First US Factory Approved in Cuba

[RedSonRising]

A 2-man tractor company hoping to employ Cuban workers and sell tractors to Latin American buyers, particularly Cuban farmers who lack such equipment. However it's difficult to imagine Cuban farmers being able to afford them at $10,000.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2016/02/15/cuba-us-factory-approved-cleber-tractor/80400968/

_q5h7os0qso
WuJl1Z5Gqiw

I know many users are cynical about the Cuban government, but I've always been (critically) supportive of the gains of the Cuban Revolution and the overlooked structures in place that allow worker participation in planning.

So is this the sign of US capital making an unrestrained return, or is Cuba able to make some concessions in order to have access to formerly inaccessible productive means?

[Antiochus]

I know many users are cynical about the Cuban government, but I've always been (critically) supportive of the gains of the Cuban Revolution and the overlooked structures in place that allow worker participation in planning.

So is this the sign of US capital making an unrestrained return, or is Cuba able to make some concessions in order to have access to formerly inaccessible productive means?

Please, be cynical. This IS Cuba's version of Dengism. This has already begun. Cuban expatriates and their families (though note: Many of these remittences are used not simply as 'capital', but to survive) already own large amounts of real estate.

This really began with Cuba's reliance on tourism. Make no mistake, Spanish tourists were/are just as rapacious as their American counterparts from the 1950s. Prostitution, child prostitution and other 'informal' sectors have grown exponentially since the 1990s.

THough to its credit, Cuba has managed to keep drug use relatively low. Whether this is due to geography or effective gov. policy, I don't know.

[PikSmeet]

Whats the difference between Cuba and DPRK? Well, the Cubans have better weather and beaches and at least get enough to eat. Other than that both are hell-holes that everyone is trying to escape from. Fidel handed power over to his brother, I thought Marx was against hereditary monarchies. As for tourism, yes, that means that goods and services the Cuban working class produce they are not able to consume, but are sold to wealthy tourists whilst they go without. Wow, isn't that what Fidel fought against in '59? Foreign factories, so that means foreign capitalists will extract surplus values from Cuban workers and this is called socialism?

[hexaune]

Whats the difference between Cuba and DPRK? Well, the Cubans have better weather and beaches and at least get enough to eat. Other than that both are hell-holes that everyone is trying to escape from. Fidel handed power over to his brother, I thought Marx was against hereditary monarchies. As for tourism, yes, that means that goods and services the Cuban working class produce they are not able to consume, but are sold to wealthy tourists whilst they go without. Wow, isn't that what Fidel fought against in '59? Foreign factories, so that means foreign capitalists will extract surplus values from Cuban workers and this is called socialism?

I know which country I'd rather live in and its nothing to do with the weather. Also I'm not aware of anyone on this site claiming the Cuba is socialist.

[PikSmeet]

I know which country I'd rather live in and its nothing to do with the weather. Also I'm not aware of anyone on this site claiming the Cuba is socialist.

At least in the DPRK you can try to escape to the South!;)

[Armchair Partisan]

At least in the DPRK you can try to escape to the South!;)

Fun fact: it's a lot easier to go through China into Thailand, Laos or Mongolia and try to get passage to the ROK there than to try and cross the DMZ. Most defectors do that, anyway. I wonder if that's really easier than taking a boat from Cuba to the US...

[RedSonRising]

Whats the difference between Cuba and DPRK? Well, the Cubans have better weather and beaches and at least get enough to eat. Other than that both are hell-holes that everyone is trying to escape from. Fidel handed power over to his brother, I thought Marx was against hereditary monarchies. As for tourism, yes, that means that goods and services the Cuban working class produce they are not able to consume, but are sold to wealthy tourists whilst they go without. Wow, isn't that what Fidel fought against in '59? Foreign factories, so that means foreign capitalists will extract surplus values from Cuban workers and this is called socialism?

I won't suggest the Cuban government is a model of democracy, but don't repeat the bourgeois line that Fidel "handed over" power to Raul; the congress designated him successor and elected him. Is it nepotistic? Sure, but you're not going to see their sons or nephews becoming president during the next elections by the national assembly. The old guard of a revolution staying in power is an unfortunately common feature of bourgeois and socialist revolutions. Raul has already announced he is stepping down in 2018 and hopes to introduce term limits.

