quote:

---

Originally posted by stokholm:
allowing people to open small businesses such as corner stores and snack bars..

---

quote:

---

At last count there were 240 joint ventures in Cuba, involving fifty-seven countries in forty areas of the economy. The foreign investment projects announced to date total some $5 billion.

---

There is also small business among Cubans. All of this can be verified by anyone who bothers to check such things. Even the CIA "factbook" acknowledges such things. The usual pathological haters of socialism can't be bothered to do so. Yawn.

Cuba's Entrepreneurial Socialism.

[ 12 September 2007: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by rasmus:
Talk amongst yourselves.

---

quote:

---

Michelle: I'm all verklempt!

---

Well, at least your weltanschauung isn't premised on anti-Cuban schauenfreude. I'm sure you'll feel better soon enough.

[ 12 September 2007: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:
The only problem is that finding out about where these restaurants are is like trying to buy heroin, its all whispered word-of-mouth because if the secret police discover that someone is running a business serving homecooked meals - they get sent to a forced labour camp.

---

I've never heard anyone complain of forced labour camps in Cuba. Like I said before, are you sure you were in Cuba and not Mexico or Honduras ?.

If a clear majority of Cuban vote YES in a fre and fair vote to a constitution that demands one-party socialist rule in perpetuity - I will have nothing more to say about Cuba.

Notice the dichotomy. I want the Cuban people to be allowed to CHOOSE their system of government. YOU want your favourite system to be shoved down their throats in perpetuity whether they like it or not - because you apparently know what's best for them.

[ 12 September 2007: Message edited by: Stockholm ]

quote:

---

The constitution has been established completely democratically.

---

Give me the date and results of the referendum or election that democratically established the Cuban constitution.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:
I'm not a Cuban citizen and i have no "say so". But i believe that a constitution needs to have some sort of a popular mandate. Let the Cubans vote on whether or not they accept the constitution.

---

The U.S. was the first country to recognize Batista's dictatorship and head of the CIA encouraged him to create an oppressive secret police. Cuba was a repressive fascist dictatorship for the next 20 years, and there was zero tolerance for political opposition by the very oppressive U.S.-backed mafia regime. Washington's stooge cracked down on freedom of the press and suspended the constitution.

There were three elections in Cuba leading up to 2003, and they were all open to observation by foreign and domestic journalists. These three national elections were basically national referendums for the revolution. More than 90 per cent of the Cuban electorate, casting ballots by secret votes in each of the three elections, voted for all 601 Cuban national candidates. This happened as CIA-funded propaganda stations in Miami broadcasted illegally into Cuba begging Cubans to spoil their ballots and stay away from the elections each time. Prominent dissidents, including Osvaldo Paya, have admitted that Cuba's Revolution and Fidel have the overwhelming support of the Cuban people.

When the government wanted to pass the Charlottetown Accord, there was a national referendum and it lost - so those amendments didn't happen.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:
I have been to Cuba. If you want to have a decent meal and not eat the institutional glurp that passes for food at government run canteens, you have to eat at these charming little restaurants that people run in the living rooms of their homes. The only problem is that finding out about where these restaurants are is like trying to buy heroin, its all whispered word-of-mouth because if the secret police discover that someone is running a business serving homecooked meals - they get sent to a forced labour camp.

---

Parrot-like regurgitations of "freely elected", like a mantra proves nothing. The Cubans have their own intermediate level of government between municipalities and the federal level.

quote:

---

Originally posted by N.Beltov:

Cuba's Entrepreneurial Socialism.

---

From that link:

quote:

---

It's also an economy that is recovering from the crisis triggered by the disintegration of the Soviet Union and the collapse of the socialist bloc. From 1989 to 1993 Cuba's gross domestic product declined, according to official estimates, by 35 percent. Imports dropped 75 percent, and the deficit reached 33 percent of GDP. Oil imports from Russia fell from 13 million tons in 1989 to less than 7 million tons in 1992. Cuba not only had to replace the oil and support it had received from the Soviet Union but also had to establish an entirely new set of trading partners, because 85 percent of its trade had been with the socialist bloc.

