RadioRaheem84
23rd July 2010, 20:47
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,707267,00.html
SPIEGEL: Ms. Castro, you are the proponent of a modern policy on AIDS and sexuality, the sort of policy one is more likely to see in the Western democracies. Is this a harbinger of reforms and overdue liberalization in Cuba?
Modern policy on AIDS and health care is only something that can be done by Western nations due to their liberalism? Can anyone else smell the chauvinism here? Are they are linking progress in health care with economic liberalization? This coming from a country with universal health care? I mean really this is just too much.
Does Christopher Hitchens own Spiegel?
SPIEGEL: Why is it taking such an endlessly long time? Even the president, your father, openly admits that the situation, in agriculture, for example, is worse than ever before. He has sharply criticized the inefficiency of government-owned operations. In other words, reforms are critical to Cuba's survival.
This is such a canard. I cannot believe this coming from a supposedly liberal left rag. Even liberal economists acknowledge that state owned enterprises can out compete their private competitors. Reform does not have to equal economic privatization like in the context they're describing.
Castro: Our people stand behind the Cuban form of socialism, but now it should be better than before. We are sufficiently self-critical to know this, and to know that our people want more flexibility and liberality. How this can happen is now the subject of discussion in many committees. It's a slow process, but something is moving.
SPIEGEL: There isn't much evidence of that.
Not according to the bourgeoisie media which only accepts privatization as a means of reform.
SPIEGEL: Many members of the opposition have lost patience. In February, imprisoned dissident Orlando Zapata died after an 85-day hunger strike, with which he sought to obtain the release of other political prisoners. The governments of the United States and the European Union have sharply criticized Havana's behavior
What the hell is wrong with these reporters? Do they not fact check their work? If they had they would've found out that Zapata was not a political prisoner. He was a con man who was aided by the US Embassy office in Havana. Zapata’s name never even appeared on the list of the 75 Cuban prisoners drawn up by the United Nations Human Rights Commission in 2003.
Castro: There was no political background to this strike. Zapata wanted to achieve personal privileges in prison: a telephone, a TV set and a kitchen. Of course, no one wanted him to die, but people abroad, in Miami, encouraged him to continue and to stick with his campaign until the end. He was used for a media campaign against Cuba.
SPIEGEL: You're simplifying the issue. Even renowned Cuban artists often campaign against restrictions on free thought. The popular singer-songwriter Pablo Milanés, for example, recently made an appeal to the regime when he said: "You discuss and fight ideas, but you don't lock them up."
Talk about simplifying it? Talk about stupefying it!
SPIEGEL: If they were all truly guilty of treason, you couldn't simply release them this easily. The first of 52 political prisoners have just been released.
They can make a big schpeel about 52 mercenaries but not a peep about 5 Cubans trying to bring down terrorists in the US. Cuba was serious about terrorists and sent agents to share information about right wing terrorists in Miami and they arrest them.
The US funds mercenary groups in Cuba and when prosecuted, they're all of a sudden political prisoners! They're released due to international pressure and co-operation, and then Cuba is called a repressive state for holding them in the first place.
SPIEGEL: Cuba's government is alone in the world with its view that these are mercenaries and terrorists. Without reforms, how do you intend to stop the exodus of young, well-educated Cubans?
Anything the Cuban government says to the contrary will be seen as Cuban propaganda. Anything the US, who funded the people in question, says is truth. When will the circular reasoning end with the media?
SPIEGEL: Most of all, you need more freedom: more and better mobile phones, and unlimited and affordable use of the Internet and new media, for example.
This what freedom entails? The freedom to consume stuff produced by major corporations? Economic liberalization tied to freedom is now the new staple for defining liberty in the world. Right Libertarian lexicon is in the mainstream now.
SPIEGEL: Why is Cuba so bold when it comes to the rights of homosexuals, of all people? After all, your uncle, the revolutionary leader Fidel Castro, claimed that a homosexual lacked the "strength of character of a revolutionary."
And the dozens of homophobic stuff that springs from the mouth of politicians in the West, heads of State, etc? Jeez, can these people at least be a little consistent in their propaganda?
Ms. Castro does a good job of answering back but even her responses presume some of the stuff that the reporter was spewing. I mean how deep has libertarianism, liberalism penetrated every facet of society due to the media? It's very ingrained and very presupposed. To question it is almost to go against all that is "democratic".
