[Newfie]

Interesting thread. One can see the points on both sides of the argument.

I don't know enough about Cuba to comment on that state.

It does seem that there are countries, like the old Yougoslavia and Iraq, and Libia where the local factions required a very heavy hand to keep the country together.

If one assumes the purpose of government is to provide for our safety, and that in factious communities we kill one another, then a dictator strongman makes sense. I kind of doubt that was the case in Cuba.

But how was it between Haiti and DR? IIRC Haiti was a "democracy" and DR a dictatorship?

[Sixstrings]

Several years ago Forbes estimated Fidel Castro's personal fortune at almost a trillion dollars---it must be much more now.

The pic says "in millions", so it looks like $900 million (almost a billion), not "almost a trillion."

By the way, just an anecdote, I saw on CNN they said that unlike most dictators Castro was against any idea of a "cult of personality." He never wanted any statues of himself or monuments.

I don't think it's true that he ever lived in palaces or such?

[Sixstrings]

Well the thing is guys.. Castro and his communist Cuba were / are a mixed kind of thing, good and bad.

We all have different impressions.. overall in my mind, it seems like Castro was not as bad as Hitler or Stalin, or Pol Pot, or Mao, or Hussein or Ghadaffi or anything like that. Castro was like.. more "bad guy" than Hugo Chavez, but it seems like he wasn't as bad as the very bad dictators of the world.

Another thing to keep in mind -- it ain't like South America's got all angelic politicians, that's for sure. The whole continent's a mess and has been, for centuries.

One dictator after another -- right wing fascist dictators, communist dictators, on and on.

You have to remember folks, a lot of people look in at OUR culture and they criticize us too -- we have 2.2 million people in prison. The US imprisons the most people in the world, per capita.

Of the communists, Castro was HUGE.

He was a figure on the world stage for what, sixty years? It just is what it is, he's a major figure in world history.

I saw on CNN, they interviewed one Cuban man in Cuba and he said that Fidel made his country world famous, and without Castro then Cuba would have just been a "pebble in the ocean."

And there's just a lot of folklore stuff, about Castro. As Onlooker posted: "He survived 638 assassination attempts by the CIA." I don't know if that's an accurate number, but it is in fact true that the CIA tried to take him out at least dozens and dozens of times. And he somehow survived, every time. (just so everyone knows, the US government doesn't make attempts on world leaders anymore, per an executive order back in late 60s I think)

Castro's life was so big, one could take just one aspect of it -- like just the assassination attempts against him -- and make a feature length documentary or book about it, and it's fascinating. It's amazing the guy lived to 90 years old, lol.

Or, one could write a book about Cuba's medical system -- communist, yep, but yet they churned out tens of thousands of doctors.

It's just a whole society down there -- is it wacky and weird and different to our eyes? Yes, but, it's their culture.

What the US should do is have friendly relations and gradually encourage more democracy and human rights, but it shouldn't be done in a way that's threatening to their system and government. (to start being heavy handed would be like being the first ones to start problems over again, as it stands the Cubans have been working with the US in good faith)

Fidel did all he did, while under EMBARGO and constant pressure from the US, for sixty years. And, the Cuban exile community after him all that time too.

It just seems to me like maybe Cuba's earned its right to be left alone, and Obama made peace and America made peace and we chose to move on about Cuba, a year ago. Why start it all up again?

We can't FORCE rapid immediate change with all our allies and partners in the world. What the right thing to do, is encourage GRADUAL change -- but be nice about it, don't be an ass about it.

As I already posted, one must remember that (a) latin america's been full of "awful dictators" for centuries now. (b) Castro led a guerilla revolution against an awful US-backed right wing dictator, Batista. The poor suffered a lot under Batsita -- and American mobsters from Chicago ran the swanky casinos. And big American corporations had fiefdoms in Cuba, barely paying the poor any kind of money at all.

Did you guys ever see the "Godfather" movies? Part of that, was about swinging Havana in the 50s, and when Batista fell.

Here's something ironic -- the swanky hotels and maybe casinos are starting to come back. But these days, rather than the Chicago mob, it's the communist Cuban military that runs the tourism department!

The whole thing has come full circle.

But the thing is -- it's a sovereign country. That has to be respected, folks. It's not an enemy of the US anymore -- rather, tourists are having a good time down there, the Cubans are nice people, what's the problem?

