5 ms·

>Of course because of the economic blockade against Cuba they are forced to be creative on how to use the available resources. Yes of course, Cuba's economic w

>Of course because of the economic blockade against Cuba they are forced to be creative on how to use the available resources. Yes of course, Cuba's economic woes and abysmal civil/tech infrastructure are entirely due to the economic blockade. several decades of a certain repressive, individuality and development crushing political system and its economic theories have nothing worth mentioning to do with it. This itself is more than a little piece of misinformation, blaming Cuba's problems entirely on the US (though the US and its misguided blockade have their share of faults)

slumpt_ 6y ago
Yeah, I’m sure their political system’s success / failure wasn’t impacted at all by US intervention. Oh, HackerNews. I love you.
- gadders 6y ago
  Yes, because non-blockaded communist countries have been such glowing successes.
  - SerLava 6y ago
    I mean, even the ones that were not just blockaded, but genocidally invaded, still turned from really bad feudal peasant states into modern industrial nations faster than any previous countries.
    - Kbelicius 6y ago
      Which countries would that be?
      - SerLava 6y ago
        For instance Russia, China
  - artem247 6y ago
    Well in my country between 1945 and 1990 many good things were done in regards to education, healthcare, science, housing - millions of people got their first urban home for free. Of course it had a fair share of problems but I think it is at least comparable with capitalist states.
    - gadders 6y ago
      Which country was that? Did you live there then or were you born after that date?
    - Google234 6y ago
      The Soviet Union was a pile of rust by 1990. I’m not sure how you can justify the immense suffering and indiscriminate persecution just for that...
      - artem247 6y ago
        Ehh, did you live there let's say in between 1960 - 1990? Just for the record - no, it wasn't a pile of rust by 1990. It had free universal healthcare, free higher education, no need for mortgage, abundance of jobs. And in my family there was a history of persecution during Stalin time, surviving Holodomor, so I know these things first hand. I don't need lecturing on what went wrong from Westerners. And what about immense suffering after 1991? - Ethic conflicts, absolutely atrocious poverty, would have been much worse if not for some remnants of socialist safety net (de-facto free healthcare). The new capitalist society was not exactly a much of improvement on many areas. For example in 1993 Boris Eltsin (president of Russia) ordered shelling of Parliament by tanks. And that was fine with the West. Somehow.
  - pvaldes 6y ago
    That depends on how you define success. If your main measure of success is economy, I wouldn't tag China as an economic failure exactly.
    - throwaway8581 6y ago
      I wouldn't tag China as a communist country for at least a couple decades now.
      - pvaldes 6y ago
        Then, all we have is a 'not true communist scotsman' spiral all the way down. If a country directed by a party named the Communist party is not communist, who could claim that tag for themselves? Not North Korea. A country frozen in time and obsessed by xenophobic purity, dictator worship, army and control of the citizens. This is the very own definition of dystopic fascism, bordering isolated religious cult. Definitely not communism, that always was a mixed bag of anarchists, misfits craving power and other undercurrents moving in similar directions before turning ameboid and splitting again or eating alive the other groups. Russia? is very "capitalism of the mob" now. As US, is just too big to define it, but it definitely has components of Neofeudalism and tug dictatorship IMHO with several thin layers of shiny democracy put strategically over it to cover the ugly rust. Communism has influenced the society, but is a thing of the past now (probably, I could be wrong).
        helloworld11 6y ago
        The "no true scotsman" argument is very valid in many political and economic topics, but it doesn't remotely apply to China or Russia, two countries that have long since abandoned even the semblance of socialism or communism in favor of systems that more closely approach economic fascism. One can criticise countries thatt have failed at communism validly by citing real examples such as Cuba, which genuinely spent decades trying to implement and maintain these ideologies with rigour that closely resembled hardline socialism in practice. Nothig about today's China or today's Russia invalidades that criticism or those that are similar.
- Chris2048 6y ago
  You're engaging in as much hyperbole as the post you respond to, and you are also a HNer.
cardanome 6y ago
You are making up a straw man. The economic blockade by the US has the goal of destroying the political and economic order of Cuba. And just to be clear, this blockade is not just blocking Cuba from trading with the US but is effectively blocking Cuba from a good portion of the world market except for a few small allies. And even those trades with allies can become vastly more costly because of the blockade. There are not many countries that would survive such a blockade not to mention thrive in it. Are there internal problems in Cuba? Sure there are. Does it make my quoted sentence incorrect that said: >Of course because of the economic blockade against Cuba they are forced to be creative on how to use the available resources. No, it does not. It does not state that there might not be also other problems in Cuba. There is lots of internal problems one can talk about and if someone has honest questions, please ask. Just don't use these internal problems to minimize the injustice of the blockade against Cuba. (Not to imply whether this is what my former poster intended to do or not).
- redis_mlc 6y ago
  > The economic blockade by the US has the goal of destroying the political and economic order of Cuba. Well, Cuba could return the US property that was nationalized, and elect a non-Communist government, you know. Instead they swim for the US. Also, the Cuban missile crisis didn't end when people were told. Half of the Russian nuclear missiles were left behind, and when Russia realized Castro wanted to actually use them against the US, Russia had a nightmare in getting them back. (A Russian diplomat became a hero by pointing out some treaty loophole to the Cubans, who decided to follow the "treaty" and allowed the repo. Had the Russians told Castro he was crazy, likely those missiles would still be there.)
- 908B64B197 6y ago
  > the US but is effectively blocking Cuba from a good portion of the world market except for a few small allies. It is not. Every country is free to decide if it wants to trade with Cuba or not. > Just don't use these internal problems to minimize the injustice of the blockade against Cuba There is no injustice. Cuban people can end it whenever they want. Their government too.
sudosysgen 6y ago
Cuba has a GDP PPP per capita of around 25 000$, which is above the worldwide average. This is despite being prevented from trading with all but a handful of countries. It's by very far the wealthiest country under US embargo, and better to live in than most of the world. Given their current, fairly high standard of living, they would probably economically be a first world country without a US embargo - as it is they're already quite close.
helloworld11 6y ago
Those of you making defenses of Cuba here are flatly deluded if you make these claims seriously. Cuba was only able to sustain itself with enormous Soviet backing and this regardless of the economic embargo by the U.S. Once the USSR collapsed, the Cuban government made hurried attempts at introducing partial capital-friendly reforms in certain sectors (especially tourism) which still never really brought major benefit to its people because the rest of the stagnant, suffocating socialist bureaucracy remained in place for most of daily life. I am absolutely no fan of the U.S embargo and think it was a an idiotic disaster in terms of both PR and practical terms, a useful blame point for decades of corrupt, criminally repressive Cuban government propaganda, that allowed that state to conveniently deviate attention away from its own very real failures in trying to stick to ideology in the country. None of this is to even mention the very real dictatorship of one single political party running that country for so long under conditions that simply cannot be compared to those of most democratized countries. To say otherwise of this is a blatant game of whataboutism which normally gets derided on this site but apparently, by what I see in replies to my original comment above, is supported when it comes to Cuba. It's absurd to see so many HNrs, living under largely privileged market friendly conditions and fully enjoying the benefits of the market in their own personal and professional lives, defending the grotesque little experiment in social and economic repression that is Cuba simply because theyre either ideologically fixated on throwing (partially deserved) shit at the US or emotionally sentimental about a country that few of them would want to actually live in as the locals do, for decades on end.
- artem247 6y ago
  "at country for so long under conditions that simply cannot be compared to those of most democratized countries" Well let's compare Cuba to most democratized countries in the Caribbean. Or in South America. Or to any place that is not US or EU+Switzerland and Norway.

