Tags for This Article:

Corruption (1846)  Peace (1454)  Change (1221)  State (1082)  Health (870)  Weapons (611)  Revolution (476)  Reality (241)  Leader (203)  Homeless (192)  Equal (153)  Invasion (117)  Doctors (39)  Nationalization (37)  Fidel Castro (20) 

Populum Tag Cloud
       Control Panel
Fine tune your search to access content
Articles
Diaries Products
Events All
All time
Last 6 mos
Last month
Last week
Last 24 hrs
From:
Month  Day   Year

To:
Month  Day   Year
Alphabet
Popularity
Count ON
Count OFF
This Level
Sub-levels

 

 

 

Tag(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (more...) ; ; ; ;  (less...)
Add to My Group
September 13, 2008 at 17:11:53

Fidel Castro, Cuba's Revolutionary Leader

by John Little     Page 1 of 2 page(s)

www.opednews.com

 
Tell A Friend

View Ratings | Rate It  

  Fidel Alejandro Castro Ruz was born on August 13, 1926, and is the current President of Cuba. He attended Catholic schools before graduating from the University of Havana with a degree in law. In 1947, Castro joined the Cuban People's Party. He was attracted to this new party's campaign against corruption, injustice, poverty, unemployment and low wages. The Cuban People's Party accused government ministers of taking bribes and running the country for the benefit of the large United States corporations that had factories and offices in Cuba. 

In 1952, Fidel Castro became a candidate for Congress for the Cuban People's Party. He was a superb public speaker and soon built up a strong following amongst the young members of the party. The Cuban People's Party was expected to win the election but during the campaign. General Fulgencio Batista, with the support of the armed forces, took control of the country. Castro came to the conclusion that revolution was the only way that the Cuban People's Party would gain power.

On the 26th of July in 1953, Fidel Castro launched an attack on the Moncada army barracks.  It failed, and most involved were killed or captured.  Fidel was captured and given a trial, which he used to make his famous speech, "History Will Absolve Me".  Sentenced to 15 years, he was pardoned after just two. He then went into exile in Mexico, where he trained and assembled the 26th of July Movement.  He gained support from Che Guevara and others before leaving aboard the Granma to invade Cuba in 1956. 

Fulgencio Batista responded to this by sending more troops to the Sierra Maestra. He now had 10,000 men hunting for Castro and his 300-strong army. Although outnumbered, Castro's guerrillas were able to inflict defeat after defeat on the government's troops. In the summer of 1958, over a thousand of Batista's soldiers were killed or wounded and many more were captured. Unlike Batista's soldiers, Castro's troops had developed a reputation for behaving well towards prisoners. This encouraged Batista's troops to surrender to Castro when things went badly in battle. Complete military units began to join the guerrillas. 

The United States supplied Batista with planes, ships and tanks, but the advantage of using the latest technology such as napalm failed to win them victory against the guerrillas. In March 1958, the United States government, disillusioned with Batista's performance, suggested he hold elections. This he did, but the people showed their dissatisfaction with his government by refusing to vote. Over 75 per cent of the voters in the capital Havana boycotted the polls. In some areas, such as Santiago, it was as high as 98 per cent. 

Castro was now confident he could beat Batista in a head-on battle. Leaving the Sierra Maestra mountains, Castro's troops began to march on the main towns. After consultations with the United States government, Batista decided to flee Cuba. Senior Generals left behind attempted to set up another military government. Castro's reaction was to call for a general strike. The workers came out on strike and the military were forced to accept the people's desire for change.

Castro marched into Havana on January 9,1959, and became Cuba's new leader. Ten days after the Revolution both Fidel Castro and Dwight D. Eisenhower issued a statement with a similar ring of conciliation. In Washington Eisenhower stated his earnest hope "that the people of that friendly country . . . so close to us in geography and sentiment," could "through freedom find peace stability, and progress."

The CIA director Allen Dulles, in testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, stated, "When you have a revolution, you kill your enemies. There were many instances of cruelty and oppression by the Cuban army, and they have the goods on some of those people. Now there probably will be a lot of justice. It will probably go much too far, but they have to go through this."

The era of good feelings lasted less than a week. Castro had become increasingly irritated by criticism of the trials, particularly in the American and Mexican press. The Bar Association in Mexico City had sent a strongly worded letter to the Cuban National College of Lawyers, protesting against the large number of executions. On January 15, Fidel Castro entered the lobby of the Havana Hilton. As usual he found a crowd of well wishers. Flattery accomplished more with Castro than with the President or the Cabinet. When guards tried to push back the crowd, he stopped them. "El pueblo! The people! Let the people see me. Let me talk with them." Then someone raised the question of the purge trials and the possibility of American intervention. Castro fumed. If the United States sent marines into Cuba, he said, 200,000 gringos would die.

