¡ mis camaradas ! ¡ Fidel es muerto !

[DudeMan]

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-castro20feb20,0,7737031.story

okay, not quite dead, but fortunately for the cuban people, he's well on his way...

fidel is stepping down as 'president for life'. time to invest in undeveloped beach front property! dirty dancing 2:havana nights!! welcome back, mafia, we need you to run the new casinos!!

[frizgolf]

Well, well. Can the cigars be far off?

[Motti]

Jeez, you almost gave me a heart attack!

Damn, I just missed it by 10 months. I wish I were in Cuba again to see how people are taking it. I'd guess most of them are quite happy.

I'm really worried about the change of regimen in Cuba. There's too much social tension over there, that's only kept at bay (I think) by the thousands of policemen that are everywhere on the street. And I wish they try to make the change after W steps down -- he is too much hated over there for anything capitalism-related to have a chance to succeed.

[Motti]

Hmm, I feel strangely disappointed. Why? I can't put my finger on it.

[frizgolf]

Hmm, I feel strangely disappointed. Why? I can't put my finger on it.
The man's been in power for all but two of my years alive on this planet.
There's a twisted sense of familiarity about that.

[ICONOCLAST420]

Hmm, I feel strangely disappointed. Why? I can't put my finger on it.

The next guy will be just as bad.

[Jumpman]

I just want to see democratic reforms that manage to keep in place the social programs that have given Cuba better infant mortality rates and literacy rates than the U.S. That would be something.

I'm just afraid for Cuba that Havana will become Vegas again eventually

[Motti]

The man's been in power for all but two of my years alive on this planet.
There's a twisted sense of familiarity about that.

Maybe it's because I had a great time there and now I'm sure it would never be the same when I get there again.

And maybe -- as selfish as it seems -- it's because I like the idea of having some socialist countries around, sort of like a museum of the XX century. It keeps things in perspective.

[DudeMan]

And maybe -- as selfish as it seems -- it's because I like the idea of having some socialist countries around, sort of like a museum of the XX century. It keeps things in perspective.
do you also like the idea of having a few places with famines because it reminds you how lucky you are to have food every night? "as selfish as it seems"; that is an understatement. are you really that solipsistic?

fidel was (he's dead to me even though he's still technically alive for now) a brutal, horrible, cold-blooded killer who ruthlessly oppressed his people and needlessly kept his population in poverty and without any sort of human rights. his brother will probably rule for the next few years, and he's more of a pragmatist than his bound-for-hell brother, and things will get a bit better. and then after that, when all of these old guard assholes are dead, expect to see more opening up, patterned after the chinese juggernaut.

and by the way, jumpman, it is a complete canard to say that cuba's childbirth stats are better than the US's. in the US, we're lucky to have modern equipment, diagnoses, and societal investment to save many many babies who would die almost anywhere else in the world. some of those babies end up dying, but we try anyway. in cuba, all of those marginal cases result in babies not being born in the first place -- either aborted or stillborn -- which skews their stats compared to ours.

[Breeze]

And maybe -- as selfish as it seems -- it's because I like the idea of having some socialist countries around, sort of like a museum of the XX century. It keeps things in perspective.
The Dos Equis century! Viva!

[wileE]

With Fidel gone and a new president, that might be the right combination to heal the ties with Cuba.

[drougan]

Way to mislead us on the thread title.

sheesh.:mad:

Well, good riddance. Now that he's no longer presidente perhaps he can just die quietly, having given up his will to live.

That or he'll "Never die" as some Big Brother figure.

[Motti]

do you also like the idea of having a few places with famines because it reminds you how lucky you are to have food every night? "as selfish as it seems"; that is an understatement. are you really that solipsistic?

Geez, DudeMan. Those are not nice things to say to someone. I was just saying how I feel, why are you angry at me? I'm just trying to make conversation. Here, I'll clarify.

By "keeping things in perspective", I meant both the good and the bad. In other words, socialists countries are neither as good nor as bad as it seems. It's a reality check both for hardcore socialists and hardcore capitalists.

I've been to Cuba, they're doing okay. Not "okay" by Midwest-US standards, but certainly "okay" by Brazilian Northeast standards. Most people in Brazil are worse off then they would be if they lived in Cuba. That's what I meant. I'd appreciate if you confirmed if this is proper explanation.

and by the way, jumpman, it is a complete canard to say that cuba's childbirth stats are better than the US's. in the US, we're lucky to have modern equipment, diagnoses, and societal investment to save many many babies who would die almost anywhere else in the world. some of those babies end up dying, but we try anyway. in cuba, all of those marginal cases result in babies not being born in the first place -- either aborted or stillborn -- which skews their stats compared to ours.

I kinda agree. It's a bit of a myth that the health care in Cuba is that great. They have some nice hospitals but -- I was told -- it's just for foreigners and local government. Most of the people have to go to small clinics where treatment is less than great, mostly because of lack of equipment/medicine.

However, they have lots of well-trained doctors. Since 95% of things that demand medical attention is easily treatable, people live generally better. If you have to pay to check a little pain in your stomach, you are probably not having it checked. And then... well, bad things may happen.

Yes, I'd rather have US medical care over Cuban medical care. Then again, I'd be able to afford it.

[Duemellon]

do you also like the idea of having a few places with famines because it reminds you how lucky you are to have food every night? "as selfish as it seems"; that is an understatement. are you really that solipsistic? So, according to that logic...To want to have some socialist government around is to want people to die of hunger & have a low success birthrate.That's a perfect example of how your extreme view, your binary comprehension, your oversimplified & judgmental view totally polarized it.

