Castro: Cuban Model no longer works

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Blacks who left the United States for the Soviet Union did so because the society they found was superior enough for them, where their talents were rewarded because of their skill, not demeaned because of their skin color, and there they made valuable contributions to Soviet society.
Well, they left since they were being discriminated against and expected to find a better society. We can't know whether they liked what they found, however. Racism was not absent in USSR either, although it was not institutionalized.
I would dare say that immigrants to the USSR, both from former imperial colonies and the West, generally found life better than where they left. The ones who didn't went back where they came. And some of those American Blacks did just that.
I would like a citation here...or a dozen citations, actually. I am extremely sceptical about this last claim. Emigration from USSR, whether legal or illegal was almost impossible. Re-emigration into US on the grounds "it really isn't as great here as I thought, I actually liked it better back there"? Unthinkable. At best, maybe some of these people were able to return as Soviet diplomats of officials of some kind.

EDIT: I was trying to find sources about blacks emigrating from US in USSR and found this:
During the 1930s fifteen Black American families moved to the Soviet Union as agricultural experts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_diaspora EDIT 2: Nah, this obviously irrelevant sample.

...and this book: http://search.barnesandnoble.com/The-Forsaken/Tim-Tzouliadis/e/9781594201684
Spoiler :
The Forsaken starts with a photograph of a baseball
team. The year is 1934, the image black and white: two rows of
young men, one standing, the other crouching with their arms
around one another’s shoulders. They are all somewhere in their
late teens or twenties, in the peak of health. We know most, if
not all, of their names: Arthur Abolin, Walter Preeden, Victor
Herman, Eugene Peterson. They hail from ordinary working
families from across America—Detroit, Boston, New York, San
Francisco. Waiting in the sunshine, they look just like any other
baseball team except, perhaps, for the Russian lettering on their
uniforms.
These men and thousands of others, their wives, and
children were possibly the least heralded migration in American
history. Not surprising, maybe, since in a nation of immigrants
few care to remember the ones who leave behind the dream.
The exiles came from all walks of life. Within their ranks were
Communists, trade unionists, and radicals of the John Reed
school, but most were just ordinary citizens not overly concerned
were politics. What united them was the hope that drives all emigrants:
the search for a better life. And to any one of the millions
of unemployed Americans during the Great Depression, even the
harshest Moscow winter could sustain that promise.
Within four years of that June day in Gorky Park,
many of the young men in that photograph will be arrested and
along with them unaccounted numbers of their fellow countrymen.
As foreign victims of Stalin’s Terror, some will be executed
immediately in basement cells or at execution grounds outside
themain cities. Others will be sent to the “corrective labor”
camps, where they will be starved and worked to death, their
bodies buried in the snowy wasteland. Two of the baseball players
who survive and whose stories frame this remarkable work of
history will be inordinately lucky. This book is the story of these
mens’ lives—The Forsaken who lived and those who died.
The result of years of groundbreaking research in
American and Russian archives, The Forsaken is also the story
of the world inside Russia at the time of Terror: the glittering
obliviousness of the U.S. embassy in Moscow, the duplicity of
the Soviet government in its dealings with Roosevelt, and the
terrible finality of the Gulag system. In the tradition of the finest
history chronicling genocide in the twentieth century, The
Forsaken offers new understanding of timeless questions of guilt
and innocence that continue to plague us today.
...
The desperate poignancy of the situation for many comes through in a heartbreaking letter from a teenage American named George Sviridoff, who was arrested for trying to leave the USSR and found himself in a concentration camp above the Arctic Circle. Writing to his father in the U.S., the captive American explained: "Now papa my fate is sealed. I have left you, lost my country, lost my freedom, lost all the delights of life...there remains in addition only to lose my head."
...
The Cold War began in the 1930s, to judge by this narrative of strange events within the borders of the old Soviet Union. It's just that no one thought to tell the Americans. British TV journalist Tzouliadis turns up an intriguing tale in the undocumented Depression-era migration that took tens of thousands of Americans to the Soviet Union, recruited for their technical skills in a time of widespread joblessness at home. They did not have to be persuaded; a Soviet trade agency in New York advertised 6,000 positions and received more than 100,000 applications, Tzouliadis reports. Few were communists or fellow travelers; most listed disgust with conditions at home as a more powerful reason than "interest in Soviet experiment" for their exodus. One reason for disgust was Jim Crow, and African-Americans fleeing racism figured prominently in the wave of migration. Once in Russia, the Americans lived as Americans do abroad. Some blended in, others banded together, formed baseball teams, searched out their compatriots-and they worried when their children seemed to be "turning out just a little too Red' " after a spell in the Soviet school system. Things turned sour, though, after 1936, in the years of Stalinist purges, when all things foreign were suspect and the elite of Russian culture and politics were killed off. The Americans, one by one, started to disappear into the Gulag. Diplomat George Kennan observed that the Soviets justified this by unilaterally making Americans citizens of the Soviet Union, thus negating their rights. "Logically we should refuse to recognize the naturalization of Americans in the Soviet Union as voluntary and valid in the absence of confirmation," Kennan wrote,but instead the U.S. government did nothing-and would do nothing when, a decade later, Americans taken prisoner during World War II, even though allies, were shipped to the Gulag, joined still later by POWs during the Korean War. Tzouliadis's narrative-though rather tuneless-holds the reader's attention and illuminates an overlooked chapter in 20th-century history, revealing larger trends in relations between Russia and the United States that persist today.