[Sixstrings]

O Canada: Trudeau's Castro tribute raises eyebrows

(CNN)Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's tribute complimenting Fidel Castro as "remarkable" and a "larger than life leader who served his people" drew criticism and derision. ...

In his statement, Trudeau expressed "deep sorrow" after learning of "the death of Cuba's longest serving president."

"Fidel Castro was a larger than life leader who served his people for almost half a century. A legendary revolutionary and orator, Mr. Castro made significant improvements to the education and healthcare of his island nation."

"While a controversial figure, both Mr. Castro's supporters and detractors recognized his tremendous dedication and love for the Cuban people who had a deep and lasting affection for 'el Comandante'."
http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/27/world/justin-trudeau-castro-eulogy-parody/index.html

Fidel Castro survived 600 assassination attempts, officials say
http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/12/americas/cuba-fidel-castro-at-90-after-assassination-plots/

[Sixstrings]

Some pictures on NBC news.

Fidel Castro with Earnest Hemmingway:



Castro with Ed Sullivan:

Castro visits the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C. in 1959. Castro visited the U.S. in April of 1959 as part of a charm offensive for his new government, but was refused a meeting with President Eisenhower.

Castro speaking before a huge gathering of people in Cuba in 1960.

Castro with Jimmy Carter at a baseball game in Havana:



Castro with Chinese president Xi Jinping:



And, on and on.. pictures of Castro and the Pope.. pictures of Castro laughing with Nikita Kruschev.. Castro scuba diving.. Castro in a tank.. Castro skiing in Soviet Russia..

He's just a part of history, "most interesting man in the world" kind of thing.

The reason Justin Trudeau is praising Castro, is because I guess Castro was close to Pierre Trudeau.

But anyhow, Fidel Castro is the past.. US government should be focusing on the future, and in a positive way.

Here's the thing --

* For starters, Trump and Republicans need to think about PUERTO RICO. It's a full US territory, and US citizens. Did they ever get the bailout they needed? There was a lot of suffering there, hospitals without electricity and such. Puerto Rico is a priority right now, more than Cuba.

* I'm not sure Cuba is really a "problem." How does it compare to the rest of central and South America? Is cuba the biggest problem in the hemisphere right now, and if so, why?

There's food shortage and massive problems in Venezuela. Brazil's got problems. Everybody's got problems. Cuba seems to be doing okay, no?

* Cuba is just a relatively small island -- it's not any kind of priority for the US right now, like Republicans are making it to be. We've got a lot more bigger problems going on -- the Baltics, Ukraine, and securing east europe. The problem in Syria.

* Just having the embassy open, and travel and tourism and trade and letting US business make deals, would naturally change Cuba over time. But nothing should be heavy-handed.

* People should keep in mind that Cuba is like a latter USSR kind of thing -- they've got to be handled gingerly, carefully, and the right way. It's a communist state, the people could be a little shell-shocked right now (like post USSR Russia was) -- Republicans shouldn't just unleash Miami Cuban Americans to just go yell at the Cuban Cubans.

I'm just saying, Republicans should stop the aggressive tone I've been seeing on the news -- it's just nuts, Russia just decided our presidential election, but "Fidel Castro" is all that the GOP can think about?

We need to get our priorities straight, in this country. The Russia stuff needs looked into.

We've got Russian lobbyists all in and throughout the Trump administration, yet the GOP wants to talk about "Fidel Castro."

About the Russia stuff though -- we do need better relations, but without being bought and sold by the Kremlin either.. but if Trump administration has to get tough with Putin, then neither would it be good if it's not handled carefully and reasonably diplomatic.

What we really need right now, is Mitt Romney for sec of state and just let him be in charge of foreign policy. Romney could be tough, and has the right values and isn't bought by the Kremlin -- but also Romney isn't rude either, or insulting.

Talk about a "banana republic" -- we need to worried about our own country right now, with the Trump administration and the extreme level of incompetence and it's just all tea party and "outsider" and NO EXPERIENCE or skill or subtlety or polish.

Last thing about Republicans and Cuba -- we'll just see what happens. I'm just saying, I don't think the tone is right.

But if it works out, then I WILL note that and give credit if Trump admin accomplishes something good.

[Sixstrings]

Just to note -- I don't approve of or sympathize with communism in any way. I've read a few "bad things about communism" about Cuba before, that I may post some time.