There's some gray in there d00d. There's some gray.

[Breeze]

That's a perfect example of how your extreme view, your binary comprehension, your oversimplified & judgmental view totally polarized it.

Not that this ever happens in CE/P...

[DudeMan]

That's a perfect example of how your extreme view, your binary comprehension, your oversimplified & judgmental view totally polarized it..

don't taze me, bro!

[DudeMan]

Geez, DudeMan. Those are not nice things to say to someone. I was just saying how I feel, why are you angry at me? I'm just trying to make conversation. Here, I'll clarify.

oh yeah, i forgot that your feelings become hurt very easily if anyone expresses sentiments that aren't in sync with yours. so, just to clarify, i'm not 'angry', but i think you made a ridiculous statement. and i then used the time-honored technique of reductio ad absurdum to take your idea to an absurd conclusion to make the point that your world isn't a world i want to live in.

[Motti]

oh yeah, i forgot that your feelings become hurt very easily if anyone expresses sentiments that aren't in sync with yours. so, just to clarify, i'm not 'angry', but i think you made a ridiculous statement. and i then used the time-honored technique of reductio ad absurdum to take your idea to an absurd conclusion to make the point that your world isn't a world i want to live in.

Ok. While I don't agree with that, I'm not hurt about what you said. And I'm not hurt about other people's opinion. AND I don't think I'm solipsistic (I had to look it up). I just think it's not a nice way to conduct a discussion. You could make the same point in a nice manner.

Anyway, cheers!

PS: Try and make a trek to Cuba someday, you'll love it! :)

[the happy prole]

Not saying Castro was such a nice guy, but he's not the even close to the sole cause of the problem. If it weren't him, it would have been some other asshole dictator. If it weren't communism, it'd be some kind of backwards predatory capitalism.

For whatever reason, people sometimes don't want a free democratic society. Maybe they're not ready for it. It's like the whole "cycle of abuse" thing. If you were abused as a kid, you grow up with messed up values and either continue to get abused or abuse other people or both. Takes a couple generations to get things back on track.

Cuba could have done worse than Castro. Hopefully going forward they'll do a lot better.

[DudeMan]

PS: Try and make a trek to Cuba someday, you'll love it! :)
i've been there with a journalist visa. liked the people and am amazed they are so resilient in the face of such oppression. reminds me a lot of burma.

it wasn't too many years ago that cuba was richer that puerto rico. it can be again, but this regime needs to be scraped away like plaque from an abscessed tooth.

[frizgolf]

Cuba could have done worse than Castro. Hopefully going forward they'll do a lot better.

Well, except for that time he painted a huge target on the island with the missile crisis. Coulda been that the only evidence today the island ever existed would be the still-smoldering pile of crystallized sand.
At least they survived Kruschev's chess game.
It would be cool to visit some day.

[Motti]

it wasn't too many years ago that cuba was richer that puerto rico. it can be again, but this regime needs to be scraped away like plaque from an abscessed tooth.

I think they are in great position to be a very rich country. They have THE perfect location on the Americas (aside from all the hurricanes) and they have the most educated people I have ever met. Well, not top education, but everybody is generally well-educated and, ironically, information-hungry.

But I do think the transition needs to be smooth, China-like. I think that's what you mean too (considering your previous post). I'm very worried about the safety of the people over there, they do have a lot of anger in them against the government (in effect, the rich guys). They will need lots of investment, I hope someone (U.S., wink-wink) can help them.

[the happy prole]

and i then used the time-honored technique of reductio ad absurdum to take your idea to an absurd conclusion to make the point that your world isn't a world i want to live in.

No, actually Motti is right.

What you did was use the time-dishonored technique of attacking the strawman/appeal to riducule/putting words in his mouth. Or the slightly less dishonored technique of "slippery slope." A combo of the two, really.

It's really only a proper reductio ad absurdum argument when you show a logical fallacy within the speaker's own argument. You pretty much have to get the speaker to actually screw himself via issuing contradictory statements.

What you did was assume that socialism leads to famine, and then assume that Motti desires famine. You're taking one of his statements and running it through YOUR belief system, arguments, and assumptions instead of his. That creates a logical problem for you, because you have not shown how the seemingly absurd conclusion is HIS fault, and not yours. You've simply tossed an absurd conclusion out there.

There are all sorts of outs for him here. It could be he doesn't think socialism leads to famine, or at least no more than they'd have under a different government. It could be that while he doesn't like famine, he think it might be necessary for a greater good.

If you want to do a true reductio ad absurdem (or really any logical attack, really) is you have to pretty much use only the speakers' own statements. Or at least assume some great degree of common rationality.

In this instance, it would probably be acceptable to work off the assumption that Motti probably thinks of famine as something bad, since that is kind of a no-brainer. You would then work backwards from that conclusion to his initial statement and there should be an actual logical fallacy in there somewhere.

Instead you jumped to a conclusion without the proper foundation-- even if it was just a conclusion about someone else's conclusion. Motti is quite naturally (and correctly from a logic viewpoint) going to take offense at you putting words in his mouth and assigning him a statement ("famine is good") that he never made. You then compound the error by attacking the strawman and calling him overly sensitive instead of addressing the actual logic and facts in the argument you just made.