At the time the Eisenhower administration had no intention of intervening and would soon send an ambassador to Havana who would seek to improve relations with the revolutionary government and with the rebel leader. In its first hundred days in office Castro's government passed several new laws. Rents were cut by up to 50 per cent for low wage earners; property owned by Batista and his ministers was confiscated; the telephone company was nationalized and the rates were reduced by 50 per cent; land was redistributed amongst the peasants (including the land owned by the Castro family); separate facilities for blacks and whites (swimming pools, beaches, hotels, cemeteries etc.) were abolished. 

Castro had strong views on morality. He considered that alcohol, drugs, gambling, homosexuality and prostitution were major evils. He saw the casinos and night-clubs as sources of temptation and corruption and he passed laws closing them down. Members of the Mafia, who had been heavily involved in running these places, were forced to leave the country. 

Castro believed strongly in education. Before the revolution 23.6 per cent of the Cuban population were illiterate. In rural areas over half the population could not read or write and 61 per cent of the children did not go to school. Castro asked young students in the cities to travel to the countryside and teach the people to read and write. Cuba adopted the slogan: "If you don't know, learn. If you know, teach." Eventually free education was made available to all citizens and illiteracy in Cuba became a thing of the past. 

The new Cuban government also set about the problem of health care. Before the revolution Cuba had 6,000 doctors. Of these, 64 per cent worked in Havana where most of the rich people lived. When Castro ordered that doctors had to be redistributed throughout the country, over half decided to leave Cuba. To replace them Cuba built three new training schools for doctors. The death of young children from disease was a major problem in Cuba. Infant mortality was 60 per 1,000 live births in 1959. To help deal with this Cuba introduced a free health-service and started a massive inoculation program. By 1980 infant mortality had fallen to 15 per 1,000. This figure is now the best in the developing world and is in fact better than many areas of the United States. 

It has been estimated that in his seven-year reign, Batista's regime had murdered over 20,000 Cubans. Those involved in the murders had not expected to lose power and had kept records, including photographs of the people they had tortured and murdered. Castro established public tribunals to try the people responsible and an estimated 600 people were executed.  

The Eisenhower administration initially welcomed Castro to power, but President Eisenhower snubbed Castro when he visited Washington in April, 1959. Castro met instead with Vice President Richard Nixon. Castro would never forgive the United States for treating him like a second-class leader of a third-world nation. In May 1960, Cuba and the Soviet Union resumed diplomatic relations, and Cuba began importing Soviet oil. When American-owned refineries in Cuba refused to refine the oil, Castro confiscated the facilities. In response to that and other nationalizations of U.S. properties in Cuba and to Castro's growing friendship with the Soviet Union, the United States placed an economic embargo on Cuba in October 1960. This was two years before the naval blockade of 1962.

Just before Eisenhower leaves office in January, 1961, the U.S. government breaks diplomatic relations with Havana.  Some of Castro's new laws also upset the United States. Much of the land given to the peasants was owned by United States corporations. So also was the telephone company that was nationalized. The United States government responded by telling Castro they would no longer be willing to supply the technology and technicians needed to run Cuba's economy. When this failed to change Castro's policies they reduced their orders for Cuban sugar. Castro refused to be intimidated by the United States and adopted even more aggressive policies towards them. In the summer of 1960, Castro nationalized United States property worth $850 million. He also negotiated a deal where by the Soviet Union and other communist countries in Eastern Europe agreed to purchase the sugar that the United States had refused to take. The Soviet Union also agreed to supply the weapons, technicians and machinery denied to Cuba by the United States. 

 1  |  2

 

http://beyond.euskalaretoa.com/belief/YaBB.pl

53 year old Californian male - I've lived in three different countries, USA, Switzerland, Mesico - speak three languages fluently, English, French, Spanish - parttime journalist for Empower-Sport Magazine

Contact Author
Contact Editor
View Other Articles by Author

 

Bookmark this page: (what's this?)

NETSCAPE      DIGG THIS      Add This Page to Mr Wong!           NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      My Web      Tag!RawSugar      Blink List     (More...)
Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
24 comments

I'm sixty-seven and I live in Northern California. I graduated from college in 1963 and from law school in 1966. I retired in 2001, after working 23 years for the United States Forest Service. I have radical politics, and before going to work for the Forest Service in 1978 I spent ten years trying to contribute to the revolution.

Presently, I don't spend nearly as much time as I should re-writing old pieces. Although I haven't re-written my own favorite self-quotation, a little...

to see more of bio, click on member name

GLloyd RowseyI'm sixty-seven and I live in Northern California. I graduated from college in 1963 and from law school in 1966. I retired in 2001, after working 23 years for the United States Forest Service. I have radical politics, and before going to work for the Forest Service in 1978 I spent ten years trying to contribute to the revolution.