The Cuba is starkly different to the DPRK. Cuba has imperfect but existing structures that allow the workers, through teacher's unions and workers' unions, to influence the economic plan established by the state. Cuba's model has afforded the people a basic standard of living that North Korea could only dream of. Cuba negotiates with other countries who show solidarity and spread the benefits of their healthcare system throughout the continent.

Not to mention the lifestyle is just radically different. Cuba is a far more open society. It may have a centralized bureaucracy, but as a foreigner you don't have to be spoonfed propaganda while taken on a tour on which you're closely watched. I had Cubans complain out loud to my face in the open about this or that. Cuba has students come to study medicine for free, has lawyers from the NLG in the US come to write a report on their labor practices from a legal standpoint, there's just no comparison.

Cuba isn't a socialist paradise, but please don't compare it to a cartoonish neo-feudal monarchy like North Korea.

[RedSonRising]

Please, be cynical. This IS Cuba's version of Dengism. This has already begun. Cuban expatriates and their families (though note: Many of these remittences are used not simply as 'capital', but to survive) already own large amounts of real estate.

This really began with Cuba's reliance on tourism. Make no mistake, Spanish tourists were/are just as rapacious as their American counterparts from the 1950s. Prostitution, child prostitution and other 'informal' sectors have grown exponentially since the 1990s.

THough to its credit, Cuba has managed to keep drug use relatively low. Whether this is due to geography or effective gov. policy, I don't know.

The reliance on tourism is definitely the source of a lot of problems on the island. The one thing we hadn't seen yet though (aside from the tourism industry) foreign capital being allowed to exploit Cuban labor. When my mother informed me about this factory I was distressed, but when I read the article I began to wonder: assuming Cubans have access to these agricultural goods, does the benefit of access to needed industrial commodities outweigh the cost of allowing a controlled allowance of foreign capital to operate on the island? Especially with regards to agriculture.

Cubans readily told me: we don't want the Americans to come back (as they were), but we do want more freedoms. I wonder how Cuban media is framing this.

[KurtFF8]

So is this the sign of US capital making an unrestrained return


That would be quite a jump in logic. A 2 man company opening up an operation is hardly the same thing as a complete transformation of the Cuban system of production.


is Cuba able to make some concessions in order to have access to formerly inaccessible productive means?

I see it this way. The Cuban economy has been isolated for some time now by US imperialism. It's naive to believe that they can just keep going on isolated, especially with the current situation in places like Venezuela.

[Antiochus]

What CUba is doing is reintegrating itself into global capital. Fact.

[motion denied]

What CUba is doing is reintegrating itself into global capital. Fact.

Actually, this would imply that Cuba has, at some point, been outside it.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Actually, this would imply that Cuba has, at some point, been outside it.

Not engaging in trade with the largest capitalist state for 50 years, and only being able to engage in trade with that capitalist state's trading partners (for example, Europe) in a very indirect way for that time period would indicate that Cuba has not been part of the system of capitalist trade.

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

Not engaging in trade with the largest capitalist state for 50 years, and only being able to engage in trade with that capitalist state's trading partners (for example, Europe) in a very indirect way for that time period would indicate that Cuba has not been part of the system of capitalist trade.

The point is, they DO depend on trade, be it with the Eastern Bloc's state capitalists or the EU or 3rd world governments. That the US isn't a part of that doesn't make them not dependent on capitalist trade, any more than Iran today or Saddam's Iraq was not dependent on capitalist trade.


What CUba is doing is reintegrating itself into global capital. Fact.

Yes, and this may well be a bad thing, but do you think the bureaucrats and legislators running Cuba have any alternative? I guess they could just trade with North Korea. But if their farmers need tractors for the national economy to improve, they may just have to open this tractor factory.