You haven't proven Motti wrong, or even close. At best you are simply forcing him to clarify his remarks, with a little zinger in there that hopefully amuses him and helps him better understand YOUR argument. The same thing could be accomplished more politely by simply asking him to clarify in the first place.

I don't know why, but everyone on the boards has tremendous problems with this concept. I mean, it's not a friggin' debate class so sometimes it's fun to get be a little snarky. But if the other person gets upset, you really have to yield because you don't have a logical defense.

[Jumpman]

and by the way, jumpman, it is a complete canard to say that cuba's childbirth stats are better than the US's. in the US, we're lucky to have modern equipment, diagnoses, and societal investment to save many many babies who would die almost anywhere else in the world. some of those babies end up dying, but we try anyway. in cuba, all of those marginal cases result in babies not being born in the first place -- either aborted or stillborn -- which skews their stats compared to ours.

Right then, find me a country of similarly low economic performance and take a look at their IMR's. The fact of the matter is that Cuba (regardless of the system that produced the results) has maintained health statistics to rival the "Developed" world. And that is something worth preserving, and thus not a canard. You really needed to look at the spirit of the argument not the details, mr. detail arguer.

[jcarwash31]

No, actually Motti is right.

blah blah blah....here's how you debate, bitch....blah blah
What the hell's this "logic" doing in here? There's no logic in CE/P.

[Breeze]

There's no logic in CE/P.
http://www.uniphiz.com/library/hanks/hanks-240-270.jpg
Tell 'im, Jimmy!

[DudeMan]

No, actually Motti is right.

What you did was use the time-dishonored technique of attacking the strawman/appeal to riducule/putting words in his mouth. Or the slightly less dishonored technique of "slippery slope." A combo of the two, really.

bullshit prole. i think he made a ridiculous statement that he wants the country to stay suspended in the same state. i think that's amazingly self-centered to hope an entire country continues to live in oppressed & horrible conditions merely for his own sake. whether he didn't think through the logical consequences of his secret wish or whatever, it's still a stupid statement.

i want everyone around the world to do better and live better, and if offends me when people say disparaging things about "that factory worker in china" or makes stupid claims like motti did. so no, it's actually not too far of a stretch to take the argument further and ask if he also likes countries to live in famine.

i will admit i was tougher than normal in the way i chose to respond, because i got pissed at some of the things motti was saying in the sug thread last week. so yeah, i said something i knew he wouldn't like. but that doesn't take away from the point i'm making or make me wrong... because i'm still right -- it was a ridiculous statement he made. it just means i accomplished more than one thing with my post.

now on to you -- i'm not sure what the point of your sermon is, because you sure as hell aren't the captain of the forensics team yourself. are you the only chaste man in the brothel, here to play the piano? give me a break.

[the happy prole]

Say Dudeman-- do you like capitalism? I bet you think it's pretty nifty. Well guess what? THERE ARE PEOPLE STARVING IN THIS COUNTRY!!!!

Man, I can't believe you like it when people starve. Talk about selfish.*

THAT is how you make a reductio ad absurdum argument. And THAT is why I am captain of the forensics team.:p






*All insults strictly for illustrative purposes. Dudeman is a nice guy.

[Duemellon]

bullshit prole. i think he made a ridiculous statement that he wants the country to stay suspended in the same state. i think that's amazingly self-centered to hope an entire country continues to live in oppressed & horrible conditions merely for his own sake.Hey dude, just, perhaps... there's a chance... that maybe,... other people view the world differently than you do?

I mean, there is a chance right? Maybe you're the one assuming he feels they're "oppressed & horrible conditions". I'm just thinking if you losened up that absolutism & extremism, you probably would've given him room to talk. Instead you kinda polarized the situation.

Your explanation of your reaction supports the claim there are people who have a binary view on the subject & ignore the possible nuances others have. Furthermore, they feel anyone who doesn't agree with them is juxtaposed to them. After all, if it's binary, it's either correct or wrong.

It's reactions like that which spur some people to attack back, not just take the time to try to explain. People get away with starting this crap,... or.... worse yet... people start assuming everything is that way & overreact to those people who aren't like that. It's one of those things that makes it uncomfortable. It also puts people on the defensive & start deciding who's right or wrong....whether he didn't think through the logical consequences of his secret wish or whatever,...
I will admit i was tougher than normal in the way i chose to respond,...vs.it's still a stupid statement.

because i'm still right -- it was a ridiculous statement he made.This bothers me 'though...
You actually grant him some leeway, but then retract it viciously. You say it's "possible he didn't think/mean that" but then follow it up with the absolutist "didn't matter, it's still stupid".now on to you -- i'm not sure what the point of your sermon is, because you sure as hell aren't the captain of the forensics team yourself. are you the only chaste man in the brothel, here to play the piano? give me a break.It was easy to get caught up in the act-react mode from the earlier days of CE/P, but now it shouldn't be like that. It's so easy to get lost in what you think others are saying, or to give in to the instant/1st reaction you have when being personally attacked (or seeing someone else), but I know I was trying to point out how that can be changed.

If people actually let it. Note it. Be more forgiving or open up to allow other's to have more views or details. There is still a point, down below, where we all do agree on the same thing. But dismissing others, assuming other's are always "villians/attacking", & stuff gotta go.

There are many here who won't let it die because they have grudges. Unfortunately they've been winning for awhile. They will perpetuate propoganda by making everything as personal as possible as quickly as possible. But the quieter we get the clearer their actions are to others.