Presently, I don't spend nearly as much time as I should re-writing old pieces. Although I haven't re-written my own favorite self-quotation, a little...

to see more of bio, click on member name

I second the previous comment.

Although I would add that the American embargo of Cuba is the longest and most inhumane arms-length treatment of one nation by another since nations formed in the 14th century.   And the embargo can be ended by the signing of a document; it would not require bringing hundreds of thousands of American soldiers back from foreign shores.  Finally, of course, Cuba has no natural resources which America covets, like oil.

Do these facts make the embargo more or less immoral than the War in Iraq?  I'm coming to the opinion that they make the embargo more immmoral. 

 

 

by GLloyd Rowsey (48 articles, 3 quicklinks, 26 diaries, 338 comments) on Saturday, September 13, 2008 at 10:50:14 PM
 


53 year old Californian male - I've lived in three different countries, USA, Switzerland, Mesico - speak three languages fluently, English, French, Spanish - parttime journalist for Empower-Sport Magazine
John Little53 year old Californian male - I've lived in three different countries, USA, Switzerland, Mesico - speak three languages fluently, English, French, Spanish - parttime journalist for Empower-Sport Magazine

Thank you both

I agree that I should have posted more about the 1960 economic embargo the US unilaterally placed on Cuba. What the people of that island have done over the past 48 years is nothing short of miraculous. As Moore's movie, Sicko, aptly pointed out, the health care system on the island is phenomenal despite the effects of the embargo.

 Again, thank you both for the nice words.

by John Little (23 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 71 comments) on Sunday, September 14, 2008 at 12:41:39 AM
 


I'm an anti-civilizationist and election boycott advocate in San Diego. For reasons not to vote in faith-based elections with secret vote counts for candidates you cannot hold accountable if they fail to represent you, check out the discussions, articles, and videos on my website http://noinnovember.ning.com
Mark E. SmithI'm an anti-civilizationist and election boycott advocate in San Diego. For reasons not to vote in faith-based elections with secret vote counts for candidates you cannot hold accountable if they fail to represent you, check out the discussions, articles, and videos on my website http://noinnovember.ning.com

Thank you, John.

I found this paragraph to be of particular interest:

In March 1958, the United States government, disillusioned with Batista's performance, suggested he hold elections. This he did, but the people showed their dissatisfaction with his government by refusing to vote. Over 75 per cent of the voters in the capital Havana boycotted the polls. In some areas, such as Santiago, it was as high as 98 per cent. 

I'd known about the successful election boycott in South Africa that discredited, delegitimized, and led to the eventual overthrow of the Apartheid regime, but I hadn't known about the successful election boycott in Cuba.

I've been advocating an election boycott here in the U.S. in November. While there has been substantial interest, it is not likely to happen because too many Americans still think that having a car and a TV, even if you don't have a job or health insurance, is freedom.

Here on opednews there are many people who plan to vote for Obama despite knowing that our elections are rigged and that their votes are likely to be flipped to McCain. They also know full well that Obama is committed to continuing the wars of aggression based on lies that were started by the Bush/Cheney administration. Obama has even stated that he will pursue these crimes against humanity using the Bush/Cheney agenda of privatizing the wars by using fewer U.S. military troops and more private mercenaries. Obama voted to fund these wars through 2010, so that no matter whether he or McCain becomes President, the wars will continue. And if he becomes President, Obama will have to uphold the Democratic Party precedent of pardoning the members of the previous administration for war crimes, as Bill Clinton did, because he will also be guilty of those same war crimes and will need pardoning in his turn.

American progressives, even here on opednews, claim to oppose the wars, but are committed to voting for Obama, even though he will continue the wars, because they see him as a somewhat less enthusiastically evil war criminal than McCain. The fact that the wars of aggression are crimes against humanity and are driving the U.S. deeper into debt to the tune of a million dollars every two minutes, doesn't seem to enter into their progressive minds and, indeed, they seem to feel that anybody who doesn't vote for the lesser war criminal, or who refuses to vote in a rigged election at all, is "psychotic." 

I personally know hundreds of decent Americans who have voted all their lives but are committed to not voting in November. My election boycott advocacy has succeeded beyond my wildest dreams. But although I do expect a slightly lower turnout seven weeks from now than there was in the primaries when peace was still on the ballot, I do not expect there to be a successful election boycott. 

