able to shop at Walmart, and make those ever important choices between Pepsi and Coke, McDonald’s and Burger King etc etc.”
Capitalism, Baby!
What I want to know is when the Corleone Family and Hyman Roth will get their casinos and other Cuban “businesses” back…?
Oopsie. Yep.
This whole thing just seems like a giant pissing contest now. Neither Cuba nor the US want to back down and make progress, fearing that doing so will make them look weak.
It’s not just the fear of looking weak. Both the US and Cuba need enemies for political reasons.
The existence of Cuba as a communist state right off the coast of Florida has been a constant reminder of the reality of communism as an evil ideological enemy of everything sacred in America (so to speak).
And the existence of the giant US so close to Cuba (with memories of the Bay of Pigs) give the Cuban government an excuse for anything they want to do.
It’s mutually beneficial…
“Yes, soon Cubans will be able to shop at Walmart, and make those ever important choices between Pepsi and Coke, McDonald’s and Burger King etc etc.”
Sounds better than oppression to me!
Yep. It will be much better for Cubans if they can reform slowly enough that they can keep the few advantages they do have (healthcare and literacy, both the best in Latin America) while shedding the political oppression. But that’s going to be hard to do as long as you have exiles in Miami who are convinced they’re going to be able to go back to Cuba and demand “their” land back from the people who’ve been farming on it for the past 50 years.
Castro sucked, but so did Bautista. Exchanging a repressive Communist government that we hate for a repressive right-wing government that we like wouldn’t be much of an improvement for the people of Cuba.
It will be much better for Cubans if they can reform slowly enough that they can keep the few advantages they do have (healthcare and literacy, both the best in Latin America) while shedding the political oppression.
Land reform, a better hurricane response system than the US… You have to be wealthy to think that the “advantages” of having a government that improves your quality of life, as opposed to a government that cares primarily about you as a source of profit, is trivial.
If the US was serious about wanting Cuba to reform, the first step is for the US to get rid of the notion that it’s Communism that makes Cuba bad: and the second step would be for the US to reform the tiny little section of Cuba that is under its direct control. So long as the US is running a gulag in Guantanamo Bay, the US has no moral advantage to speak of in calling down the Castro regime as brutal and repressive. No doubt it is: but then, so is the US.
W is already saying “We have to make sure the Cubans get free and fair elections like we have…”
Poor bastards just can’t catch a break. Wish Fidel had been able to hang on another year, when there might have been a chance for a democracy to start.
When certain liberals talk about how great Cuba is for healthcare or literacy, it reminds me of when right-wingers praise Pinochet for Chile’s economic growth. Sometimes the end doesn’t justify the means.
Interesting. You know, Pinochet overthrew a democratically elected Marxist in Salvador Allende. Allende supposedly committed suicide as Pinochet’s forces closed in on the Presidential Mansion with a Kalshnikov rifle given to him by Castro. Engraved upon that weapon were the words “To my good friend Salvador from Fidel, who by different means tries to achieve the same goals.”
Given the result of those different means it’s difficult to knock Castro too much for the means he chose. Castro is going to die of old age in a nation whose people are better off than they were before. The same can certainly not be said of Allende.
Jesurgislac and Sarcastro-
One can hold the dictatorial government in Cuba in low regard overall without being a Batista or Bush foreign policy apologist. If you all want to justify the actions of dictators, you can do so but I have little regard for any kind of dictator right or left wing.
I listened this morning to BBC where the benefits of this socialist Cuban regime were listed as the literacy and health (universal medical care).
Cuba actually exports reasonably trained physicians.
The down side was listed as a weak economy which got me to wondering about exactly what that entails.
The French are said to suffer that but nonetheless enjoy a pretty good standard of living. Great medical care and decent educational facilities..all right-wing propaganda notwithstanding.
Americans until very recently had this really strong economy…
maybe we still do.
But we fail to provide good medical care to the less and dis-advantaged and our preparatory schools are failing across, at least, the -public - board.
Certainly this is so for the hard disciplines …physics, medicine, math, engineering might all fit into that category.
So…what exactly do we get from this thing called the strong American economy? Like take-home.
[For the cavilator crowd that doesn’t include BigMacs.]
Redmountain would have that about right…
seems to me.
In terms of effectiveness, you’re right- obviously Castro chose the more efficient and successful means to promote his policies. In terms of ethics? Hell no. A dictator is a dictator. Just because that dictator has some genuine affection for his subjects doesn’t excuse him from being a dictator- it just excuses him from being a worse dictator.
Castro has locked up political dissidents for decades. His regime has executed thousands of fellow Cubans. I don’t find it difficult at all to knock Castro for the means he chose. The man’s a murderous lout that happened to install a few advantageous programs in his country. Guess what, Canada has a good healthcare system and a pretty solid education system too. But it doesn’t have a mound of corpses as a byproduct.
Castro was a brilliant dictator who knew exactly how to hold on to the power he seized. He’s also a sorry excuse for a human being. Touting him as being any better than any other dictator is using some pretty friggin’ low standards.
I listened this morning to BBC where the benefits of this socialist regime were listed as the literacy and health (universal medical care). Cuba actually exports reasonably trained physicians. The down side was listed as a weak economy which got me to wondering about exactly what that entails.
The French are said to suffer that but nonetheless enjoy a pretty good standard of living. Great medical care and decent educational facilities..all Neocon propaganda notwithstanding.