[DudeMan]

Say Dudeman-- do you like capitalism? I bet you think it's pretty nifty. Well guess what? THERE ARE PEOPLE STARVING IN THIS COUNTRY!!!!
how many people starve to death in the US? i would submit that besides a few anorexics and mentally ill people or junkies who are too far gone to seek food, no one. there are small pockets of tough poverty in the US, but no starvation, as there are plenty of places where people can get subsistence food in the US. i don't think people starve in Cuba either, by the way, but that doesn't take away from the fact that their government has brutally oppressed the populace.

Man, I can't believe you like it when people starve. Talk about selfish.
hey, that's the way i roll

Dudeman is a nice guy.
how DARE you. we both know i'm a dick, so please don't mess with my street cred. think of the children!

[Shlep]

Hey dude, just, perhaps... there's a chance... that maybe,... other people view the world differently than you do?

I think I see what you're getting at.

Some people, for instance, think Cuba is a swell place. Motti has actually *been* there and has said he wished it wouldn't change; he did also say that it felt "selfish" hoping that the situation in Cuba remained the same. I'm not sure how someone would feel selfish hoping others were deliriously happy.

Then again, we have folks-- I've run into them a lot-- who will point out that Cuba apparently has literacy and infant mortality rates that should be the envy of the "free world" because their public services-- especially their healthcare system-- is just the absolute bee's knees.

So I guess that wanting Cuba to stay the same doesn't make you a bad person. Wildly misinformed, perhaps, or (such as in the case of the college kid living in a $500,000 house in the 'burbs, drinking a $3 Starbucks coffee, listening to an iPod, and sporting a Che Guevara t-shirt) downright clueless and lacking a sense of irony to boot.

But not bad.

[Buzzstein]

I think motti likes socialism...specifically the idea of socialized medicine. I don't think he likes oppressive dictatorships. That's the impression that I get (btw I've never had to knock on wood). Can't he like some aspects of Cuba and not others? I don't see where he is being ridiculous. And his perspective is that of a Brazilian citizen not a US citizen. I think that matters.

[Shlep]

I think motti likes socialism. I don't think he likes oppressive dictatorships. That's my impression anyway. Can't he like some aspects of Cuba and not others? I don't see where he is being ridiculous.

I agree.

Motti: you'll always have Sweden, mi compadre. Be happy.

[purple_octopus]

The next guy will be just as bad.

No way. I'll be worse. ;)

[gwar469]

No way. I'll be worse. ;)

oh yeah. do you have your list of cabinet positions still? i'm still available for whatever i was penciled in.

[purple_octopus]

oh yeah. do you have your list of cabinet positions still? i'm still available for whatever i was penciled in.

Well, someone needs to run the rum distilleries.

[the happy prole]

how many people starve to death in the US? i would submit that besides a few anorexics and mentally ill people or junkies who are too far gone to seek food, no one. there are small pockets of tough poverty in the US, but no starvation, as there are plenty of places where people can get subsistence food in the US. i don't think people starve in Cuba either, by the way, but that doesn't take away from the fact that their government has brutally oppressed the populace.

So what you're saying is that my little reductio ad absurdum conclusion was actually not correct. There are intervening facts and arguments you have that lead you down a different path. It was MY assumption that was wrong, not your argument. S'all I'm saying, man.

The difference between you and Motti basically boils down to the fact that he doesn't really think Socialism is as bad as you do. He thinks there are some parts that might work and some that don't, just as there are parts of capitalism that might work and some that don't.

So it's in some ways useful to have those extremist systems around to learn from and that helps out the US's, UK's and Swedens of the world. It's a little bit selfish in the sense that we learn and benefit from their failures while they pay the price. But it's not totally selfish as it also isn't completely about what's good for Motti today? That unintended social experiment helps all of us learn. I thought he was upfront about that.

I think you can call Motti's belief in socialism stupid and he can deal with it. That's just sort of a regular-ass disagreement over a premise. It was the unsupported conclusion that he was a selfish prick that was a bit too personal.

Look, you know I agree with you over the BS ban. But what really happened was he made a hypo that people took the wrong way. It wasn't serious, and I know it was intended to be a ridiculous response to a hypothetical. It just wasn't as clear as it should have been given the other things he'd said on that thread.

I'm trying to turn over a new leaf here. But I'm still kind of a dick so I'm forcing you to do it with me. No one needs to be babied, but let's just try and be real extra clear about what is part of a logical argument and what is snarky banter. And let's try not to drag last week into this week. It's not for US, it's for other people that might be reading who don't have the same context. If that's stuff is all made clear, we can all take a zinger or two slung our way.

[Motti]

Oh boy, I always wished I had an entire thread about me! :)
Here, let me try and clarify things.

The difference between you and Motti basically boils down to the fact that he doesn't really think Socialism is as bad as you do. He thinks there are some parts that might work and some that don't, just as there are parts of capitalism that might work and some that don't.

So it's in some ways useful to have those extremist systems around to learn from and that helps out the US's, UK's and Swedens of the world. It's a little bit selfish in the sense that we learn and benefit from their failures while they pay the price. But it's not totally selfish as it also isn't completely about what's good for Motti today? That unintended social experiment helps all of us learn. I thought he was upfront about that.

Yes, thanks!

I think motti likes socialism...specifically the idea of socialized medicine.

Kinda. I don't really like socialism. I just think that in some extreme cases it might work better than capitalism (I'm not sure, though).

I also don't think oppressive dictatorships are that connected with socialism. I think it's theoretically possible for a democractic socialism. And there's also the average capitalism dictatorship (Angola these days, for example).

