Castro Gone

The Coffee Shop
21

Were you equally concerned with the restrictions of the freedoms imposed on American citizens by American sanctions against South Africa?

I doubt it. You’re not really bothered by the fact that Americans’ freedoms are impinged upon by the travel ban, you just don’t think we should have sanctions against Cuba because you see no problem with Cuba. And while you’re entitled to your opinion, and so is Canada, America is too, and we get to set our own foreign policy. Don’t try to muddy the issue by shedding big crocodile tears about how our government is brainwashing us by not allowing us to visit Cuba, or how it’s such a terrible restriction of our freedom. Because that isn’t really why you object to the policy.

22

"America can and should help hasten the sparking of freedom in Cuba. "

If McCain is serious about this, the first thing he should do, should he become president, would be to drop the sanctions. The emabargo helped Castro a lot more than it ever hurt him.

23

Point is Vitus, Cuba would have been a lot more democratic today without the embargo.

It’s pure hypocrisy to single out Cuba and then do business as normal with certain other regimes which are just as or even more oppressive…

24

** if your reason for sanctions is the leadership’s repression of it’s citizens, I’d argue that opening up trade and relations, in the long term, will do more help the populace pressure the government for change than holding on to the sanctions.**

Arguable, certainly. And you’re right in that that’s been the argument in support of business with China. I’d say that so far, it’s not working too hot, and in China’s case, has the added drawback of wrecking our economy. But let’s say that in the long term, China ends up more free and democratic- 50 years from now, they’re less brutal than they are now, thanks in part to open trade. Do you think that the transformation is entirely one way? I don’t- I think the influence is a two way street. And how many of the crimes of the Chinese state does such a policy make us complicit in over that time? Do you think that the dissidents jailed in China are much comforted by the fact that Yahoo’s business dealings in China might one day lead to a more free China? *Is *Yahoo helping develop a more free China, or is Yahoo being coopted by the Chinese government to further censorship and maintain control? (Just for example.)

Again, though, if it’s always the case that open trade is more effective at bringing about change, we should abandon sanctions altogether- South Africa shouldn’t have been isolated, Iran should not be isolated, we should buy more, not fewer, diamonds, etc and so on.

25

Many of the same people that want the sanctions lifted are the ones that refuse to shop at Wal-mart…

26

Point is Vitus, Cuba would have been a lot more democratic today without the embargo.

If that’s really your point, you have a funny and remarkably slow way of making it.

**It’s pure hypocrisy to single out Cuba and then do business as normal with certain other regimes which are just as or even more oppressive… **

I believe I’ve already agreed to that. I see no reason, though, to cooperate with one evil regime on the grounds that we cooperate with other evil regimes. That seems sort of a backwards solution to me.

27

Doesn’t stop us from doing business with China.

China is the exception to all of our foreign policies.

28

I’ll make other points since I’m probably the only person who’s posted on this thread that has actually been to Cuba.

It’s not the evil society that in the US you’re lead to believe it is. Yes it’s not a western style democracy and there are no doubt some human rights abuses, but you can talk freely to ordinary Cuban citizens and they can and will express their thoughts about Casto and politics quite freely and not get locked up for doing so. I know because I’ve spent lots of time talking to Cubans as have many other tourists from around the world.

The average Cuban wants a more democratic society and freely expresses this, but they don’t want want an American style model, more of a Swedish style socialist democracy from what I gathered in my discussions.

The typical Cuban feels that Castro was good for Cuba, but feels his time and ideology is past. At the same time they don’t want to give up some of the good things that that Castro brought to the island such as a high standard education which includes free university tuition and a quite good government health system for all citizens. They’ve also made some very significant innovations in farming, etc. They’ve actually done quite well in many things despite the embargo.

Democracy will eventually come to Cuba, but it won’t be open arms for the Miami expatriates and a return to the bad old days of Baptista.

29

It’s not the evil society that in the US you’re lead to believe it is.

Only *some *human rights abuses, eh? When you consider the rum and cokes, it balances out nicely, I suppose.

I don’t really have anything to add to the rest of your comments. If Cuba adopts Swedish style democracy, I imagine sanctions will be gladly lifted.

30

**Cuban tourist resorts are full of Canadian, European and South American tourists, all seeing for themselves that Cuba is not the evil threat that conservative Republicans want the world to believe. **

JFK was a conservative republican?

Yes, because Cuba during JFK’s presidency was just the same kind of threat it has been for the following 40 years. It’s not anything like Vietnam, right?

31

Were you equally concerned with the restrictions of the freedoms imposed on American citizens by American sanctions against South Africa?

Good one. Apartheid in South Africa was just like the repression now found in Cuba. Funny, I can’t quite place which particular majority segment of the Cuban population is segregated from the rest, is forced to live in squalid shanty towns unlike the rest, is subject to onerous pass laws unlike the rest, and has essentially no rights unlike the rest. Help me out here.