Americans until very recently had this really strong economy…
maybe we still do.
But we fail to provide good medical care to the less and dis-advantaged and our preparatory schools are failing across the -public - board.
Certainly this is so for the hard disciplines …physics, medicine might both fit into that category.
So…what exactly do we get from this thing called the strong American economy?
Redmountain would have that about right…
seems to me.
What exactly -for us- is the take-home from what is seen as a strong economy?
Pam, your tone and the tone of the article you quote is scary as shit. Makes me think of the political prisoners currently being torchured in Cuba as well as the thousands and thousands that have already been killed. This ends Castro’s “rule”? How about tyranny that Raul is now going to take over. He’ll have the reins, sure. But he’ll also have a damn painful whip. Also, your commenters are even scarier.
You know, Freddy, it would be a lot easier for the US to speak against torture if we didn’t do it ourselves.
“You know, Freddy, it would be a lot easier for the US to speak against torture if we didn’t do it ourselves.”
Oh, I’m sure Freddy has some clean logical reason why OUR “enhanced interrogation techniques” are perfectly reasonable and justifiable, while an evil dictator or an evil regime using those exact same “techniques” (now called torture) is committing crimes against humanity and must be forcibly removed and executed…
“Also, your commenters are even scarier.”
I’m guessing that probably becomes a compliment after being run through the “Freddy Filter”…
Has_T-
The fact that the exiles in the United States have to send their relatives back in Cuba things like toilet paper and aspirin should say something about the Cuban economy.
France, it isn’t.
Governments are good at running things like infrastructure, education, healthcare, social safety nets, and the military.
Governments suck, however, at running the entire economy by command.
Ben–
You can’t really conclude much about the efficiency of communism by looking at Cuba, since its biggest potential trade partner has boycotted the island for almost half a century.
Even so, the people of Cuba are much better off than the people in Caribbean and Central American countries that were run by American puppets, like Haiti, the Dominican Republic, and El Salvador.
“You can’t really conclude much about the efficiency of communism by looking at Cuba, since its biggest potential trade partner has boycotted the island for almost half a century.”
Thats true, some of the bad effects could be due to the embargo. But the United States traded with Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union and it didn’t improve their standard of living very much. People in those countries still had to queue up at the state store every morning hoping there wouldn’t be another shortage of one kind or another.
“Even so, the people of Cuba are much better off than the people in Caribbean and Central American countries that were run by American puppets, like Haiti, the Dominican Republic, and El Salvador. ”
International comparisons are often fraught with problems, but Costa Rica does pretty well for a developing nation and has managed to avoid being either an American crony capitalist puppet or a Communist dictatorship.
Yup, we got some in St Martin a decade ago- to get through customs, they just relabelled them as Dominicans. Man, they were good.
Charlie would be on the first flight there and never come home!
This whole “left/right” dictators thing is unreal.
I think civilization has proven that a democratic, free-thinking society can successfully maintain an egalitarian nature and still offer quality social services like a good education system and human and advanced medical care. If one had to choose between literacy and freedom of speech or medical care and a free press then I suppose a case could be made for a repressive regime that offered these minimal social services.
But those choices don’t have to be made- we can have both. Castro isn’t a hero of the people- he’s a psychotic asshole who managed to do a couple things right. Hell, even W has made a few good decisions.
And Please, for the sake of whatever you think is holy, don’t equate Castro with liberalism on any level. Liberalism is almost the antithesis of Castro’s philosophy. He thrived on the subjugation of the individual to the state, while modern liberalism practically defines itself by establishing the virtue of freeing the individual from the will of society and/or the state. Practically every right and freedom that we fight for would, under Castro’s world view, fall under the control of the state. Population getting low? No problem- Abortion is now illegal. Too Populous? No worries- mandatory pre-natal screening for imperfection! FISA? Are you joking? All messages are recorded to guaranty loyalty to the state.
Don’t fool yourself thinking that Castro has some redeeming qualities just because the other side of the aisle can’t stand him. Sometimes an asshole is just as asshole.
Guess what, Canada has a good healthcare system and a pretty solid education system too. But it doesn’t have a mound of corpses as a byproduct.
Oh yea, the British Empire just doled out ponies to the world.
The problem we’re running into here is that I and Jesurgislac are arguing from a utilitarian standpoint here rather than an ideal ethical standpoint. There is no doubt in my mind that a truly free liberal democracy would be better for Cuba than Castro’s dictatorship, but there’s also very little doubt in my mind that such a thing was not possible in 1959 and that the US’s policy towards Cuba since has insured that such a thing is not possible to this day because the plain fact is that Cuba would elect Marxists and the US will not stand for that (see Chile).
The question is not “Would Cuba be better today if everything was perfect and peachy?”, the question is “Has Castro been worse for Cuba than what would have happened had he not successfully led the 26th of July Movement?”
And that question is highly debatable. I happen to be a bit pessimistic on the issue seeing as how other nations in Latin America have fared in the past 50 years.
“The problem we’re running into here is that I and Jesurgislac are arguing from a utilitarian standpoint here rather than an ideal ethical standpoint.”
Then as Lincoln would say, you’re “blowing out the moral lights around us”.
Oh, and I’m glad you brought up the British Empire.