I don't think he likes oppressive dictatorships.

No! I don't like oppressive dictatorships. And therein lies my greatest doubt about Cuba. People I met were generally satisfied with food/education/health but complained mightily of (i) lack of free information; and (ii) travel restrictions.

So I thought long and hard about which is worse: being hungry and unschooled and dreaming about someday traveling abroad or being fed and educated and knowing you will never be able to travel abroad? Needless to say, I didn't come to any conclusion. That's the thing about Cuba, people don't have much of a chance. And they hate it. It's like being in prison for life.

But it's still a matter of hierarchy of needs: first you need to be alive (not starving), then you need to be have someplace to live then you need to be free (...) and finally you can buy your Nintendo Wii.

Can't he like some aspects of Cuba and not others? And his perspective is that of a Brazilian citizen not a US citizen. I think that matters.

Yes! I like some aspects of Cuba and not others and I see an interesting parallel between Brazil and Cuba.

Now let's go back to my statement. First of all, let me swear I don't want anybody to starve or be oppressed. Here, these are my best friends in Cuba. Alberto and María. They really hated Fidel so I bet they're really happy right now. I'm happy for them.

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1427/547486154_9817621e09_m.jpg http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1219/547486096_a94798a073_m.jpg

That said, okay, it might have been a ridiculous statement. I was just feeling distraught this morning (because of Fidel's resignation) and trying to put my finger on it. It was not a "political" statement, I was just making conversation.

BUT considering there are all sorts of horrible things happening in the world, I think Cuba/socialism might be a lesser evil. Yes, I want them to get better, I'd LOVE for them to get better, but I think there are other things that need to get better sooner. Like Sudan or, let's say, the poorer neighborhoods of São Paulo. When all the other nasty stuff around the world gets to the general level of Cuba, then things should move forward (I'm a pessimist, though).

I almost forgot: I didn't say I wanted Cuba to stay as it is, I said I wanted to have socialist countries around. Like Laos, for example. I've never been there, but I'm told things are improving greatly. Far from perfect yet, obviously.

Now, DudeMan, to try and close this matter, I apologize if my statement got you pissed (your words!). I really didn't mean it. I wrote like I was commenting some unimportant matter to a friend and didn't think of the possible understanding some people might have about it. It was just something that came out and maybe I should have explained it better.

But please don't think I want bad stuff to happen to people. Far from it. You'd know it if you knew me. I'd be glad to discuss this via PM or email if you feel like it.

[Shlep]

-Damn, I just missed it by 10 months. I wish I were in Cuba again to see how people are taking it. I'd guess most of them are quite happy.

Considering what can happen to people who are noticeably unhappy with governmental developments in Cuba, this may be hard to gauge.

I wish they try to make the change after W steps down -- he is too much hated over there for anything capitalism-related to have a chance to succeed.

I'd have to say that if Cubans are the sort of folks who can't reconcile their desire to be comfortable and prosperous with their dislike of a foreign head of state whose days in power are literally numbered, then there's little hope for capitalism to succeed because they are clearly too fucking stupid to live anywhere that they are not told what they can and cannot buy or own or even like. Nor would they deserve to.

However, my understanding is that Cubans are not at all that stupid. I say this based on the fact that a) Cubans in the US seem to have the whole "capitalism" thing well in hand by virtue of their relative prosperity as an immigrant group and b) Cubans in Cuba seem to be eagerly embracing what little capitlism the Castro regime will allow. In the case of the latter, this includes accepting dollars from American tourists from the country currently run by the hated "Bush" fellow who are willing to make the circuitous journey to Cuba necessary to get around US travel restrictions so they can hang out in Havana and drink mojitos and say "So...this is what it was like to be Ernest Hemingway!"

Hmm, I feel strangely disappointed. Why? I can't put my finger on it.

Maybe it's because I had a great time there and now I'm sure it would never be the same when I get there again.

I think you just put your finger on it.

I think a free Cuba where create the odd state of affairs where everything everyone loves about it will be gone.

What do I mean? Well, I've smoked genuine Cohiba, Montecristo, and H. Upmann cigars. Cigar lovers will tell you that *real* Cuban cigars are better than sex; I agree with this to some extent. They really *ARE* better than having sex...like the sex you have when you're a teenager in high shcool. Not because the sex is better, or even if you know whether or not you're doing it right, but because it's nearly impossible to get, and even if you can, you're not supposed to.

Going to Cuba as a tourist for some folks (i.e. Americans) is a big, naughty secret mission involving going through Canada or the Caribbean via South America or some such route which has all the deliberation and directness of sailing from New York to San Francisco through Cape Horn, all the while thinking "Ooooh...I could get caught!" Once Cuba ceases to be forbidden fruit and you can practically row there from Florida (plenty of folks in Miami have), I would predict that following a brief spike in tourism, a lot of interest in going there may die.

Unless, of course, developers rush there to try and play it up as a boffo vacation destination by building it up...which could very, very easily destroy everything that people find charming about "Old Havana;" that being the "old" part.

Who knows? A lot of expat Cubans, longing for home and prosperous (and business-savvy) from being Americanized might start building some pretty nice economic bridges that'd make a lot of nice stuff happen. We can hope.

And maybe -- as selfish as it seems -- it's because I like the idea of having some socialist countries around, sort of like a museum of the XX century. It keeps things in perspective.

As long as some other poor bastard has to live there and not me, I don't have much of a problem with this.

