Cuban Protests

[bolverk 29402]

17 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

AOC is full of shit on this. Her statement is the progressive rhetorical equivalent of pivoting to all lives matter and Black-on-Black crime after cursorily condemning the latest police killing. Incidentally, it’s pretty close to what Diaz-Canal said himself in softer terms— “hey, we made some mistakes but let’s all agree that the United States is the real baddie”—  and thus gives him further ammunition to duck meaningful reform. Reform that would, by the way, end the embargo, except for the fact that the Communist Party would rather watch every Cuban on the island starve than risk losing an actual election or saying goodbye to their secret police. And finally, it seems worthwhile to point out that she’s not being a very good Ally here and letting the Cuban protesters themselves express what they want and what is important to them.

You can even think the embargo is bad and should end while realizing that a moment when actual Cubans are out on the street demanding rights and reforms is not the moment to bring up that old saw, which is the one thing the criminals running that island want to talk about instead of ANYTHING else in the world. 

We all have blind spots and this is one of hers. She’s right about a lot of things, maybe most things. But the enduring soft pedaling for various left-wing Latin American strongmen is one she should really leave behind. 

It's been a busy day so just now responding.

First of all, you completely failed to acknowledge the original point I was making, which is needlessly dragging our domestic partisan bullshit into a "news" thread over in the Daily Texan about events occurring in another country. There are posters over there who cannot help themselves and compulsively throw out passive aggressive one-liners like what I quoted from Nicole just to stir up shit.

Last night, I was perusing the Cuban thread over there just to see what had been going on during the day as I had spent it traveling to Waco for meetings and came back in the evening. You can see why I was in a bad mood: post-pandemic I-35 traffic + spending the day in fucking Waco. AtomHeart has been doing the lord's work for us by following and reposting reliable Twitter posts to keep us informed. Then, I ran into a string of borderline CR-worthy posts, capped by Nicole just throwing out AOC for no other reason than to try to score some stupid internet points from the usual crowd.

Mind you, at that point, AOC's statement on the protests had not yet even been released. Nicole just threw that a comment during the day about AOC, and she knew she was going CR. Read her comment again:

Quote

AOC? Just kidding. Kill poster delete comment. Felt great to say it! 

Nicole, and Brat for that matter, both somehow feel justified in throwing that kind of shit out there often with a little jokey remark that acknowledges they've crossed the line. Sometimes, you just hit a point where you need to call them out on it. Last night, I did, but I brought it over here so as to not fuck up the flow of the news thread.

Secondly, as for AOC, her voicing her opinion on the embargo isn't all that radical or far out there. Cuban-American support for the embargo has swung wildly back and forth over the last decade, so there is some flexibility in their thinking and they're not a monolith. In fact, I heard one report the other day on NPR about some Cuban-Americans who were in support of the protests but opposed the embargo - just like AOC. Obviously, there are others who support both.

In a 2005 interview, George P. Shultz, who served as Secretary of State under Reagan, called the embargo "insane".^[81] Daniel Griswold, director of the Cato Institute's Center for Trade Policy Studies, criticized the embargo in a June 2009 article:^[82]

The embargo has been a failure by every measure. It has not changed the course or nature of the Cuban government. It has not liberated a single Cuban citizen. In fact, the embargo has made the Cuban people a bit more impoverished, without making them one bit more free. At the same time, it has deprived Americans of their freedom to travel and has cost US farmers and other producers billions of dollars of potential exports.

Moreover, the UN just held a vote last month which overwhelmingly opposed the embargo, so it's not like AOC simply threw this out there randomly to puppet Cuba's current dictator.

Finally, we don't have to have binary black or white thinking on complex issues. In fact, the vast majority of posters on this site have vocally supported the protests, so calling out AOC to feed red meat to the GOP crowd over in DT was done with purpose and that was to stir up shit and divide a united audience. Nicole knew what she doing, immediately admitted it in the same post, and even followed up today with another in this thread saying that her shit often gets deleted.

Edited July 17, 2021 by bolverk

[956 Worldwide 34444]

9 hours ago, bolverk said:

It's been a busy day so just now responding.

First of all, you completely failed to acknowledge the original point I was making, which is needlessly dragging our domestic partisan bullshit into a "news" thread over in the Daily Texan about events occurring in another country. There are posters over there who cannot help themselves and compulsively throw out passive aggressive one-liners like what I quoted from Nicole just to stir up shit.

Last night, I was perusing the Cuban thread over there just to see what had been going on during the day as I had spent it traveling to Waco for meetings and came back in the evening. You can see why I was in a bad mood: post-pandemic I-35 traffic + spending the day in fucking Waco. AtomHeart has been doing the lord's work for us by following and reposting reliable Twitter posts to keep us informed. Then, I ran into a string of borderline CR-worthy posts, capped by Nicole just throwing out AOC for no other reason than to try to score some stupid internet points from the usual crowd.

Mind you, at that point, AOC's statement on the protests had not yet even been released. Nicole just threw that a comment during the day about AOC, and she knew she was going CR. Read her comment again:

Nicole, and Brat for that matter, both somehow feel justified in throwing that kind of shit out there often with a little jokey remark that acknowledges they've crossed the line. Sometimes, you just hit a point where you need to call them out on it. Last night, I did, but I brought it over here so as to not fuck up the flow of the news thread.