Using your standard colonization was a good thing for India. Hey, the British built railroads, infrastructure, and stopped the practice of women burning themselves on the funeral pyer of their husbands! I’m sure life expectancy went up, too since they brought western medicine. Sure they killed a few people, and imposed an authoritarian, racist, foreign government but the world isn’t perfect! Right?
But the United States traded with Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union and it didn’t improve their standard of living very much.
I think you’re misremembering the Cold War in a very serious way. Please support your assertion that the US “traded” with the Soviet Union in any significant way. Selling them wheat during a famine doesn’t count.
There is one — and only one — thing that makes Castro different than the Latin American and Asian dictators we’ve supported and/or opposed: he doesn’t seem to have spent a whole lot of time enriching himself like, say, the Marcoses or the Duvaliers, or even the Husseins. I’m sure he has a nice Swiss bank account in case the US successfully overthrows him, but he’s not buying solid gold bathtubs or hundreds of pairs of shoes.
Using your standard colonization was a good thing for India.
So Castro, who was born and raised in Cuba, was in reality an outside power who colonized the country by force? Fascinating.
“So Castro, who was born and raised in Cuba, was in reality an outside power who colonized the country by force?”
…same for Lenin, Stalin, Adolph, Mao Zedong, Ho Chi Minh…
I’ve been to Cuba. Yes, the education and public availability of healthcare is a remarkable achievement. But let’s not make light of the “weak economy.” It has a direct bearing on the ability of families and individuals to obtain the necessities of life, like food, clothing, medicine (OTC stuff in particular) and so on. Food is not as big a deal - it’s possible for a lot of families to stay fed for a relatively small amount of money. Staples like rice and beans go a long way. But isn’t it nice to be able to buy fancier foods, too? The situation is more serious with any good with a real presence on the international market. Take a pair of cheap sneakers. They might run (heh) at a price somewhat equivalent, in pure dollar amounts, to what they would cost in the United States. Say, $30. This is obviously trivial for most Americans. For some Cubans, this is a month or more of wages.
Don’t get me wrong, Cuba is a beautiful country with a wonderful culture and the same wonderful, down-to-earth, friendly people that you can find anywhere. And it has a lot of things going for it, such as literacy and healthcare. But dismissing a weak economy as a disadvantage (”What has a strong economy gotten us?” Please.) is incredibly naive. Americans really do have no conception of what a lack of economic power and vitality really mean for the individual citizen. There is a damn good reason that many Cubans to this day will try to immigrate, legally or not, to the United States. Cubans aren’t stupid, and they can recognize the bullshit coming out of Havana as easily as anyone else.
I do think that what’s wrong with Cuba is not “Teh Socialism!!!11″ I rather like most aspects of democratic socialism. In spite of its successes, Cuba is NOT a good model for democratic socialism!! (I mean, duh). Yeah, Castro has tried to do well by his people in many ways. He’s also imprisoned and executed thousands in his efforts to maintain his hold on power. I don’t think his retirement is going to make for any kind of immediate change, sadly. I do hope that Cuba will transition to a free and open society that can retain its advantages while granting both improved economic access and political freedom for its citizens. Unfortunately, it’ll probably be a few more years, yet.
Reminds me of the tool in a class of mine last semester who suggested that, really, the invasion, occupation and political domination of Ireland by the English, along with the subsequent brutal murder of literally hundreds of thousands of people over several centuries of rule, was really not a big deal, since Ireland now has one of the best standards of living in the world. The same guy also suggested that women weren’t paid as much as men because dem bitches weren’t as productive, what with getting pregnant all the time (I informed him that this “theory” had been discredited sometime before he was born).
Yeah, that guy was a tool. Proof that voting Democratic doesn’t mean you aren’t a jackass.
“So Castro, who was born and raised in Cuba, was in reality an outside power who colonized the country by force?”
No, but he was a dictator who never held one free election, permitted no peaceful opposition, no freedom of speech, no free press, and threw you in jail if you dared protest his action. But he did some good things! Just like the British in India did.
But heres another example, using a native son of a particular country.
I heard Mussolini made the trains run on time. He also did some really great public works projects and reduced unemployment and illiteracy in southern Italy. Sure he was a fascist murderous dictatorial bastard, but he did some good things! The world isn’t perfect!
I don’t think that’s a fair depiction of what Sarcasto is saying. In the case of India, were there other possibilities besides colonization and languishing without infrastructure or medicine? If there were other alternatives, then Sarcasto’s argument doesn’t apply there.
It’s simply a fact that any realistic conversation has to start with the question: “Has Castro been worse for Cuba than what would have happened had he not successfully led the 26th of July Movement?”
Possibly the answer is “yes”. And I don’t know what my answer would be. But that’s where the conversation has to start.
Grammar-
There were other alternatives, like Castro allowing fair, free, multi-party elections after it was clear he was close enough to the Soviet Union to prevent any foul play by the United States. Castro’s Party might have evolved into a European-type Social Democratic Party if it had been required to compete for power. Cuba would then be better off than it is now.
Isn’t that an oxymoron? The key feature of Leninism is “dictatorship of the proletariat”. How could Castro have enjoyed the protection of the USSR if he wasn’t sticking to the party ideology?
Mnemosyne-
I didn’t say they were major trading partners. But trading was allowed. The problem for the USSR was, they didn’t make anything Americans wanted to buy. Seriously, would you pick a Soviet or Japanese TV set? Yeah, exactly. You might want Soviet vodka (and people did buy that here) but thats about it.