[DaHood]

p_o is a slacker. She missed her opportunity to conquer Cuba when they were vulnerable.

[Shlep]

p_o is a slacker. She missed her opportunity to conquer Cuba when they were vulnerable.

If it appears she somehow failed to ruthlessly capitalize on the weakness of someone who stood between her and a goal...I assure you, sir, it's all part of her plan. :D

[Motti]

I'd have to say that if Cubans are the sort of folks who can't reconcile their desire to be comfortable and prosperous with their dislike of a foreign head of state whose days in power are literally numbered, then there's little hope for capitalism to succeed because they are clearly too fucking stupid to live anywhere that they are not told what they can and cannot buy or own or even like. Nor would they deserve to.

However, my understanding is that Cubans are not at all that stupid. I say this based on the fact that a) Cubans in the US seem to have the whole "capitalism" thing well in hand by virtue of their relative prosperity as an immigrant group and b) Cubans in Cuba seem to be eagerly embracing what little capitlism the Castro regime will allow.

Hmmmmm... okay, but are you that sure that capitalism will bring comfort and prosperity to Cuba? Well, it may make the country richer, but how would that reflect on the Average José? There are some capitalism countries around there having a very tough time (Haiti, Dominican Republic etc.).

I agree with item "b" on your paragraph (lots of Cubans have their own private enterprise, with the renting of houses for tourists and private restaurants). As for item "a", I'm not sure if that population sample should be considered. Those are the guys that hated the regimen so much that risked their lives to go to the US.

I think a free Cuba where create the odd state of affairs where everything everyone loves about it will be gone.

[edited for space purposes]

Unless, of course, developers rush there to try and play it up as a boffo vacation destination by building it up...which could very, very easily destroy everything that people find charming about "Old Havana;" that being the "old" part.

Yes, definitely. There's a reason people choose to go to Cuba instead of the generic Caribbean island. It's exotic and doesn't have the freeway-mall aspect to it. It's an adventure, more so for Americans due to the tourism ban. If you take that out -- the archictecture will probably be saved --, it's might be just another Aruba with a Museo de la Revolución.

[Listen_Thinker]

Sooo I guess Raul Castro is taking over...I am surprised. NOT!

[Ambassador V3.0]

Obviously someone has not yet informed Fidel and Raul Castro that America is the greatest country on earth, and that they are all the poorer for not following the lead of U.S. and A. :D:cool:

[Marlowe]

very good article regarding cuba and a comparison to the asian tigers such as s'pore and hong kong. this is spot on... korea, singapore, hong kong and taiwan all went from 3rd world to 1st world countries in one generation while cuba stagnated.

cuba has a lot of ingredients going for it to make a move of its own, but we gotta get those septuauthoritarians (tm) outta here first.


Viva Castro's departure
Cuba in 2008 should be the Hong Kong or Singapore of Latin America

Mark Milke
For The Calgary Herald

In 1958, the year before Fidel Castro came to power in a revolution and promised prosperity, democracy and the restoration of Cuba's 1940 constitution, the Caribbean island, while troubled by poverty, a corrupt dictator and the American Mafia, was also better off than most developing nations.

While poor compared to the United States, Cuba in 1958 had a per capita GDP of $3,170 according to the OECD. (Canada's was $8,947.). But Cuba outranked all other Latin American countries except four: Argentina, Chile, Uruguay and Venezuela.

Tellingly, in 1958, the island nation's per person wealth was higher than any East Asian country or colony, save Japan, which barely beat Cuba at only $3,290. Hong Kong had a per capita GDP of $2,924, Singapore's was $2,294, the Philippines' was $1,447, Taiwan's per person GDP stood at $1,387 and South Korea's was $1,112.

Thus in 1958, Cuba was almost as rich as Japan, one and half times as wealthy as Singapore, richer than Hong Kong, and three times as prosperous as South Korea.

Fifty years later, Cuba is one of the poorest countries in Latin America.

Meanwhile, jurisdictions such as Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan (the latter two also had dictators and problems similar to Cuba in the 1950s) have long eclipsed Cuba. They've done so not only in per capita wealth, but in measurements Castro's defenders point to when they assert the Marxist revolution "worked," such as in health care and education

The irony of Cuba's position became even more evident recently.

By happenstance, I was in Cuba when Castro resigned. It should have happened long ago and I doubt his replacement, his brother Raul, will change much.

Human Rights Watch puts it this way: "The repressive machinery (Castro) constructed over almost half a century remains fully intact."

That machinery, documented extensively by a plethora of sources in the decades since 1959, includes secret police, plenty of snitches, summary executions, concentration camps, sadism against male and female inmates alike, "re-education" and forced labour. One refugee I spoke with last year told me how his father was sent away for three years to work in the sugarcane fields after the family applied to leave Cuba in 1969.

The abuse of Cubans continues even recently. In 2003, the Cuban government gave 75 journalists jail terms of 20 years and more for expressing something other than the state line.

Sometimes, Cuba's government is just petty. In 2005, a chambermaid, Leidys Morales Quinteros, was fired after she was overheard criticizing Castro. (Note to Canadian tourists: this is why Cubans tell you they don't want to discuss politics.)

On the economic front, the effect of 49 years of Castro's communism is clear.

One travel guidebook estimates that 45 per cent of Cubans live in substandard shelter. That might be a wild underestimate. Walk around Havana and much of the housing is literally crumbling. It's also substandard and cramped.