I don't know how to explain it. Few Americans approve of what our government is doing, yet 48% voted in the last Presidential election, and I expect that more than 30% will vote in November.  Among Democratic Party voters, Congressional Democrats have an 11% approval rating, yet many of them will vote for a Member of of Congress they disapprove of, and who supports an agenda they disapprove of, Barack Obama, simply because he, like his mentor Joe Lieberman, is a Democrat in name. These voters also know that because Obama has not strenuously opposed the Bush/Cheney agenda, the race is likely to appear (thanks mostly to election fraud) to be close, and that Obama is like to follow the precedent set by Gore and Kerry before him and concede to McCain without bothering to ensure that the votes are even counted. 

It is unfortunate that because Americans are aware of and concerned about the fact that our elections are rigged, a large election fraud industry has arisen that documents, investigates, litigates, and publicises election fraud. The stars of this industry, people like Brad Friedman of bradblog and Professor Mark Crispin Miller, have written extensively about how our elections are rigged, have predicted with certainty that the November election will be stolen, yet are still encouraging people to vote in the rigged election, possibly so that they can continue to profit from writing about how the election of '08 was stolen. 

Miller is supporting a whistle-blower lawsuit, believing that exposing the crimes of this administration with regard to election fraud will "send them scurrying for cover." Yet he has to know that most of the high crimes and misdemeanors set forth in the Articles of Impeachment read out by Dennis Kucinich in the House of Representative have been proven and/or admitted to by this administration, and nobody has gone scurrying for cover. There was also a large conference over the weekend about prosecuting this administration for war crimes, even though everyone is aware that any prosecutor who tries it will lose their job and the prosecution will be squashed. 

Despite the growing numbers of people who understand that an election boycott is the ONLY nonviolent way of delegitimizing a government that has proven to be effective, and who will not vote to grant their mandate, delegate their power, and give their consent to a rogue government they cannot hold accountable, there are still many who listen to the political party operatives who urge them to vote in an election that they know will be stolen.

I often think of Harriet Tubman, an escaped slave who led many other slaves to freedom on the underground railway. This is from her Wikipedia page:

She also carried a revolver, and was not afraid to use it. Once a slave agreed to join her expedition, there was no turning back – and she threatened to shoot anyone who tried to return.[72] Tubman told the tale of one voyage with a group of fugitive slaves, when morale sank and one man insisted he was going to go back to the plantation. She pointed the gun at his head and said: "You go on or die."[73] Several days later, he was with the group as they entered Canada.

Imagine the love of people and the strength it took to lead people to freedom at gunpoint if necessary. Fidel Castro also had that great love of people and of freedom and never lost hope even when his numbers were small and they had suffered great setbacks. 

I wish I had that great a love of people and of freedom. Not only do I not dare take up arms, I don't even have the courage to take a leadership position. I urge people not to vote in rigged elections, not to vote for war criminals, and to boycott the November election rather than allowing a third presidential election in a row to be stolen, as they freely admit it will be. But I'm not a Fidel Castro or a Harriet Tubman. I know that as long as we continue to vote, to delegate our power to a corrupt government we cannot hold accountable, we will not be free, and I'd like for us to be a free country, but I lack the strength of character to lead my people to freedom the way that Tubman and Castro did. 

My admiration for Tubman and Castro is boundless, but I am, myself, a sorry excuse for a human being. I am nothing more than just another spineless American. There may be hope for us, but it would probably take a miracle.

 

 

by Mark E. Smith (21 articles, 30 quicklinks, 100 diaries, 1325 comments) on Sunday, September 14, 2008 at 3:30:35 PM
 


53 year old Californian male - I've lived in three different countries, USA, Switzerland, Mesico - speak three languages fluently, English, French, Spanish - parttime journalist for Empower-Sport Magazine
John Little53 year old Californian male - I've lived in three different countries, USA, Switzerland, Mesico - speak three languages fluently, English, French, Spanish - parttime journalist for Empower-Sport Magazine

Wow, Mark!!!

I am definitely impressed. There aren't many people like you and Glloyd above who speak out and advocate for radical change. I'm blown away at that.

 I have found few Americans who even have an inkling of what's going on. Nearly everyone who is dissatisfied with the status quo, become "Progressives" so they can pretend to protest the current course of events. At first, these sites looked promising, but when I noticed that they still advocated voting for "the lesser of twl evils, and maybe next time we'll get one of 'ours' on the ballot" I realized that these groups are nothing more than step-children of the corporatists who will leave no stone unturned to keep their vicd-like grip on US policy intact. They may even be worse than the Republicrats because they hold out a carrot of change while masking the stick of continuance behind their back. "Vote our way THIS TIME and maybe we'll have a better candidate next time."

Progressives are nothing more than "Winners of a losing battle". "Well, we lost this time, but we fought the good fight!" That's bs. You lost, and that's all that counts. The corporatists are laughing all the way to the next war repeating the mantra of the Progressives: They fought the good fight, but lost. Well LA-TE-FRIGGIN-DA.