Secondly, as for AOC, her voicing her opinion on the embargo isn't all that radical or far out there. Cuban-American support for the embargo has swung wildly back and forth over the last decade, so there is some flexibility in their thinking and they're not a monolith. In fact, I heard one report the other day on NPR about some Cuban-Americans who were in support of the protests but opposed the embargo - just like AOC. Obviously, there are others who support both.

In a 2005 interview, George P. Shultz, who served as Secretary of State under Reagan, called the embargo "insane".^[81] Daniel Griswold, director of the Cato Institute's Center for Trade Policy Studies, criticized the embargo in a June 2009 article:^[82]

The embargo has been a failure by every measure. It has not changed the course or nature of the Cuban government. It has not liberated a single Cuban citizen. In fact, the embargo has made the Cuban people a bit more impoverished, without making them one bit more free. At the same time, it has deprived Americans of their freedom to travel and has cost US farmers and other producers billions of dollars of potential exports.

Moreover, the UN just held a vote last month which overwhelmingly opposed the embargo, so it's not like AOC simply threw this out there randomly to puppet Cuba's current dictator.

Finally, we don't have to have binary black or white thinking on complex issues. In fact, the vast majority of posters on this site have vocally supported the protests, so calling out AOC to feed red meat to the GOP crowd over in DT was done with purpose and that was to stir up shit and divide a united audience. Nicole knew what she doing, immediately admitted it in the same post, and even followed up today with another in this thread saying that her shit often gets deleted.

I really don’t give a shit about the Daily Texan thread or what posters on the site do. My broader point is that yes, binary thinking isn’t necessary and so in this case its fine to point out that what AOC actually said at this moment in time is inconsistent with her own stated principles and is enabling a pretty brutal, nasty regime. It’s not even her stance on the embargo, it’s the way and time it was delivered.

It should not be difficult to deliver a clear and unambiguous expression of support for victims of state repression and violence without muddying the waters by bringing up something else that plays right into the rhetoric of the oppressors. And to borrow her own principles—- at this precise moment, it’s not really ABOUT what Cuban Americans think or what other Americans think, it’s about what the people getting their skulls cracked think. And this round of protests is remarkable in that the authoritarian regime in Cuba has been unable to redirect popular anger and change the subject inside the country, so why help them do that?

What’s really going on is that for a certain branch of American progressive, there is an almost constitutional allergy to letting the word “Cuba” pass their lips without launching into a tirade against U.S. policy, and there’s also a lingering sympathy for a brutal authoritarian regime that knows how to tickle ears with the language of liberation and economic equality. And not letting that go is a sign of a bit of political immaturity and a blind spot. And it helps the Communists because they absolutely want us all talking about the embargo and not all the active abuses that happen every day and about how they’re going to crush these protests.

[bolverk 29402]

1 hour ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I really don’t give a shit about the Daily Texan thread or what posters on the site do. My broader point is that yes, binary thinking isn’t necessary and so in this case its fine to point out that what AOC actually said at this moment in time is inconsistent with her own stated principles and is enabling a pretty brutal, nasty regime. It’s not even her stance on the embargo, it’s the way and time it was delivered.

It should not be difficult to deliver a clear and unambiguous expression of support for victims of state repression and violence without muddying the waters by bringing up something else that plays right into the rhetoric of the oppressors. And to borrow her own principles—- at this precise moment, it’s not really ABOUT what Cuban Americans think or what other Americans think, it’s about what the people getting their skulls cracked think. And this round of protests is remarkable in that the authoritarian regime in Cuba has been unable to redirect popular anger and change the subject inside the country, so why help them do that?

What’s really going on is that for a certain branch of American progressive, there is an almost constitutional allergy to letting the word “Cuba” pass their lips without launching into a tirade against U.S. policy, and there’s also a lingering sympathy for a brutal authoritarian regime that knows how to tickle ears with the language of liberation and economic equality. And not letting that go is a sign of a bit of political immaturity and a blind spot. And it helps the Communists because they absolutely want us all talking about the embargo and not all the active abuses that happen every day and about how they’re going to crush these protests.

And that's fair, but I do believe you're giving short shrift to progressives like myself who hope to see Cuba turn itself around. I can't speak for whatever is passing through her mind, but I can say that, overall, economic sanctions like the embargo doesn't seem like it's done a whole lot of good for the common folk over the past half-century. But let's also keep in mind that AOC is just one of a multitude of voices in Congress with limited power over our foreign policy and dealings with Cuba. To be super generous, she might be expressing her opinion on one of the very few things she could hold sway over in her capacity as a lone rep. But, yeah, today the embargo isn't the biggest priority in my opinion but it does matter.

ETA: In comparison, my particular representative is Chip Roy who would likely prefer to perform in a one-act, lemon-party play than pass the mic over to whomever might challenge him.

Edited July 17, 2021 by bolverk

[Fudge Nuggets 19151]

12 hours ago, tx 3 putt said:

buy. They’ve been planning for the fall of that govt for sometime 

Lol.  I'm sure it will work out just like it did in Russia when communism fell.

Some big shot Cubano in Miami will "buy" 20 miles of primo beach real estate for about $200,000.

