Here's another article - quite good I thought - by the same guy (Pedro Campos Santos):

This is a pretty good reminder as well. It is in regard to some in the US and in the EU "who see everything through the prism of profit and markets":

quote:

---

But that's not what they ask. They want to impose upon us their interpretation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

---

Sound familiar? There's more:

quote:

---

They want us to turn to mercantilism, to more foreign investment, more "freedom" to exploit other people's work, more of the bourgeois "representative democracy" that is so unrelated to the interests of our people. They want a free hand for the counter-revolution. In sum, they want to create the conditions for the restoration of capitalism, something they euphemistically call "a transition to democracy."

Those "rights" will never be obtained in Cuba by those who attempt to restore capitalism by any means. Once and for all: our answer to a "democratic transition" to capitalism is NO. The type of transition our people desire was chosen in 1961, when they declared our Revolution to be socialist. History has taught us that true socialism must be participative, democratic, self-managed and inclusive.

---

Pretty clear to me. The Cuban people have chosen socialism. It's written into their constitution. Furthermore, it's the duty of their government to keep on that path. And they're not about to be hoodwinked by false friends or conquered by their enemies.

It gives you hope, doesn't it?

[ 19 August 2007: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]

The young artists I met worshiped Che and trusted Fidel. Raul, not so much. The Committees in Defense of the Revolution are starting to get ignored. There is definitely some kickback against some of the control structures. A lot of people just don't want to be so poor.

quote:

---

Readers who aren't in Cuba should really try to avoid the temptation to leap to conclusions about any one document, or position expressed, or to take sides in Cuban internal politics. This is a temptation easy to fall into, but it should be avoided. Unless you know the people, and really know the situation in Cuba, I strongly urge you not to do this. I've explained more than once that the more time I spend in Cuba, the more I know how little I know. Most readers of these messages spend little or nearly no time in Cuba. So when people ask me, is this one a Stalinist? What social layer does so and so represent, and so forth, I'm troubled by that and try to remind the person, as politely as I can, that such speculation is pointless and purposeless. That's why it's best to avoid the trap of trying to take sides and get involved in Cuban internal politics through doing that.

---

Here's that joint declaration on the SPP in English:

I removed this because it really didn't belong here. My apologies to everyone.

[ 19 August 2007: Message edited by: RosaL ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by N.Beltov:
[QB]
Pretty clear to me. The Cuban people have chosen socialism. It's written into their constitution. Furthermore, it's the duty of their government to keep on that path. And they're not about to be hoodwinked by false friends or conquered by their enemies.
[QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ken Burch:
BTW, when will CUBA CUBA CUBA CUBA(Season One) be out on Dvd?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug:

I wouldn't say so. Is their economy in the hands or workers or of bureaucrats in the various planning departments? State capitalism - no matter how well-run, is not socialism and shouldn't be mistaken for it.

---

David Suzuki said recently that Cuban farm cooperatives offer farmhands an overall better deal than Canada's agro marketing boards do with small farmers here. I can't recall exactly what he was referring to, but it sounded good anyway. It's true that Fidel has allowed market-oriented economy to happen in Cuba, but I think it's more state-socialism than state-capitalism. State-capitalism was what Lenin described in the 1920's, and that system collapsed around the western world in 1929. Market socialism has been around for a long time - at least since Polanyi told liberal economists that laissez-faire was planned and that planning was not.

Neo-Liberal capitalism, said to be invisible hand revisited, collapsed again in 1985 Chile under near laboratory conditions. Greg Palast, a Chicago School of Economics graduate himself described how the cure for what ailed Chile's economy was more New Deal socialism than Milton Friedman's recipe for leave it to the market capitalism.

And the dictator was never brought to justice.
Bachelet is surrounded by Pinochet's people today. They don't have socialism or real capitalism as Friedman prescribed.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug:
There are countries in the region that manage to do better than Cuba in this respect, such as Costa Rica and Barbados, if you go by the UN Human Development Report, for example. Both are also functional democracies. There's no excuse not to have both democracy and development.

---

Costa Rica was somewhat socialist for many years. CR's health system and infant mortality have improved in stride with Cuban rates. Cuba has done a remarkable job contributing to vaccination programs and basic health care around the Caribbean and South America. And Cuban doctors and scientists have had a hand in Costa Rica's health care strategy over the years as well. But let's not forget that CR was used as a base by the contra mercenaries for launching raids into Nicaragua during the years of dirty war.