Please, be cynical. This IS Cuba's version of Dengism. This has already begun.This is Cuba re-entering the Capitalist market, but it is very different from Dengism. Deng's China sought to use its massive labor force of 1 billion people as a labor army for Western firms. Cuba, it seems, is bringing foreign firms into areas of the economy where the state lacks capacity or resources. The fact is, Cuba needs tractors, and where else will they get them? If they can produce them at home, instead of sending that money overseas, that may be an appealing choice. At least from a Cuban point of view they are producing industrial goods for their own economy, instead of iPads for American consumers like Chinese workers (well, for now).


This really began with Cuba's reliance on tourism. Make no mistake, Spanish tourists were/are just as rapacious as their American counterparts from the 1950s. Prostitution, child prostitution and other 'informal' sectors have grown exponentially since the 1990s. Child prostitution is disgusting, but prostitution as a whole is just a way for people to make more money. Do you think those prostitutes would really be better off if there were no tourists there, and they could not work as prostitutes? Sex work is just another kind of work.

If anything, our demand should be that the Cuban government organize and protect prostitutes, not that we look down on these dirty "lumenproles" and fail to understand how they are making, from their point of view, a decision which betters themselves.


THough to its credit, Cuba has managed to keep drug use relatively low. Whether this is due to geography or effective gov. policy, I don't know. What's wrong with drugs? I think Cuban drug policy is just another poor way in which Cuba replicates some of the worst aspects of the bourgeois state.

I'm pretty sure it's a mix of both geography and government policy. They are on an island, corruption over drugs is severely punishable within the government, and their armed forces are well organized enough to patrol their coastal areas. That, and it's hard to get rich in Cuba without getting noticed, so there's no incentive to become a drug kingpin.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

The point is, they DO depend on trade, be it with the Eastern Bloc's state capitalists or the EU or 3rd world governments. That the US isn't a part of that doesn't make them not dependent on capitalist trade, any more than Iran today or Saddam's Iraq was not dependent on capitalist trade.


Perhaps the point about trade has some validity, though it's clear that the nature of production in the fUSSR was night-and-day different to that which has existed in the US and Europe. I don't think it's helpful to lump them together as the same.

Secondly, the outcome of your argument is either:

a) Cuba was always capitalist because even post-Revolution it had a state, classes, and money, OR
b) Cuba's actions in recent years are excusable because they were never socialist anyway.

Or a mixture of both. I would move towards point a), given that the lack of abolition of state/classes/money cannot be compensated for by the liberation of blacks, gays, or women in Cuban society, since their treatment for decades seems to have been nothing short of dreadful, particularly the former two groups.

[RedSonRising]

On the drugs issues, while I find Cuba's penalties pretty draconian and I obviously oppose the war on drugs, I think that an island country that stands between North and South America has little choice when the dominant regional power, the US, refuses to reform its drug policies. If Cuba legalized drugs like they ought to be in an ideal society, it would simply mean a free trafficking hub between the tip of South America to Mexico and Florida.

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

Perhaps the point about trade has some validity, though it's clear that the nature of production in the fUSSR was night-and-day different to that which has existed in the US and Europe. I don't think it's helpful to lump them together as the same.


Yeah, it was different, I won't dispute that. They were still characterized by Capitalist relations however. For instance, the fact that Cuba's leaders were encouraged to focus on sugar and tobacco production instead of diversifying, which then made it dependent on the international price of only a few commodities. They did this since they were the eastern bloc power most suited to grow sugar (unlike, say, Mongolia or Poland). This is despite the fact that other commodities like sugar, meat, dairy, nickel, ethanol and so on could efficiently be produced. This caused huge economic disruption when the USSR fell and suddenly Cuba lost their huge sugar buyer.



Secondly, the outcome of your argument is either:

a) Cuba was always capitalist because even post-Revolution it had a state, classes, and money, OR
b) Cuba's actions in recent years are excusable because they were never socialist anyway.