“Isn’t that an oxymoron? The key feature of Leninism is “dictatorship of the proletariat”. How could Castro have enjoyed the protection of the USSR if he wasn’t sticking to the party ideology?”
Tito managed to stay in power despite falling away from the party line, didn’t he? If the Soviets objected Castro could’ve started making noises about getting closer to the Americans, and that would shut up the Soviets real fast.
Canada became a sovereign nation in 1931, from what I understand. Don’t you think you’re giving the British a bit too much credit for Canada’s social institutions? Beyond that, I can obviously name plenty of other countries where decent social services coexist with personal liberty.
Contrast Juan Carlos of Spain with Fidel Castro. I find it surprising and rather depressing that a fellow liberal (well, I assume that you’re a liberal) would give Castro a pass because, gee, he’s better than Hitler and Pinochet.
The fundamental building block for a free, prosperous country is free speech. Cynicism aside, the United States is unlikely to slide into dictatorship. Cuba on the other hand, will lose its healthcare system as soon as a goon who is only slightly more greedy than Castro comes to power. Castro’s legacy of caring for his people, such as it is, will always be one or two heartbeats away from complete eradication.
And crap, Castro didn’t need to slaughter his political opponents to institute those social reforms. Somehow tying one to the other is doing a tremendous disservice to Cuban dissidents that fought for Cuban liberty and lost their lives in Castro’s Gulags. Stop schilling for this scumbag- he’s not worth your sympathy or tolerance.
Let the record show that I don’t know shit about Tito or Yugoslavia, and do not feel qualified to comment any further. As I said before, “I don’t know what my answer would be.” My only claim here is that extending Sarcasto’s argument to India is an unwarranted generalization.
This is an example of a naming fallacy. No, Socialism and Communism are not what’s wrong in Cuba because nothing vaguely resembling the definition of socialism or communism exists in Cuba. For the life me, I don’t get why people think that Castro was a socialist. He wasn’t- he was a dictator, the exact opposite of a socialist.
I’m afraid, however, that Castro and his ilk have pretty much poisoned the terms so completely that mistaking their current use for their classical definition makes you look like a totalitarian. For all intents and purposes, Socialism and Communism are synonyms for dictatorships.
““Has Castro been worse for Cuba than what would have happened had he not successfully led the 26th of July Movement?””
If the two choices were a fascist dictator who is a puppet of the USA vs. a Communist dictator who is a puppet of the Soviet Union, you might as well flip a coin. I know I’d end up in prison or a mass grave given my political opinions regardless of the outcome.
Hey, he hated Bush and teh Amerkian Kapitalistz so he must be good!
“Hey, he hated Bush and teh Amerkian Kapitalistz so he must be good!”
…’cause most of the comments here are in support of the wonderful job Castro has done since 1959…
Oh wait! NOBODY here has said Castro was a great man. But I guess that’s just not clear enough for Freddy…
Because some of us have pointed out that Batista wasn’t all sweetness and light, that means we’re supporters of Castro.
I think George Bush is an evil man and the worst president in the nation’s history - does that mean I must be a supporter of Marx, V.I. Lenin, Mao Zedong, etc.? I didn’t think so, but I bet Freddy does…
I didn’t say they were major trading partners. But trading was allowed.
It wasn’t Cuba who disallowed trading with the US. In fact, manumissions from people who have escaped to the US are a major source of income for many Cubans.
Considering how many Americans illegally travel to Cuba every year, it’s a little disingenuous to argue that there’s nothing there that Americans would be interested in, isn’t it? Winter in Havana and winter in Moscow are two very different things.
Tito managed to stay in power despite falling away from the party line, didn’t he?
Not comparable. Tito was well away from Moscow while Stalin was still in power, so Khrushchev inherited that situation. Castro didn’t come into power until six years after Stalin’s death, so he was Khrushchev’s boy.
Not to mention, it wasn’t the Soviets who embarrassed themselves at the Bay of Pigs.
If the Soviets objected Castro could’ve started making noises about getting closer to the Americans, and that would shut up the Soviets real fast.
Wow. I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone more naive about Cold War politics posting on this board.
Both Castro and Tito were part of movements indegenous to their respective countries, not Soviet-installed puppets. They are very comparable. Khruschev didn’t install Castro, Castro came to power on his own.
Considering how easy it is for Americans to illegally travel to Cuba (via Canada) isn’t it a little silly to say lack of American tourism is what is sinking their economy? Do you really still give command economies the benefit of the doubt? This isn’t the 1930s–we know the results of them now. They don’t have a very good track record.
Oh, puh-leeze. I’ll see your “naming fallacy” and raise you a “no true Scotsman.” Point the first: I didn’t make any claim about Cuba being a “real” socialism. Point the second: not that it matters. Merriam-Webster and Wikipedia both give definitions of socialism under which Cuba most certainly falls. If you have some discomfort with the term applying to evil people as well as good, well, you’re going to have to learn how to live with that. Socialism is an extremely broad term, and democracy is not a necessary component. Dictator and socialist are NOT opposites. Dictator and communist, maybe, but I don’t buy that either. You just can’t take a term that you have some affinity with and refuse to apply that term to any system that you aren’t comfortable with. Democratic socialism, which I happen to think is a pretty good idea, is a far cry from the totalitarian socialism of Cuba, but they are both forms of socialism. One happens to include things we like, e.g. freedom of speech, association and so on. The other is marked by brutality and oppression. So what? Fight for what you love, be clear on your terminology, have fun. Oy.