---

quote:

---

The Cuban government responded to the crisis in part by developing trade and investment and in part by introducing elements of a mixed economy... The Cuban government also legalized the small business enterprises and farmers' markets. Food prices at these markets vary -- some are affordable for everyone, some too expensive for anyone not running a private business in dollars. But the presence of the markets meant that the food shortages were over -- and, perhaps as important, that the sense of shortage was over...

THE economic changes in Cuba go to the very structure of the Cuban economy... In 1992 the Cuban constitution was modified to recognize a variety of new forms of property. New kinds of foreign investment, Cuban corporations, and joint ventures were legalized. Foreign corporations were given the right to repatriate profits freely. The law was modified again in September of 1995, to permit foreign investment with up to 100 percent foreign ownership. Foreign investors are guaranteed full protection of their assets and the right to remove profits in hard currency.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:
There is no system in Cuba because you can't legally set up a business of any kind. They don't want restaurants to exist, they just want there to be mess halls laddling up rice and beans and overcooked tough inedible pork

---

Canadian David Suzuki was in Cuba last year, and he said there is small business and free enterprise and farm cooperatives all over the island. He was tripping over Canadians doing business in Cuba.

When I was in Cuba, there was food everywhere. I ate fresh fish all the time and washed it down with Havana Club, beer and goats milk, and sometimes all three for good measure. I think you're so full of it your eyes are brown, Stockholmer.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stephen Gordon:

Yet another case of liberalisation as a response to an economic crisis. D'ya think Naomi Klein knows about this?

---

Yes, and while the average rate of growth for Latin America between 1970 and 1989 was three percent, Cuba's averaged 5 and 6 percent. And they didn't even have to hand natural resources over to wealthy foreigners, or privatize health care, or privatize public education as Naomi Klein mentions about shock treatment for post-Katrina New Orleans.

quote:

---

When I was in Cuba, there was food everywhere. I ate fresh fish all the time and washed it down with Havana Club, beer and goats milk, and sometimes all three for good measure.

---

When were you IN Cuba? The conditions you've described sound like those that obtained during the "Special Period" of the early '90s, when Cuba was having to scramble desperately to make up for the loss of Soviet support. That was a time of extreme austerity.

To me, it makes quite a statement that there was no major popular uprising against the Cuban government during this period.

Don't get me wrong, there's a lot of Fidel Castro's choices I would not have made, but it seems to me that if his regime really did have the low level of support you appear to assume it has, there would have been a mass revolt.

Remember, the conditions the 26th of July Movement operated under were at least as repressive as the conditions anti-Castristas operate under today. Plus the 26th of July Movement didn't have the U.S. backing it up(it also didn't have the USSR backing it, as the Soviets were supporting of the Popular Socialist Party(the OLD Cuban CP, for those who didn't know)and its policy of backing Batista.

[ 12 September 2007: Message edited by: Ken Burch ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by N.Beltov:
Cuba has plenty of capitalism in their country, large and small. But it doesn't dominate their society. And, they likely want to keep things that way. Atlantic Monthly pointed out in 1997, ten years ago, that:

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:

Of course you can have all those things as long as you have US dollars and can go to the eateries where tourists and the Communist Party brass eat. The other 90% of the population suffers from malnutrition.

---

You must be thinking of El Salvador, Chiapas or Guatemala where children come out of the woodwork with a haunted look in their eyes to beg you for your threadbare Nike knock-offs and spare change.

Meanwhile, Cubans are guaranteed a minimum number of calories and food staples subsidized by the government. This is on top of what they can grow themselves with backyard gardening or buy with wages earned through true free enterprise and farm cooperatives and so on. David Suzuki said Cuban farm cooperative labourers receive a better deal than the equivalent setup in Canada.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:

Prominent dissidents, including Osvaldo Paya, have admitted that Cuba's Revolution and Fidel have the overwhelming support of the Cuban people.

Viva la Revolucion!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:
There is no system in Cuba because you can't legally set up a business of any kind. They don't want restaurants to exist, they just want there to be mess halls laddling up rice and beans and overcooked tough inedible pork

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug:

In which case, there should be nothing to fear from dissidents. So why are they subject to repression and prevented from organizing politically?