[956 Worldwide 34444]

3 hours ago, bolverk said:

And that's fair, but I do believe you're giving short shrift to progressives like myself who hope to see Cuba turn itself around. I can't speak for whatever is passing through her mind, but I can say that, overall, economic sanctions like the embargo doesn't seem like it's done a whole lot of good for the common folk over the past half-century. But let's also keep in mind that AOC is just one of a multitude of voices in Congress with limited power over our foreign policy and dealings with Cuba. To be super generous, she might be expressing her opinion on one of the very few things she could hold sway over in her capacity as a lone rep. But, yeah, today the embargo isn't the biggest priority in my opinion but it does matter.

ETA: In comparison, my particular representative is Chip Roy who would likely prefer to perform in a one-act, lemon-party play than pass the mic over to whomever might challenge him.

Ending the embargo is a rational and supportable position, I mean it was something even Obama wanted to do. It’s just the specific timing and context on this one that induces eye-rolls with me. I think there’s a bit of naivety on her end as to how the voice of a sitting U.S Congress rep can be used and misused by dishonest actors, especially in a manipulated information environment like Cuba.
 

And I also think its equal parts desire to not lose credibility with her base combined with lingering misplaced sentimentality for Latin American revolutionary movements that broke bad a long time ago that led to the misstep. So it’s fair to call her out, not that all of the people doing it are honest themselves. 

[bolverk 29402]

14 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Ending the embargo is a rational and supportable position, I mean it was something even Obama wanted to do. It’s just the specific timing and context on this one that induces eye-rolls with me. I think there’s a bit of naivety on her end as to how the voice of a sitting U.S Congress rep can be used and misused by dishonest actors, especially in a manipulated information environment like Cuba.
 

And I also think its equal parts desire to not lose credibility with her base combined with lingering misplaced sentimentality for Latin American revolutionary movements that broke bad a long time ago that led to the misstep. So it’s fair to call her out, not that all of the people doing it are honest themselves. 

She's 31 years old and was born only a few months after I graduated from high school. Yeah, there's some naïveté, but we need that youthful exuberance to move forward as a society in spite of the occasional misstep.

[Satchel 6908]

On April 29, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed an "anti-riot" bill into law in the wake of civil unrest that took place with George Floyd in 2020. The bill states that protesters could be arrested if a gathering could be considered a riot. Also, it deems blocking a freeway a felony and gives full immunity to persons who drive through protesters that are blocking a roadway.

 

DeSantis received a considerable amount of pushback from Democrats who felt that the bill was unfair and targets black and brown communities disproportionately.

Upon signing the bill, DeSantis stated that the bill is needed to protect Florida residents on the road.

"Just think about it: you're driving home from work and all of the sudden, you have people out there shutting down a highway. We worked hard to make sure that didn't happen in Florida," said DeSantis. They start to do that, there needs to be swift penalties."

During the protests, there weren't any arrests made and the Miami-Dade Police Department redirected traffic for the protesters. This set off a firestorm on Twitterin relation to the treatment of Black Lives Matter protesters.

Representative Anna Eskamani commented on a tweet DeSantis posted in support of the protesters in Cuba, calling him the governor who pushed legislation that's a "means to silence racial justice protests."

Biblical scholar Wil Gafney noted that she doubted those protesting in Florida would face felony charges, as the law makes possible. However, she suspected it would be different if Haitians or BLM protesters of "any race" were in the same situation, writing on Twitter, "that's who the law was written for."

Olee Fowler, a writer at Eater, also believed people would have been arrested if it was a BLM protest.

When asked about the Cuban American protesters blocking the road, instead of addressing how the law would be applied, DeSantis turned attention to the protesters in Cuba. The Miami Herald editorial board criticized DeSantis' response, noting that the question highlighted the hypocrisy of the law that's arbitrarily enforced.

https://www.newsweek.com/ron-desantis-anti-blm-protests-law-backfires-cuban-american-protests-1609456

 

[Brisketexan 104628]

Ending the embargo is a rational and supportable position, I mean it was something even Obama wanted to do. It’s just the specific timing and context on this one that induces eye-rolls with me. I think there’s a bit of naivety on her end as to how the voice of a sitting U.S Congress rep can be used and misused by dishonest actors, especially in a manipulated information environment like Cuba.
 
And I also think its equal parts desire to not lose credibility with her base combined with lingering misplaced sentimentality for Latin American revolutionary movements that broke bad a long time ago that led to the misstep. So it’s fair to call her out, not that all of the people doing it are honest themselves. 

The impetus for this uprising is the long-standing — and recently exacerbated — suffering of the Cuban people. It wouldn’t have happened without them losing their patience with being hungry, being frustrated by the unavailability of essentials, etc.

It’s absurd to have a conversation about that scenario and NOT discuss a decades-long embargo by what should be a major trading partner. Now, that raises a point that’s either incredibly uncomfortable or supportive….maybe the embargo worked, not in spite of but BECAUSE of the human suffering it caused? Make the people hungry enough, and they’ll revolt (and again, the embargo is just one piece of the current set of circumstances)? It’s a conversation that has to happen in any honest and complete discussion of what’s happening in Cuba right now.