slumpt_ 6y ago

Yeah, I’m sure their political system’s success / failure wasn’t impacted at all by US intervention. Oh, HackerNews. I love you.

gadders 6y ago
Yes, because non-blockaded communist countries have been such glowing successes.
- SerLava 6y ago
  I mean, even the ones that were not just blockaded, but genocidally invaded, still turned from really bad feudal peasant states into modern industrial nations faster than any previous countries.
  - Kbelicius 6y ago
    Which countries would that be?
    - SerLava 6y ago
      For instance Russia, China
- artem247 6y ago
  Well in my country between 1945 and 1990 many good things were done in regards to education, healthcare, science, housing - millions of people got their first urban home for free. Of course it had a fair share of problems but I think it is at least comparable with capitalist states.
  - gadders 6y ago
    Which country was that? Did you live there then or were you born after that date?
  - Google234 6y ago
    The Soviet Union was a pile of rust by 1990. I’m not sure how you can justify the immense suffering and indiscriminate persecution just for that...
    - artem247 6y ago
      Ehh, did you live there let's say in between 1960 - 1990? Just for the record - no, it wasn't a pile of rust by 1990. It had free universal healthcare, free higher education, no need for mortgage, abundance of jobs. And in my family there was a history of persecution during Stalin time, surviving Holodomor, so I know these things first hand. I don't need lecturing on what went wrong from Westerners. And what about immense suffering after 1991? - Ethic conflicts, absolutely atrocious poverty, would have been much worse if not for some remnants of socialist safety net (de-facto free healthcare). The new capitalist society was not exactly a much of improvement on many areas. For example in 1993 Boris Eltsin (president of Russia) ordered shelling of Parliament by tanks. And that was fine with the West. Somehow.
- pvaldes 6y ago
  That depends on how you define success. If your main measure of success is economy, I wouldn't tag China as an economic failure exactly.
  - throwaway8581 6y ago
    I wouldn't tag China as a communist country for at least a couple decades now.
    - pvaldes 6y ago
      Then, all we have is a 'not true communist scotsman' spiral all the way down. If a country directed by a party named the Communist party is not communist, who could claim that tag for themselves? Not North Korea. A country frozen in time and obsessed by xenophobic purity, dictator worship, army and control of the citizens. This is the very own definition of dystopic fascism, bordering isolated religious cult. Definitely not communism, that always was a mixed bag of anarchists, misfits craving power and other undercurrents moving in similar directions before turning ameboid and splitting again or eating alive the other groups. Russia? is very "capitalism of the mob" now. As US, is just too big to define it, but it definitely has components of Neofeudalism and tug dictatorship IMHO with several thin layers of shiny democracy put strategically over it to cover the ugly rust. Communism has influenced the society, but is a thing of the past now (probably, I could be wrong).
      - helloworld11 6y ago
        The "no true scotsman" argument is very valid in many political and economic topics, but it doesn't remotely apply to China or Russia, two countries that have long since abandoned even the semblance of socialism or communism in favor of systems that more closely approach economic fascism. One can criticise countries thatt have failed at communism validly by citing real examples such as Cuba, which genuinely spent decades trying to implement and maintain these ideologies with rigour that closely resembled hardline socialism in practice. Nothig about today's China or today's Russia invalidades that criticism or those that are similar.
Chris2048 6y ago
You're engaging in as much hyperbole as the post you respond to, and you are also a HNer.

