4 ms·

I don't mean to question your friend's decision, and I don't know the exact situation, but this is just anecdotal evidence. Was it discrimination by the governm

I don't mean to question your friend's decision, and I don't know the exact situation, but this is just anecdotal evidence. Was it discrimination by the government or by fellow Spaniards in a private capacity? If it's the latter (which I'd guess), then it's not really a restriction on individual freedom. Nonetheless, I don't think this would conform to the experiences of the vast majority of Cubans, wrt individual liberty. I know several Cubans myself who fled the Castro regime. The UN charter on human rights also includes the right to freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, for political action etc. Take a scale of 1 to 10. Spain may be an 8/10 when it comes to equal treatment wrt sexual orientation. For the sake of argument, let's say Cuba is 10/10 in this measure. For reference, Saudi or Iran (where you can be executed for being gay) are 1/10. In most measures of freedom, Spain (and Chile) would be 8+ while Cuba would be 1-2/10. Here's another rating (considering political and civil liberty) where Chile/Spain come out perfect and Cuba is one of the worst: http://www.freedomhouse.org/report-types/freedom-world#.VDQwaZNdVy8 http://www.freedomhouse.org/report-types/freedom-world#.VDQw...

bildung 12y ago
Thanks for your response. To make that clear: I'd be very happy if people in Cuba could experience more individual freedoms. If it's the latter (which I'd guess), then it's not really a restriction on individual freedom. That perhaps is the main source of our disagreement :) 'Freedom' (or similar concepts like justice) an be approached from to angles. The first is the deontological, or institutional approach, e.g. freedom is what the laws provide. The second way is the consequentialist approach: freedom is what the individual actually experiences. Both ways have advantages and disadvantages. I personally lean more towards the latter, because that approach makes it possible to differentiate between classes of people inside a society. Another anecdote :) I live in the eastern part of Germany, which as you know was socialist 25 years ago. People could not really vote, dissidents didn't have it easy etc. The current Germany is definitily more free from an institutional viewpoint. Yet, when I look out my office window, I can reguarly see people searching for food in the dumpsters. In the dumpsters! Thats a thing that was unthinkable in the former Eastern Germany. We now have children coming to school without having breakfast because of poverty and mismanagement of their parents. That, too, was unheard of before (schools provided breakfast in those cases, there was no mass unemployment -> way less parents were like that, without hope and self-regard etc.) People like me definitely practically profit from the new institutional freedom, people like them don't. From a consequential viewpoint on freedom, their score dropped significantly. I've read a really nice book about the theories of freedom and justice from Amartya Sen, it's called The Idea of Justice. Highly recommended, it's both informative and approachable.

bildung 12y ago

Thanks for your response. To make that clear: I'd be very happy if people in Cuba could experience more individual freedoms. If it's the latter (which I'd guess), then it's not really a restriction on individual freedom. That perhaps is the main source of our disagreement :) 'Freedom' (or similar concepts like justice) an be approached from to angles. The first is the deontological, or institutional approach, e.g. freedom is what the laws provide. The second way is the consequentialist approach: freedom is what the individual actually experiences. Both ways have advantages and disadvantages. I personally lean more towards the latter, because that approach makes it possible to differentiate between classes of people inside a society. Another anecdote :) I live in the eastern part of Germany, which as you know was socialist 25 years ago. People could not really vote, dissidents didn't have it easy etc. The current Germany is definitily more free from an institutional viewpoint. Yet, when I look out my office window, I can reguarly see people searching for food in the dumpsters. In the dumpsters! Thats a thing that was unthinkable in the former Eastern Germany. We now have children coming to school without having breakfast because of poverty and mismanagement of their parents. That, too, was unheard of before (schools provided breakfast in those cases, there was no mass unemployment -> way less parents were like that, without hope and self-regard etc.) People like me definitely practically profit from the new institutional freedom, people like them don't. From a consequential viewpoint on freedom, their score dropped significantly. I've read a really nice book about the theories of freedom and justice from Amartya Sen, it's called The Idea of Justice. Highly recommended, it's both informative and approachable.