And I'm not sure why Barbados rates as high as they do. The population is well under half a million, and infant mortality there is wanting for all the foreign money that's stashed there from taxation in countries of origin. Cubans live more than two years longer on average.Barbados receives U.S. aid. As an island dependent on tourism, money laundering and U.S. aid, it doesn't read like a model economy for Latin America as far as I can tell.

[ 19 August 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]

quote:

---

They want to impose upon us their interpretation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

---

Oh! So there is a CUBAN intetrpretation of the of the UNIVERSAL Declaration of HUMAN Rights?

How handy!!

Do they publish their "version" or is it just what the Communist Party has decided to do on any given day?

Reproducing the lame apologies of dictators is a task for right wing toadies, too bad babble keeps closing its eyes to this crap.

[ 19 August 2007: Message edited by: jeff house ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by jeff house:

Oh! So there is a CUBAN intetrpretation of the of the UNIVERSAL Declaration of HUMAN Rights?

How handy!!

Do they publish their "version" or is it just what the Communist Party has decided to do on any given day?

Reproducing the lame apologies of dictators is a task for right wing toadies, too bad babble keeps closing its eyes to this crap.

[ 19 August 2007: Message edited by: jeff house ]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RosaL:

I think the implication is that there's an American interpretation.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jeff house:
Reproducing the lame apologies of dictators is a task for right wing toadies...

---

Jimmy Carter would be glad to observe, as would the EU, Amnesty, you name it

quote:

---

The Cubans have chosen socialism.

---

That is absurd. They never had an election. They never had a referendum on one-party rule and president for life.

quote:

---

Stockholm: They never had an election. They never had a referendum on one-party rule and president for life.

---

Repeating a lie doesn't make it any more true, Stockholm. As has been pointed out on this thread, and on many other threads, more times than you've had hot breakfasts, there is No political party that has any authority to pass laws or carry out any legislative initiatives whatsoever in Cuba. You choose to ignore this fact.

No party is allowed to put forward candidates. No party can spend all sorts of money to brainwash the Cuban population. Instead, locally based democracy dispenses with this pathetic fraud about which you are so enamored. Candidates are allowed a single page biography to promote themselves.

quote:

---

Originally posted by N.Beltov:
Kirk to Enterprise. Beam me aboard. There's no intelligent life down here.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Geneva:

but no one is convinced by one-party rubber stamp elections

---

You'll have to pardon the Cubans if they carry on doing their business their own way without your benevolent advice from afar.

You see, they figured out long ago that nothing will convince their enemies except capitulation and return to the U.S. fold. You will have noticed, for example, the warm acceptance by the U.S. of the freely elected government of Venezuela. I believe the U.S. was also extremely convinced by the election of Ahmedinejad as President of Iran.

quote:

---

unionist: Of course, when they don't like the outcome, they question the election. Unless the victor was George W. Bush.

---

Or Felipe Calderón. Or ... (fill in the blank)

[ 20 August 2007: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]

quote:

---

s has been pointed out on this thread, and on many other threads, more times than you've had hot breakfasts, there is No political party that has any authority to pass laws or carry out any legislative initiatives whatsoever in Cuba. You choose to ignore this fact.

---

quote:

---

If hypothetically 99% of Cubans hated Castro and wanted him out of power, there would be no possible way for them to demonstrate this.

---

Ya, of course, if the number was indeed this astronomical, then there would be non-stop riots,Romania style, and the army would stage a coup.
But of course, no such crazy things are happening, and Cubans still have relatively decent support for Castro.
So no need to spew out philosophical fallacies about how liberal democracy is a perfect panacea for Cuba, Stock.
At any rate its fairly obvious that ordinary Cubans have a much stronger approval for the socialist government than Americans do for their own MR. 27%Shrubbery and his Rethuglicans.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:
Your just in denial and can't admit that massive flaws in the Cuban political system. Your postings about the good things that have come as a result of Castro would have a lot more credibility, if you were also willing to ever acknowledge the bad.

---

It's just that the Cubans and myself are terribly underwhelmed by the lack of net results in U.S. managed colonies in and around Central America and the Caribbean. About a dozen or so families and multinationals in Central and South America still lay claim to vast tracts of the most fertile farmlands granted them under Spanish colonial law and by previous corrupt regimes friendly to U.S. interests. People's Democracy, real democracy, is way behind in Latin America, even in countries like Chile where the left has a weak claim to power and where fascists are still working hand in hand with status quo.