Also, I’m so proud to live in just about the only country that has the high moral standards to not put up with Cuban repression. Right up there with our stand on the death penalty (with those other bastions of freedom around the world), our stand on gays in the military, and other such positions. I’m sure it has nothing whatsoever to do with any power block of Cubans living in Florida.

32

Apartheid in South Africa was just like the repression now found in Cuba.

What, Apartheid is the only moral issue that demands to be addressed? No other moral concerns rise to that level?

Whatever. The point was that CG doesn’t really object to restriction on citizens’ freedom involved in sanctions, he just objects to Cuba being a target of those sanctions. Which is fine, but I’m tired of hearing him sneer at how the sanctions are in place to oppress Americans.

I’m so proud to live in just about the only country that has the high moral standards to not put up with Cuban repression. Right up there with our stand on blah blah blah.

We cannot take any moral stand at all if we don’t take *every *moral stand you think we should? Remind me of that principle the next time you post about some moral outrage our government is responsible for and which you want addressed.

33

Apartheid in South Africa was just like the repression now found in Cuba.

What, Apartheid is the only moral issue that demands to be addressed? No other moral concerns rise to that level?

Whatever. The point was that CG doesn’t really object to restriction on citizens’ freedom involved in sanctions, he just objects to Cuba being a target of those sanctions. Which is fine, but I’m tired of hearing him sneer at how the sanctions are in place to oppress Americans.

I’m so proud to live in just about the only country that has the high moral standards to not put up with Cuban repression. Right up there with our stand on blah blah blah.

We cannot take any moral stand at all if we don’t take *every *moral stand you think we should? Remind me of that principle the next time you post about some moral outrage our government is responsible for and which you want addressed.

Your comparison with South African and apartheid is just wrong. Totally apples and oranges.

There comes a point when it is reasonable to ask why one is on the opposite side of so many so-called moral issues from everyone else. It’s not usually because one is right.

Whatever.

34

**Your comparison with South African and apartheid is just wrong. Totally apples and oranges. **

I think you’re missing the point. I’m not comparing the Cuban situation to South African Apartheid. (Though I don’t really see that one is so outrageously morally abhorrent while the other is basically benign, either.) My point, as I’ve said a couple of times now, is that CG does not object to sanctions because of the restrictions they impose on American citizens- he doesn’t object to sanctions as a tool- only that he doesn’t agree with American foreign policy when it comes to the question of Cuba. He should stop pretending otherwise. (And has, apparently and thankfully.)

There comes a point when it is reasonable to ask why one is on the opposite side of so many so-called moral issues from everyone else. It’s not usually because one is right.

Sure. Because the majority so often has a lock on what’s moral.

Do you really believe that the rest of the world trades with Cuba because the rest of the world really believes that’s the best way to achieve freedom in Cuba?

People talk about how American sanctions have failed to achieve anything in 50 years. I wonder how much more they would have achieved had they not been undermined by the oh-so-moral world community.

35

A**rguable, certainly. And you’re right in that that’s been the argument in support of business with China. I’d say that so far, it’s not working too hot, and in China’s case, has the added drawback of wrecking our economy. But let’s say that in the long term, China ends up more free and democratic- 50 years from now, they’re less brutal than they are now, thanks in part to open trade. Do you think that the transformation is entirely one way? I don’t- I think the influence is a two way street. **

I don’t really see this point, the US is going to become a more brutal society because of the exchange? From what vantage? Government? Citizenry? You can make a case for cheap goods hurting jobs but I’ve seen no evidence of importing societal ills from china.

And how many of the crimes of the Chinese state does such a policy make us complicit in over that time? Do you think that the dissidents jailed in China are much comforted by the fact that Yahoo’s business dealings in China might one day lead to a more free China? *Is *Yahoo helping develop a more free China, or is Yahoo being coopted by the Chinese government to further censorship and maintain control? (Just for example.)

I don’t buy the complicity argument from a human rights stand point but the complexity of issues for and against trade go far beyond human rights. There’s a balance of “national interest” ranging from economic to security to human rights and in the long run somebody will be able to make your argument because our security and economic interests will outweigh our human rights goals and responsibility. (and I don’t have a problem with that) But, China is a much different and more complex story than Cuba.

Again, though, if it’s always the case that open trade is more effective at bringing about change, we should abandon sanctions altogether- South Africa shouldn’t have been isolated, Iran should not be isolated, we should buy more, not fewer, diamonds, etc and so on.

Same thing here, each country has a different balance of national interest issues and I don’t claim to be expert on any of them. But, when you look at Cuba, we have little military fear or economic fear of this little island so it’s primarily a human rights/democracy issue and our sanctions do more to empower Castro than to hurt him. For 50 years we have been Castro’s greatest weapon of propaganda against his people.