Nonsense. Most people will identify, say, Finland being socialist to some greater or lesser degree. No sane person, on the other hand, would say that Finland is a dictatorship. Again, socialism is NOT necessarily democratic!
Let me say for the record I was hoping Castro would stay in power until Bush’s term is done. The cynical side in my says Castro resigned now because he knew Bush would fuck it up and make America look worse in the world. Sad thing is, hes probably right.
I hope a President Obama shuts down Guantanamo and disavows torture, after which he asks Cuba to do the same so we can talk.
The fundamental building block for a free, prosperous country is free speech.”
Bullshit.
I’m from Romania. Within my lifetime I have seen my country shifting violently from communism to “democracy”. A shitton of people in my country enjoyed the freedom of speech in 1990. It was good. It was awesome. And do you know what happened after 6 months? After we got tired of the right to freely call the politicians assholes?
we realized that free speech doesnt buy shit and doesn’t pay bills. We saw ourselves falling from a standard of living that was somewhat better than the middle class in the USA is having right about now (free education, free healthcare, no unemployment, almost no crime) to being a third world country on par with… I don’t know… Uganda?
Yeah, it’s nice to come talk from your privileged asshole POV about what is best for other people. Those who never asked for your hep or fucking opinion. And we have also seen in recent times , (Iraq for the slow) that it doesn’t work.
It is my personal belief that dictatorship is a necessary form of government in the evolution of a nation. I am talking about its normal evolution, (the USA is an abnormality and should be treated as such from that POV). Why? because democracy and free speech don’t quite work without economic stability. Democracy is fine and dandy when the economy is prosperous and people can afford to talk. Until then, a dictatorship is a necessary phase in order to attain stability, create an infrastructure and a certain degree of institutionalized politics.
So how about all of the privileged imperialist assholes start minding their own fuckign business and their own fucking country and leave others alone to make their own decisions?
So, soopermouse, what you’re saying is is that Romania was better off under Ceauşescu than it is in 2008? I doubt you could say that with a straight face in person.
“We saw ourselves falling from a standard of living that was somewhat better than the middle class in the USA is having right about now (free education, free healthcare, no unemployment, almost no crime) ”
…”the middle class in the USA” my asshole.
I guess the Romanian orphanages were all a figment of the entire world’s sick imagination..as were all the handicapped & other unmentionables in your Romanian land under your beloved dictator. YOU just screwed the pooch here, big time.
nope, I didn’t say that. I did say however that the brutal change costed my country a lot over the past 19 years, and if things are starting to painfully and slowly get better now, the price was definitely not worth it.
5 Million romanians leaving their country because of poverty is too high a price to pay for anything. But here is the difference: YOU, from your privileged seat in the western world, don’t get to judge what is better or worse for MY country. I do, the immigrant forced to leave her country at age 25. My generation forced to flee the poverty and crime and desperation, WE have the right to decide whether the price was worth paying. Those of us who saw our parents and families and friends dying of illness and desperation and poverty over the 90’s because Romania was a “free west” zone for unscrupulous business and politicians of the West and not only, only WE have the right to decide whether it was worth it.
Under Ceasescu old people weren’t dying because they can’t afford healing or medication or food.
I am NOT saying Communism was all good or that Ceausescu was a saint. That’s bullshit. But I wish we would have been left alone to make that decision for ourselves, not manipulated like cattle in sending people to die because someone wanted free access to Romania’s resources.
We were lied to. We were told by radiostations like the Voice of America and radio Free Europe and all of the fucking Western Media that Communism was a bad thing and that the much praised democracy and market economy would bring instant prosperity plus freedom plus a fucking pony for everyone. Guess what? It was all a big fucking lie, and we paid the bill for it.
Hillary met Castro & interviewed him. He thought she was hot, as i remember. He may have been a bastardo, but he seemed to have some charm.
Also this just in: Che Guvara wasnt an angel, either. But compared to Castro…
“nope, I didn’t say that. I did say however that the brutal change costed my country a lot over the past 19 years, and if things are starting to painfully and slowly get better now, the price was definitely not worth it.”
Again, are you saying that Romania would have been better off had Ceauşescu had never been overthrown? Yes or no, please.
bluebonnet:
“We saw ourselves falling from a standard of living that was somewhat better than the middle class in the USA is having right about now (free education, free healthcare, no unemployment, almost no crime) ”
…”the middle class in the USA” my asshole.
I guess the Romanian orphanages were all a figment of the entire world’s sick imagination..as were all the handicapped & other unmentionables in your Romanian land under your beloved dictator. YOU just screwed the pooch here, big time. ”
Don’t believe everything you see on TV. If I offered NOW to the middle class of the USA the choice to :
- permanent and secure employment
- affordable cheap housing
- free education at all leves
- free healthcare
- job security
Ho long do you think the queue would be?
Oh but nevermind. You know better than me how things were in my country, after all you saw it on TV. Because TV always shows you all reality.
“My generation forced to flee the poverty and crime and desperation”
yeah..it sounds to me that you were in ” the priveledged seat” under a dictator & handily ignored all the other shit going down to those less fortunate than you..until the foot was on the other shoe…namely, yours. Waaaah….