Oh, and also, Desantis’s law about banning protests that block roads and shit is so transparently one-sided that any defense of it is laughable. Protests that the regime agrees with? A-ok. Protests against the regime’s interests? Let’s start cracking skulls! It’s Authoritarianism 101….shit, it’s the kind of rule Castro himself put in place (you could march through Havana all day protesting Yanqui imperialism, but go to jail for marching for one minute protesting Castro).

[RPM 26229]

You would think one of our state's Senators would be strongly in favor of intervention.

[TwiceHorn 31283]

On 7/12/2021 at 6:01 PM, JimmyJames said:

I used to like Cuban Americans but apparently they came out scrong for trump last election therefore they suck. Not sure about the actual Cubans position on trump so I’ll have to defer on the protests for the time being. 

On the one hand, they're immigrants and came here fleeing communism, and, generally, they are good Americans.

On the other hand, they fled communism and are latin Catholics, which virtually guarantees that they are going to be seduced by anti-SoCIaLlsM!! and socially conservative nonsense.  So they make "good" Republicans.

[TwiceHorn 31283]

2 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

The impetus for this uprising is the long-standing — and recently exacerbated — suffering of the Cuban people. It wouldn’t have happened without them losing their patience with being hungry, being frustrated by the unavailability of essentials, etc.

It’s absurd to have a conversation about that scenario and NOT discuss a decades-long embargo by what should be a major trading partner. Now, that raises a point that’s either incredibly uncomfortable or supportive….maybe the embargo worked, not in spite of but BECAUSE of the human suffering it caused? Make the people hungry enough, and they’ll revolt (and again, the embargo is just one piece of the current set of circumstances)? It’s a conversation that has to happen in any honest and complete discussion of what’s happening in Cuba right now.

Oh, and also, Desantis’s law about banning protests that block roads and shit is so transparently one-sided that any defense of it is laughable. Protests that the regime agrees with? A-ok. Protests against the regime’s interests? Let’s start cracking skulls! It’s Authoritarianism 101….shit, it’s the kind of rule Castro himself put in place (you could march through Havana all day protesting Yanqui imperialism, but go to jail for marching for one minute protesting Castro).

Sadly, I think the point of an embargo is to make it hard for the embargoed government to operate, which includes the ability to provide for its citizens.  The focus tends to be on the pain exacted on the government, but the reality is that the people bear the brunt of it, even assuming the embargoed government gives a shit about the people.

A somewhat illuminating article on Cuba in the context of something else. By a UTSA professor who is a recent Cuban emigre. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/07/black-lives-matter-misses-point-about-cuba/619471/

Edited July 18, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[FORTY NINE TO ZERO 2630]

The embarago is horrible and needs to end. All it does is hurt the common people and gives the communist government a built in excuse for all its failures. 
 

the communist government is horrible and needs to be overthrown. It’s leaders are guilty of crimes against humanity.  

A decent portion of the Cubans who left in the 60s are fuckwads who don’t care about those who they left behind.  Hell, look at Bacardi. they fucking funded Fidel hoping to get beneficial treatment.

Laugh 

 

[MaybeACoordinator 8349]

6 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

On the one hand, they're immigrants and came here fleeing communism, and, generally, they are good Americans.

On the other hand, they fled communism and are latin Catholics, which virtually guarantees that they are going to be seduced by anti-SoCIaLlsM!! and socially conservative nonsense.  So they make "good" Republicans.

The same goes for the elites among the Iranians, Venezuelans and Vietnamese we've allowed to come here, and as soon as they get their papers here, they start voting for the same kinds of politicians who ruined their own countries and brought down revolutions upon themselves. 

The leadership and elite of the Miami Cubans are the descendants of the people who kept slavery going in Cuba until 1886 and then supported one corrupt dictator after another and allowed the Mafia to take over Havana and otherwise sold out to foreigners. And they are fucking ruthless. They've launched bombing campaigns on tourist hot spots in the 1990s and blew up a Cuban airliner in the 1970s. Batista was another in a long line of murderous thugs down there, and I think most agreed that Castro's revolution was just, if not his adoption of Communism later.

I see a bunch of people on the DT thread solemnly claiming there will be mass executions once the dust settles on this. Cuba abolished the death penalty in 1999 and as for extralegal killings, while those completely trustworthy murderous emigre groups claim that Castro has killed as many as 17,000 people, less biased sources put that number at around 2000, and almost all of those in the immediate aftermath of the revolution. These were Batista's torturers and secret police and one expert said that if Castro had not shot them against the wall they would have been torn to pieces by angry mobs. At the time, the only criticism Castro got for killing those goons was that he didn't follow due process, but he said he used the same system the Allies had used at Nuremberg. 

After 1959, Amnesty International says the number was 200-something between that year and 1987, when they last made an estimate, and bear in mind -- that is the total number of executions, which also includes common murderers and such.

There won't be mass executions or hundreds of desapericidos. That's the kind of shit the right pulls in Latin America: see Chile, Argentina, Brazil, etc. 

None of which is to say Cuba is anything resembling a free country, because it's not. Neither is it North Korea.

We've fucked Cuba over constantly throughout its existence for no real good reason at all except greed. If we supported some mildly leftist government down there a long ass time ago we wouldn't be where we are today, but the CIA won't tolerate Mossadeghs or Allendes anywhere, much less 90 miles from Miami.