---

Read an American dissident's take on the Cason affair. As a former CIA specialist on Latin America, Agee recognized exactly what the Yanks were trying to pull in Havana. The U.S. "diplomat" to Cuba, James Cason, basically screwed the Cuban dissidents on purpose. And it's because the CIA understands full well that there is no momentum for "regime change" or counterrevolution in Cuba since the failed Bay of Pigs invasiona and several dozen terrorist attacks on the people and island's infrastructure since then. In the end, the CIA got what they wanted out of the dissidents and Cuban "journalists", which was to sabotage Cuba's attempts at forging ties with the EU.

ETA: We probably don't want to know what the bastards would pull on Canada if our weak and ineffective colonial administrators pulled out of NAFTA to seek fair trade relations with other countries as might happen with true free trade choices and real democracy.

[ 12 September 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]

quote:

---

Don't get me wrong, there's a lot of Fidel Castro's choices I would not have made, but it seems to me that if his regime really did have the low level of support you appear to assume it has, there would have been a mass revolt.

---

A totalitarian police state can do wonders for preventing any mass revolt. Look at the horrific conditions that prevailed in eastern Europe for 40 years before people finally revolted. In North Korea, vast numbers starve to death, but there is no revolt because people are so defeated and the repression is so total that to "revolt" is tantamount to committing suice.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:

A totalitarian police state can do wonders for preventing any mass revolt.

---

Yes, and Batista's "BRAC", or secret police which the U.S.-backed mafia regime was encouraged to create are still in Cuban memories. It's no wonder Cubans don't want a return to U.S.-backed repression and days of labouring under the tropical sun for United Fruit and Big Sugar. Your way, the U.S. way, was tried before in Cuba and rejected whole sale by Cubans in 1959. Viva la revolucion!

quote:

---

Look at the horrific conditions that prevailed in eastern Europe for 40 years before people finally revolted.

---

And they were never poorer after the dissolution of the Soviet Union. In Russia, the estimated number living in poverty shot up from 2 million to over 60 million during the perestroika and neoLiberal reforms. Putin has started down the road of renationalisation of what the PNAC pinheads tried to get their grubby hands on in 2003 with buying votes in the Duma, but it backfired.

quote:

---

PS: There were no revolts in Auschwitz either

---

Auschwitz and Birkenau liberated Jan, 27, 1945

The first mass exterminations were in Russia and Ukraine. There the final solution meant Jews along with everyone else. No POW's, just flamethrowers, relentless blitzkrieg and roving death squads.

They think their grandfather's day is past, just as the days of Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, George Bush the First, and Bill Clinton are past.

quote:

---

Originally posted by jeff house:
Change is coming to Cuba, of course. The regime won't live out the decade.

---

And Fidel has survived more than 600 assassination attempts by the cold warriors and several cosmetic U.S. leaders. I think our western world will have to endure more crisis capitalism and change before Cubans give up revolutionary socialism. Crisis oriented capitalism is working against itself now as it did when the results were two world wars and several decades of Pentagon capitalism to prop up a failing system.

We are reminded that in 1974, there were no food banks in Canada. Today there are hundreds across the country and running out of food staples on a regular basis. A conservative estimates says there are a quarter million homeless Canadians and over 30 million food insecure American citizens. Canada needs electoral reform and for democracy to take root here before we can shed the oppressive shackles of an unfair free trade deal and start anew as a sovereign democracy.

quote:

---

Canada needs electoral reform

---

But I've been reading rhetoric about the "crisis of capitalism" since about 1960, and almost none of the fervent predictions have actually come about.

And, just as you say that the Cuban people won't give up so-called "revolutionary socialism", I can remember the same thing being said about the Russian people, East Germans, Rumanians, Czechoslovaks, Albanians, and Chinese.

quote:

---

Originally posted by jeff house:
Several Cubans I know have told me that they consider the Cuban revolution "My grandfather's revolution".

They think their grandfather's day is past, just as the days of Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, George Bush the First, and Bill Clinton are past.

Change is coming to Cuba, of course. The regime won't live out the decade.