Cubans, meanwhile, lay claim to the highest rates of home ownership in this hemisphere - world class rates for literacy and mortality. Our plutocrats and right-wing establishment are terrified that people's democracy in Cuba will spread to surrounding countries. Our plutocrats are just as afraid of an idea today as they were since the outbreak of cold war. And this is the why behind the hundreds of cowardly terrorist attacks on Cuba and over 600 attempts to assassinate Fidel over the years. Would you trust a fascist regime that has made so many attempts to undermine the Cuban people's hard-fought for choice made in 1959 ?. Ignoring these facts about Cuba's recent history is dishonest and cannot be part of any serious discussion about Cuba or any other developing country in the region.

And they don't want a return to the bad old days when a U.S.-backed mafia regime and their secret police ran Cuba into the ground. Stockholmer, it's Cuba's past history and U.S. relations which have given multi-party democracy a bad name in Cuba not good experiences. Go ask them yourself.

[ 20 August 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]

quote:

---

Cubans, meanwhile, lay claim to the highest rates of home ownership in this hemisphere - world class rates for literacy and mortality - and they don't want a return to the bad old days when a U.S.-backed mafia regime

---

If that's the case, why are you so scared of letting them show their support for Castro in an election? Wouldn't it be great to show the world that Cubans actually support him. it could be a great propaganda coup!

[ 20 August 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]

The UNIVERSAL Declaration of Human Rights says:

13. (2) (2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.

Now, someone is quoted who uses the standard ploy of dictatorships everywhere: "We have our own interpretation of the Declaration." No specifics are mentioned as to how this "interpretation" justifies Cuban practices; they just claim not to be covered.

Then, the local apologists for Cuba say:

quote:

---

I think the implication is that there's an American interpretation.

---

So, if anyone quotes the actual words of the Declaration, or relies upon their plain meaning, that's an "American interpretation"?

Wow, that's handy. An international enactment apparently has no intrinsic meaning; it is just up to states to "interpret" it.

I guess that makes it easier to remain wilfully blind to ALL violations of human rights, doesn't it ? (except those of Cuba's enemies of course!)

Why, oh why, would any honest person give any credence to such a flimsy contention? They don't even ask to see the supposed "interpretation" before concluding that it has full validity.

This is yet another instance of simply deferring to the assertions of Cuban Communism: if they say so, then the useful fools will fall in line.

And why can't American citizens travel to Cuba without fear of fines and other shadow government disincentives against travelling to the socialist island of Cuba ?. Why is the shadow government so afraid of a tiny socialist island 55 miles from Haiti, the "freest trading nation in the Caribbean" with their democratically-elected leader abducted by the CIA and now living in Africa ?.

What has Ottawa said to their imperial masters in Warshington about the dirty tricks they've pulled in Haiti over 20 some-odd times from the last century through to this decade ?. Where does that fit in with the human rights declaration ?.

Are you at all aware of the U.S.-sponsored coups that have taken place just 55 miles from Cuban shores and in Venezuela in recent years ?. Are you aware of the USA's tainting of democracy from El Salvador to Iraq and Afghanistan in recent times ?. You say this has nothing to do with Cuba, and I say you're wrong.

Because I know full well that if the USSR was still around, people like you would drone on endlessly about how Moscow was influencing surrounding nation's elections and tainting democracy.

[ 20 August 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]

However, let me try to do so anyway. Many of the things you mention are unjustified, indeed, despicable. The Cuban Five should get visits while their cases proceed through the courts. US citizens should be allowed to visit Cuba. The government of Haiti was wrongly overthrown.

None of this is on topic here, though. We are discussing whether Cuba should follow the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It should.

quote:

---

How will Fidel Castro's Drones do any better? I'm not saying that they don't deserve freedom from the collective. Far from it. I'm just saying that after so many years of being denied their individuality, how hard it will be to build a civil society without the Borg Queen.

---

This metaphor insults the intelligence of the Cuban people, and is also ahistorical.

One of the accomplishments of the Castro regime is high levels of literacy and education. Like the former East Bloc countries, this should equip Cubans to embrace political pluralism and civil liberties when these are allowed to take root.

Like Poles and Hungarians - and unlike the former Yugoslavia - Cubans have a strong sense of a single national identity. This should help ensure a largely peaceful transition.