The way I look at things though, as a centrist, is just respecting different cultures -- it's like, I'm not AMISH and never want to be and can't imagine being Amish, but yet I respect their difference and their culture and society. People have a right to that, to be different.

The thing about Cuba is that it doesn't seem quite like North Korea, or something. People aren't starving there, or miserable. We're not in a war with communism right now -- actually, it's far right fascism that's the rising concern in the world.

I'm certainly not an expert about Cuba, but from anything I've ever seen or read, it's a mixed picture.

Should the US be *for* Cuba becoming more open and democratic? Of course! That's the human rights I'm always talking about.

But when dealing with a society that's already set and just is how it is, then foreign policy shouldn't be heavy handed and it should be a nice and friendly approach and gently nudging and encouraging, but not heavy handed.

When US foreign policy gets too heavy handed, about changing another culture -- then that's what can cause problems and then have the opposite effect of what pro democracy people want. The other country can just go the other way, and put the walls up even higher, and relations more ruined.

[evilgenius]

For those that have a hate hard on for Castro: he would never have gained power if the f*cking USA did not support yet another bloody dictator (Batista) and put its money and "values" where its lying mouth is. If you claim to support democracy, then actually do it. Instead we have the US supporting every junta in Latin America and South-East Asia, the head-chopping theocracies in the Middle East, and terrorists in Syria. Then US drones get all hysterical when there is blowback. Grow a brain!

And that is kind of the point. The export land model has been at work for a long time now, in the fears of the strategic thinkers who have run the US. Everything has been about building a pyramid, with either the US or a European hegemony at the top. The Middle East is made up of oil bound economies because the US has made certain that they sell their own oil rather than use it to build an industrial base. Where there was conflict between Marxist or 'Freedom' fighters and right-wing land based concentrations of power the US chose always to back the group that would keep the poverty flowing. Same goes for every president for life in Africa. If enough of those countries had achieved the same kind of miracle that the US had, then the oil might already be gone by now.

You can say that the policy was the result of an inherited position. There might be some truth to that, like how the US wound up holding the bag for the French in Vietnam. Even there, however, people like Roosevelt wondered about what to do with South East Asia long before that whole mess got into the US's lap. If I remember correctly there was talk about how the best policy might be to back independence, back before WWII even ended, but it was shot down by those who aren't necessarily accountable to the voters.

Incidentally, it was also beneficial that communism took over in many of the places that it did. Under it, those countries weren't going to be a threat under the workings of the export land model either. The Soviets did have a lot of industry, and they did use a lot of natural resources, but they weren't about spreading a consumer culture.

Anyway, rant, rant, rant. The people of the US were never about that. They believed is all. It's way beyond some conspiracy theory or msm montage too. It's just life on a finite planet, and what those posed with the question of who gets what will answer, and whom they will tell.

[onlooker]

Good points Evil and Dissident. The US right after WWII, was by far the strongest Power and roughly one half the world's Economy. So a group and meeting designated the Council of Foreign Relations was convened. Here the US along mainly with its European allies discussed how to assure the predominance of the Western Empire. It was agreed that in the 20th century, dominance was about economic dominance. This makes sense because of the MAD effect of roughly equal nuclear arsenals of the US and USSR and because via the economic means one could achieve a more widespread and thorough domination. Thus, various international bodies and institutions were created like the World Bank, IMF, the World Trade Council etc. Via these entities and a pervasive and perverse system of lending , countries would all be tightly controlled and dominated. So that at present a Central Bank exists in almost every country and almost all privately owned by the Banking tycoon family Rothschild. The other manner in which US has chosen to assert control is surreptitiously by infiltrating and subverting the political process of countries. This done via bribery, blackmail, coercion , assassinations and other unsavory tactics bought to you by the CIA, NSA etc. You can always find people ready to sell out their fellow countrymen. So this is a little bit about history and I am straying off topic but Castro held out against all this, which is amazing.

[Plantagenet]

NPR just reported from Havana. The Cubans in Miami celebrated Fidels death. In contrast the Cuban population has been quiet since Fidel's death. Why?

The NPR reporters says the cuban police are going around and ordering people to turn off their radios and to talk quietly and look mournful.

NPR called it "ENFORCED MOURNING."

The Cuban regime used to bus in thousands of people so there would be a crowd for Fidel's ranting speeches. Its only right that the Cuban police state now have its minions go around and order people to mourn.