Peer into an apartment and you'll notice the ubiquitous dividers in rooms. It's common for several families to live in apartments and houses designed for just one.

Then there's the social fallout of the glorious revolution and its Marxist doctrines.

One acquaintance chatted with a Cuban training to become a doctor. Her rent was 100 pesos a month. Her income was 30 pesos. When asked how she paid the bills, she replied that she prostituted herself once a week -- twice weekly when the rent was due.

Some will point to the U.S. trade embargo as the source of Cuba's economic ills.

I agree. It's a significant reason for Cuba's poverty, that and the Communist system itself -- and both should end. Cuban-Americans don't have to give up their claims to property confiscated by Castro and his thugs, but that can be dealt with if and when Cuba becomes a liberal, market-oriented democracy.

In the meantime, money is power and the Americans should try another strategy: wash the Communists out to sea on a tidal wave of U.S. dollars from investment, trade and tourism.

If Castro cared about Cubans instead of raw power, he could have long ago admitted that his economic program had failed, reversed course, and/or even resigned. He could have called elections as did other Marxists such as Nicaragua's Daniel Ortega in the 1980s.

But instead, precisely similar to past Cuban dictators, Castro tightened his grip and now has a worse economic and human rights record than the dictator he toppled, Fulgencio Batista.

Cuba in 2008 should be the Hong Kong or Singapore of Latin America. That it is not is the fault of Castro and his cronies.

[Orville Wrong]

I've been to Cuba for bass fishing. Had to get a faked "research" permission from a university in Texas to spend US dollars there. It is an absolute shithole with no redeeming qualities outside its barely hopeful people and Guantanamo Bay. I've been to other poor countries (including Haiti), but never encountered anything like Castro's "Workers' Paradise," with women pathetically whoring themselves for food in Havana.

Viva Fidel. Viva la Revolucion.

[Motti]

It is an absolute shithole with no redeeming qualities outside its barely hopeful people and Guantanamo Bay.

No, it's not. It's a beautiful country, with awesome architecture, rich history, interesting culture, great people, lovely beaches etc.

Of course, you're entitled to your opinion. I have mine on forgery of documents (and on bass fishing!).

ETA: BTW, I hope you're not proud about GITMO. You may have heard about some ugly stuff going on there.

[Marlowe]

ETA: BTW, I hope you're not proud about GITMO. You may have heard about some ugly stuff going on there.

so here's a question for you... why is it okay for you to make negative references to the US such as this one, but you cry like a baby when i make a reference to brazilian 'democracy'. you're a hypocrite, motti.

[Motti]

so here's a question for you... why is it okay for you to make negative references to the US such as this one, but you cry like a baby when i make a reference to brazilian 'democracy'. you're a hypocrite, motti.

First, you should point to where I "cried like a baby" at the reference to Brazilian democracy. I don't recall doing it.

Second, there are documented things about the ugly stuff happening in GITMO, so it's not like I'm inventing things. And it's weird that someone says that Guantanamo Bay is a "quality" about Cuba.

Third, there is nothing currently bad -- nor one was ever pointed out here -- about Brazilian democracy. Which I think is in a fine state, but I'm perfectly willing to discuss it if you think it's not. And I'm not one to defend the Brazilian politics or anything: there are lots of problems here and I'd love to discuss them with you guys to get a feel on outside opinions.

Fourth, I didn't understand your "hypocrite" comment. Once again, if you (or anyone else) think it's improper for a foreigner to discuss any matters related to the US, just state it clearly. Every time I say something about the US, someone (thankfully, this is restricted to some few persons) comes out and say "hey, what about Brazil!". Well, fine, let's discuss Brazil -- I'd love to! What do you want to say about it?

[euro60]

Notice he never says anything about Brazilian babes ;)

[Motti]

Notice he never says anything about Brazilian babes ;)

And that would be my favorite topic of discussion! Well, at least one I know something about... :cool:

[euro60]

And that would be my favorite topic of discussion! Well, at least one I know something about... :cool:

That, and beaches and Jack Johnson. It's a nice life. :p

[Motti]

That, and beaches and Jack Johnson. It's a nice life. :p

We have some problems, though. Marlowe will list them shortly. :p

[Marlowe]

First, you should point to where I "cried like a baby" at the reference to Brazilian democracy. I don't recall doing it.

Hey, but there's a difference. We're savages, not enlighted superior beings! That said, I'd love to hear your suggestions on how to improve our system.

PS: If you think I'm not supposed to participate in this thread, just be open about it. No problem.


hysterical over-reaction where you "respond" to statements that were never said. and your whiny question about you participating in the thread. all statements that are hysterical, over-the-top, and not responding to what what actually said. so there you have it... you were crying like a baby when i made a mild reference to brazilian 'democracy'. then you go and make a pretty pointed remark about american policies. hence, you are a hypocrite. Q.E.D.

[Motti]

hysterical over-reaction where you "respond" to statements that were never said. and your whiny question about you participating in the thread. all statements that are hysterical, over-the-top, and not responding to what what actually said. so there you have it... you were crying like a baby when i made a mild reference to brazilian 'democracy'. then you go and make a pretty pointed remark about american policies. hence, you are a hypocrite. Q.E.D.

Oh, Marlowe! I don't think that's crying. And that was a logical response in that thread, as DudeMan (you're both the same guy? :)) nonchanlantly said Brazilian democracy sucked -- never explaining why! -- because I made a a question about the American primaries.