cardanome 6y ago

You are making up a straw man. The economic blockade by the US has the goal of destroying the political and economic order of Cuba. And just to be clear, this blockade is not just blocking Cuba from trading with the US but is effectively blocking Cuba from a good portion of the world market except for a few small allies. And even those trades with allies can become vastly more costly because of the blockade. There are not many countries that would survive such a blockade not to mention thrive in it. Are there internal problems in Cuba? Sure there are. Does it make my quoted sentence incorrect that said: >Of course because of the economic blockade against Cuba they are forced to be creative on how to use the available resources. No, it does not. It does not state that there might not be also other problems in Cuba. There is lots of internal problems one can talk about and if someone has honest questions, please ask. Just don't use these internal problems to minimize the injustice of the blockade against Cuba. (Not to imply whether this is what my former poster intended to do or not).

redis_mlc 6y ago
> The economic blockade by the US has the goal of destroying the political and economic order of Cuba. Well, Cuba could return the US property that was nationalized, and elect a non-Communist government, you know. Instead they swim for the US. Also, the Cuban missile crisis didn't end when people were told. Half of the Russian nuclear missiles were left behind, and when Russia realized Castro wanted to actually use them against the US, Russia had a nightmare in getting them back. (A Russian diplomat became a hero by pointing out some treaty loophole to the Cubans, who decided to follow the "treaty" and allowed the repo. Had the Russians told Castro he was crazy, likely those missiles would still be there.)
908B64B197 6y ago
> the US but is effectively blocking Cuba from a good portion of the world market except for a few small allies. It is not. Every country is free to decide if it wants to trade with Cuba or not. > Just don't use these internal problems to minimize the injustice of the blockade against Cuba There is no injustice. Cuban people can end it whenever they want. Their government too.

sudosysgen 6y ago

Cuba has a GDP PPP per capita of around 25 000$, which is above the worldwide average. This is despite being prevented from trading with all but a handful of countries. It's by very far the wealthiest country under US embargo, and better to live in than most of the world. Given their current, fairly high standard of living, they would probably economically be a first world country without a US embargo - as it is they're already quite close.

helloworld11 6y ago

Those of you making defenses of Cuba here are flatly deluded if you make these claims seriously. Cuba was only able to sustain itself with enormous Soviet backing and this regardless of the economic embargo by the U.S. Once the USSR collapsed, the Cuban government made hurried attempts at introducing partial capital-friendly reforms in certain sectors (especially tourism) which still never really brought major benefit to its people because the rest of the stagnant, suffocating socialist bureaucracy remained in place for most of daily life. I am absolutely no fan of the U.S embargo and think it was a an idiotic disaster in terms of both PR and practical terms, a useful blame point for decades of corrupt, criminally repressive Cuban government propaganda, that allowed that state to conveniently deviate attention away from its own very real failures in trying to stick to ideology in the country. None of this is to even mention the very real dictatorship of one single political party running that country for so long under conditions that simply cannot be compared to those of most democratized countries. To say otherwise of this is a blatant game of whataboutism which normally gets derided on this site but apparently, by what I see in replies to my original comment above, is supported when it comes to Cuba. It's absurd to see so many HNrs, living under largely privileged market friendly conditions and fully enjoying the benefits of the market in their own personal and professional lives, defending the grotesque little experiment in social and economic repression that is Cuba simply because theyre either ideologically fixated on throwing (partially deserved) shit at the US or emotionally sentimental about a country that few of them would want to actually live in as the locals do, for decades on end.

artem247 6y ago
"at country for so long under conditions that simply cannot be compared to those of most democratized countries" Well let's compare Cuba to most democratized countries in the Caribbean. Or in South America. Or to any place that is not US or EU+Switzerland and Norway.