The US is the land of sheeple. Not only are people clueless, but they prefer it. They will fight the peaceniks to keep our hegemonic and brutal policies in vigor. It's sickening.

 I would like to invite you two, and anyone else, to my forum to discuss what is going on, and to my ning site to discuss what to do to break the yoke of corporatist oppression we've been under for so long. There has to be a way to bring this down, and I'm not talking naively about the US alone. It's very international and the decisions don't always originate from Washington DC. But even though it's intertwined, it can be brought down. We need to find that way.

 http://beyond.euskalaretoa.com/belief/YaBB.pl

http://letssaveus.ning.com/

All sincere help will be appreciated. The idea of boycotting the elections is a valid one. They most recently used it in Spain, with mixed results, but it is a very legitimate way to wake up the sheeple and tell them that all is not well in Fantasyland.

by John Little (23 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 71 comments) on Sunday, September 14, 2008 at 3:56:11 PM
 


The author has a Master's Degree in Counseling Psychology, which she can find no profitable use for.She was a '60's rebel and anti-war protester. She is now 21st century rebel, anti-war protestor, anarchist, and would-be writer. Think for yourself!
Sharon FroehlichThe author has a Master's Degree in Counseling Psychology, which she can find no profitable use for.She was a '60's rebel and anti-war protester. She is now 21st century rebel, anti-war protestor, anarchist, and would-be writer. Think for yourself!

Boycotted elections

I also had not realized that Cuba had a successful election boycott. I am one of the US citizens who have voted faithfully for the last 25 years, only to see promises broken, wars continued, and lies. lies, lies, This year I have decided not to vote, as voting gives my mandate to the liars to continue. I am done with that. If most progressives are democrats, I guess I'm a radical. But I think we need to establish a government that really does represent the people, and that won't happen by voting for Obama.

by Sharon Froehlich (0 articles, 9 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 32 comments) on Sunday, September 14, 2008 at 4:26:13 PM
 


The author has a Master's Degree in Counseling Psychology, which she can find no profitable use for.She was a '60's rebel and anti-war protester. She is now 21st century rebel, anti-war protestor, anarchist, and would-be writer. Think for yourself!
Sharon FroehlichThe author has a Master's Degree in Counseling Psychology, which she can find no profitable use for.She was a '60's rebel and anti-war protester. She is now 21st century rebel, anti-war protestor, anarchist, and would-be writer. Think for yourself!

Fidel Castro. Cuba's Revolutionary Leader

Comment from Ratings:   Thanks so much for this article, John. I found it to be well-researched and well written. it also expanded my education about Fidel and the real Cuba quite a bit.
I was a child during the Bay of Pigs fiasco, and was raised as all American children were during the Cold War-"Better dead than Red" was our theme. I have long since realized the fallacy of this, and that Fidel was NOT the bad guy, but the history you covered, along with the facts about Cuba today, were very welcome. I am only sorry that our government continues so have the attitude it does towards Cuba, imagine how many lives could have been saved if we had accepted their help?
George W.Bush is the dictator here. He still says better dead than Red, but I believe the people who died would have said differently. Thanks again.

by Sharon Froehlich (0 articles, 9 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 32 comments) on Sunday, September 14, 2008 at 4:13:51 PM
 


53 year old Californian male - I've lived in three different countries, USA, Switzerland, Mesico - speak three languages fluently, English, French, Spanish - parttime journalist for Empower-Sport Magazine
John Little53 year old Californian male - I've lived in three different countries, USA, Switzerland, Mesico - speak three languages fluently, English, French, Spanish - parttime journalist for Empower-Sport Magazine

Thanks for all the positive responses

I've decided to put my Woody Guthrie tribute up next. He was a legendary folk hero who sung praises and ballads across our country. He sang about its beauty and about the suffering that ordinary folks had to endure in order to make a living. And, he was a card-carrying member of the Communist Party.

My piece is not to praise that party, mainly because I don't know much about it, but to praise the man who touched so many of us so deeply, especially those of us who were there during the 60s. Here is a snippit from one of his son's famous songs that was made into a movie which I saw at a drive-in I'm proud to say. Both men are shining examples of what America is all about.

from Alice's Restaurant:

I went over to the sargent, said, "Sargeant, you got a lot a damn gall to
ask me if I've rehabilitated myself, I mean, I mean, I mean that just, I'm
sittin' here on the bench, I mean I'm sittin here on the Group W bench
'cause you want to know if I'm moral enough join the army, burn women,
kids, houses and villages after bein' a litterbug."  He looked at me and
said, "Kid, we don't like your kind, and we're gonna send you fingerprints
off to Washington."