Or a mixture of both. I would move towards point a), given that the lack of abolition of state/classes/money cannot be compensated for by the liberation of blacks, gays, or women in Cuban society, since their treatment for decades seems to have been nothing short of dreadful, particularly the former two groups.I think it's a bit of (a) and a bit of (b) but a caveat on (b). The thing is, I don't think it was ever really possible for a small country like Cuba (or even the combined weight of all the "Eastern" bloc powers for that matter) to achieve socialism without a global movement, since capitalist nations still dominated the global economy. To me, it's plausible to argue that the Cubans were transitioning to socialism, but the end of that transition has always been dependent on the character of the rest of the global economy. The only alternative is autarkic SIOC, and autarky would depend on having the kind of large, resource-rich, industrially advanced and diverse economy which Cuba lacked (or any other state for that matter - even the USSR depended on trade for many commodities, both with capitalist states and allied states run by Marxist-Leninist parties).

[RedSonRising]

Yeah, it was different, I won't dispute that. They were still characterized by Capitalist relations however. For instance, the fact that Cuba's leaders were encouraged to focus on sugar and tobacco production instead of diversifying, which then made it dependent on the international price of only a few commodities. They did this since they were the eastern bloc power most suited to grow sugar (unlike, say, Mongolia or Poland). This is despite the fact that other commodities like sugar, meat, dairy, nickel, ethanol and so on could efficiently be produced. This caused huge economic disruption when the USSR fell and suddenly Cuba lost their huge sugar buyer.

I think it's a bit of (a) and a bit of (b) but a caveat on (b). The thing is, I don't think it was ever really possible for a small country like Cuba (or even the combined weight of all the "Eastern" bloc powers for that matter) to achieve socialism without a global movement, since capitalist nations still dominated the global economy. To me, it's plausible to argue that the Cubans were transitioning to socialism, but the end of that transition has always been dependent on the character of the rest of the global economy. The only alternative is autarkic SIOC, and autarky would depend on having the kind of large, resource-rich, industrially advanced and diverse economy which Cuba lacked (or any other state for that matter - even the USSR depended on trade for many commodities, both with capitalist states and allied states run by Marxist-Leninist parties).

I remember reading that Cuba's plans to diversify and industrialized simply weren't economically feasible. Specifically on the point of meat and dairy; the breed of cattle that were able to exist in Cuba's hot Caribbean climate were rare and fewer, and so those they did manage to maintain, they used to guarantee milk for all school children up to a certain age (which they still do today). Beef is also relatively rare there, and I had a few Cubans express how protective the state is of the cattle. "In Cuba, it's worse to kill a cow than a man."

[PikSmeet]

On the drugs issues, while I find Cuba's penalties pretty draconian and I obviously oppose the war on drugs, I think that an island country that stands between North and South America has little choice when the dominant regional power, the US, refuses to reform its drug policies. If Cuba legalized drugs like they ought to be in an ideal society, it would simply mean a free trafficking hub between the tip of South America to Mexico and Florida.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-cuba-beatles-idUSTRE51300220090204

Also there censorship is draconian and made Mary Whitehouse look positively bacchanalian.

[RedSonRising]

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-cuba-beatles-idUSTRE51300220090204

Also there censorship is draconian and made Mary Whitehouse look positively bacchanalian.

Cultural crackdowns are never good. But that was a long time ago.

[PikSmeet]

Cultural crackdowns are never good. But that was a long time ago.

You mean they no longer ban books/websites/film/music on the grounds that listening/reading them makes you a nazi!

[Working Class Hero]

I might be one of the few people here who looks up to the Cuban model as one of the more sustainable forms of Marxist-Leninism. Despite being cut off from their closest and largest potential trade partner, Cuba has persevered as a socialist state longer than the USSR and far longer than any Western analyst would have predicted.

They send thousands of doctors to the developing world and have one of the highest literacy rates -and lowest infant mortality rates- on the planet. Also, they have developed one of the more democratic (http://www.democracycuba.com/) Marxist-Leninist regimes in history.

Many of the more authoritarian measures passed in Cuba were a result of terrorism by Miami's exiles. (http://www1.easternct.edu/germinaveris/nunca-olvide/)

Still, Cuba is far from being a truly democratic socialist place.

[PikSmeet]

I might be one of the few people here who looks up to the Cuban model as one of the more sustainable forms of Marxist-Leninism. Despite being cut off from their closest and largest potential trade partner, Cuba has persevered as a socialist state longer than the USSR and far longer than any Western analyst would have predicted.