JJ

36

** I’ve seen no evidence of importing societal ills from china.**

Oh, I don’t know. I think that material cooperating with an oppressive regime like that is a societal ill all by itself. But again, witness Yahoo’s decision to cooperate with the Chinese government at the expense of Chinese dissidents’ freedom. Do you think that such cooperation with a government against the welfare of a citizen sets no precedent? Do you think that Yahoo and other corporations will continue to make such decisions in China, and it will have no effect on their policies over time here in America?

I don’t buy the complicity argument from a human rights stand point

Why, pray tell, not?

There’s a balance of “national interest” ranging from economic to security to human rights

Certainly. (Though I’d say our stance towards China is a long term loser on every score.)

But, China is a much different and more complex story than Cuba.

Also true.

when you look at Cuba, we have little military fear or economic fear of this little island so it’s primarily a human rights/democracy issue and our sanctions do more to empower Castro than to hurt him.

Certainly we have little to fear from Cuba at this point, and the only rationale for the embargo is human rights. I do not see that the sanctions do anything substantial to empower Castro. Sure, it gives him a public relations point, but so what? You think that without being able to readily demonize the US, Castro would have surrendered or been driven from power? Or caused him to respect human rights that he has continued to violate for half a century? Not a chance. Again, one wonders what effect the sanctions would have had if the “rest of the world” was not so enamored with this communist revolutionary, and had supported US efforts.

37

Many of the same people that want the sanctions lifted are the ones that refuse to shop at Wal-mart…

Exactly! (but of course, that is different)

38

“I do not see that the sanctions do anything substantial to empower Castro”

Talk to any Cuban and they unanimously blame the island’s economic woes on the US sanctions, not on Castro. He’s been able to hold on to power for so long partly because of using the sanctions as source of nationalistic anti-American pride and also in all fairness because he’s done some very good things for Cuba in the areas of education, health care, agriculture, etc. If Castro was as unpopular in Cuba as some people wish to believe, there would have been a counter revolution years ago

If there were never sanctions, I personally don’t believe that in itself would have pushed Castro out of power, at least not in the early days, but it would have likely moderated his policies towards the USA and not pushed him into the Soviet Bloc fifty years ago. The Cuba of today would be different than it is.

39

**Oh, I don’t know. I think that material cooperating with an oppressive regime like that is a societal ill all by itself. But again, witness Yahoo’s decision to cooperate with the Chinese government at the expense of Chinese dissidents’ freedom. Do you think that such cooperation with a government against the welfare of a citizen sets no precedent? **

This is a pretty slippery slope. I’m all for free speech but Yahoo has a legal obligation to the countries it maintains offices in. Also, I don’t like this anymore than you do but how far is this from the guy who does the same thing in the US and goes on about killing the President? I don’t know the particulars of the case but if some bozo in the US goes on about blowing up buildings and killing government officials I damn well want Yahoo to let us know he is. So, on the surface this looks like a typical free speech, human rights violation that China is so famous for, but, I didn’t read what he wrote so I don’t know how far it is from being a “legitimate” threat.

**Why, pray tell, not? **

You can’t remove that particular statement from the context of the entire paragraph to understand it’s meaning.

**Certainly. (Though I’d say our stance towards China is a long term loser on every score.) **

I’d argue the security issue is in our favor. China is less likely to go to war with a trading partner it depends on, even if it has to put up with our petty bitching about it’s “internal affairs”.****

Certainly we have little to fear from Cuba at this point, and the only rationale for the embargo is human rights. I do not see that the sanctions do anything substantial to empower Castro. Sure, it gives him a public relations point, but so what? You think that without being able to readily demonize the US, Castro would have surrendered or been driven from power? Or caused him to respect human rights that he has continued to violate for half a century? Not a chance. Again, one wonders what effect the sanctions would have had if the “rest of the world” was not so enamored with this communist revolutionary, and had supported US efforts.

Remember how much of the world was communist in 1960 and how much power there was backing this guy up. As the power base died, so did Castro’s threat to anything other than his own people. To a lot of the world Castro’s tyranny is quite minor in comparison and pales compared to China’s. I’ll argue none of the sanctions had anything to do with human rights when they were instituted and now the HR issue is just an excuse for the status quo. I’ve never been to Cuba but from all reports it’s nothing like it was 40 years ago and you certainly don’t see the mass exodus of people trying to get out as you did years ago. I’m not saying it’s paradise but it might not be as bad as you think it is.

JJ

40

This is a pretty slippery slope.

Maybe. Yahoo certainly seems to have slid down pretty fast, and I maintain that’s a decent enough example of how doing business with China affects us as well as them.

I’d argue the security issue is in our favor. China is less likely to go to war with a trading partner it depends on

This has been the standard argument on the security front, of course. It apparently pays no heed to the Chinese military build up, a build up that’s directed largely at the US and funded largely by US dollars. It also ignores such developments as China’s increasing influence over oil markets, etc etc- perhaps more of an economic issue, strictly speaking, but certainly security related. It also ignore the sheer amount of technology that we’ve traded to the Chinese and which they’ve used to dramatically modernize their military. Etc and so on.