Cuban embargo: good or bad?

[pusher robot]

I am curious as to the opinion of revolutionaries whether or not the US embargo on Cuba is mostly good or mostly bad.

On the one hand, I would answer that it is mostly bad, since it actually undermines the stated goal of bringing increased economic and social freedom to Cuba. I think that if trade was opened up, the massive influx of wealth, tourists, capital, and American cultural goods could not have any other effect but to increase the pressures for economic and social liberalization in cuban society.

On the other hand, if one is against these changes and wants to maintain communist control and social engineering, then of course this would be bad. Much vituperation has been spent on the untoward cultural dominance of the United States in latin america, and the impossibility of socialism thriving wherever capitalism is allowed to exist, so it would seem somewhat logical that revolutionary leftists would actually prefer the U.S. isolating itself from Cuba.

On the other other hand, I have heard lots of complaining about how the U.S. embargo hurts Cuba and is terribly unfair, so it seems that many leftists are actually agitating for greater U.S. involvement in Cuba.

How to resolve this apparent contradiction?

[Dr Mindbender]

its not so much we would call for greater US interference, the problem is under the global economic status quo the US is the no.1 economic player. Therefore its involvement or lack of involvement will affect the interests of other countries respectively.
This puts Cuba at a enormous disadvantage compared to countries that are involved in American markets. Thats not an inditement of Cuba's political system, more evidence that nationalised economies cannot co-exist with prominent economies with private orientation.

[MT5678]

Cuba has somehow made huge gains in social welfare and healthcare, despite the inacessibility of certain medicines due to the embargo.

I support dropping the embargo, as does ZNet. This way, agorism in the field of healthcare can be halted, and the technology of advanced computers (Cubans have some, but things could always be better) will become more widespread as Cuba can directly get them from Mirosoft instead of buying them at higher prices from Latin-American firms.

[pusher robot]

its not so much we would call for greater US interference, the problem is under the global economic status quo the US is the no.1 economic player. Therefore its involvement or lack of involvement will affect the interests of other countries respectively.
This puts Cuba at a enormous disadvantage compared to countries that are involved in American markets. Thats not an inditement of Cuba's political system, more evidence that nationalised economies cannot co-exist with prominent economies with private orientation.

Okay, but given that the United States is not going to nationalize its economy any time soon, what is a country like Cuba's best option? If they remain embargoed, they cannot partake in the wealth-generation that international trade generates - but they also remain relatively isolated, enough so that their nationalized economy is permitted by its population to exist in exchange for the equality it renders. If they open up to trade, it will become much harder to forestall the inevitable influx of cultural influence from the United States. Also, without the embargo in place, the nationalized economy will be forgoing vastly more potential wealth for that equality, which will increase the pressures to liberalize.

[Demogorgon]

Your argument is based on some flawed premises. First of all it is relatively easy to get American goods in Cuba anyway. Everyone I have known who lives in Cuba or has previously lived in Cuba did not find it at all difficult. They just ordered them in from a third country. Similarly a lot of other Western goods are imported from places like Canada and the EU already. The trouble with the blockade is largely the US banning its citzens from buing from Cuba and preventing Cuba from receiving income that way.

Secondly the notion that in the rest of Latin America, access to American goods has killed off socialism is so flimsy that it falls down at the slightest scrutiny. US domination is incredibly unpopular across Latin America and currently there is the small matter of leftist Governments, opposed to the US, being elected across the continent.

[Dr Mindbender]

Okay, but given that the United States is not going to nationalize its economy any time soon, what is a country like Cuba's best option? If they remain embargoed, they cannot partake in the wealth-generation that international trade generates - but they also remain relatively isolated, enough so that their nationalized economy is permitted by its population to exist in exchange for the equality it renders. If they open up to trade, it will become much harder to forestall the inevitable influx of cultural influence from the United States. Also, without the embargo in place, the nationalized economy will be forgoing vastly more potential wealth for that equality, which will increase the pressures to liberalize.
No, the US will not adopt nationalisation because there are too many conflicting interests but why should the burden of change always have to be on Cuba just because its system does not coincide with the convienience of the American establishment? It isnt just Cuba that loses out, it is also the average american who loses as a result of the concentration of wealth in the hands of the elite that the US govt champion.

Ideally, if the american populace (as well as that of the developed world) were to seize control for themselves, and embrace a nationalised system then all ordinary peoples could enjoy its benefits.