In other words, I (and perhaps others, though I won't presume to speak for anyone else) react to these "multi-party, free election" arguments because of the notion of democracy to which they implicitly appeal.

The disasgreement, I think, is not about elections but about the nature of democracy.

[ 20 August 2007: Message edited by: RosaL ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by John K:
A final prediction based on recent history. The emergence of a democratic Cuba will be led by people who currently reside on the island, not by Cuban emigres. It could even be led by someone within the existing Cuban leadership who wants to be remembered as a 'Mikhail Gorbachev' and not a 'Yuri Andropov.'

---

But Mikhail Gorbachev said last year that the Soviet Union 'should have been preserved' It was Boris Yeltsin and his aspiring state-capitalists who dismantled the very Soviet institutions which could have been used to foster democracy in Russia and former Republics.

There are those who are recommending that the exact same Soviet experience with democracy be foisted upon Cuba, and this is what's lacking in the discussion about how to approach democratic reforms around the world. As an example, grassroots and civil society groups in Canada are attempting to update our own democracy here. Even the few dissident Cubans say they need successful examples in and around Latin America to follow. And good examples are few and far between.

[ 20 August 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]

Amen, brother!

[ 20 August 2007: Message edited by: RosaL ]

[bloody hell, I misspelled "loquitur"]

[ 20 August 2007: Message edited by: RosaL ]

quote:

---

But Mikhail Gorbachev said last year that the Soviet Union 'should have been preserved'

---

I was referring to Gorbachev's policy of glasnost (openness), NOT to the subsequent break-up of the Soviet Union.

And so as not to prolong this particular red herring, let me be clear.

quote:

---

Originally posted by John K:

I was referring to Gorbachev's policy of glasnost (openness), NOT to the subsequent break-up of the Soviet Union.

.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by John K:

And so as not to prolong this particular red herring, let me be clear.

Nowhere in Gorbachev's remarks does he suggest or even imply that non-democratic means should have been used to preserve the Soviet Union.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RosaL:

May God preserve Cuba from a Mikhail Gorbachev. I'm referring to his destruction of the socialism that existed in the Soviet Union (and there was some, though I have no illusions about it's flaws) in favour of capitalism.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stephen Gordon:

Hee. I suspect that you harbour quite a few illusions about Soviet-style communism.

---

I'm sure you do but, short of a massively long post, I don't know how I could prove otherwise.

[fixed screwed up italics, I hope]

[ 20 August 2007: Message edited by: RosaL ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stephen Gordon:

Hee. I suspect that you harbour quite a few illusions about Soviet-style communism.

---

Is that why Angus-Reid reported that a majority of Russians surveyed in 1998 wanted to return to Soviet communism? This was after several years of Harvard Inst for Intl Development economic reforms, corrupted privatization decrees, IMF emergency loans, price deregulation while wages for millions of workers went unpaid, and widespread poverty and millions of premature deaths that resulted from perestroika and western interference with democratic reforms ie. Boris Yeltsin and the revolution from above.

Gorbachev thought they would be getting a version of Swedish style socialism. And boyo, was he lead up the garden path.

[ 20 August 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by N.Beltov:
WEll, for myself, I get impatient, not to say bored, discussing the issue with people whose views are indistinguishable from the views of the US government. At least the latter has the honesty to admit that their goal is the overthrow of socialism

---

That's the whole thing though. What goes on in Cuba is not socialism, no more that what goes on in North Korea is. It just happens to be that the unelected (in free, fair and open elections) Cuban elite are rather nicer and more capable than their North Korean cousins are. They're still every bit as illegitimate.

quote:

---

The Cubans have their own democratic forms

---

Nonsense. How can there be democracy when political opposition is illegal and where there is no media independent of government?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug:

Nonsense. How can there be democracy when political opposition is illegal and where there is no media independent of government?

http://thereport.amnesty.org/eng/Regions/Americas/Cuba

---

You are complaining that there are no parties to represent the interests of capital and no corporate-controlled media outlets.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stephen Gordon:
Truly amazing.

---

At least, that's what I've heard. And it would seem that the Cuban govt is at the forefront of the battle for freedom of expression on this new frontier. Sadly, they're on the wrong side:

quote:

---

Amnesty International today expressed concern at the impact on freedom of expression and information of Cuba's new law restricting internet access.