[TwiceHorn 31283]

10 minutes ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

The same goes for the elites among the Iranians, Venezuelans and Vietnamese we've allowed to come here, and as soon as they get their papers here, they start voting for the same kinds of politicians who ruined their own countries and brought down revolutions upon themselves. 

The leadership and elite of the Miami Cubans are the descendants of the people who kept slavery going in Cuba until 1886 and then supported one corrupt dictator after another and allowed the Mafia to take over Havana and otherwise sold out to foreigners. And they are fucking ruthless. They've launched bombing campaigns on tourist hot spots in the 1990s and blew up a Cuban airliner in the 1970s. Batista was another in a long line of murderous thugs down there, and I think most agreed that Castro's revolution was just, if not his adoption of Communism later.

I see a bunch of people on the DT thread solemnly claiming there will be mass executions once the dust settles on this. Cuba abolished the death penalty in 1999 and as for extralegal killings, while those completely trustworthy murderous emigre groups claim that Castro has killed as many as 17,000 people, less biased sources put that number at around 2000, and almost all of those in the immediate aftermath of the revolution. These were Batista's torturers and secret police and one expert said that if Castro had not shot them against the wall they would have been torn to pieces by angry mobs. At the time, the only criticism Castro got for killing those goons was that he didn't follow due process, but he said he used the same system the Allies had used at Nuremberg. 

After 1959, Amnesty International says the number was 200-something between that year and 1987, when they last made an estimate, and bear in mind -- that is the total number of executions, which also includes common murderers and such.

There won't be mass executions or hundreds of desapericidos. That's the kind of shit the right pulls in Latin America: see Chile, Argentina, Brazil, etc. 

None of which is to say Cuba is anything resembling a free country, because it's not. Neither is it North Korea.

We've fucked Cuba over constantly throughout its existence for no real good reason at all except greed. If we supported some mildly leftist government down there a long ass time ago we wouldn't be where we are today, but the CIA won't tolerate Mossadeghs or Allendes anywhere, much less 90 miles from Miami.

Yeah, they always seem to have thrived under a right-wing dictator (Batista, Pahlavi, etc.) and haul ass as soon as a left-wing dictator gets in.

A lot of the Cubans and South Americans were wealthy back home. Not so much the SE Asians.

[MaybeACoordinator 8349]

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

Yeah, they always seem to have thrived under a right-wing dictator (Batista, Pahlavi, etc.) and haul ass as soon as a left-wing dictator gets in.

A lot of the Cubans and South Americans were wealthy back home. Not so much the SE Asians.

I hope that we let in the poor Vietnamese out of a sense of obligation to their taking our side in the war. We really need to be doing that now in Iraq and Afghanistan but we probably won't 'cause Moozlims. 

[bad_teammate 13132]

On 7/16/2021 at 7:30 PM, bolverk said:

Then, I ran into a string of borderline CR-worthy posts, capped by Nicole just throwing out AOC for no other reason than to try to score some stupid internet points from the usual crowd.

Mind you, at that point, AOC's statement on the protests had not yet even been released. Nicole just threw that a comment during the day about AOC, and she knew she was going CR.

I got a week-long ban for being "political" in that thread. In the interim I've watched it just turn into fantasies about how many Cubans we can kill for freedom and different strategies for making poor Cubans suffer enough to overthrow Communism.

On 7/17/2021 at 4:58 AM, 956 Worldwide said:

I really don’t give a shit about the Daily Texan thread or what posters on the site do. My broader point is that yes, binary thinking isn’t necessary and so in this case its fine to point out that what AOC actually said at this moment in time is inconsistent with her own stated principles and is enabling a pretty brutal, nasty regime. It’s not even her stance on the embargo, it’s the way and time it was delivered.

Horse shit.

The Cuban regime doesn't even register on the scale of Brutal, Nasty regimes we are actively friends with. Israel just destroyed an ancient Canaanite burial ground to build a settler road. China can't kill Muslims fast enough. Saudi Arabia just built a special tower for homosexual-tossing.  Pakistan, Egypt, and on and on.

Meanwhile, we get photos/video out of Cuba of CUBAN POLICE BRUTALITY that would make the LAPD giggle.

Obviously the US embargo isn't the only problem going on, but it's the problem WE have control over and responsible for, so that's actually what should be central in our conversation. And it always gets boiled down to this "you're either with us (brutal right-wing interventionists) or you're with the terrorists (Communists)" and the political center just marches along like it always does.

[bad_teammate 13132]

18 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Sadly, I think the point of an embargo is to make it hard for the embargoed government to operate, which includes the ability to provide for its citizens.  The focus tends to be on the pain exacted on the government, but the reality is that the people bear the brunt of it, even assuming the embargoed government gives a shit about the people.

A somewhat illuminating article on Cuba in the context of something else. By a UTSA professor who is a recent Cuban emigre. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/07/black-lives-matter-misses-point-about-cuba/619471/

This is fun...

#1 - The country is not an empty canvas onto which Americans can project their political ideas.

EXCEPT WHEN IT IS!

#2 - ...the main obstacle to Cuban development and prosperity is the government’s model of a state-controlled economy, a system in which Cubans cannot materialize their entrepreneurial energy...

lol fucking liberals

[956 Worldwide 34444]

10 hours ago, Cheeseweasel said:

Now would be the worst possible time to end the embargo. The leadership would tell the people that it would be coming to them if they stop protesting then keep 99% of the goods.