And friends, somewhere in Washington enshrined in some little folder, is a
study in black and white of my fingerprints.  And the only reason I'm
singing you this song now is cause you may know somebody in a similar
situation, or you may be in a similar situation, and if your in a
situation like that there's only one thing you can do and that's walk into
the shrink wherever you are ,just walk in say "Shrink, You can get
anything you want, at Alice's restaurant.".  And walk out.  You know, if
one person, just one person does it they may think he's really sick and
they won't take him.  And if two people, two people do it, in harmony,
they may think they're both faggots and they won't take either of them.
And three people do it, three, can you imagine, three people walking in
singin a bar of Alice's Restaurant and walking out. They may think it's an
organization.  And can you, can you imagine fifty people a day,I said
fifty people a day walking in singin a bar of Alice's Restaurant and
walking out.  And friends they may thinks it's a movement.

And that's what it is , the Alice's Restaurant Anti-Massacre Movement, and
all you got to do to join is sing it the next time it come's around on the
guitar.

With feeling.  So we'll wait for it to come around on the guitar, here and
sing it when it does.  Here it comes.

You can get anything you want, at Alice's Restaurant
You can get anything you want, at Alice's Restaurant
Walk right in it's around the back
Just a half a mile from the railroad track
You can get anything you want, at Alice's Restaurant

I've often mused of starting such a movement.

Hey, THEY made a difference. A HUGE difference. A POSITIVE difference. We owe it to them, and Pete Seegar, and Lenny Bruce to name a few. Only from within can this dream called USA die, and only from within can it be saved. The seeds of destruction are all around, but we must plant only the seeds of peace. It's a beautiful country and it would be a shame to watch the dream die on a mound of toxic, radioactive waste piled onto the forgotten millions we've already killed.

 Again, thanks.

by John Little (23 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 71 comments) on Sunday, September 14, 2008 at 5:03:37 PM
 


Darren Wolfe is the former Eastern Vice Chair of the Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania. He grew up in Puerto Rico and lived in Venezuela for seven years, including the first year of Chavez' rule. His articles have appeared in OpEdNews.com, the Libertarian Penn, and the Nolanchart.com. News services such as the New York Post.com and Rational Review have published links to his work.

Anyone interested in a good game of chess can challenge me below, if you dare. LOL

http://...

to see more of bio, click on member name

Darren WolfeDarren Wolfe is the former Eastern Vice Chair of the Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania. He grew up in Puerto Rico and lived in Venezuela for seven years, including the first year of Chavez' rule. His articles have appeared in OpEdNews.com, the Libertarian Penn, and the Nolanchart.com. News services such as the New York Post.com and Rational Review have published links to his work.

Anyone interested in a good game of chess can challenge me below, if you dare. LOL

http://...

to see more of bio, click on member name

Communist failure

How is it that this guy, Castro, that comitted mass murder & only lead his country to poverty & deprivation deserves such praise? Just because he was anti-American?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending Batista or the US intervention in Cuba, but the change should be for the better. Cuba is poorer now than it was in the '50s. At least the economy was slowly moving up before Castro.

The quality of healthcare in Cuba is bad. Shortages of medicine & equipment are the norm. Filthy facilities are what the common folk get, not the nice new ones that the communist elite enjoy. Before castro, Cuba had one of the longest life expectancies in Latin America & better healthcare than most of its neighbors.

While literacy is up, there are 2 points to be made about this. One is that the claim of 100% is extremely suspicious. 95% might be credible, but 100%? How is that possible?

The second point is that governments, including the US & Cuba, control education so they can indoctrinate the people into supporting the regime.  So, while people learn the 3 Rs they also learn suberviance to the state.

Speaking of the state, the Cuban government is a brutal dictatorship that squashes all dissent. After all, if it were such a great place to live why do so many leave, even risking their lives to do so?

Castro, like Bush, Kennedy, et al, deserves condemnation not praise.

by Darren Wolfe (7 articles, 191 quicklinks, 104 diaries, 765 comments) on Sunday, September 14, 2008 at 9:24:29 PM
 


53 year old Californian male - I've lived in three different countries, USA, Switzerland, Mesico - speak three languages fluently, English, French, Spanish - parttime journalist for Empower-Sport Magazine
John Little53 year old Californian male - I've lived in three different countries, USA, Switzerland, Mesico - speak three languages fluently, English, French, Spanish - parttime journalist for Empower-Sport Magazine

Sorry to hear that you don't know the whole story.

Darren,

 The US enforced economic blockade started in 1960 has created a lot of the conditions you are blaming Castro for. I agree that they are very poor. Economic isolation has a way of doing that. It should not come as a surprise that an economic blockade started in 1960 and which still exists today would have a devastating effect on the country.