"The new measures, which limit and impede unofficial internet use, constitute yet another attempt to cut off Cubans' access to alternative views and a space for discussing them," said Amnesty International as a new law came into force on Saturday. "This step, coming on top of last year's prosecution of 75 activists for peacefully expressing their views, gives the authorities another mechanism for repressing dissent and punishing critics."

The new law, which came into effect on 10 January, limits internet access to those, such as officially recognised businesses and government offices, with special telephone accounts payable in US dollars. This prevents ordinary Cuban people from accessing the service.

"Amnesty International fears that the new measures are intended to prevent human rights monitoring by restricting the flow of information out of Cuba," the organisation said.

"The Cuban authorities must do away with illegitimate curbs on freedom of expression and information, and must bring their legislation into line with international human rights standards once and for all," Amnesty International concluded.

---

quote:

---

Hee. I suspect that you harbour quite a few illusions about Soviet-style communism.

---

quote:

---

You may feel that you vote freely, but ask yourself why you don’t feel free to vote for a minor party candidate. Ask yourself why you don’t want to “waste” your vote, yet instead reward with it the very parties responsible for this state of futility.

The army teaches a valuable survival lesson. When you are captured, the best time to escape is as soon as you can, because it gets harder as you go on. This presupposes something so obvious that it can be overlooked. That you know you are captive!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stephen Gordon:
Ever heard of that new-fangled thingy called the 'internet'? I hear that you can express yourself to many, many people, without paying much at all.

---

The internet helps a bit. Not much. The same voices still have all the money and the power and they still dominate. But it's a small improvement.

I have some sympathy with Cuba if they are trying to keep out a massive wave of propaganda they can't possibly compete with. I don't know the facts of the case, so I don't feel competent to judge. But it's possible they are doing the wrong thing. I don't agree with everything done in Cuba.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stephen Gordon:
That's not really your decision to make, is it?

---

quote:

---

Hey, this thread is about Cuba. Focus, FM, focus.

---

In fact, it can be argued, and has, that Cuba is more democratic than Canada or the US.

So really it is a discussion about democracy. What it is and what it is not. To suggest a discussion about Cuba is not a discussion about democracy, and ultimately a people's right to self-determination, is to apply western standards of debate. That is to say, spin away from the substance and focus on the trivial.

Because, how can there be any discussion at all about democracy in Cuba without a discussion of the Cuban people's right to self-determination? And how can anyone seriously discuss the Cuban people's right to self-determination without discussing Cuba's history and the realities of empire and small countries?

To control Cuba, the US forced Cuba to accept a constitution that would allow the US to intervene militarily whenever it wanted.

And then, guess what?

quote:

---

Canadian jurisdiction over its Northern territories was redefined, following an April 2002 military agreement between Ottawa and Washington. This agreement allows for the deployment of US troops anywhere in Canada, as well as the stationing of US warships in Canada's territorial waters.

---

[ 20 August 2007: Message edited by: Frustrated Mess ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Frustrated Mess:

So really it is a discussion about democracy. What it is and what it is not. To suggest a discussion about Cuba is not a discussion about democracy, and ultimately a people's right to self-determination, is to apply western standards of debate. That is to say, spin away from the substance and focus on the trivial.
[ 20 August 2007: Message edited by: Frustrated Mess ]

---

We're not allowed to question is the way the great western capitalist powers define democracy. It is not, as the man says, ours to decide.

[ 20 August 2007: Message edited by: RosaL ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by RosaL:

You are complaining that there are no parties to represent the interests of capital and no corporate-controlled media outlets.

There are other conceptions of democracy.

---

quote:

---

Democratic government is for everyone.

---

To say "democratic government is for everyone" is to ignore the disproportionate weight of corporations, is it not? What is the readership of your blog, assuming you have one, to, say, the combined reach of CanWest media? Pathetically tiny is it not?

How many ministers of government are stored in your cell phone compared to say, well, D'Aquino?

And why should corporations have a role to play in government? Are there any corporations risking being blown to bits by IEDs in Afghanistan? How many corporations sacrificed their lives in WWII?

[ 20 August 2007: Message edited by: Frustrated Mess ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug:

I said independent, not corporate - these could be cooperative forms of media. And I don't see why capitalists (in the ideological sense) don't deserve representation. Democratic government is for everyone.

---

I'd be all in favour of cooperative media. But you said Cuba wasn't a democracy because it didn't have an independent media. If by that you mean a cooperative media, I don't see this as a critique that applies in any special way to Cuba (or a critique likely to be made by Amnesty, which you cited).