Yeah, Communism was so great. Thats why you executed your President on live TV Christmas Day. Give me a break.
I’m not fan of unfettered crony capitalism but Stalinist “Communism” can be just as horrible. Haven’t you ever read Animal Farm?
Ben:
I think we would have been better off without the fake Revolution. The change would have happened anyway, only gradually and with less of the suffering. Ceausescu was an old man and had cancer. And thing were already seriously looking up at that point.
Having traveled to Eastern Europe a few time I can say the revolution wasn’t “fake” unless you were perhaps part of the Communist Party apparatus.
Bluebonnet:
talking out of your ass yet again. I was the only child of a widow. My mother was a teacher who wasn’t even a party member. Actually, because her grandparents had had land before the war, the “personal file” was “bad”. Working class. We lived in a block of flats with everyone else. That simple.
Stop making assumptions, especially about things you know nothing of.
Ben:
FYI:
Ceausescu was NOT executed live on TV. He does however have one of the best taken care of graves in Bucharest. It might not even be his, it was just an anonymous nameless grave in Ghencea cemetery. It is assumed tat it is him who was buried there. And the people who constantly bring him flowers and candles know a lot more about life under communism than a couple of privileged assholes in the West.
It is people like you and bluebonnet and attitudes like yours who cause things like what happened to my country. Like what happened to Iraq. A bunch of privileged overentitled assholes who thought they knew better than us what was good for us.
soopermouse,
Wow… sorry, that rant came out of left field.
I never said anything about what I think is best for other people. I’m friggin’ sure that I DON’T know what’s best for other people, which is why I consider it wise to avoid sticking my nose where it doesn’t belong.
What little I can get out of your post is that you think that a dictatorship that provides social services is better than a powerless, ineffective government. Since I’ve lived in neither, I’ll take your word for it.
As for the rest of your rant:
(1) You seem to think that the turn to democracy caused the loss of all your social services. I’m pretty certain that another major contributor was the loss of financial support from the Soviet Union and an economic base that was hopelessly out of date. In other words, even if the murderer that was leading your country in the ’80s had stayed on board, you would’ve probably experienced some pretty damn nasty problems.
(2) How the hell are you so sure that a murderous dictatorship is a “necessary form of government in the evolution of a nation?” You’re essentially looking back wistfully at a regime which literally killed millions of your fellow Romanians. Are you seriously saying that you’d rather have a dictatorship that competed with the Nazis for murders per capita than an unstable democracy that eventually finds its footing?
To be honest, your self-righteous sermonizing pissed me off so much that I don’t exactly know what else to say without getting really nasty. Suffice it to say that you didn’t corner the market on economic hardship, and the fact that you were pissed off at free speech and blame it for the bucket of shit that your forner dictator left you in has me scratching my head.
Ben:
Read more. The nature of the so called “Romanian Revolution” is more controversed than that of the Iraq war. Again: talkign out of your ass because you’re Western and know better.
soopermouse-
Give me a fucking break, whatever problems Romania had in the 90s it will still be better off in the future than it would have under your favorite murderer.
You know, Sweden manages to have things like a good education system, social welfare, great infrastructure, etc., while not having to resort to murder. If I were you I’d hope my country learns from they and the other Nordic Social Democratic countries rather than looking wistfully upon the murderer Ceauşescu.
Puggins:
(1)
we never had financial support from the Soviet Union, partially because Ceausescu refused to fall in line with Moscow ( this is documented over more than 30 years). The economic decay happened whe Romania became a free feast for all possible vultures. American businessmen coming to buy factories to close them down… that can’t be blamed on the fall of communism.
The “material base” being out of date… I heard that before and it was a myth. Do you know why it was a myth? Because as soon as those factories who were “out of date” and “a pile of rust” were sold to the benevolent Western buyers for nothing… some of them stopped being rusty and as soon as the master changed they started over night to churn out good merchandise. Even and especially in the cases of businesses where the buyer didnt satisfy their part of the contract about investing and modernizing the equipment.
The Steel Combinate of Galatzi was a rust bucket right about until the time Mittal Steel bouht it for almost nothing. Immediately afterwards it became of the biggest steel producers of Eastern Europe. Miracle!
(2)
I am looking at history. I am yet to see democracy thriving in circumstances of economic instability.
(3) I am not “pissed of at free speech”. What i did say is simple, “Free speech doesn’t pay bills”. It doesn’t.
Hey soopermouse why don’t you look at the aforementioned Costa Rica? Its not exactly a wealthy country but has a democratic tradition stronger than any in both American continents except the much wealthier United States.
Ben again:
who the fuck are you to think you have the right to decide for us?
And no, YOU are not me. YOU are an overprivileged asshole who thinks he has the right to decide what is best for others.
Northern democracies? Of COURSE! After all THEY have also been ravaged by WW2 and 40 something years of communism! How fucking silly of us to not follow their example!
Or alternatively if you know a little tiny bit about contemporary history, you’ll notice that very few of the ex Warsaw block countries are in fact doing well. Eastern Germany, once the most developped country of the Western block, is not even today, more than 15 years after uniting with West Germany, even remotely close to attaining a similar standard of living with the one they had in 1989. Poland, a country who has received endless financial help , help that won’t even have to be paid back, is suffering from depopulation because most of the Poles of working age have moved to the West in search of work. The depopulation of the country is so severe that its president has proposed severe measures in an attempt to try and stop peiople from leaving the country, since more than 68% of the under 40’s have left the country.