Something that gets frequently missed in the embargo debates is that Cuba's economy is still and old-school, planned command economy in which virtually every enterprise of significance is owned by the state.  Something like 80 percent of the employed population works in a state-owned company or industry.  It's not mixed like China's or even particularly close to China's; the sole concession they made after the collapse of the Soviet Union (and the end of the direct Soviet subsidies that kept their economy somewhat afloat and financed virtually every 'accomplishment' the regime made) was to allow small private businesses in non-key sectors. These are not the companies that will be benefiting from trade liberalization with the United States.  

So, if you are arguing for the end of the embargo, you are arguing for U.S. companies and people to go into business directly with the Cuban Communist Party and for U.S. wealth to bankroll the continued existence of that regime. And you are hoping that some of those benefits will trickle down to the Cuban people after the state and the party get their cut.

There's still some arguments to ending the embargo to be made, but I think that the above needs to be addressed upfront rather than with a bunch of handwaving about humanitarian issues.  You'd think that the Cuban Communists should explain why their great socialist revolution so desperately needs running dog imperialist dollars to survive, but that would require consistency from Communists.   

[956 Worldwide 34444]

On 7/18/2021 at 8:35 PM, TwiceHorn said:

Sadly, I think the point of an embargo is to make it hard for the embargoed government to operate, which includes the ability to provide for its citizens.  The focus tends to be on the pain exacted on the government, but the reality is that the people bear the brunt of it, even assuming the embargoed government gives a shit about the people.

A somewhat illuminating article on Cuba in the context of something else. By a UTSA professor who is a recent Cuban emigre. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/07/black-lives-matter-misses-point-about-cuba/619471/

This is a good article. 
 

Something missing in most of these debates is the legacy of the Soviet Union. It’s no exaggeration to say that Cuba existed until 1989 as essentially a client state and real-life propaganda tool for the Soviet Union in the Western Hemisphere. From direct aid to military funding to sugar subsidies to well below market sales of Soviet petroleum, the Soviets basically kept that island afloat and any of the accomplishments of the Cuban regime should have a little “a gift from the Soviet Union” tag attached.  Kind of a a bizarro world Soviet Marshall Plan to demonstrate the superiority of Marixism-Leninism to Latin America with all the efficiency and effectiveness that the words “Soviet Marshall Plan” evoke.

Since 1989  and the collapse of their benefactor the sole concession to economic reform has been to allow small private businesses to operate but nearly all of the economy remains state owned, state controlled, and command. An end to the embargo is not “trading with Cuba” it is “trading with the Cuban Communist Party.” It’s United States people and companies stepping into the (literal in this case) Sugar Daddy role once played by the USSR and bankrolling an ongoing, failing Marxist-Leninist experiment.

The Revolution must be paid for by the running dog lackeys of capitalist imperialism, I guess. 
 

 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

2 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Something that gets frequently missed in the embargo debates is that Cuba's economy is still and old-school, planned command economy in which virtually every enterprise of significance is owned by the state.  Something like 80 percent of the employed population works in a state-owned company or industry.  It's not mixed like China's or even particularly close to China's; the sole concession they made after the collapse of the Soviet Union (and the end of the direct Soviet subsidies that kept their economy somewhat afloat and financed virtually every 'accomplishment' the regime made) was to allow small private businesses in non-key sectors. These are not the companies that will be benefiting from trade liberalization with the United States.  

So, if you are arguing for the end of the embargo, you are arguing for U.S. companies and people to go into business directly with the Cuban Communist Party and for U.S. wealth to bankroll the continued existence of that regime. And you are hoping that some of those benefits will trickle down to the Cuban people after the state and the party get their cut.

There's still some arguments to ending the embargo to be made, but I think that the above needs to be addressed upfront rather than with a bunch of handwaving about humanitarian issues.  You'd think that the Cuban Communists should explain why their great socialist revolution so desperately needs running dog imperialist dollars to survive, but that would require consistency from Communists.   

Their system is a friggin' scam. If you figure out a way to make a few extra dollars a month the powers that be will create a rule that doesn't allow it. The intention is to keep citizens poor, and controlled. If there was no embargo all the goods, and dollars would be still be kept from the citizens. 

Edited July 20, 2021 by Onboard 2.0

[TwiceHorn 31283]

2 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

This is a good article. 
 

Something missing in most of these debates is the legacy of the Soviet Union. It’s no exaggeration to say that Cuba existed until 1989 as essentially a client state and real-life propaganda tool for the Soviet Union in the Western Hemisphere. From direct aid to military funding to sugar subsidies to well below market sales of Soviet petroleum, the Soviets basically kept that island afloat and any of the accomplishments of the Cuban regime should have a little “a gift from the Soviet Union” tag attached.  Kind of a a bizarro world Soviet Marshall Plan to demonstrate the superiority of Marixism-Leninism to Latin America with all the efficiency and effectiveness that the words “Soviet Marshall Plan” evoke.

Since 1989  and the collapse of their benefactor the sole concession to economic reform has been to allow small private businesses to operate but nearly all of the economy remains state owned, state controlled, and command. An end to the embargo is not “trading with Cuba” it is “trading with the Cuban Communist Party.” It’s United States people and companies stepping into the (literal in this case) Sugar Daddy role once played by the USSR and bankrolling an ongoing, failing Marxist-Leninist experiment.