Should everyone be represented in a democracy? I'm not sure. What about fascists? What about people who want to bring back the slave trade? Advocates of child abuse? Racists? It's a question in my mind, that's all I'm saying.

quote:

---

Granma: Arrested in September 1998, the five Cubans have spent nearly nine years in prison after a politically charged trial in Miami that broke most established legal norms. Without presenting evidence, the prosecution obtained a guilty verdict on a number of trumped up charges and harsh sentences were dished out against the men who had penetrated Miami-based terrorist groups to inform on their plots against Cuba.

---

The five victims of American "justice", Gerardo Hernandez, Fernando Gonzalez, Ramon Labañino, Antonio Guerrero and Rene Gonzalez, will have the company of a group of distinguished legal experts from around the world who will attend this travesty of justice. They include: Former US Attorney General Ramsey Clark, US congresswoman Cynthia McKinney and Vanessa Ramos, president of the American Association of Jurists.

quote:

---

Judges, attorneys and personalities from around the world met over the weekend in Atlanta to get an update on the case from defense attorney Leonard Weinglass. Among the group were Chilean judge Andres Guzman; Paolo Lins e Silva, president of the International Lawyers Association; Norman Paech, member of the German parliament; Uriel Gomez Ceballo, a judge from Colombia; Raymundo Cesar Britto, president of the Brazilian Bar Association; and Heidi Boghosian, former executive director of the National Lawyers Guild of the United States.

---

In other news, terrorist Osvaldo Mitat was freed by the US government to join his pal, Luis Posada Carriles. Carriles was responsible for the slaughter of 73 people in a bombing of a Cuban airliner, including the entire Cuban National Fencing Team that had just won all the gold medals in the Central American and Caribbean Championship; many of whom were teenagers. In disdain even of their own alleged "War on Terror" the US government freed this butcher in May of this year.

[ 20 August 2007: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]

We have seen loudly and clearly what happens to countrys which hold free and fair elections, yet the people have the goddamned audacity to elect, to paraphrase LBJ, their sonofabitch.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug:

I said independent, not corporate - these could be cooperative forms of media. And I don't see why capitalists (in the ideological sense) don't deserve representation. Democratic government is for everyone.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug:
It just happens to be that the unelected (in free, fair and open elections) Cuban elite are rather nicer and more capable than their North Korean cousins are. They're still every bit as illegitimate

---

So if we're more democratic than North Korea or Cuba, then why can't more than 70 percent of Haiti's electorate vote for Jean Bertrand Arisitide ?. How do explain Ottawa aiding and abetting the overthrow of a democratically-elected leader on that island nation just 55 miles from Cuba in this decade ?.

Why do our stoogeocrats pawn off our valuable natural wealth and fossil fuels to a country that attempted a CIA coup against Venezuela's democratically-elected leader, again, in this decade ?.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:
The only issue here is should Cuba have free elections. Nothing that happens in other countries is of any relevance to this issue.

---

You're unofficially encouraged to check out the grinding poverty in Guatemala, Haiti, El Salvador, Iraq, or Afghanistan. All of those shitholes have enjoyed unfair and unfree elections tainted by U.S. political interference. I triple dare you to visit any one of the countries on this shortlist of U.S. managed democracies, and make a few mental notes of the important differences between those Uncle Sam friendlies and Cuba.

quote:

---

All of those shitholes have enjoyed unfair and unfree elections tainted by U.S. political interference.

---

Stockholm would probably like something resembling a Costa Rica:
decent government, neutralist foreign policy, widespread respect for humna rights and, yes, multi-party elections

And CR wasn't at all neutral in the 1980's when contra mercenaries used that country to launch raids into Nicaragua during the years of dirty war. Many Nicaraguan children ended up with arms and legs shot off by bullets supplied by the gringos.

[ 21 August 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]

quote:

---

The only issue here is should Cuba have free elections. Nothing that happens in other countries is of any relevance to this issue.

---

[ 21 August 2007: Message edited by: Frustrated Mess ]

quote:

---

Caissa: The debate seems to revolve around the questions of what freedoms are people willing to give up for a relatively decent standard of living.

