10 ms·

A lot of that is due to their circumstances and the US embargo. I don't quite see what you are saying here – we may disagree with his policies and ideology, but

A lot of that is due to their circumstances and the US embargo. I don't quite see what you are saying here – we may disagree with his policies and ideology, but he seems very candid and truthful here, admitting many faults of his country's system. This is something a "Western" politician would rarely – if ever – do these days. You also need to be mindful of the situation in Cuba before the revolution, where the people felt that their country was becoming a satellite of the US, and losing control over its own destiny.

rayrod2030 10y ago
I was born in Cuba and just returned from the island 3 days ago. I'm pretty mindful of the situation there. There is no one to blame for the dire situation in Cuba other than the regime and it's leaders.
- tw04 10y ago
  So... in your opinion the US embargo had absolutely no effect on the situation? Or you're suggesting that any nation that doesn't act as a puppet of the US should be forced into severe economic sanctions as punishment? In other words, the US should be the only sovereign nation in the world?
  - tptacek 10y ago
    It's possible to disagree with the parent commenter without egregiously stuffing words into their mouth. Please read comments charitably.
    - tw04 10y ago
      I didn't stuff any words into his mouth - that's what the question marks were for. His first comment made his stance pretty clear so I gave him room for clarification. But thank you for doing what you just accused me of - I'm surprised your head didn't explode from the irony.
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
      - AnimalMuppet 10y ago
        Well, at a minimum you're asking him, in quite an accusing way, to defend against a bunch of things he didn't say. That's pretty close to "putting words in his mouth, but with question marks after them". It's not a fair form of debate, and it's not welcome here.
        tw04 10y ago
        He actually literally said that when someone mentioned the embargo being a huge reason that Cuba was in the situation they're in (which is true). If asking people to explain inflammatory statements like there's NOBODY to blame but the leaders in a situation like Cuba's is unwelcome, I'm not sure why this place exits. >There is no one to blame for the dire situation in Cuba other than the regime and it's leaders. I've not heard a single credible expert on the subject throw out an idea as laughable as the US embargo not having any effect on the Cuban economy. If you're going to support him I suggest you also provide some facts to backup such a ludicrous statement. Or, you know, just down vote me for calling him out.
        AnimalMuppet 10y ago
        You said: > Or you're suggesting that any nation that doesn't act as a puppet of the US should be forced into severe economic sanctions as punishment? In other words, the US should be the only sovereign nation in the world? That's stuffing words in his mouth, because he literally didn't say anything remotely like that. It's also far more inflamatory than anything he said.
      - sctb 10y ago
        > I'm surprised your head didn't explode from the irony Please don't include things like this in comments, it violates the guidelines that ask for civility. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - davidcollantes 10y ago
    The embargo had little effect, as with embargo Cuba could/was doing business with Spain, several nordic countries, Mexico, various South American countries, etc. It is the retrograde economical system in the island what has caused most of the problem, and that is linked to the political/dictatorial behaviour of the current system. For the records, I do not agree with the embargo, as I see it as 1) worthless, and 2) only affecting Cubans and Americans (the people).
    - dade_ 10y ago
      For the record, the Cuban embargo has been great for Canada. Energy and mining companies (nickel) have done very well without having to compete with American companies and it has been a beautiful low cost vacation destination to one of the safest places in the Carribean. I think the embargo kept Fidel in power. With the US constantly trying to assassinate their head of state, the dismal record with American organized crime, and their multinational corporations already behaving badly, Cuba had an enemy. An enemy + control of the press = a beautiful world for a dictator. Today, much of their infrastructure is a disaster, but they are some of the most enterprising people I have met, reasonably well educated, remarkably socially cohesive and very happy (though ridiculously poor). This can end well, but does require that America finally end the disastrous embargo policy Apologies to Cuban Americans who won't agree because they hate Fidel too much to realize it...