Sounds like something you might wish to read...:rolleyes:
EDIT 3: ...and this book:
http://www.amazon.com/Black-Red-Years-Inside-Soviet/dp/0874918855/ref=pd_cp_b_2
Robinson, a Jamaican-born Ford Motor toolmaker who sought economic security, engineering training, and an escape from racism, was recruited to work in the Soviet Union in the mid-1930s. Never a Communist, Robinson walked a tightrope while living in the Soviet system, not completely accepting or being accepted by it and recognizing that there was racism, repression, and regimentation around him. Finally, after 24 years of unsuccessful effort, Robinson "escaped" to the United States via Uganda. He provides firsthand accounts of the Stalinist purges, sacrifices of World War II, and economic and political tensions of the Cold War. A rare look at Soviet life.
This guy apparently got lucky... he eventually seems to have preferred Idi Amin's Uganda though...
 
That makes no sense.
You vote for a party that promotes selfishness and intolerance as virtue, while adhering to a religion which preaches generosity and universal love. It makes perfect sense. :p
 
You vote for a party that promotes selfishness and intolerance as virtue, while adhering to a religion which preaches generosity and universal love. It makes perfect sense. :p

Those adjectives are quite forced.
 
......And about the permanence of the cuban political regime beyond Fidel Castro's death: whatever people here may say about him, I think we can agree that he was possibly the most charismatic leader in Latin America during the whole 20th century. Cuba became communist because he pushed for that and people followed him.

charisma has little to do with competency.....but the reasons that cubans (in cuba) followed/continue to follow him are more complex than charisma....from firing squads to brainwashing kids in school.

And while I'm sure that there are a million or so former cubans who hate him, in Florida, most of the population in Cuba genuinely likes him. He should have proposed a president elected through universal suffrage, and run for office, he'd have won easily and silenced many critics (their non-party attempt at representative democracy is too odd to be generally accepted elsewhere, as things stand now, as democracy).

u forgot new jersey :p one millon is about 10% of the population, about as many jewish poles feld the nazis...castro is a narcissist bully...he would have never (as evidenced by history) allowed a free election or tolerated dissention

But there's no one capable of succeeding him in with that level of popularity.

right now, he is as popular as a poor crazy grandfather (the one that probably hit you when u were a kid but u could not do anything about it then, and feel sorry for him now)

When he dies, the political future of Cuba will be open for discussion..

agree....
However, I don't expect the cubans to suddenly "embrace capitalism". There won't be a revolution, but there will be big changes. But, anyway, just the mere end of the US embargo on Cuba would have been enough to cause big changes, now or anytime in the past..

perhaps, but i am not as sure as u r, at least in terms of benefit to the people

And I suspect that Castro's death will be seized as an opportunity for dropping the embargo without losing face.

agree
 
Well, they left since they were being discriminated against and expected to find a better society. We can't know whether they liked what they found, however. Racism was not absent in USSR either, although it was not institutionalized.

Well more in the form of "holy crap we've never seen a Darkie before," and then only in individual interaction, the latter of which can still be found in the United States even today.

These hate crimes and racial crap today are really a post-Soviet phenomenon.

I would like a citation here...or a dozen citations, actually. I am extremely sceptical about this last claim. Emigration from USSR, whether legal or illegal was almost impossible. Re-emigration into US on the grounds "it really isn't as great here as I thought, I actually liked it better back there"? Unthinkable. At best, maybe some of these people were able to return as Soviet diplomats of officials of some kind.

Emigration to Warsaw Pact nations or nations the USSR had agreements with (Ethiopia, Mozambique, India, et al) was not so different from moving around within the USSR. A pain in the ass, but perfectly legal. For most people. Though if you wish to throw that under the bus, by all means do so, I think their movement restrictions were stupid.

Anyway that's not to say there wasn't illegal emigration.

However, the Americans I was referring to were those who came to the USSR as exchange students or other visitors, to kind of scout things out, and ultimately decided it wasn't for them after their year or 6 months or whatever of being there.

EDIT: I was trying to find sources about blacks emigrating from US in USSR and found this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_diaspora EDIT 2: Nah, this obviously irrelevant sample.

...and this book: http://search.barnesandnoble.com/The-Forsaken/Tim-Tzouliadis/e/9781594201684
Spoiler :

...

...


Sounds like something you might wish to read...:rolleyes:
EDIT 3: ...and this book:
http://www.amazon.com/Black-Red-Years-Inside-Soviet/dp/0874918855/ref=pd_cp_b_2

This guy apparently got lucky... he eventually seems to have preferred Idi Amin's Uganda though...