---

Not really. It's more a question of whether you share the desire of the US government to overthrow the Cuban system by any means necessary or not. Evidence of democratic institutions is irrelevant. It's also irrelevant if the US supports terrorism against that country, or tries to kill the head of state, or poisons the water supply, or creates horrific chaos by creating the conditions where Cubans would "flee" their island, or tries to kidnap and/or bribe the athletes of that country, etc.

quote:

---

Originally posted by RosaL:
The disasgreement, I think, is not about elections but about the nature of democracy.

---

I very much agree. Democracy means rule by the people. How that rule should be achieved, implemented and maintained, is a difficult debate. It is curious to read the complacent remarks about Cuba by some Canadians who believe (incredibly) that we have actually achieved that rule here.

For example, what is the inherent connection between democracy (surely a collective notion if ever there were one) and individual rights? Calling them "democratic rights" merely begs the question. I believe that real democracy isn't achievable or desirable without individual rights, but the link must be explored and the rights clearly identified.

Some people would say that democracy is impossible without enshrining an individual's property rights. If they are right, Canada is no democracy. I'm not familiar enough with Cuba to say what their constitution sets out on this score.

As a second example, some would say that democracy is a farce in the absence of some form of proportional representation, in that the rise of new oppositional trends is structurally suppressed, thus favouring the dictatorial rule of the "old-line" parties. If this is true, Canada is no democracy, never has been.

Then, someone might point out that in Canada, when a majority government is elected (under the current anti-oppositional system), one or two individuals can dictate every single governmental decision for the next five years. What kind of democracy is that?

In short, I would be more interested in discovering how Cuba's system of government actually works than in tossing cynical stones at it. It may turn out that our own house is made of glass.

[ 21 August 2007: Message edited by: unionist ]

When a Liberal politician tries to live up to a promise, the event makes front page headlines. (Sheila Copps resigned her seat upon a broken Liberal promise. The promise is still broken but Copps did resign her seat and run again.)

Huge numbers of Canadians, fed up with the farce, no longer even vote. This latter practice has the ominous detail that the numbers seem to be increasing over time. Politicians blather about this like it is the fault of the voters who hold them in contempt.

Door to door enumeration is no longer done in this country. It's too expensive, or something. But there is money, billions of dollars in fact, for military spending on wars that the Canadian people do not support. The current minority government is, through the SPP, modifying many aspects of Canadian economic and political life without proper public consultation under orders from the corporate hoi polloi of North America.

This gigantic farce is preached as the compulsory form of democracy, without which, say its supporters, Cuba deserves to be terrorized, bombed, subject to embargo, etc., etc..

If it's so good for Cuba, why not have that system in canada.

I suggest we all get our winter clothes ready - the weather at that forced labour camp in Nunavut that we'd ALL be sent to is likely to be very chilly.

And that's a step forward from the breast-fed regurgitations of the US State Department that this thread, and most of the threads about Cuba here on babble, are littered with, thanks to yourself and other friends of "democracy".

[ 21 August 2007: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:
Maybe "Fidel" would be spared the prison term out of diplomatic immunity since I'm beiginning to think that he/she is a salaried employee of the Cuban embassy as a propaganda officer.

---

"I'm beginning to think" is surely an exaggeration.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:
So, the logical conclusion is that you oppose having elections in canada and believe that Canada should be a one party socialist state with prison terms for anyone who questions government policy and a jamming of independent debate on the internet etc...

If it's so good for Cuba, why not have that system in canada.

I suggest we all get our winter clothes ready - the weather at that forced labour camp in Nunavut that we'd ALL be sent to is likely to be very chilly.

Maybe "Fidel" would be spared the prison term out of diplomatic immunity since I'm beiginning to think that he/she is a salaried employee of the Cuban embassy as a propaganda officer.

---

Yesterday, the five (Gerardo Hernández, Fernando González, Ramón Labaniño, Antonio Guerrero and René González) had a day in Appeal Court and this time all sorts of international witnesses were present.

quote:

---

Juan Guzmán, the Chilean attorney who brought charges against the ex-dictator Augusto Pinochet, was present and informed the Roundtable program (again by phone) that the U.S. government was unable to refute the defense ...

The defense lawyers submitted that the prosecution committed serious procedural errors and used intimidation to pressure the jury of the initial trial, which took place in Miami in a climate of apparent hostility toward the five heroes.