---

I am sure that there are cubans that think that way. It's pretty irrational, though. More importantly, however, I have read a report that there is concern about a generation that grew up during the "special period", when things were pretty bad, and whose views of life under socialism were informed by that. That would certainly pose a problem for cuba. But it doesn't prove anything about the desirability or feasibility of socialism.

I don't know whether cuba will survive as a socialist country - or, at least, a country trying to build socialism. If it doesn't, it will be a great loss. But if it finally succumbs to the relentless pressure of the imperium, that doesn't prove either 1) that socialism is bad or 2) that socialism doesn't work.

[ 12 September 2007: Message edited by: RosaL ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stephen Gordon:
You mean no-one has to work in Cuba?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by jeff house:
Slogans are nice, and may allow people to hold onto their faith longer than otherwise.

But I've been reading rhetoric about the "crisis of capitalism" since about 1960, and almost none of the fervent predictions have actually come about.

---

And the Yanks are worried about the popularity of Cuban slogans and icons in Colombia now that the people understand the links between Uribe and U.S.-backed paramilitaries and right-wing death squads over the years. Plan Colombia is failing.

NeoLiberal reforms in Latin America have failed and are failing as they did when Milton Friedman and los Chicago boys tested the viability of laissez-faire and ended up recreating 1930's conditions in America across Chile.

Bolivians don't want private water markets anymore than Atlantans or Parisians or New Brunswickers. Private water, deregulated electricity markets and more of the experiment for new Liberal capitalism are failing in the U.S., Canada and around the world where tried.

quote:

---

And, just as you say that the Cuban people won't give up so-called "revolutionary socialism", I can remember the same thing being said about the Russian people, East Germans, Rumanians, Czechoslovaks, Albanians, and Chinese.

---

But Czechs still managed to hang on to socialized medicine and other aspects of socialism. They are a rich country compared with the failed neoLiberal experiments in Latin America and Africa, and it's due in part to having a well educated public as a direct result of Soviet socialism. Third world capitalist countries under tutelage of the west are far less fortunate - there is more hope that former Soviet countries can mimick failing western capitalist economies than, say, El Salvador or Guatemala or Haiti, countries which have had zero socialism while subsisting as backwaters of capitalism.

quote:

---

But Czechs still managed to hang on to socialized medicine and other aspects of socialism. They are a rich country compared with the failed neoLiberal experiments in Latin America and Africa, and it's due in part to having a well educated public as a direct result of Soviet socialism.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:

But Czechs still managed to hang on to socialized medicine and other aspects of socialism. They are a rich country compared with the failed neoLiberal experiments in Latin America and Africa, and it's due in part to having a well educated public as a direct result of Soviet socialism.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:

Your comments are really in bad taste. I'm sure all the Czechs who were crushed under Soviet tanks and sent to forced labour camps in 1968 must be sooooo grateful for their "good education thanks to the Soviet Union".

---

I'll take Soviet education over what are appaling rates of illiteracy and still developing world mortality rates in Afghanistan, Africa, Indonesia and Latin America. An estimated 350 million in demcoratic capitalist India alone go to bed hungry every night of their miserable lives. And with ongoing neoLiberal reforms in that country, an esimated 400 million agricultural refugees will be created in that country over the next number of years.

Russian perestroika to African and Indian Liberal capitalism has been the largest experiment in separating people from the land and common good since British era enclosure, and even more extensive a violation of basic human rights to exist than Stalin's collectivization of 1930's war communism in preparation for a pending war against fascism.

If you want the Cuban people to despense with Fidelista authoritarianism, help them fight against the economic sactions which have crippled their nation. Once the embargo is lifted, Cubans can start to expeiriment with democracy, right now however, they are under seige. People don't worry about elections when the most powerful country on earth is brutilizing their homeland.