In spite of the US's crippling blockade since 1960, Castro has done many good things for his country. Education is free, and as you well noted, the illiteracy rate is one of the best in the world. Their healthcare system is nothing short of incredible despite the lack of medicine and equipment caused by the US's embargo since 1960. Perhaps you're not aware of the fact that doctors in Cuba actually visit their patients at home, probably more so than any other country on Earth. Their hospital facilities are spotless and the care they give their patients some of the best treatment of any country on Earth.

Free schooling for all
Free healthcare for all
Cuban doctors can be seen all over Latin America where they give life-saving care to the poor!
Near 100% literacy
Infant mortality rate one of the best in Latin America.
Reduced costs for rent, telephone, more equitable repartition of the land amnog all citizens
I could go on, but those represent just SOME of what he was able to accomplish. Just imagine what he could have done if the US hadn't tried to destroy his economy all this time.

The US has tried to assassinate Castro many times. This is illegal in the international arena. The US has imposed a strict economic blockade of his country, yet he keeps on improving on his already fantastic program. Castro is the only leader of a Latin American country that HASN'T bowed down to kiss America's foot. That, in and of itself, is incredible. Other place felt the sting of US hegemonic goals. Chile - USA overthrow of democratically elected leader to put a ruthless dictator in its place. Thousands will di as a result. Aregntina - with the full backing of the US, the military junta killed tens of thousands of citizens. Ecuador - leader wouldn't accept enslavement by the IMF and WB. He was assasinated by the US. Panama - same result. Colombia - receives billions in aid from the US to "fight cocaine" guess what, it's worse now than before (psst - Uribe knows that if his cocaine "problem" were to be solved, he'd lose all the FREE US TAXPAYER money we send him. He ain't stupid). Nicaragua - US sends contras in to kill peasants by the boatload because the US didn't like the elected government.

I think Castro's direction for his country, while far from perfect, has done much more good for his people than the directions made by the dictators propped up by the US throught Latin America.

by John Little (23 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 71 comments) on Sunday, September 14, 2008 at 10:07:50 PM
 


citizen
tim bristolcitizen

You haven't answered Darren's question

"After all, if it were such a great place to live why do so many leave, even risking their lives to do so? "

 

by tim bristol (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 89 comments) on Monday, September 15, 2008 at 8:23:30 AM
 


Darren Wolfe is the former Eastern Vice Chair of the Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania. He grew up in Puerto Rico and lived in Venezuela for seven years, including the first year of Chavez' rule. His articles have appeared in OpEdNews.com, the Libertarian Penn, and the Nolanchart.com. News services such as the New York Post.com and Rational Review have published links to his work.

Anyone interested in a good game of chess can challenge me below, if you dare. LOL

http://...

to see more of bio, click on member name

Darren WolfeDarren Wolfe is the former Eastern Vice Chair of the Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania. He grew up in Puerto Rico and lived in Venezuela for seven years, including the first year of Chavez' rule. His articles have appeared in OpEdNews.com, the Libertarian Penn, and the Nolanchart.com. News services such as the New York Post.com and Rational Review have published links to his work.

Anyone interested in a good game of chess can challenge me below, if you dare. LOL

http://...

to see more of bio, click on member name

I suggest you learn more about cuba

John,

While no doubt there are some Potemkin village type hospitals that are nice, most healthcare facilities in Cuba aren't good:

http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/004070.php

http://josue.blogtownhall.com/default.aspx?mode=post&g=4af608f7-8a31-45e7-a6ef-518bf46e67c9

Don't believe the communist hype. I've known a number of Cubans over the years, things are bad there that's why they leave. True, the US embargo doesn't help, but even Soviet aid didn't move them forward. More proof that socialism doesn't work.

Now had Castro moved Cuba in a free market (not to be confused with a controlled market like we have now) direction they would have done much better even with a US embargo in place.

Lastly, I join with you in condemning the US interventions that you mention.

by Darren Wolfe (7 articles, 191 quicklinks, 104 diaries, 765 comments) on Monday, September 15, 2008 at 5:51:56 PM
 


I'm a 29 year old male. 
TyI'm a 29 year old male. 