Hola, mi hermanos Cubanos. The regime says Look mournful---OR ELSE!

Cheers!

[Cog]

Enforced mourning sounds a lot like enforced hand clapping in North Korea. The regime hasn't changed a bit from its brutal beginnings. As a side note, did you realize that the Castro brothers and Che Guevara were adamant racists against black Cubans?

[Ibon]

One tyrant exits, another enters. And the seasons they go round and round.

[Sixstrings]

Just to add to a thread, there's a Cuban dissident blogger / writer I've read before that really gives some insight into "bad things about communism" in Cuba.

I think this is the one I was thinking of, Yoani Sanchez. I remember reading some of her stuff, about the everyday sillyness / irritations of communist life. I don't know if Cubans have any internet access to this day -- Sanchzez used to write about the secret underground of Cubans passing flash drives, etc., to get outside world news and information exchange with each other, etc.

Here's one of her pieces, this was about Castro's 90th birthday:

Recipe For Forgetting Fidel Castro

This whole excess of tributes and reminders is, undoubtedly, a desperate attempt to save the former Cuban president from oblivion, to pull him out of that zone of media abandonment in which he has fallen since announcing his departure from power a decade ago.

We have left the man born in the eastern town of Biran, in 1926, in the past, condemning him to the 20th century, burying him alive.

Children now in elementary school have never seen the once loquacious orator speak for hours at a public event. Farmers have breathed a sigh of relief on not having to receive constant recommendations from the “Farmer in Chief” and even housewives are thankful that he does not appear at a congress of the Federation of Cuban Women to teach them how to use a pressure cooker.

The official propaganda knows that people often appeal to short-term memory as a way of protecting themselves. For many young people, Fidel Castro is already as remote as, for my mother in her day, was the dictator Gerardo Machado, a man who so adversely marked the life of my grandmother’s generation.

Followers of the figure of Fidel Castro are taking advantage of the celebrations for his nine decades of life to try to erect a statue of immortality in the heart of the nation. They deify him, forgive him his systematic errors and convert him into the most visible head of a creed. The new religion takes as its premises stubbornness, intolerance for differences, and a visceral hatred – almost like a personal battle – against the United States.

The detractors of “Él,” as many Cubans simply call him, are preparing the arguments to dismantle his myth. They await the moment when the history books no longer equate him with José Martí, but offer a stark, cold and objective analysis of his career. They are the ones who dream of the post-Castro era, of the end of Fidelismo and of the diatribe that will fall on his controversial figure.

Most, however, simply turn the page and shrug their shoulders in a sign of disgust when they hear his name. They are the ones who, right now, turn off the TV and focus on a daily existence that negates every word Fidel Castro ever said in his incendiary speeches, in those times when he planned to build a Utopia and turn us into New Men.

Tired of his omnipresence, they are the ones who will deal the final blow to the myth. And they will do it without hullabaloo or heroic acts. They will simply stop talking to their children about him, there will be no photos in the rooms of their homes showing him with a rifle and epaulettes, they will not confer on their grandchildren the five letters of his name.

The celebration for the 90th birthday of Fidel Castro is, in reality, his farewell: as excessive and exhausting as was his political life.
https://generacionyen.wordpress.com/2016/08/13/recipe-for-forgetting-fidel-castro/

She's a darn good writer, and it's persuasive because she is a Cuban in Cuba, rather than Cuban American.

This kind of thing tells you all you need to know about strongman communist leader system (or strongman right wing dictatorship for that matter ):

Farmers have breathed a sigh of relief on not having to receive constant recommendations from the “Farmer in Chief” and even housewives are thankful that he does not appear at a congress of the Federation of Cuban Women to teach them how to use a pressure cooker.

The ominpresent "dear leader," in everyone's life right on down to the "leader" telling housewives how to use their pressure cooker.

In her view, Cubans had already moved on from Fidel, tired of a lifetime of his "ominpresence" in their lives:

Tired of his omnipresence, they are the ones who will deal the final blow to the myth. And they will do it without hullabaloo or heroic acts. They will simply stop talking to their children about him, there will be no photos in the rooms of their homes

And this is a good argument for moderate centrism, and against political extremes in general:

The new religion takes as its premises stubbornness, intolerance for differences, and a visceral hatred

[onlooker]

15235786_966591030150966_3153005365850815250_o.jpg

[Sixstrings]

Good post, Onlooker. Their medical achievements are noteworthy, considering that Cuba is just an island in the Caribbean and one wouldn't expect anything extraordinary to come from there.