They send thousands of doctors to the developing world and have one of the highest literacy rates -and lowest infant mortality rates- on the planet. Also, they have developed one of the more democratic (http://www.democracycuba.com/) Marxist-Leninist regimes in history.

Many of the more authoritarian measures passed in Cuba were a result of terrorism by Miami's exiles. (http://www1.easternct.edu/germinaveris/nunca-olvide/)

Still, Cuba is far from being a truly democratic socialist place.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Cuba

Healthcare in Cuba, although impressive, is nothing to do with socialism.
It is similar to the type found in the UK, a capitalist country, and other states. It is there to reform capitalism and was introduced in the UK in order to make the British economy more competitive in a post-WW2 economy.
In Cuba it was introduced to make the Cuban working class more productive, thereby allowing the elite in Cuba to enjoy the best they workers can produce.

[hexaune]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Cuba

Healthcare in Cuba, although impressive, is nothing to do with socialism.
It is similar to the type found in the UK, a capitalist country, and other states. It is there to reform capitalism and was introduced in the UK in order to make the British economy more competitive in a post-WW2 economy.
In Cuba it was introduced to make the Cuban working class more productive, thereby allowing the elite in Cuba to enjoy the best they workers can produce.

As true as that is, it's still a very important reform for the working classes and is vastly better for our quality of life than the American system. A good and free health care system doesn't just help capitalism and as America shows, it can function well without it and is therfore imo an important reform ti fight for.

[RedSonRising]

You mean they no longer ban books/websites/film/music on the grounds that listening/reading them makes you a nazi!

They definitely aren't banning the Beatles anymore, that's for sure. And if you think Cuba is still resisting "Western Cultural Imperialism" through widespread censorship, you're mistaken. In Cuba they show American movies, have recognized hip-hop as a burgeoning subculture, LGBTQ rights have soared since the initial era of repression, and internet access is increasingly available. Of course, a centralized bureaucracy and non-stop attempts by the local imperial power to foment violent insurrection kind of muddy the waters with respect to openness. But your specific references are outdated.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Cuba

Healthcare in Cuba, although impressive, is nothing to do with socialism.


This statement is inaccurate. Although Universal Healthcare doesn't make a country socialist, it is a necessary feature of a socialist society, in which planning produces the needs for all, and through which the working class participates. The first part definitely happens; the second part happens at least to some significant degree.

Further, Cuba is not producing luxury commodities for any "ruling elite" to enjoy or benefit from financially, and their workforce is not producing goods of value that are wholly disproportionate to their standard of living, as is the case in capitalist counties with welfare states.

Why would a formerly cash-crop capitalist government with little to no valuable commodity production and no access to the world economy invest in healthcare for the working class? There is no profit to be had, and the logic of capitalism shows us that exploitation is always cheaper when surplus labor exists. By that logic, neighboring states Puerto Rico and the Dominican Republic, who do in fact produce commodities for the world market, should have universal healthcare.

[PikSmeet]

Does anyone here believe that this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationing_in_Cuba

Also applies to the Castros'?

:grin::laugh:

[lutraphile]

Whats the difference between Cuba and DPRK? Well, the Cubans have better weather and beaches and at least get enough to eat. Other than that both are hell-holes that everyone is trying to escape from. Fidel handed power over to his brother, I thought Marx was against hereditary monarchies. As for tourism, yes, that means that goods and services the Cuban working class produce they are not able to consume, but are sold to wealthy tourists whilst they go without. Wow, isn't that what Fidel fought against in '59? Foreign factories, so that means foreign capitalists will extract surplus values from Cuban workers and this is called socialism?
That is just ridiculous. DPRK is a closer to fascist than socialist. Cuba may be state capitalist (or a deformed worker's state if you prefer) but I don't recall Cuba having quasi-official racist policies or imprisoning anyone who publicly disagrees with the government and their families indefinitely. Not to mention that the Castros have nowhere near the horrifying state-sponsored cult of personality that the Kims do, and don't plan on holding onto power forever.