The Revolution must be paid for by the running dog lackeys of capitalist imperialism, I guess. 
 

 

Yeah, it came up on one of my feeds, I dismissed the part about BLM as uninteresting, but thought the sort of historical notes about being a Soviet satellite were interesting.  I thought the bit about racism being mostly quashed during Soviet dependency odd.

And, although it is fairly obvious, the Soviet alignment initially justified the embargo (and made it more justifiable), and simultaneously made it less effective (less effect on the Cuban people).

I checked the author, though, because I wanted to make sure it wasn't a "Miami Cuban," as I don't think they're credible on Cuba.  It may be that he's the functional equivalent, having left, but he sure sat through it for a good while.

Edited July 20, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[956 Worldwide 34444]

36 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Yeah, it came up on one of my feeds, I dismissed the part about BLM as uninteresting, but thought the sort of historical notes about being a Soviet satellite were interesting.  I thought the bit about racism being mostly quashed during Soviet dependency odd.

And, although it is fairly obvious, the Soviet alignment initially justified the embargo (and made it more justifiable), and simultaneously made it less effective (less effect on the Cuban people).

I checked the author, though, because I wanted to make sure it wasn't a "Miami Cuban," as I don't think they're credible on Cuba.  It may be that he's the functional equivalent, having left, but he sure sat through it for a good while.

Venezuela sort of has played the old Soviet role since Chavez took over, mostly in the form of subsidized petroleum. That started going to shit a few years ago and is a big part of the reason things are also collapsing in Cuba. 

[Cheeseweasel 26437]

 

Edited July 20, 2021 by Cheeseweasel
Fuck a CR thread

[bad_teammate 13132]

yeah, I think you are completely wrong.   The Cubans would be hollering waving flags just like the italians and french.

Just so I'm clear, you are saying that you actually believe that the Cubans would react to a US military invasion the way Nazi-occupied Europe reacted to Soviet and US forces when they were kicking the Nazis out?

I don't want to misrepresent you. That's why I'm asking.

Follow up, did you believe this about Iraq/Afghanistan?

[bad_teammate 13132]

So, if you are arguing for the end of the embargo, you are arguing for U.S. companies and people to go into business directly with the Cuban Communist Party and for U.S. wealth to bankroll the continued existence of that regime. And you are hoping that some of those benefits will trickle down to the Cuban people after the state and the party get their cut.

Saudi Arabia

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

20 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

We send them aid. (A bit old link, but still accurate)

https://www.state.gov/u-s-relations-with-cuba/

Although economic sanctions remain in place, the United States is the largest provider of food and agricultural products to Cuba, with exports of those goods valued at $220.5 million in 2018.  The United States is also a significant supplier of humanitarian goods to Cuba, including medicines and medical products, with total value of all exports to Cuba of $275.9 million in 2018. Remittances from the United States, estimated at $3.5 billion for 2017, play an important role in Cuba’s state-controlled economy.

 

And how much of that aid ever gets to the actual man in the street I wonder...

[Cheeseweasel 26437]

Edited July 20, 2021 by Cheeseweasel
Fuck a CR thread

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

8 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

 

Just so I'm clear, you are saying that you actually believe that the Cubans would react to a US military invasion the way Nazi-occupied Europe reacted to Soviet and US forces when they were kicking the Nazis out?

I don't want to misrepresent you. That's why I'm asking.

Follow up, did you believe this about Iraq/Afghanistan?

 

This is so far into politics brah. Right now they have no choice or say in what they get ever.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

3 minutes ago, Cheeseweasel said:

Legit question. 

I keep getting visions of the grain/rice distribution scene from Blackhawk Down, which is not apples to apples in Cuba, but the general concept is pretty close I bet.

Edited July 20, 2021 by Onboard 2.0

[bad_teammate 13132]

Right now they have no choice or say in what they get ever.

What does that have to do with my question?

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

12 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

 

What does that have to do with my question?

 

Seriously ?  You don't get that ? Again this is so far into politics I'll PM you a response.

[Starfleet Command 441]

You really can't believe anything you read about Cuba in the Western press.  A lot of it is simply made up.

 

[bad_teammate 13132]

You really can't believe anything you read about Cuba in the Western press.  A lot of it is simply made up.
 

This. 1000x this.

We are heavily propagandized.

[Mrs Whiggins 13049]

43 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

This. 1000x this.

We are heavily propagandized.
 

With some of the newer tech, it's only going to get worse.

[Enchubben 5509]

1 hour ago, Starfleet Command said:

You really can't believe anything you read in mainstream media.  A lot of it is simply made up.

FIFY

[956 Worldwide 34444]

Ah yes, it’s all the lugenpresse. I really like it when the veil slips and the far left and far right make it obvious that politics doesn’t exist on a continuum but a closed circle. With two diametrically opposed points of reality/pragmatism and conspiracy/ideology.

[Starfleet Command 441]

3 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Ah yes, it’s all the lugenpresse. I really like it when the veil slips and the far left and far right make it obvious that politics doesn’t exist on a continuum but a closed circle. With two diametrically opposed points of reality/pragmatism and conspiracy/ideology.

You think Stockwell is making that up for laughs?  