About women's equality though -- I'd just note that communist North Korea has female equality too, and women all throughout their government and political system. But a female fundamentalist is still a fundamentalist, a thing isn't necessarily better just because it has women in it.

The medical achievements ARE impressive, though. They've exported something like 50,000 doctors. I didn't know about the vaccine firsts, you just posted about.

If I'm not mistaken, Cubans also have a higher life expectancy than Americans (part of that is eating less, but actually it's healthy to not eat so much ).

Cuba's certainly fascinating. It always has been -- Teddy Roosevelt led the US Army into Cuba, a hundred plus years ago. And as we all know in the 1960s -- Fidel invited Russian nukes in, and he almost caused nuclear armageddon. We now know, from history, that the Soviet commanders had orders to launch their nukes if the US had invaded.

The US has a LONG history with Cuba (including the pro American right wing dictator before Fidel, and how American companies owned all the infrastructure in Cuba) -- we should be cautious about Cuba, going forward.

Lefties in the US find all these good things to say about Cuba, but yet conservatives in the US are just as animated about what was WRONG about Castro and his communism.

There's lessons to be learned about Cuba -- in my view, the most important lesson is that moderate centrism is what's best. (without ignoring the poor in society)

Back on topic -- the US should be taking a moderate centrist policy approach toward Cuba going forward, as President Obama has been doing.

The reality of relations right now is that they are GOOD -- so really, there's no reason for a new administration to mess that up. Take it easy. Don't mess up something that's working. The current Cuban government is nice to Americans, they've been working with the US, Voice of America writes nice articles about them.

I'd say -- just open up trade. Drop the embargo entirely, fifty-four years of embargo is enough already. On remittances though -- THAT could be tied to getting things in return, which is what Obama has been doing (like Cuba increasing its percentage of private employment).

Just trade and tourism and business alone can change Cuba naturally over time. I think the thing is just that it wouldn't help to insult their government -- take a honey, not vinegar approach.

There's a lot of possibilities for trade and business with Cuba. For one thing, Americans could fly or take a speedboat ferry down there, for inexpensive medical treatment.

P.S. The point of my post is really just about balance and moderate centrism. Cuba is one of those "but on the other hand" topics, it's just a mixed kind of thing. To have an objective view, one must consider BOTH sides.

[Sixstrings]

Kremlin: Putin and Trump Disagree On Role Of Cuba’s Castro
A “true friend” to one and a “brutal dictator” to the other.

The views of Russian President Vladimir Putin and U.S. President-elect Donald Trump generally coincide, but the two men disagree about the role of late Cuban leader Fidel Castro, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Tuesday.

Putin paid tribute to Castro after his death on Friday calling him a “true friend of Russia,” while Trump dubbed the Cuban “a brutal dictator.”

“They are not identical, of course, there may be differences,” Peskov said of the two men’s views.

“In general they coincide a lot, of course. But without doubt there are differences, including when it comes to assessing the role of Castro. Yes, their differences on that one are plain to see,” Peskov told a conference call with reporters.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/kremlin-putin-and-trump-disagree-on-role-of-cubas-castro_us_583d78fde4b0860d61165301

Here's the situation on this -- Russia is more like far right autocrat, and isn't communist anymore. But, they have historical affection for Cuba obviously (Putin himself was a KGB agent and while Russia has gone far right, it still reminisces for the old Soviet Union).

Whereas Trump is just plain far right -- with obviously no formerly communist affection for Castro. (and another factor is just simply the political constituency of Cuban American Republicans, who were refugees from the Castro regime)

And it's off topic to this thread, but what I find noteworthy is that the Kremlin spokesman thinks Trump and Putin would only disagree on "some things" and then it sounds like otherwise they agree about everything.

The views of Russian President Vladimir Putin and U.S. President-elect Donald Trump generally coincide

“They are not identical, of course, there may be differences,” Peskov said

[careinke]

To be fair you might want to include Trump in list of wealthy tyrants. He outshines them all.

Could you please provide some examples of Trumps Tyranny that compares?

[KaiserJeep]

[careinke]

To be fair you might want to include Trump in list of wealthy tyrants. He outshines them all.

Could you please provide some examples of Trumps Tyranny that compares?

Still waiting.......................