Cuba is moving more towards a mixed economy now. It's sad, but unavoidable. Hopefully it's a NEP-style mixed economy as a temporary retreat, not an excuse to go full capitalist like in China. But Cuba was never going to survive as the only country in the world attempting socialism and no money coming in.

[RedSonRising]

Does anyone here believe that this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationing_in_Cuba

Also applies to the Castros'?

:grin::laugh:

I see you've avoided responding to the factually based refutations of your misconceptions on Cuba's system, and are instead resorting to cheap one-liners. This isn't how you learn, or contribute to a discussion.

[PikSmeet]

I see you've avoided responding to the factually based refutations of your misconceptions on Cuba's system, and are instead resorting to cheap one-liners. This isn't how you learn, or contribute to a discussion.

Hope this helps with the discussion

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/21/fidel-castro-lived-like-king-cuba

Castro quote - "Perhaps one of the most difficult aspects of rectification has been to persuade the workers to give up the excessively high wages stemming from implementation of outdated norms, or erroneous criteria".
In other words work more for less, can they be a more reactionary outlook?

[PikSmeet]

That is just ridiculous. DPRK is a closer to fascist than socialist. Cuba may be state capitalist (or a deformed worker's state if you prefer) but I don't recall Cuba having quasi-official racist policies or imprisoning anyone who publicly disagrees with the government and their families indefinitely. Not to mention that the Castros have nowhere near the horrifying state-sponsored cult of personality that the Kims do, and don't plan on holding onto power forever.

Cuba is moving more towards a mixed economy now. It's sad, but unavoidable. Hopefully it's a NEP-style mixed economy as a temporary retreat, not an excuse to go full capitalist like in China. But Cuba was never going to survive as the only country in the world attempting socialism and no money coming in.

Yet the DPRK rigidly adheres to the Stalinist economic model, is that a model you praise?

[RedSonRising]

Hope this helps with the discussion

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/21/fidel-castro-lived-like-king-cuba

Castro quote - "Perhaps one of the most difficult aspects of rectification has been to persuade the workers to give up the excessively high wages stemming from implementation of outdated norms, or erroneous criteria".
In other words work more for less, can they be a more reactionary outlook?

Bourgeois newspaper reports on Cuban defector who stands to benefit financially from a sensational tale of hypocritical luxury, and that somehow invalidates the observable structural gains of the revolution?

Let's say Fidel did have private luxuries. How does that erase the existence of a structure in which workers actively participate and in turn receive their needs at a rate greater than any other country in Latin America? Let's say Fidel's couple of Yachts were sold and distributed to public goods. What glaring deficiencies would it solve? Cuba is a primarily service economy. How would Cuba's limited production even support multiple luxury lifestyles, the type of which you describe? You can't have both an exploitative ruling class while also having the needs of the population met on such a small and isolated economy. It's mathematically impossible.

I find the whole thing hard to believe anyway. Cuba isn't so big that people wouldn't know where Castro keeps his "hectares and hectares" of land. Forbes's assertion he has 900 million dollars based on this account is just ridiculous.

[PikSmeet]

Bourgeois newspaper reports on Cuban defector who stands to benefit financially from a sensational tale of hypocritical luxury, and that somehow invalidates the observable structural gains of the revolution?

Let's say Fidel did have private luxuries. How does that erase the existence of a structure in which workers actively participate and in turn receive their needs at a rate greater than any other country in Latin America? Let's say Fidel's couple of Yachts were sold and distributed to public goods. What glaring deficiencies would it solve? Cuba is a primarily service economy. How would Cuba's limited production even support multiple luxury lifestyles, the type of which you describe? You can't have both an exploitative ruling class while also having the needs of the population met on such a small and isolated economy. It's mathematically impossible.

I find the whole thing hard to believe anyway. Cuba isn't so big that people wouldn't know where Castro keeps his "hectares and hectares" of land. Forbes's assertion he has 900 million dollars based on this account is just ridiculous.


Would you be able to show how it is mathematically impossible, without the aid of any bourgeois resources or from those who benefitted financially from such information?

As you have not provided any evidence to counter anything I wrote and gave the game away with your statement "I find the whole thing hard to believe anyway".