Puggins
Godwin law. Thank you for playing.
soopermouse-
Since you have disqualified me from commenting on European politics, I don’t ever want to hear you commenting on American politics ever again.
With pleasure. Immediately after American politics stop affecting the rest of the world. Until then, I am afraid American politics are my business too. After all, my taxes do pay for your Iraq war.
Supermoose, who the hell are you to tell us what to do? You’re not American! It sucks when your “logic” bites you in the ass doesn’t it?
apples and oranges. For that comparison to work, you would need to have my country’s politics affect you, your country and your livelihood.
I’m pretty sure the policies of your puppet master the USSR affected my livelihood.
But I really don’t wish to engage any longer in an argument someone who defends a totalitarian system.
Read more. Seriously.
Isn’t it too bad that I didn’t defend it? That all I said was that:
1. Free speech doesn’t pay bills.
2. People were living better under communism than they do now, at least in my country.
3. That it would have been better for us to be left alone to make the decision that best fit ourselves instead of having a fake Revolution imposed on us. The evidence of foul play about it is abundant.
If you do want to talk about this, I recommend you go and have a serious read about eastern Europe and Romania, before 1989 and after.
On topic: my point, which probably didn;t escape anyone with the gift of critical thinking, is that the Cubans need to be left alone to decide themselves what is good for themselves and their country. I am seeing a LOT of people in this thread and not only who keep making judgements about what the Cubans SHOULD do. I have also seen the reasonable people acknowledging the fact that while Castro wasn’t lily white, it was probably better for Cuba to be under him than a colony of the USA with all that entails.
“It is people like you and bluebonnet and attitudes like yours who cause things like what happened to my country. Like what happened to Iraq. A bunch of privileged overentitled assholes who thought they knew better than us what was good for us. ”
you assume a lot ..& you know what that makes… an ass out of you…well, mostly you.
ive never agreed with the propaganda that the US shills to anywhere–but youre argument is beyond the pale & a bucket of lies for other reasons. checkyourself.
your big bitch is that after falling for communist propaganda, you fell for capitalist propagada. cry me a river, we’re all raised on lies. capitalist pigs shut down the factories in my city, too, killing the economy & raping my american dream. c’est la vie, life’s a bitch. but you rather have a demon to blame than take a long hard look at yourself & your fellow (ex)patriots.
Godwin’s law deals with inflammatory and/or unreasonable comparison to National Socialism. Unfortunately, when it comes to Romania, the comparison between Hitler and Ceauşescu is both sane and reasonable.
So, Godwin’s Law doesn’t quite apply, sorry.
As for the laundry list of your assertions, I think you have to re-assess both the tone of your communication and the latent hypocrisy in your arguments.
(1) I’m currently, have always been and will always be against the war in Iraq. Your assumption- that you’ve repeated several times- that I am a pro-war imperialist is wrong and insulting.
(2) Free Speech doesn’t pay bills, but it doesn’t facilitate the slaughter of millions of your countrymen. Nothing that you have said has contradicted my assertion that free speech is the basis for a “free, prosperous country.” Your re-imagined Communist government may have facilitated prosperity, but it came at the steepest of costs. You may be willing to over look the occasional murder or political purge so that you can have cheap healthcare, but the vast majority of humanity would probably disagree with you.
(3) Considering the shear number of people slaughtered in your country, it’s very difficult to take your argument that people lived better lives under a totalitarian government at all seriously.
(4) I know nothing about the “fake revolution.” If it was indeed forced upon you, then you may be correct in saying that a grassroots effort from within would’ve been preferable. On the other hand, ignoring blatant ethnic cleansing is not something that I would find particularly principled. You were being governed by a butcher that was still wiping out swaths of ethnically different citizens. In the face of that, international action might have been appropriate.
I read up a bit about the uprising. The evidence of international intervention is scant at best from what I see, and your views are seen as conspiracy theories. Since ten minutes of reading don’t qualify me to comment, I’ll leave it at that.
No you’re not- you’re just seeing what you want to see. Here’s my exact quote:
I will be hoping for some genuine, grassroot democratic movement- which is still several decades off, I’m afraid.
Note my use of the words grassroots, as in change from within rather than from without. I have yet to read one comment urging U.S. action. You’re attacking the flimsiest of strawmen. Expressing hope for the future is not the same as advocating foreign intervention.
Please: less self-righteousness, more sobriety.
Bluebonnet: seriously, read MORE. Unless by “falling for Communist propaganda” you mean “Imposed upon your country by way of Russian tanks”. Nice victim blaming though.
Puggins:
Oh, where shall I start? let’s see:
1. The comparison between Hitler and Ceausescu is about as reasonable as that between Hitler and GWB. You might want to read more, because your posts show that you have no idea what in the hell you’re talking about. Please read on, it might improve your education and thus help you talk slightly less nonsense next time.
2. “I’m currently, have always been and will always be against the war in Iraq. Your assumption- that you’ve repeated several times- that I am a pro-war imperialist is wrong and insulting.”
actually that’s not quite what I have said. What I have said is here:
“It is people like you and bluebonnet and attitudes like yours who cause things like what happened to my country. Like what happened to Iraq. A bunch of privileged overentitled assholes who thought they knew better than us what was good for us.”