[ 12 September 2007: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

[ 12 September 2007: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug:

There's no reason why Cuba can't maintain its own advantages from the pre-democratic period. It's likely that an empowered Cuban public will demand it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by CMOT Dibbler:
People don't worry about elections when the most powerful country on earth is brutilizing their homeland

---

All they Yanks have to do in order to create conditions and favourable environment for democracy in their immediate backyard and hemisphere in general is to:

1. Close down the notorious U.S. Army School of the Americas the world's foremost school for the export of terror and torture
2. Close Gitmo Bay's torture gulags and remove the military presence, all representing a threat to democracy
3. Release the Cuban Five Anti-terrorists held in American gulags, the largest gulag population in the world
4. Extradite Luis Posada Carriles and other murderers because, “If You Harbor Terrorists, You Are a Terrorist”
5. Bring an end to the dated cold war embargo nonsense as a gesture of good will toward all democratic nations, not just Cuba.
6. Put the kibosh to the CIA agenda of trying to murder or overthrow popular socialist leaders of foreign countries, with several attempts in this decade
7. Stop "Plan Colombia", because killing people and supporting a right-wing death squad government
   has no legitimate role in democracy.
8. Stop broadcasting over Cuban airwaves in direct violation of international law
9. Allow democracy to happen in the U.S.A. and investigate Republican Party election rigging and disqualification of thousands of African-American voters over at least the last two elections

It's easy-breezy, but I'm afraid Canada's largest trade partners and recipients of massive, simply massive amounts of Canadian exports of greenhouse gas-emitting fossil fuels and raw materials on the cheap are still very focused on preventing an outbreak of democracy, at least in this part of the world for the time being.

[ 12 September 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Frustrated Mess:
Here's a question. Suppose all across Canada, in the next election, Canadians elected only independents. They sent to parliament people with no party affiliations who promised, some even swore, to represent their constituents first.

Would Canada still be a democracy without a party system?

---

It's possible...but not very likely at all considering the advantage a party brings to candidates. It's also just about inevitable that a new party system would emerge out of the wreckage. Unless government were somehow to step in and prevent it, you see. It can even be said to be required by our parliamentary system, since the House of Commons must appoint (technically recommend) a Prime Minister who in turn will assemble a cabinet and then must secure support from sufficient MPs to pass legislation. There's your governing party.

[ 12 September 2007: Message edited by: Doug ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Frustrated Mess:

Would Canada still be a democracy without a party system?

---

I think it's a good idea, but without fair voting we can't lay claim to having advanced democracy in Canada or the U.S. How can we have democracy when voter participation rates are higher in real democracies ?. Democracy needs regular maintenance not autocratic rule in North America since several decades before Tsarist era Russia came to an end in 1917.

We have to have fair and equal exposure in "mainstream" news media, which is impossible with the degree of news media concentration in the hands of a few billionaire interests that exists in North America.

And we have to have universal access to higher education as per Cuba and several other countries. Because democracy requires a well-informed public and protections for the basic right to an education. And if big business understands the value of post-secondary ed today in the same way that grade twelve was the standard 25 or 30 years ago, then neo-Liberal reforms and democracy are incompatible. Commodifying the right to an education is just as wrong as trying to marketize water and electrical power.

The right to see a doctor on a regular basis is another important cornerstone of modern democracy.

None of these things can be compromised while laying claim to democracy.

[ 12 September 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]

quote:

---

Bring an end to the dated cold war embargo nonsense as a gesture of good will toward all democratic nations, not just Cuba.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by CMOT Dibbler:

Cuba IS NOT a democratic state.

---

Sure it is. They have elections all the time just like here. The difference is, Cuba is NOT a third world capitalist shithole like U.S.-influenced Haiti, Guatemala, Colombia, El Salvador, Honduras, Mexico or Chiapas. THOSE countries are real shitholes which we all enjoy the personal freedom to travel to and eyeball up close.

quote:

---

It's possible...but not very likely at all considering the advantage a party brings to candidates. It's also just about inevitable that a new party system would emerge out of the wreckage. Unless government were somehow to step in and prevent it, you see. It can even be said to be required by our parliamentary system, since the House of Commons must appoint (technically recommend) a Prime Minister who in turn will assemble a cabinet and then must secure support from sufficient MPs to pass legislation. There's your governing party.

---

[ 12 September 2007: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Frustrated Mess:

That doesn't answer my question at all. If there are no parties, is it still a democracy?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Frustrated Mess:
So democracy does not depend on the party system. Excellent. Now, human rights. Is one such right the freedom of speech? Does freedom of speech demand the converse, the right to be heard?