[Bud Struggle]

Your argument is based on some flawed premises. First of all it is relatively easy to get American goods in Cuba anyway.

That's true. I have a place near Key West and we boat on down to Havana a couple of times a year to buy cigars, (all legal--complicated, but legal,) and there is a THRIVING underground economy. You can buy anything you want, and I mean anything. It called of all things: "por la izquierda"--which means "on the left.":D (I'm guessing they mean left hand, here.) Most of the items sold are of American origin.

A lot of the stuff is brought in by boaters and family on visits which the Cubans turn around and sell in the black market.

[pusher robot]

Your argument is based on some flawed premises. First of all it is relatively easy to get American goods in Cuba anyway. Everyone I have known who lives in Cuba or has previously lived in Cuba did not find it at all difficult. They just ordered them in from a third country. Similarly a lot of other Western goods are imported from places like Canada and the EU already. The trouble with the blockade is largely the US banning its citzens from buing from Cuba and preventing Cuba from receiving income that way.

First of all, please stop calling it a blockade. That childish propaganda insults my intelligence.

Second of all, it is true that American goods are bought in Cuba - in fact, the U.S. is the second largest importer into Cuba, and provides the most Cuban agricultural imports. But what there is almost none of is American investment, because it is prohibited by law. In other words, if I wanted to start a capitalist operation in Cuba, I would have to defeat the criminal justice system of the United States, no easy task. Without the embargo, the potential wealth generation of these enterprises would be so great that it would be an offer that Cuba would have a hard time saying "no" to, I think. Imagine that, say, a major pharma company wanted to build a large production facility in Cuba, with lots of well-paying technical and medical jobs, but only on the condition that Cuba change its policies as to nationalization. Right now, the embargo prevents that, but it would be hard to say "no" to such opportunities, wouldn't it?


Secondly the notion that in the rest of Latin America, access to American goods has killed off socialism is so flimsy that it falls down at the slightest scrutiny. US domination is incredibly unpopular across Latin America and currently there is the small matter of leftist Governments, opposed to the US, being elected across the continent.
It's not just access to goods, it's the influx of investors, tourists, and media.

[pusher robot]

Ideally, if the american populace (as well as that of the developed world) were to seize control for themselves, and embrace a nationalised system then all ordinary peoples could enjoy its benefits.

I know that's the ideal, but I am asking about what you think would be best for Cuba given what's realistic. Realistically if they truly cannot coexist then Cuba has to change and the U.S. doesn't because the U.S. is strong and Cuba is weak.

[Dr Mindbender]

I know that's the ideal, but I am asking about what you think would be best for Cuba given what's realistic. Realistically if they truly cannot coexist then Cuba has to change and the U.S. doesn't because the U.S. is strong and Cuba is weak.

Being 'strong' does not make the US better or ideaollogically superior. I am basing my argument around what political system is most likely to benefit the maximum amount of people, not around which side has the most werewithal to bully the other into getting its way.

If all members here advocated changes based on what was most realistic, then their revolutionary resolve would be somewhat castrated.

It is unrealistic that we will find a cure for aids and cancer anytime soon. That doesnt mean we should stop striving for a cure. The same applies to the argument to rid the planet of capitalism.

[Demogorgon]

Right now, the embargo prevents that, but it would be hard to say "no" to such opportunities, wouldn't it?
The situation on the Cuban end stops all that. I mean nowhere in the EU imposes restrictions on trade with Cuba, yet there is no influx on Eurpean money (beyond the level the Cuban Government allows). Same with Canadian investment and so forth. The embargo is not causing harm in terms of lack of American investment, but rather lack of American consumers of their produce


It's not just access to goods, it's the influx of investors, tourists, and media.
Again where are you getting this notion that the end of the embargo will lead to American investment? Cuban law would still prevent that, just as it prevents the vast majority of European and Canadian investment. Cuba certainly does not lack for Western tourists and media though. Just not American ones.

[Dr Mindbender]

if anything, Cuba should worry about US investment less than it should say, anytime since the end of the cold war. They have prospering relations with oil-rich Venezuela, and with the prospering chinese economy they should be setting their sights east, not north.

[RNK]

The embargo is good.

...for Capitalists. Bad for everyone else.

[pusher robot]

Well, it looks like we agree in this case, then. Interesting.