I stand by that, Because that is exactly the attitude that caused things like the Iraq war and not only. You think you know better than us what we should do. You don’t have the information to make a judgement, but you make it nonetheless and based on that a bit further down you talk about international intervention. Yes, ignorance and privilge IS the kind of attitude that made a lot o peope in your country to support the war on Iraq. You are displaying a lot of that right now, and fail to see that it’s the exact same thing.
“I will be hoping for some genuine, grassroot democratic movement- which is still several decades off, I’m afraid.
Note my use of the words grassroots, as in change from within rather than from without. I have yet to read one comment urging U.S. action. You’re attacking the flimsiest of strawmen. Expressing hope for the future is not the same as advocating foreign intervention.”
Actually, I lmost believed you except for one little tiny string of words that you forgot to put in “assuming the Cuban people desire it”. You seem to operate under the assumption that they want said change and that a certain political system is such a be all end all that everyone should aspire to it. until you can actually consider the possibility that the Cubans might not want your political system and that they are entitled to their own choices,
3. ” You may be willing to over look the occasional murder or political purge so that you can have cheap healthcare, but the vast majority of humanity would probably disagree with you.”
Oh what a big load of overprivileged talk. In case you haven’t noticed Puggins, the vast majority of humanity lives in utter poverty. Yes, I know that doesn’t quite register for you, but when food is an issue and you die from untreated illnesses, free speech is just a strange and worthless luxury.
And no, I am not talking about “cheap healthcare”, nice cute strawman there as well. I am talking about the difference between a decent living and dying of poverty. I know you cannot quite comprehend that these things do exist, but sadly that is not my problem.
4. “Considering the shear number of people slaughtered in your country, it’s very difficult to take your argument that people lived better lives under a totalitarian government at all seriously.”
ORLY? Do you even have a remote idea as to the numbers you are talking about? Because “but he killed so many people” is exactly the rhetoric used against Saddam Hussein whe the Iraq war needed to be justified. You might not like the Iraq war, but you seem to sure as hell be good at employing its propaganda techniques.
And no, I am not actually excusing the brutal way in which Communism came to power into Romania. That is your assumption. Regardless of how much the idea that Communism was not all bad scares you, I am not making excuses for it. What I did say , and ALL I have said was that people in my country lived better under communism, and that the forced change was a bad thing. Not all imperialism manifests itself with wars, but it happens nonetheless.
5. “I know nothing about the “fake revolution.” If it was indeed forced upon you, then you may be correct in saying that a grassroots effort from within would’ve been preferable. On the other hand, ignoring blatant ethnic cleansing is not something that I would find particularly principled. You were being governed by a butcher that was still wiping out swaths of ethnically different citizens. In the face of that, international action might have been appropriate.”
“Blatant ethnic cleansing”? You mean the incident with the gassed Kurds? Oh wait, we’re not talking about Iraq and you are just assuming that “all dictators performed ethnic cleansing”?
Here’s to the white man telling us barbarians what REALLY happened in our own history because we are too stupid to figure it out on our own.
Translation: READ MORE PLEASE.
“You were being governed by a butcher that was still wiping out swaths of ethnically different citizens. In the face of that, international action might have been appropriate.
”
Hell yeah, the anti Saddam rhetoric in all its glory. Seriously Puggins, you are making this too easy. This is exactly the mentality I was talking about. The “we kow what’s better for you” mentality. How many fucking cases do you people need to realize that it isn’t working?
It isn’t, and you don’t have the remotest idea as to what you ARE talking about.
6.”I read up a bit about the uprising. The evidence of international intervention is scant at best from what I see, and your views are seen as conspiracy theories. Since ten minutes of reading don’t qualify me to comment, I’ll leave it at that.”
Oh what a nice piece of passive aggressive bullshit. You have read a bit so you feel entitled to pass judgement, but since you lack arguments you feel you can label my words as “conspiracy theories” and then cop out with the ” I’ll leave it at that”. Bullshit again. Yes, you do not have the information to enable you to make any judgement ( or any information by the looks of it) so please don’t.
Is it that hard to comprehend the “stay out of other people’s bussiness” part, oh white master?
It seems to me that the reason that we don’t like Castro is that he has made us look like a bunch of hypocritical asses for the last 50 years. Why is he worse than all the dictators that we have made friends with since the 1950’s? The last phony reason for the embargo died with the end of the USSR. Since then it has been basically spite. We made friends with Mao but we couldn’t make friends with Castro?
soopermouse,
Eat this for breakfast:
“1966 - New laws are introduced to engineer an increase in the size of Romania’s population. “The foetus is the property of the entire society,” Ceausescu states, “Anyone who avoids having children is a deserter who abandons the laws of national continuity.”
Abortion and contraception are outlawed, childless couples face higher taxes, divorce is discouraged, and sex education prohibited. The birth-rate almost doubles, but is accompanied by a leap in infant mortality and unwanted pregnancies, with the rising numbers of handicapped, orphaned and abandoned children being placed in decrepit institutions under state care. After the fall of Ceausescu in 1989 over 100,000 handicapped and orphaned children are discovered living in horrific conditions. ”
..Oh, but you never heard of it, i’ll bet, & so it doesnt count, is what you’ll think. I bet theose kids were a real drag on your system, & so for the greater good & so your ma ma could get her goiter treated…oh well, sacrifices had to be made, eh