Let's be fair: here's a link (http://woxy.com/boards/showthread.php?t=51746&page=9) to that discussion, in case anyone wants to see if there was anything to be responded to "what was actually said" (I'm still nto sure how one could respond to that). BTW, you didn't respond to my other three points. Are you a hypocrite? :)

But anyway, I'll make it clear: despite of what anybody thinks of the reaction above, it is okay and desirable to discuss anything (anything!) about Brazil. As long as it is an actual discussion and not a unfounded attack, obviously. And I understand it is okay for me to discuss anything about the US on the same terms.

(Parenthesis: maybe my remark about American policies was not properly explained. It surprised me that Orville Wrong thinks Guantanamo Bay is a good thing while there is widespread information about abuses going on there, prisoners without judgment or proper accusation for months etc. So yes, it is a remark against US policies, which in this case seem undefensible to me. But I'm willing to hear about it.)

Truce?

[Marlowe]

whatever motti -- we've just seen the facts. you think it's totally acceptable for you to critique another country's system and practices, but you react in a defensive and hysterical fashion when someone dares to touch upon your precious system. you are a hypocrite. you can't have it both ways.

[Motti]

whatever motti -- we've just seen the facts. you think it's totally acceptable for you to critique another country's system and practices, but you react in a defensive and hysterical fashion when someone dares to touch upon your precious system. you are a hypocrite. you can't have it both ways.

Oh man, don't 'whatever' it. Hey, what do you want to discuss about Brazil? Pick your topic, really. Let's see what DudeMan said:

so you think the US could stand to import some of the glorious democratic traditions from brazil? lol, physician, heal thyself.
you guys want to do a little experiment and go to a brazilian-based board near their elections and post some similar point about the brazilian system and see what sort of reaction you get? what i wrote is mild compared to what you'd hear back, believe me.

That was the whole point. Now, other people thought that was out of line. Is that a discussion or an attack? You call it.

So in case you did not get it the first two times, I'll say it again (and that makes me a non-hypocrite under your argument): it is okay and desirable to discuss anything (anything!) about Brazil. As long as it is an actual discussion and not a unfounded attack, obviously. And I understand it is okay for me to discuss anything about the US on the same terms.

If I was a hypocrite before, I swear I won't be from now on. But I'll keep criticizing the US when I feel it's proper. First Amendment! :)

And next time I'll employ a large sized font, I swear!

BTW, the sun is shining and I'm off to the swimming pool. I'll tackle your response later this afternoon.

[yoshomon]

whatever motti -- we've just seen the facts. you think it's totally acceptable for you to critique another country's system and practices, but you react in a defensive and hysterical fashion when someone dares to touch upon your precious system. you are a hypocrite. you can't have it both ways.

I'm confused why an off-hand comment about Gitmo made you this upset.

[twentyshots]

I'm confused why an off-hand comment about Gitmo made you this upset.

not surprisingly, orville seems to like gitmo.

[Buzzstein]

I'm confused why an off-hand comment about Gitmo made you this upset.

Yeah, I don't really get why motti is being targeted here. I saw Cuba being discussed and somehow the US and Brazil made it back into the conversation.

By the way Orville Wrong is insane. I wouldn't bother arguing with him. He's just a more intelligible version of harnk. Really I wouldn't be surprised if it was the same person.

[Orville Wrong]

By the way Orville Wrong is insane. I wouldn't bother arguing with him. He's just a more intelligible version of harnk. Really I wouldn't be surprised if it was the same person.
I won't give you credit, because you're a dick and I am, too. But I'm going to put the harnk thing in my sig until I can replace it with a really good Jack Chick quote. K?thxbye.

[Orville Wrong]

Cuba has beautiful architecture because nothing has been built there since 1960. I fucking dare you to actually enter the spaces behind those lovely facades (as if you could fit because its three people to a square yard inside). They are absolute death traps, and this is well documented. Popsicle sticks and rubber bands can keep a '57 Chevy running, but they can't hold up a building.

I maintain that Cuba is a shithole with the exception of the part with a respectable tenant.

Can you tell me you've been there and not had young women repeatedly offer to fuck you for FOOD? FOOD! No one I have ever met who has been there does not share this experience.

The Cuban black bass is a "lunkier" version of the Florida black. It is a hell of a fighter, but was no match for my vast arsenal of crank bait and plastic worms.

[Motti]

Cuba has beautiful architecture because nothing has been built there since 1960. I fucking dare you to actually enter the spaces behind those lovely facades (as if you could fit because its three people to a square yard inside). They are absolute death traps, and this is well documented. Popsicle sticks and rubber bands can keep a '57 Chevy running, but they can't hold up a building.

I maintain that Cuba is a shithole with the exception of the part with a respectable tenant.

Can you tell me you've been there and not had young women repeatedly offer to fuck you for FOOD? FOOD! No one I have ever met who has been there does not share this experience.

I actually stayed in a casa particular when I was there. It's a regular house where people rent a room to foreigners. It was great. But indeed there are lots of crumbling buildings. However, Habana Vieja is entirely under work, they're even burying the power lines. It's getting a lot better.

Yes, some women did approach me and ask me if they could go to my room. Not that much, it happened three times in the 14 days I spent there. After I turned them down, they usually wanted to talk about stuff, know where I was from, what I was doing there and so on. Yes, they try to get money from tourists, but they like to talk even when they know they're not getting anything from you.

Of course, that has happened to me in São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro too. And in New Orleans or Las Vegas. So there.

It's a hell of a place to live, but it's not a shithole by any extent.