Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
All centraqist governamnt including socailism and communism have failed and to teh detriment to those living under it. All one has to do is compare sotuh to north korea. Its how it effect teh people that really counts. Does anyone think that centralised control work well for europe when they had it. There is always a core set of a small elite that when they control veryhtiong will oppress the masses. Capiatlism isn't perfect but its alot better than any other formof government. We would be on this forum otherwise;we would be reading the leaders words.
Let me restate my question, which you seem to have missed. Name a communist state that was allowed to run and succeed of fail on its own merits, without oppressive force being applied from external powers.
As for your Korea example, how much help did the US give South Korea, and much to North Korea? If you consider this difference to be irrelevant in the development of the two countries, why did we waste all that aid we gave South Korea. which would have developed anyway?
The US has held out an olive branch a few times. .
Holding out an olive branch is nothing but a lot of puffery and posturing, which is the same thing we accuse Castro of doing. All the president would have to do is to rescind all the regulations that obstruct normal relations with Cuba. Let Americans go there, let Americans import Cuban-made goods, totally unrestricted, like for any other country. These can be executive orders, to take effect at 12:01 am tonight.
The fact is, Castro knows that if the US were free to do so, Batista's old buddies would be right back in there, owning and controlling everything in Cuba, draining the economy and leaving the Cubans in poverty, with millions of ugly American tourists strutting in the beaches and casinos.
So if Cuba tried to limit the US takeover, the Americans would say "See, they've rejected our generous gesture."
Let me restate my question, which you seem to have missed. Name a communist state that was allowed to run and succeed of fail on its own merits, without oppressive force being applied from external powers.
Answer: Pilgrims
When the Pilgrims came to America aboard the Mayflower to establish the Plymouth Colony, they did so under the requirement that "all profits and benefits that are got by trade, working, fishing, or any other means" were to be placed into the "common stock" of the colony and that "all such persons as are of this colony are to have their provisions out of the common stock." Sort of "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need" — Socialism.
And there was famine. In the winter of the socialistic failure, roughly a third of the Pilgrims died. But something happened at Plymouth in 1623 because "instead of famine now God gave them plenty," Bradford wrote that and in 1624 so much was harvested that they were able to export corn.
William Bradford was a "man of God" and because of that he was a student of the word of God, and there he found wisdom. First he abolished socialism and converted to a free market society. He did as the Jews did when the entered into the promised land—he divided the land—gave each household a parcel of land and told them they could keep all that they produced, or trade it away as they saw fit. Famine ended.
Read "Mayflower" by Nathaniel Philbrick
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88
draining the economy and leaving the Cubans in poverty
And there was famine. In the winter of the socialistic failure, roughly a third of the Pilgrims died. But something happened at Plymouth in 1623 because "instead of famine now God gave them plenty," Bradford wrote that and in 1624 so much was harvested that they were able to export corn.
d.
Isn't it funny how communism must be evil, because it cannot offset a famine.
And you contend that the only factor that contributed to the plenty was the switch to capitalism? Do you know what a famine is? It is a time of poor harvests, not maldistribution of wealth. Do you know what plenty is? It is a time of good harvests.
Have you fully researched this to verify that in 1621, the infrastructure was already fully in place, producing as much as could be expected several years later? All the good agricultural land had been cleared, and the best fishing grouinds were found, and the only thing that kept the productivity lower in 1621, the very first year in a new wild land, than it was in 1624 was the communism?
If you and your family went back to the land, would expect your first year harvest just as good as it would be several years later?
The US has held out an olive branch a few times. Both Carter and Clinton did and each time Fidel provoked some kind of incident that made further moves unpalatable. He needs the Embargo. Obama hinted at an olive branch which was probably the way to go lest you incite them to scuttle it.
Its funny how the Embargo (gawd, what a name) inspires the world's imagination. While in Italy, some fella told me, with all due seriousness, that the Embargo meant we had an entire fleet controlling who and what went in and out of Cuba. I pointed out that Cuba was a popular tourist spot for many including not a few Italians. He looked confused. So it goes.
The whole Cuban thing has reach a high level of silliness. Its really Just Miami/New Jersey vs Havana with the rest of us looking on.