---

quote:

---

And now we're crossing into that territory known as "free and fair elections" versus political interference and tainted democracy. Everyone from the Russians to Salvadorans in recent years have pointed fingers at a specific nation for breaking the rules of free and fair elections either in their countries or in U.S. and surrounding satellite nations of the USSA.

---

In other words, your not going to answer the question.

[ 12 September 2007: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by CMOT Dibbler:

In other words, your not going to answer the question.

[ 12 September 2007: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

---

It's too large a question for yours truly to answer. All I can tell you is that the struggle for democracy is an ongoing process around the world. What I can tell you is that the CIA has used democracy as a Trojan horse for purposes of political interference in developing democracies.

The U.S. started out with trying to become the first democratic nation, a constitutional democracy ruled by and for the people instead of a European-style monarchy ruled by an underlying cabal of financiers. The Yanks failed, because now U.S. money creation is privatized, and real power resides on Wall Street. It's Bay Street in Canada.

quote:

---

In other words, your not going to answer the question.

---

Current example: Ontario will be voting on proportional representation. Yet, in a society where almost every person is bombarded with media messages from the time they wake up to the time they go to bed, many Ontarians still do not know there even is a referendum, of those who do, most have at best a vague idea what it is about, and of those, most can't explain MMPR.

Yet the one party that is pushing MMPR hardest, can barely get any notice at all, while the next party gets press almost as an after thought. For example, a google news search for "Frank de Jong" gives us 71 hits. How many google news hits for "mixed member proportional representation" do you think? Twenty. And the top hit? A Toronto Star article appropriately headlined "Electoral reform on ballot? Who knew?".

So, going back to the beginning, can democracy exist in a society where the mass media is concentrated in the hands of a very few?

I can certainly believe that Cuba has human righs issues. Not to brush them off, but doesn't every country? Take a look at Amnesty International or Human Rights Watch, and tell me how many countries you can name that aren't in some way criticised by either of those organisations.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:
The Northwest Territories has no parties and elects an assembly of Independents. I'm sorry, but no one has convinced me that this has resulted in vastly more progressive government and fewer social problems in the NWT than elsewhere in canada where we have parties.

---

quote:

---

The Northwest Territories has no parties and elects an assembly of Independents. I'm sorry, but no one has convinced me that this has resulted in vastly more progressive government and fewer social problems in the NWT than elsewhere in canada where we have parties.

---

[ 12 September 2007: Message edited by: Frustrated Mess ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Aristotleded24:

What Stockholm, jeff house, et al fail to acknowledge is the history of imperial interference in Latin America. Why do they feel free to make Cuba out to be this horrible place having the world's most repressive government without placing Cuba in this context?

---

Because much like a murderer who was abused as a child, bringing that history up only helps explain it, not excuse it. It does not make it okay.

quote:

---

And why do they fail to acknowledge that in almost every quality of life indicator (health, life expectancy, education levels) excluding technology (due to the US economic embargo) Cuba either leads or is near the top of every other Latin American country?[/qb]

---

I acknowledge it. But I also acknowledge, as should be obvious, one does not need to heavily restrict civil rights in order to run good public schools or provide health care.

[ 12 September 2007: Message edited by: Doug ]

quote:

---

But the question was to you.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug:

I acknowledge it. But I also acknowledge, as should be obvious, one does not need to heavily restrict civil rights in order to run good public schools or provide health care.

[ 12 September 2007: Message edited by: Doug ]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:
Canada is in "Uncle Sam's backyard" and yet we manage to have free elections, freedom of speech, human rights, universal education and health care and one of the world's best standards of living!

---

We've dropped to 16th place for economic competitiveness, and the mediam income is $25, 400 a year. Conservative estimates say there are a quarter million homeless Canadians.

We've dropped in standard of living categories, competitiveness, and the Yanks have three times more American citizens classified as 'food insecure' than Cuba has total population.

But our stoogeocrats give Yanquis corporations free rein to snap up majority ownership and control of 36 important sectors of our economy. No wonder our national pension plan and Alberta's Heritage Fund combined are worth less than Norway's Petroleum Fund, and less that Putin's oil stabilization fund created in just 2004.

