please, let's not be so naive as to believe the u.s. empire is the beacon of morality, justice and benevolence, pure as the driven snow against the forces of oppression . . . . really tired of that endless revisionist history and selective amnesia. okay, yes, the rise of totalitarian communism was probably the main driving force that escalated the cold war, but it's not as if the u.s. was blameless in the whole mess (see iran in the '50s, etc.). we need to be more realistic about this. for example, who was in charge of cuba before castro?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fulgencio_ ... .931959.29
sound familiar?After finishing his term he lived in the United States, returning to Cuba to run for president in 1952. Facing certain electoral defeat, he (Batista) led a military coup that preempted the election. . . . . Batista suspended the 1940 Constitution and revoked most political liberties, including the right to strike. He then aligned with the wealthiest landowners who owned the largest sugar plantations, and presided over a stagnating economy that widened the gap between rich and poor Cubans.[6]
yeah, nice guy. freedom and democracy . . . .Batista's increasingly corrupt and repressive regime then began to systematically profit from the exploitation of Cuba's commercial interests, by negotiating lucrative relationships with the American mafia, who controlled the drug, gambling, and prostitution businesses in Havana, and with large multinational American corporations that had invested considerable amounts of money in Cuba.[6][7] To quell the growing discontent amongst the populace — which was subsequently displayed through frequent student riots and anti-Batista demonstrations — Batista established tighter censorship of the media, while also utilizing his anti-Communist secret police and U.S.-supplied weaponry to carry out wide-scale violence, torture and public executions; ultimately killing as many as 20,000 Cubans.[8]
sound familiar?The Dallas industrialist Jack Crichton joined with several other oilmen to negotiate drilling rights in Cuba under the Batista administration. Standard Oil of Indiana signed an agreement with the Cuban-Venezuelan Oil Voting Trust Company, a unit originally established by William F. Buckley, Sr., for access to fifteen million acres. CVOVTC was during the middle 1950s one of the four or five most traded entities on the American Stock Exchange.
like i say--- neither total, heavy-handed capitalism nor total, heavy-handed socialism is "the answer." and to believe otherwise is to be a swallower of propaganda.At the beginning of 1959 United States companies owned about 40 percent of the Cuban sugar lands—almost all the cattle ranches—90 percent of the mines and mineral concessions—80 percent of the utilities—practically all the oil industry—and supplied two-thirds of Cuba's imports. ”--- John F. Kennedy[26]
In a manner that antagonized the Cuban people, the U.S. government used their influence to advance the interests of and increase the profits of the private American companies, which "dominated the island's economy."[26] As a symbol of this relationship, ITT Corporation, an American-owned multinational telephone company, presented Batista with a gold-plated telephone, as an "expression of gratitude" for the "excessive telephone rate increase" that Batista granted at the urging of the U.S. government.[26]
Earl T. Smith, former U.S. Ambassador to Cuba, testified to the U.S. Senate in 1960 that, "Until Castro, the U.S. was so overwhelmingly influential in Cuba that the American ambassador was the second most important man, sometimes even more important than the Cuban president."[35] In addition, nearly "all aid" from the U.S. to Batista's regime was in the "form of weapons assistance," which "merely strengthened the Batista dictatorship" and "completely failed to advance the economic welfare of the Cuban people."[26] Such actions later "enabled Castro and the Communists to encourage the growing belief that America was indifferent to Cuban aspirations for a decent life."[26]
According to historian and author James S. Olson . . . "The U.S. government had no difficulty in dealing with him, even if he was a hopeless despot."[6] On October 6, 1960 Senator John F. Kennedy, in the midst of his campaign for the U.S. Presidency, described Batista's relationship with the U.S. government and criticized the Eisenhower administration for supporting him.
Where would we be without a sense of humor. But there it is.
Though, I guess that they are facing rough times somehow and I wonder about the possible future of a present with CUCs as their money-unit and tourism (with a great ammounts of canadians and europeans) as their main enonomic source. I hope they will be creative enough to wave that.