---

From the lineage of Titans

quote:

---

Antonio Guerrero Rodríguez: Also arriving here, day after day, are numerous letters of encouragement and support from our beloved country and all corners of the earth. Reading what they write, children, university students, workers, Committee for the Defense of the Revolution members, people in general, as well as friends of Cuba around the world, we feel with all our hearts, the absolute certainty of your affirmation to the empire, “I assure you, you will never have Cuba.”

---

"You will never have Cuba". Outstanding!

[ 21 August 2007: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]

quote:

---

The tactic is clear: Israel and the United States will strangle Gaza by cutting off all money and goods, including fuel and most food, to reduce one of the most densely populated places on the planet to an impoverished ghetto. Hunger and anarchy, they hope, will motivate Gazans to turn on Hamas, and the anarchy will perhaps be used to justify a reoccupation by the Israeli military and see the return of the quisling President Mahmoud Abbas, who was ousted after he led an abortive coup to overthrow the democratically elected Hamas government. He is now in the West Bank.

---

Free and fair elections. The message is clear: either choose a pro-American quisling who will follow our orders, or we'll destroy you until you come around. It's the democracy of a slave plantation.

Some remarks about the "culture war" on Cuba are worth repeating here ...

quote:

---

Access to new technologies has been an essential factor in this whole process. Nowadays the electronic use of blogs is one instrument in this cultural war. There is an infinity of anti-Cuba blogs which apparently seem to be inoffensive, are frequently updated and give a cosmopolitan image because they have collaborators in various countries.

Among many others, it is no coincidence that a Cuban one has just appeared called Muñequitos rusos (Russian Dolls), a kind of review of the Soviet stage in Cuba.

Moreover, they are attacking via the issue of race, trying to promote Cubans of “African descent” on the island. This is a fierce battle at the moment and is being funded by money from the Bush Plan against Cuba (Plan for Assistance to a Free Cuba). The objective being pursued is none other than to try and divide Cubans. They are trying to disunite the people of Cuba, divide what history united on account of a political agenda. It would be very dangerous if Cubans were to confront each other on the basis of skin color. Wars based on culture are the most terrible ones.

---

... and then ...

quote:

---

... there is a species of constant monitoring of our defects, problems, errors and contradictions, and there are campaigns and even a kind of order of attack, where people who know how to read and analyze information realize when they have received an order, although one might live in Madrid and another in Australia or Miami.

---

This is what they face.

quote:

---

Originally posted by N.Beltov:

Not really. It's more a question of whether you share the desire of the US government to overthrow the Cuban system by any means necessary or not.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:

How do explain Ottawa aiding and abetting the overthrow of a democratically-elected leader on that island nation just 55 miles from Cuba in this decade ?.

---

Western imperialism has always been about ordering people elsewhere to do as we say, not as we do, so there's nothing new there. If Cuba adopted Chinese-style economic policy tomorrow, the Americans would probably stop talking about the d-word within a week.

quote:

---

Awwwww admit it now, you only mouth the words "free and fair elections" and democracy. But you don't really believe in democracy any more than our stoogeocratic colonial administrators do in Ottawa or Warshington.

---

On the contrary, it's precisely because I believe in it that I think Cubans should have it. We Canadians should have more of it than we do now.

[ 21 August 2007: Message edited by: Doug ]

What's false is the idea (a) that anything from the US government should be viewed with anything other than suspicion; (b)that Cuba would benefit from outsiders lecturing them on democracy when they have their own democratic forms of decision-making; (c) that they should "lighten up" and stop being so serious about their choices, their socialism, and their country.

quote:

---

Got anything to add about the Cuban Five political prisoners in the US? ...There's a curious silence about this. I can't imagine why ...

---

Give me a break. We've had Cuban Five threads in the past. My position is that the Cuban Five should be immediately released, expelled from the US, and returned to Cuba.

I also strongly oppose the American trade, investment and travel embargoes against Cuba, and have said so on numerous occasions.

quote:

---

Originally posted by N.Beltov:
Got anything to add about the Cuban Five political prisoners in the US? How about Stockholm? Jeff? There's a curious silence about this. I can't imagine why ...

---

I believe they'll suggest, and it's more of a knee-jerk retort, is that concerns like these can all be ironed out after U.S. managed elections take place in Cuba. And that there is no need to delay exposing Cuba to U.S. political interference, because CIA fomented coups in Haiti and Venezuela in this decade were merely aberrations of democracy in the region, and that Cubans should have nothing to fear of the world's only nuclear-powered rogue-menace to democracy.