SPIEGEL: Ms. Castro, you are the proponent of a modern policy on AIDS and sexuality, the sort of policy one is more likely to see in the Western democracies. Is this a harbinger of reforms and overdue liberalization in Cuba?
Modern policy on AIDS and health care is only something that can be done by Western nations due to their liberalism? Can anyone else smell the chauvinism here? Are they are linking progress in health care with economic liberalization? This coming from a country with universal health care? I mean really this is just too much.
Does Christopher Hitchens own Spiegel?
SPIEGEL: Why is it taking such an endlessly long time? Even the president, your father, openly admits that the situation, in agriculture, for example, is worse than ever before. He has sharply criticized the inefficiency of government-owned operations. In other words, reforms are critical to Cuba's survival.
This is such a canard. I cannot believe this coming from a supposedly liberal left rag. Even liberal economists acknowledge that state owned enterprises can out compete their private competitors. Reform does not have to equal economic privatization like in the context they're describing.
Castro: Our people stand behind the Cuban form of socialism, but now it should be better than before. We are sufficiently self-critical to know this, and to know that our people want more flexibility and liberality. How this can happen is now the subject of discussion in many committees. It's a slow process, but something is moving.
SPIEGEL: There isn't much evidence of that.
Not according to the bourgeoisie media which only accepts privatization as a means of reform.
SPIEGEL: Many members of the opposition have lost patience. In February, imprisoned dissident Orlando Zapata died after an 85-day hunger strike, with which he sought to obtain the release of other political prisoners. The governments of the United States and the European Union have sharply criticized Havana's behavior
What the hell is wrong with these reporters? Do they not fact check their work? If they had they would've found out that Zapata was not a political prisoner. He was a con man who was aided by the US Embassy office in Havana. Zapata’s name never even appeared on the list of the 75 Cuban prisoners drawn up by the United Nations Human Rights Commission in 2003.
Castro: There was no political background to this strike. Zapata wanted to achieve personal privileges in prison: a telephone, a TV set and a kitchen. Of course, no one wanted him to die, but people abroad, in Miami, encouraged him to continue and to stick with his campaign until the end. He was used for a media campaign against Cuba.
SPIEGEL: You're simplifying the issue. Even renowned Cuban artists often campaign against restrictions on free thought. The popular singer-songwriter Pablo Milanés, for example, recently made an appeal to the regime when he said: "You discuss and fight ideas, but you don't lock them up."
Talk about simplifying it? Talk about stupefying it!
SPIEGEL: If they were all truly guilty of treason, you couldn't simply release them this easily. The first of 52 political prisoners have just been released.
They can make a big schpeel about 52 mercenaries but not a peep about 5 Cubans trying to bring down terrorists in the US. Cuba was serious about terrorists and sent agents to share information about right wing terrorists in Miami and they arrest them.
The US funds mercenary groups in Cuba and when prosecuted, they're all of a sudden political prisoners! They're released due to international pressure and co-operation, and then Cuba is called a repressive state for holding them in the first place.
SPIEGEL: Cuba's government is alone in the world with its view that these are mercenaries and terrorists. Without reforms, how do you intend to stop the exodus of young, well-educated Cubans?
Anything the Cuban government says to the contrary will be seen as Cuban propaganda. Anything the US, who funded the people in question, says is truth. When will the circular reasoning end with the media?
SPIEGEL: Most of all, you need more freedom: more and better mobile phones, and unlimited and affordable use of the Internet and new media, for example.
This what freedom entails? The freedom to consume stuff produced by major corporations? Economic liberalization tied to freedom is now the new staple for defining liberty in the world. Right Libertarian lexicon is in the mainstream now.
SPIEGEL: Why is Cuba so bold when it comes to the rights of homosexuals, of all people? After all, your uncle, the revolutionary leader Fidel Castro, claimed that a homosexual lacked the "strength of character of a revolutionary."
And the dozens of homophobic stuff that springs from the mouth of politicians in the West, heads of State, etc? Jeez, can these people at least be a little consistent in their propaganda?
Ms. Castro does a good job of answering back but even her responses presume some of the stuff that the reporter was spewing. I mean how deep has libertarianism, liberalism penetrated every facet of society due to the media? It's very ingrained and very presupposed. To question it is almost to go against all that is "democratic".