As you said yourself:

I see you've avoided responding to the factually based refutations of your misconceptions on Cuba's system, and are instead resorting to cheap one-liners. This isn't how you learn, or contribute to a discussion.

Oh and for the record regimes like this do have form, when East Germany collapsed they found out that the party elite did have numerous luxuries that were denied the rest of the population and East Germany was not that big either.

[RedSonRising]

Would you be able to show how it is mathematically impossible, without the aid of any bourgeois resources or from those who benefitted financially from such information?

As you have not provided any evidence to counter anything I wrote and gave the game away with your statement "I find the whole thing hard to believe anyway".

As you said yourself:

I see you've avoided responding to the factually based refutations of your misconceptions on Cuba's system, and are instead resorting to cheap one-liners. This isn't how you learn, or contribute to a discussion.

Oh and for the record regimes like this do have form, when East Germany collapsed they found out that the party elite did have numerous luxuries that were denied the rest of the population and East Germany was not that big either.

Are you asking me to prove that an isolated economy can't support both an exploitative ruling class and provide the basic needs for all its people? That's just common sense. It's the principal contradiction of capitalism, and the reason capitalism as an economic system is unsuitable for human beings.

East Germany had an existing Soviet Union to supply them goods, and was not outperforming its neighbors in quality of life indicators. Bad comparison.

I can't prove that Castro has no luxuries (because it's impossible to prove a negative), but I can easily point to how they're irrelevant to Cuba's merit as a system that provides the basic needs of all its people due in large part to their participation in the planning process, despite severe economic limits. Along with, of course, the evidence that vast amounts of land being reserved privately for Castro's use on such a small island would be hard to hide.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

East Germany had an existing Soviet Union to supply them goods, and was not outperforming its neighbors in quality of life indicators. Bad comparison.


Actually, it's not. Cuba is not isolated-- the U.S. has embargoes, but if you think that Cuba has no trade with other capitalist countries, you're clearly delusional. China uses their advantagenous position to sell them overpriced crap like they do in Africa, for example, and there's extensive trade with the rest of the world-- just not the United States. This has been somewhat a problem, but Cuban isolation is not total-- Cuba is not as isolated as the DPRK, for example, and even they have a fair bit of trade.

[RedSonRising]

Actually, it's not. Cuba is not isolated-- the U.S. has embargoes, but if you think that Cuba has no trade with other capitalist countries, you're clearly delusional. China uses their advantagenous position to sell them overpriced crap like they do in Africa, for example, and there's extensive trade with the rest of the world-- just not the United States. This has been somewhat a problem, but Cuban isolation is not total-- Cuba is not as isolated as the DPRK, for example, and even they have a fair bit of trade.

Did I say Cuban isolation was total? No. But to compare Cuba purchasing buses and car parts from China, and having relations with Venezuela, with support from the Soviet Union while it was still a world power, is just silly. As would be comparing the standard of living and participation level of workers in the planning of the economy. So, actually, it is a poor comparison.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

Did I say Cuban isolation was total? No. But to compare Cuba purchasing buses and car parts from China, and having relations with Venezuela, with support from the Soviet Union while it was still a world power, is just silly. As would be comparing the standard of living and participation level of workers in the planning of the economy. So, actually, it is a poor comparison.

Cuba had support from the Soviet Union while the Soviet Union still existed-- well, until the latter 1980's, which is when the Soviet Union also began to stop giving the DDR good deals on cheap subsidized oil and supplies. The difference is that the DDR was by far a more well-developed industrial economy. Cuba's economy was never technologically or industrially advanced, and that was something the Soviet Union actively worked against, because it could make Cuba more politically independent. Now they instead produce bogus cancer treatments (remember those absurd promises for 'vaccines' they gave? Then you read between the lines and it said they were "homoeopathic" remedies, i.e. they were just water and worthless...) for their poor populations because they can't afford to give them real treatments... now if that is not cynical, I don't know what is. It's like when Mao decided to promote that hokus-pokus "Traditional Chinese" medicine in the 1950's because the country was too poor to give people actual medical care.