Cubans don't have our natural wealth to play free trade giveway games with Yanquis imperialists. And thank goodness, because I don't know about youz guys, but I think we'd have a hard go of itf it trying to grow bananas and coffee beans and slashing sugar cane all damn day so Americans can afford a higher standard of living than everybody else on the planet. 80 percent of Mexico's exports go the States and are basically subsidized with slave wages.

Canada(and Sweden, if you want to travel that far) is mainly white(especially in winter) and we were never mentioned in Monroe doctrine.

Canadians should be a lot better off than we are with our unparalleled in the world natural resource wealth. We don't have democracy here, not when two old line parties and successive lap dog colonial administrative governments have ruled Ottawa and provinces since way before 1917. Canada is America's gas tank, a veritable fort knox of natural resources for Yanqui imperialists to raid at will, but Canada is not a democracy. Not really.

[ 12 September 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:
Canada is in "Uncle Sam's backyard" and yet we manage to have free elections, freedom of speech, human rights, universal education and health care and one of the world's best standards of living!

---

If you don't think powerbrokers in the US have their eyes on Canada and making a great deal of money by dismantling those programs you are unbelievabley naieve. NAFTA and the proposed Security and Prosperity Partnership will go a long way to dismantling that. Not to mention that we have high numbers of Canadians not experiencing the high standards of living. Economic realities on the ground in this country are not as rosy as they look on paper.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:

As I was saying earlier, the Cubans voted for Cuban socialism and revolution in three elections between 1993 and 2003 with foreign news journalists there in Cuba as observers.

---

I must have have missed that, when did they vote for revolution, do you or anyone else have any links with that information? And was it an election that allowed some contrary views to be aired before voting?

quote:

---

There are no political parties in Cuba, and this means that Cuba is run by the people and for the people not big business or other minority special interest groups representing big money and foreign capitalists Only Cubans can run for election at the three levels of government. ...

---

Actually democracies weren't necessarily invented with parties in mind, but of course they quickly tend to form anyhow and out-compete independents. What I'm wondering is if there are more than one candidate allowed to compete against each other in these electoral races, and are they allowed to enter the race without official nomination from the party? Even limited democracy can be meaningful if there's a degree of fair competition and free speech allowed.

ETA: In the case of Cuba, I still tend to support the revolution BTW, just like I still support Canadian democracy. Not because either is perfect or produces results I necessarily approve, or because they can't be improved, but mostly because they're still better than all the likely alternatives at present.

[ 12 September 2007: Message edited by: EriKtheHalfaRed ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Aristotleded24:

Doug, I take your points, and I agree with them. However, my question still stands: why single out Cuba?

---

Because that is the subject of the thread?

quote:

---

Surely you don't believe that recommendations from Amnesty and Human Rights Watch could arrive on Castro's desk tomorrow with Castro following through on every single one would dampen the anti-Castro rhetoric of his critics?

---

No, not the ones with a personal axe to grind because grandpa's sugar plant got nationalized - but it would be worth doing anyway.

[ 12 September 2007: Message edited by: Doug ]

Is it possible to be a legitimate democracy while maintaining more than 730 military bases abroad - recruited Nazi war criminals into its intelligence fold - bombed over 21 nations since Nagasaki and Hiroshima - exported terror and torture through U.S. Army School of the Americas - attempted to assassinate a Cuban leader 600 times - harbour known anti-Cuban terrorists and known murderers - or allow 30 million "food insecure" Americans and millions of homeless people to subsist within its own borders - and own dubious honour of being the largest jailer in the world of its own citizens ?.

If we're going to discuss democracy in this thread, then I think some of us should be prepared to discuss the largest and most influential nuclear-armed rogue superpower whose purpose they believe it is to affect trade and political policies in every country in this hemisphere, including several third world capitalist nations under direct influence of trade and political ties with Washington.

Just saying

quote:

---

Originally posted by EriKtheHalfaRed:

Even limited democracy can be meaningful if there's a degree of fair competition and free speech allowed.

---

Which is why, for example, Iranian elections aren't entirely useless. Yes, the candidates are required to be some variety of Shia fundamentalist approved by the theocrats and there is by no means complete freedom of expression. However, it's definitely possible to get a sense of public opinion from which sort of candidates get elected.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:
I'm not a Cuban citizen and i have no "say so". But i believe that a constitution needs to have some sort of a popular mandate. Let the Cubans vote on whether or not they accept the constitution.