-----------------------------------MossomoOf course. Castro needs the Embargo and a "Total War Against The Empire". When he decided for the USSR, he did it knowing that the USSR would allow him to do anything he wanted in Cuba. Cuba, as the only Communist country in America 90 miles off the USSR, received 5.000.000.000 dollars a year until 1989. Castro pilfered all that money in idiotic economic programs that ruined the country.During the 60's he ruined the country, and the USSR tried to remove him in 1964-1965 ("The Microfaction Conspiracy", but the couldn't. Russians believed he was a maniac since he accused Nikita Kruschev of being "Gay" (Maricón) for removing nuclear arsenal in Cuba (Nikita mariquita, lo que se da no se quita).Yes, the Embargo only exist partially. The United States is the fourth commercial partner of Cuba, and the second source of income of Cuba are remittances from the US. I visit Cuba once or two times every year and you find all types of American products there. Cuba buys 80 percent of food stocks from the United States.
No, the Embargo is in place not because the Cuban lobby, but because the majority of the Congress wants it (both parties). There won't be a reapproachment bewteen the country until the Castros and the Nomenklatura disappears. They don't want change, they live very well.
Let me restate my question, which you seem to have missed. Name a communist state that was allowed to run and succeed of fail on its own merits, without oppressive force being applied from external powers.
As for your Korea example, how much help did the US give South Korea, and much to North Korea? If you consider this difference to be irrelevant in the development of the two countries, why did we waste all that aid we gave South Korea. which would have developed anyway?
That's a one-sided question. All countries exert force on one another. It's not like the communist countries weren't pushing on the capitalist countries at the same time.
China was a communist country that really wasn't pushed on that much by anyone, content to be rather isolationist. They are converting to a capitalistic system bit by bit. The main reason communism is still in control there is that the powerful are tied into that structure and it means good jobs, schools, perks for their families etc.
Before anyone bashes me that this also goes on in the US, I agree completely. I have spoken extensively about this with my Chinese friends and his description of China reminds me entirely of Chicago. Basically, one party rule where elections are mainly just party in-fighting. Rampant cronyism and corruption. It's actually a scary parallel.
Holding out an olive branch is nothing but a lot of puffery and posturing, which is the same thing we accuse Castro of doing. All the president would have to do is to rescind all the regulations that obstruct normal relations with Cuba. Let Americans go there, let Americans import Cuban-made goods, totally unrestricted, like for any other country. These can be executive orders, to take effect at 12:01 am tonight.
The fact is, Castro knows that if the US were free to do so, Batista's old buddies would be right back in there, owning and controlling everything in Cuba, draining the economy and leaving the Cubans in poverty, with millions of ugly American tourists strutting in the beaches and casinos.
So if Cuba tried to limit the US takeover, the Americans would say "See, they've rejected our generous gesture."
Not in the instances I cited. Both Carter and Clinton were at least halfway sincere in their desire for some kind of reproachment. Carter did lift the travel ban for a time and opened up the US Interest Section (aka de facto embassy). And Castro responded with the Mariel Boatlift. So it goes.
Yes, the policy could be rescinded instantly, as could a great many policies. In theory at least. The reality is both conservative Republicans and liberal Democrats have to worry about winning both Florida and New Jersey in elections as they are both huge states with large Cuban populations.
I suspect we both agree, somewhat at leas,t on the craziness of US/Cuban relatons. Nonetheless, policy is often made my groups that while small and in the minority view, are nonetheless well-organized, well-funded, and loud. You can find this in every country.
Your last statement was true in the past. Now I suspect most people would be happy if Cuba was something like Costa Rica. And naked German tourist and dorky Canadians are worse than ugly Americans.
Your last statement was true in the past. Now I suspect most people would be happy if Cuba was something like Costa Rica. And naked German tourist and dorky Canadians are worse than ugly Americans.
Cuba has all kinds of tourists from Europe, Canada etc. and so does Florida. I just think the whole thing is funny.
Good point about the boat lift....Castro completely played Carter off as a gigantic chump and gave the US the finger big-time with that move. Then again, we'd tried to kill him so there are just grudges there that aren't going away.
There are countries that NEED the US to be the evil menace so that they can justify their dictatorial controls and blame failed policies on.
This is nothing new, we do it in the US also...remember all the Japan bashing in the 70's and 80's? Or lately its the oil countries not selling us oil cheaply enough...the list goes on.
When he decided for the USSR, he did it knowing that the USSR would allow him to do anything he wanted in Cuba. .
Can you think of any reason why a Cuban government should not be able to "do anything he wanted in Cuba"? Does the US government get to do anything it wants in the USA? This is the first time I've ever heard the USSR being denigrated for letting somebody do whatever they want.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.