[RNK]

It would take a very stupid person to analyse the situation and come to any other conclusion. The embargo on Cuba benefits only those who wish to see the socialist trends in Cuba washed away. It is bad for nearly everyone else; it is bad for you and I, for instance, for the precedent it has created in how imperialism reacts to socialist revolutions; and the defeat of any socialist movement is a defeat for all of us who do not exploit the labour of others.

I disagree slighly that there is no "blockade" on Cuba. True, the US is one of the only countries on the planet which outlaws economic trade with Cuba -- officially leaving the door open for the rest of the world. However, despite the lack of any official law, most western countries (and corporations, more specifically) refuse to trade with Cuba on ideological grounds. This, coupled with the US-centric system of the global market, particularly in latin America, makes it more of an unspoken embargo.

[pusher robot]

I disagree slighly that there is no "blockade" on Cuba. True, the US is one of the only countries on the planet which outlaws economic trade with Cuba -- officially leaving the door open for the rest of the world. However, despite the lack of any official law, most western countries (and corporations, more specifically) refuse to trade with Cuba on ideological grounds. This, coupled with the US-centric system of the global market, particularly in latin America, makes it more of an unspoken embargo.

A refusal to trade is an economic sanction. That is an embargo. A blockade is a military operation involving patrol and interdiction. The point is that any country that wants to trade with Cuba can trade with Cuba. No warships will intervene.

[Joby]

If the embargo was lifted, I believe it would have the effect of Cuba adopting a more-Capitalist economy. The price of Cane Sugar, for example, would drop significantly in the US (hopefully Coke would begin using it instead of corn syrup). Socialism is great, but an influx of dollars would sway more Cubans.

And I think Cubans could do very well. They already have thousands of doctors...If they were paid by an American coporation $50,000 a year to handle American patients-either in Havana or the US-they'd spend more and increase the Cuban economy. If they want to keep government control of social institutions and public property, that shouldn't be part of the US's business as long as the US has the right to sell there.

Unfortunately, though, The US has done it's best to make sure no 3rd-world nation outside of it's sphere of influence is able to thrive. It'd set a bad example...

[RGacky3]

I don't think the embargo being liftesd would change Cuba at all, because it would be US companies trading with State controlled Companies, with the consent of the State so it would'nt make Cuba more Capitalist at all, but it just shows how much the US really believes in free markets.

I find it interesting how the United States GOvernment accuses Chaves of Using Oil to influence the region, if statements like that were looked at honestly they would be laughed at, (which I'm sure they are to most people here.)

[LSD]

Would lifting the embargo change Cuba? Probably. Would it lead to an implementation of complete free market capitalism? Of course not.

Cuba in the 1950s was in a unique position, alone in Latin America it was a reasonably wealthy country, isolated, and linked by trade and history to Florida 90 miles away. Had it embarked on a reasonable path of socio-economic development, who's to say what might have been accomplished.

If it hadn't fatally sealed itself off into the Soviet camp, if it had actually listened to the voice of the Cuban people and implemented a real liberal society, the Republic of Cuba might have become a truly shining beacon to the rest of the third world, instead of the mixed bag it is today,

The revolutionary Fidel Castro understood, he never intended to implement Marxism, but once swept to power he was enchanted by the appeal of that lovely dream called "revolution" and doomed his island to play a tragic, albeit fascinating, role in world history.

Cubans today enjoy the best living conditions in all of Latin America, of course Cuba has long been the jewel of the Caribbean. But uniquely among the developing world, it has implemented sweeping social welfare programs along with its market econmics. In many ways it is an example to follow.

Politically it's a mess, of course, thanks to its descendency from that degenerate bureacratism known as Leninism, but I actually do believe that the Cuban people will be able to transition into the world without bloodshed and without invasion.

There's so much potention there, imagine if it were only applied... :)

[MT5678]

If it hadn't fatally sealed itself off into the Soviet camp, if it had actually listened to the voice of the Cuban people and implemented a real liberal society, the Republic of Cuba might have become a truly shining beacon to the rest of the third world, instead of the mixed bag it is today,


Cuba has biannual municipal elections and the people elect deputies once every 5 years.

Cuba is not some unfree police state. It maintains links with pretty much all Latin-American nations, capitalist or not. There is a flow of ideas and people occurring, its just that Cuban Socialism is so much superior.

Also: when the strongest nation in the world hates your guts, you are likely to turn to the next strongest, right?