If a clear majority of Cuban vote YES in a fre and fair vote to a constitution that demands one-party socialist rule in perpetuity - I will have nothing more to say about Cuba.

Notice the dichotomy. I want the Cuban people to be allowed to CHOOSE their system of government. YOU want your favourite system to be shoved down their throats in perpetuity whether they like it or not - because you apparently know what's best for them.

[ 12 September 2007: Message edited by: Stockholm ]

---

I thought you wanted to overthrow the Cuban constitution so that you could have pretty young lassies, teatering atop high healed shoes, slavishly cater to all your needs while you eat filet mignon and drink Mohitos, based on your entre into this discussion.

Did I say "overthrow"? Sorry I meant, CHOOSE to beg and grovel in the quest to get tipped out after satisfying your dining requirements.

BTW... do you ever tip?

[ 13 September 2007: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Doug:

Which is why, for example, Iranian elections aren't entirely useless. Yes, the candidates are required to be some variety of Shia fundamentalist approved by the theocrats and there is by no means complete freedom of expression. However, it's definitely possible to get a sense of public opinion from which sort of candidates get elected.

I don't get the same sense of Cuban elections telling us anything in particular - which could just be a lack of knowledge on my part or it could be a result of that system being rather more controlled than its proponents say it is.

---

Why I'd like to know more myself, if that is this information's there. Another small advantage of even limited democracy is it offers some grassroots ways of judging an individuals competence and integrity, maybe keep them a little more honest, even without oppositional parties. Anyone have anything more on this? Could be helpful, least for me.

[ 13 September 2007: Message edited by: EriKtheHalfaRed ]

Can democracy exist in a society where the mass media is concentrated in the hands of a very few whether under corporate or state control?

I believe 100% in a continuation of the socialist revolution and the continued governance of Fidel castro, BUT I demand that we free all political prisoners and end all censorship?

The Myth of Cuban Dictatorship

[ 13 September 2007: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stockholm:
You still haven't explained why you think its such a bad thing for there to be restaurants?

---

That's a really good question.

quote:

---

Can you have a democracy within which the great majority of the citizenship is not represented by their peers?

---

No.

quote:

---

Can democracy exist in a society where the mass media is concentrated in the hands of a very few whether under corporate or state control?

---

In general I'd say no. There are circumstances however, when both corrupt conglomerates and dictatoral governments can be influenced by the people. of course, it depends on wich dictators and corporations your dealing with, and the size of movements which are challenging them.

[ 13 September 2007: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

[ 13 September 2007: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by N.Beltov:
I don't get this complaint. I can't set up a restaurant myself, here in Canada, without all sorts of regulatory hoops to jump. Why should Cuba be any different? It's socialism, not heaven.

The best single thing to happen to improve Cuban society would be if the U.S. blockade/embargo was lifted and the subversion came to an end. But, yet, I've read not a single word from all those on this thread who drone endlessly on about "freedom" about the blockade. Yawn.

---

Let's say the U.S. embargo ended today. How much impact would that have on Cuba? Can't Cuba deal with countless other countries already?

quote:

---

Originally posted by HeywoodFloyd:
Not to be totally difficult Fidel but that sounds like the Cuban Missile Crisis and Angola.

---

Ah, a fresh perspective. Heywood, the Cuban missile crisis was resolved by diplomacy. Except for a U2 pilot brought down over Cuba, there were no mass killings or ten thousand day wars to kill an idea as it was with poor people in Vietnam defending against two imperialist invaders.

And Cubans came to the rescue of Angolans who were themselves fighting a lopsided battle against UNITA, backed by the U.S.A., "Rhodesia", and apartheid S. Africa. Savimbi's forces butchered countless numbers of people, women and children. It's likely that South Africa alone butchered more innocent Africans than PLO, Red Brigades, Baader-Meinhof, Cuba, Carlos and Libya combined ever did.

Where there is oil, weapons trade, illicit drugs and threat of communism or nationalism, the CIA and Pentagon are usually in there like dirty shirts.