- peterwwillis 10y ago
  The US has increased the regime's oppressive effects, though. The embargo has created a dearth of medical supplies & knowledge, has negatively impacted nutrition, lack of resources, lack of tourism dollars, and provides a bogeyman for the regime to blame for all its ails. It has helped repress and impoverish the people more than anything else. The United Nations General Assembly has passed a resolution every year since 1992 opposing it. It's possible that, like China, the oppressive effects of Communism could have been lessened (even if just a little) under the benefits of trade with a Capitalist democracy. Medical crises would have been dealt with quicker, and they would have had more cash on hand from tourism to invest in agriculture (or at the very least, import more food). And you may feel differently about this, but I think the ban on travel really sucked ass for Cuban families who couldn't visit their relatives, and the bans on transfer of money to family members in Cuba. But that's not really a regime thing, that was just the US being dicks.
  - bmmayer1 10y ago
    > like China, the oppressive effects of Communism could have been lessened (even if just a little) under the benefits of trade with a Capitalist democracy The oppressive effects of communism were lessened because China lessened communism by introducing free market reforms. It wasn't just trade with capitalist nations that improved the welfare of China and its people, it was becoming more capitalist a nation itself.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
    - peterwwillis 10y ago
      Right... and it was becoming a more capitalist nation (technically a socialist market economy, otherwise known as state capitalism) due to influences by its Capitalist trade partners. In a single year (1978-1979) new party leader Deng Xiaoping led economic reforms to the PRC, signed an accord with Jimmy Carter for the US to officially recognize the PRC, and attracted new business from Boeing and Coca-Cola. More reforms followed soon after. But it is absolutely clear that they thought the Capitalist model was what worked and they wanted a form of it, and used trade with the US as its beginning. I make this distinction about the US influencing them because without the successful model (and attractive potential partner) of the US, the push for a market economy may not have worked. Cuba could have done the same, except we were still giving them the finger.
- vixen99 10y ago
  'its leaders'.
matwood 10y ago
So are you blaming all the human rights issues on the US embargo? One of my Spanish teachers grew up in Cuba. He was extremely vocal about how bad it was there, and he was well off because his parents were part of the government. He ended up getting snuck out on a sailboat with his grandparents and never saw his parents again. Perhaps his stories were unique and his visible anger misplaced, but I don't think so.
- turar 10y ago
  What particular stories of human rights issues, as distinctly separate from embargo-induced economic hardships, did he talk about?
  - andrenth 10y ago
    Lack of freedom of speech comes to mind. As in being killed for voicing dissent.
  - matwood 10y ago
    It was ~20 years ago, so I don't remember all of the details. The main things centered around what we have all read and heard about. Lack of freedom and political dissidence landing people in prison or worse.
caente 10y ago
I'm sorry but no. They destroyed the lives of my parents. They convinced a generation that the future was at hand, that you only need to sacrifice a little more, and everything would be great. They convinced a generation that any other alternative was a treason against Cuba and humanity. There is no justification for what they did.
terio 10y ago
The Castros are the main responsible for the dire economic situation of Cuba. Regardless of all the international relationship mistakes he made, Fidel Castro stands as one of the most economic incompetent of all communist dictators, with the notable exception of the ones in North Korea. Despite the embargo which affects mainly the commerce with the US, Cuba has always had commercial relations with many countries that were largely unaffected by the embargo. He basically had the whole country under his control. Think about a CEO of a very diversified industrial and agricultural conglomerate. He managed to screw it all and there was no other reason than his incompetence.