[dcar00 14035]

2 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

 

Just so I'm clear, you are saying that you actually believe that the Cubans would react to a US military invasion the way Nazi-occupied Europe reacted to Soviet and US forces when they were kicking the Nazis out?

I don't want to misrepresent you. That's why I'm asking.

Follow up, did you believe this about Iraq/Afghanistan?

 

apparently you didn't read my post...typical

[wildcat09 29258]

I'm really not understanding where the line is for what gets a post moved from DT to here. 

[F250 28691]

2 hours ago, Cheeseweasel said:

We send them aid. (A bit old link, but still accurate)

https://www.state.gov/u-s-relations-with-cuba/

Although economic sanctions remain in place, the United States is the largest provider of food and agricultural products to Cuba, with exports of those goods valued at $220.5 million in 2018.  The United States is also a significant supplier of humanitarian goods to Cuba, including medicines and medical products, with total value of all exports to Cuba of $275.9 million in 2018. Remittances from the United States, estimated at $3.5 billion for 2017, play an important role in Cuba’s state-controlled economy.

 

My point was that people were conflating aid with trade. These are not the same thing.

 

Yes, that is old data.  Remittance payments were severally limited a couple of years ago.

[MaybeACoordinator 8349]

The embargo has been idiotic for a long long time. I guess I could see it from a realpolitik angle back when the USSR was still around -- we didn't want some Commie paradise seducing other developing nations into believing they could be the next Cuba -- but since then it's been childish, petty, and cruel on a gargantuan scale. And counterproductive. I really don't think a repressive Communist regime would be able to survive without a boogie man to rally against. Why is it okay to trade with China and Vietnam but not Cuba? What fucking right does our government have telling us I can't go to Cuba? We are allowed to visit North Korea, but not Havana? Come the fuck on. 

[F250 28691]

1 hour ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

The embargo has been idiotic for a long long time. I guess I could see it from a realpolitik angle back when the USSR was still around -- we didn't want some Commie paradise seducing other developing nations into believing they could be the next Cuba -- but since then it's been childish, petty, and cruel on a gargantuan scale. And counterproductive. I really don't think a repressive Communist regime would be able to survive without a boogie man to rally against. Why is it okay to trade with China and Vietnam but not Cuba? What fucking right does our government have telling us I can't go to Cuba? We are allowed to visit North Korea, but not Havana? Come the fuck on. 

Agree.

Florida electoral votes are why the embargo has remained in place long after the end of the cold war.

 

[956 Worldwide 34444]

4 hours ago, Starfleet Command said:

You think Stockwell is making that up for laughs?  

I think that, at best, the claims of someone who was last on the “inside” 45 years ago is irrelevant to Cuba, 2021. 

[Starfleet Command 441]

25 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I think that, at best, the claims of someone who was last on the “inside” 45 years ago is irrelevant to Cuba, 2021. 

For one, he has direct knowledge about CIA operations which took place immediately following the revolution when most of those atrocities are alleged to have taken place. Second, why would you suppose that the CIA is not now engaged in similar operations when US policy regarding Cuba has not changed since the 60s?

A large reason for those operations is to get credulous idiots like yourself to believe our monstrous behavior towards Cuba and it’s people since the beginning of the embargo is actually good and the sensible thing to do. And it obviously works when viewing this thread. 

[MaybeACoordinator 8349]

1 minute ago, Starfleet Command said:

And it obviously works when viewing this thread. 

wait until you see the other thread

[Starfleet Command 441]

On 7/17/2021 at 7:51 AM, Fudge Nuggets said:

Lol.  I'm sure it will work out just like it did in Russia when communism fell.

Some big shot Cubano in Miami will "buy" 20 miles of primo beach real estate for about $200,000.

Cuba would be a paradise like Haiti if the US got its way. 

[bad_teammate 13132]

You think Stockwell is making that up for laughs?  

He knows it is happening he just thinks it's good. So he will pretend it isn't happening and call out people for stating the obvious. It's ACTUAL trolling.

The reality is that corporate media is a propaganda tool here just as state media is in nations like Cuba. Different levels of dishonesty and corruption and different agendas, of course.

[F250 28691]

The obsession with Communist Cuba seems weird with it being a 21st century issue. The way some people talk about it seems like they are still concerned about Domino theory being a thing as if the Soviets are waiting in the shadows to jump out and invade the U.S. As has already been mentioned in this thread, there are a lot of shitty countries in the world but the obsession with Cuba seems so out of place.

The cold war ended a long time ago and Russia, well you know.

 

 

[Starfleet Command 441]

7 minutes ago, F250 said:

The obsession with Communist Cuba seems weird with it being a 21st century issue. The way some people talk about it seems like they are still concerned about Domino theory being a thing as if the Soviets are waiting in the shadows to jump out and invade the U.S. As has already been mentioned in this thread, there are a lot of shitty countries in the world but the obsession with Cuba seems so out of place.

The cold war ended a long time ago and Russia, well you know.

 

 

I think it’s pretty simple in that interests in the US want to loot Cuba and will play up any card they can to get their way. 
 

I love that people act like Cuba is some dystopia when they have a longer life expectancy than we do. What does that say about our “regime”?

[InkaUtexas 25523]

Well to be fair we have whataburger and they have cubanos.  Oh wait....