Question

I'm confused about something. John claims that Castro's government gave land to the peasants and poor people of Cuba. From everything I've always read though the Cuban government owns all property. Cuba abolished private property and private ownership of businesses which is what makes Cuba a Communist country. The Communist Party of Cuba owns everything except for of course illegal businesses and foreign-owned businesses that do business in the country.

by Ty (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 868 comments) on Monday, September 15, 2008 at 12:43:15 AM
 


53 year old Californian male - I've lived in three different countries, USA, Switzerland, Mesico - speak three languages fluently, English, French, Spanish - parttime journalist for Empower-Sport Magazine
John Little53 year old Californian male - I've lived in three different countries, USA, Switzerland, Mesico - speak three languages fluently, English, French, Spanish - parttime journalist for Empower-Sport Magazine

Ty, that's an excellent question

To begin with, there was a law passed in 1940, long before Castro, that was supposed to be used as a first step to agrarian reform. It limited the amount of land owned by any one person to 1,000 acres. Obviously, Batista ignored it completely. He himself owned vast acreage and so did several American companies, the rich Cubans and quite possibly the mafia as well. For 19 years the laid on the books, collecting dust, while poor farmers paid rent on huge plantations and also had to give over a portion of their harvest. The land owners loved this. Batista was making money hand over fist. American companies were enjoying the profits from their own production as well as the production of the peasant Cuban farmer PLUS they also collected on rent from the farmer. No one bothered to even look at the law.

That is, until 1959. When Castro first came to power he immediately sought to reform the land so that the peasants are relieved of their yoke of enslavement by the rich land owners and foreign companies. He implemented the law that Batista refused to because Batista was merely a puppet of the US and the mafia.

For the first time in known history, the peasant farmer no longer needed to pay rent just to farm. They could grow their crops and sell them in the market place without having to give a percentage to greedy rich people and foreigners. Castro became even stricter when he lowered the size of the farm to below 200 acres a few years later. The peasant had the choice, for the first time in their life to contrinue farming, sell it and move to the city, or just live there and have someone else farm.

The peasant was restricted in their sale, however. Only other Cubans can buy the land, and later, only the government could. Now it is true that the Cuban government has the deed of property of much of the agrarian land on the island. But it must be said that the days when rich landlords, often complete foreigners who were never there, forced peasants to pay rent and a portion of their harvest. The farmer does not pay rent, the farmer is allowed to sell his entire crop in almost every case, and the farmer no longer risks losing his or her land at the whim of foreigners or rich capitalists.

I don't think Castro's system is perfect by any means. There are many changes I would wish to see happen there. But if I were to compare the days of Batista where 2% of the Cuban population had money and the mafia and foreign interests had the power, to Castro's enforcement of the 1940 law seeking equality for ALL Cubans, I'm afraid I'll have to go with equality. I know that exploitation is always a means to get rich on someone else's back and Batista and the mafia certainly proved this, but I will always prefer a more equal distribution of wealth where ALL citizens in society have EQUAL rights to everything.

One final note. While I was growing up and going to school in the US (60s - 70s) I was constantly told that Communism means the confiscation of everything and the ownership of nothing. No one ever mentioned that the system in the USSR might be different than in other countries. Since I have lived overseas and listened to many intelligent friends I've met along the way, I have become aware at the shallowness and unidimensional idea of "all communism is identical." I can see the differences in all countries and I no longer blindly apply staled attributes to countries who are called "communist" by the US. I now apply a much more rigorous investigation each and every time, knowing full well that all countries handle things differently and a black vs white concept just doesn't apply.

I hope I have answered your question. If you still have doubts, let me know.

by John Little (23 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 71 comments) on Monday, September 15, 2008 at 2:44:07 AM
 


I'm sixty-seven and I live in Northern California. I graduated from college in 1963 and from law school in 1966. I retired in 2001, after working 23 years for the United States Forest Service. I have radical politics, and before going to work for the Forest Service in 1978 I spent ten years trying to contribute to the revolution.

Presently, I don't spend nearly as much time as I should re-writing old pieces. Although I haven't re-written my own favorite self-quotation, a little...

to see more of bio, click on member name

GLloyd RowseyI'm sixty-seven and I live in Northern California. I graduated from college in 1963 and from law school in 1966. I retired in 2001, after working 23 years for the United States Forest Service. I have radical politics, and before going to work for the Forest Service in 1978 I spent ten years trying to contribute to the revolution.

Presently, I don't spend nearly as much time as I should re-writing old pieces. Although I haven't re-written my own favorite self-quotation, a little...

to see more of bio, click on member name

Also, Ty.

Since Fidel's brother, Raul, became President of Cuba - since Fidel stepped down six months ago - Raul has lessened the governmental restrictions on "private ownership" of land in Cuba.  This fact has been reported in the big media in America.  Predictably, as an example of Fidel's shortsightedness and the inevitability of the crumbling of Cuba's "democracy."

I put the words "private ownership" in quotation marks because you don't have to be a lawyer in the United States to know there's no ownership of land here that's free from governmental interference and/or regulation.  And the word "democracy" in quotations because when I hear the word Democracy spewing from the lips of politicians in America, I immediately think: "Democracy as we know it."

John's