rayrod2030 10y ago

I was born in Cuba and just returned from the island 3 days ago. I'm pretty mindful of the situation there. There is no one to blame for the dire situation in Cuba other than the regime and it's leaders.

tw04 10y ago
So... in your opinion the US embargo had absolutely no effect on the situation? Or you're suggesting that any nation that doesn't act as a puppet of the US should be forced into severe economic sanctions as punishment? In other words, the US should be the only sovereign nation in the world?
- tptacek 10y ago
  It's possible to disagree with the parent commenter without egregiously stuffing words into their mouth. Please read comments charitably.
  - tw04 10y ago
    I didn't stuff any words into his mouth - that's what the question marks were for. His first comment made his stance pretty clear so I gave him room for clarification. But thank you for doing what you just accused me of - I'm surprised your head didn't explode from the irony.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
    - AnimalMuppet 10y ago
      Well, at a minimum you're asking him, in quite an accusing way, to defend against a bunch of things he didn't say. That's pretty close to "putting words in his mouth, but with question marks after them". It's not a fair form of debate, and it's not welcome here.
      - tw04 10y ago
        He actually literally said that when someone mentioned the embargo being a huge reason that Cuba was in the situation they're in (which is true). If asking people to explain inflammatory statements like there's NOBODY to blame but the leaders in a situation like Cuba's is unwelcome, I'm not sure why this place exits. >There is no one to blame for the dire situation in Cuba other than the regime and it's leaders. I've not heard a single credible expert on the subject throw out an idea as laughable as the US embargo not having any effect on the Cuban economy. If you're going to support him I suggest you also provide some facts to backup such a ludicrous statement. Or, you know, just down vote me for calling him out.
        AnimalMuppet 10y ago
        You said: > Or you're suggesting that any nation that doesn't act as a puppet of the US should be forced into severe economic sanctions as punishment? In other words, the US should be the only sovereign nation in the world? That's stuffing words in his mouth, because he literally didn't say anything remotely like that. It's also far more inflamatory than anything he said.
    - sctb 10y ago
      > I'm surprised your head didn't explode from the irony Please don't include things like this in comments, it violates the guidelines that ask for civility. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- davidcollantes 10y ago
  The embargo had little effect, as with embargo Cuba could/was doing business with Spain, several nordic countries, Mexico, various South American countries, etc. It is the retrograde economical system in the island what has caused most of the problem, and that is linked to the political/dictatorial behaviour of the current system. For the records, I do not agree with the embargo, as I see it as 1) worthless, and 2) only affecting Cubans and Americans (the people).
  - dade_ 10y ago
    For the record, the Cuban embargo has been great for Canada. Energy and mining companies (nickel) have done very well without having to compete with American companies and it has been a beautiful low cost vacation destination to one of the safest places in the Carribean. I think the embargo kept Fidel in power. With the US constantly trying to assassinate their head of state, the dismal record with American organized crime, and their multinational corporations already behaving badly, Cuba had an enemy. An enemy + control of the press = a beautiful world for a dictator. Today, much of their infrastructure is a disaster, but they are some of the most enterprising people I have met, reasonably well educated, remarkably socially cohesive and very happy (though ridiculously poor). This can end well, but does require that America finally end the disastrous embargo policy Apologies to Cuban Americans who won't agree because they hate Fidel too much to realize it...
peterwwillis 10y ago
The US has increased the regime's oppressive effects, though. The embargo has created a dearth of medical supplies & knowledge, has negatively impacted nutrition, lack of resources, lack of tourism dollars, and provides a bogeyman for the regime to blame for all its ails. It has helped repress and impoverish the people more than anything else. The United Nations General Assembly has passed a resolution every year since 1992 opposing it. It's possible that, like China, the oppressive effects of Communism could have been lessened (even if just a little) under the benefits of trade with a Capitalist democracy. Medical crises would have been dealt with quicker, and they would have had more cash on hand from tourism to invest in agriculture (or at the very least, import more food). And you may feel differently about this, but I think the ban on travel really sucked ass for Cuban families who couldn't visit their relatives, and the bans on transfer of money to family members in Cuba. But that's not really a regime thing, that was just the US being dicks.
- bmmayer1 10y ago
  > like China, the oppressive effects of Communism could have been lessened (even if just a little) under the benefits of trade with a Capitalist democracy The oppressive effects of communism were lessened because China lessened communism by introducing free market reforms. It wasn't just trade with capitalist nations that improved the welfare of China and its people, it was becoming more capitalist a nation itself.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - peterwwillis 10y ago
    Right... and it was becoming a more capitalist nation (technically a socialist market economy, otherwise known as state capitalism) due to influences by its Capitalist trade partners. In a single year (1978-1979) new party leader Deng Xiaoping led economic reforms to the PRC, signed an accord with Jimmy Carter for the US to officially recognize the PRC, and attracted new business from Boeing and Coca-Cola. More reforms followed soon after. But it is absolutely clear that they thought the Capitalist model was what worked and they wanted a form of it, and used trade with the US as its beginning. I make this distinction about the US influencing them because without the successful model (and attractive potential partner) of the US, the push for a market economy may not have worked. Cuba could have done the same, except we were still giving them the finger.
vixen99 10y ago
'its leaders'.

matwood 10y ago

So are you blaming all the human rights issues on the US embargo? One of my Spanish teachers grew up in Cuba. He was extremely vocal about how bad it was there, and he was well off because his parents were part of the government. He ended up getting snuck out on a sailboat with his grandparents and never saw his parents again. Perhaps his stories were unique and his visible anger misplaced, but I don't think so.

turar 10y ago
What particular stories of human rights issues, as distinctly separate from embargo-induced economic hardships, did he talk about?
- andrenth 10y ago
  Lack of freedom of speech comes to mind. As in being killed for voicing dissent.
- matwood 10y ago
  It was ~20 years ago, so I don't remember all of the details. The main things centered around what we have all read and heard about. Lack of freedom and political dissidence landing people in prison or worse.

caente 10y ago

I'm sorry but no. They destroyed the lives of my parents. They convinced a generation that the future was at hand, that you only need to sacrifice a little more, and everything would be great. They convinced a generation that any other alternative was a treason against Cuba and humanity. There is no justification for what they did.

terio 10y ago

The Castros are the main responsible for the dire economic situation of Cuba. Regardless of all the international relationship mistakes he made, Fidel Castro stands as one of the most economic incompetent of all communist dictators, with the notable exception of the ones in North Korea. Despite the embargo which affects mainly the commerce with the US, Cuba has always had commercial relations with many countries that were largely unaffected by the embargo. He basically had the whole country under his control. Think about a CEO of a very diversified industrial and agricultural conglomerate. He managed to screw it all and there was no other reason than his incompetence.