I've heard of the last book, but the book I was primarily using was this one: Blacks, Reds, and Russians. Though it also talks about Du Bois and others who were merely regular visitors.
 
Though if you wish to throw that under the bus, by all means do so, I think their movement restrictions were stupid.
I think their movement restrictions were vital in keeping the damn place inhabited, but we are going a bit offtopic here, so...
 
Batistan Cuba was awful and unsustainable, but the model that replaced it didn't quite solve the problems. However, even a good revolutionary would have failed to make Cuba prosperous because Cuba was an American colony, and the US wouldn't have allowed even a reasonable government with noncommunist independent economic policies to take control, without massive sanctions and aggression from the US. So, yeah, Cuban allegiance to the USSR was strangely enough the correct choice, because at least then there was someone to finance Cuba, even if that finance came with the conditions that Cuba becomes communist.

I've got to back to the army now. Weekend's over.
 
The only adjectives in my post were "universal" and "perfect". Perhaps you mean something else? :huh:

Nouns...

For the record, I blame my busy schedule.
 
"The Cuban model doesn't even work for us anymore."

The Russian Soviets translated Tsarist autocratic central directives etc into soviet
central planning and confused conformity with communism; and Cuba followed suite.

Perhaps Fidel has finally got to reading that bit about the withering away of the state.
 
Actualy, I think he said somewhere he never finished reading Capital.
I don't know how valid it is, but I read it in a pretty well researched book published by Harvard, so I'm inclined to believe it.
 
Batistan Cuba was awful and unsustainable, but the model that replaced it didn't quite solve the problems. However, even a good revolutionary would have failed to make Cuba prosperous because Cuba was an American colony, and the US wouldn't have allowed even a reasonable government with noncommunist independent economic policies to take control, without massive sanctions and aggression from the US. So, yeah, Cuban allegiance to the USSR was strangely enough the correct choice, because at least then there was someone to finance Cuba, even if that finance came with the conditions that Cuba becomes communist.
It's perhaps worth noting that the regime was not initially USSR-aligned or explicitly communist, but broadly populist-socialist. The government contained several committed Marxists, most significantly Che Guevara and Raoul Castro, and Fidel Castro was increasingly dabbling with Marxism, but this only became a formal position in reaction to American hostility- tellingly, the Communist Party of Cuba was only formed in 1965 from the merger of several existing left-wing parties.

The Russian Soviets translated Tsarist autocratic central directives etc into soviet
central planning and confused conformity with communism; and Cuba followed suite.

Perhaps Fidel has finally got to reading that bit about the withering away of the state.
Cuba never really progressed past state capitalist (or bureaucratic collectivism, if you're a trot), so the transition from socialism to communism was really out of the question...

Actualy, I think he said somewhere he never finished reading Capital.
I don't know how valid it is, but I read it in a pretty well researched book published by Harvard, so I'm inclined to believe it.
Castro was honestly never the most committed Marxist. As I mentioned above, he never became explicitly Marxist until after the revolution, and it's hard to determine to what extent his conversion was genuine, and to what extent it was political pragmatism.
 
Even when he said, he, you know, wasn't a Communist initialy?

His personal views were to the left, but not communist. But of course, he chucked out our right wing dictator, emphasised land redistribution from the massive estates, and became somewhat friendly with Russia because he needed an ally. All of this happened was because we needed a communist scapegoat to reinforce the basicaly defunct 'domino' theory and Monolithic Communism (which was well and truely dead by Kruschev.)
One of the requirements for Cuba to get economic and military aid from the USSR was to be Marxist-Leninst. So, he decided to somewhat adopt it because it suited his purposes. He was never a complete communist. Che on the other hand......
He spent his life fighting capitalism and the bourgeiose so his face could end up on a T-shirt sold at the GAP worn by kids to appear rebellious. I think that is fitting punishment for some of his actions.
 
I think it's a canard that Castro wasn't a communist before taking over Cuba.
My point was that the revolution was not communist, but populist, humanist and, arguably, socialist. It was only when the US made its hostility clear- let's not forget who backed Batista (I mean, apart from the mafia)- that Cuban became formally communist, or aligned itself with the USSR.

Che on the other hand......
He spent his life fighting capitalism and the bourgeiose so his face could end up on a T-shirt sold at the GAP worn by kids to appear rebellious. I think that is fitting punishment for some of his actions.
Of course, outside of the first world (and even in certain parts of it), Che is still a potent and legitimate symbol of revolutionary activity and radical activism, so let's not over-simplify. When an upper-middle class white American wears a Che shirt, it may be passé, but the same cannot be said of, say, Long Hair Leung. Does clumsy Western appropriation irredeemably mar the symbol for all? Or is the world, as I suspect it is, bigger than the suburbs?
 
There is life outside of the suburbs?:eek:
There can't be. How would human life exist without mile-long malls, grocercy superstores, and batcrap crazy soccer moms in minivans? USA#1!
 
Even when he said, he, you know, wasn't a Communist initialy?
He also said he never wanted power, he said he wasn't going to expropriate foreign-owned property, and that his revolution was about installing a democracy.

So, he's 0 for 4 so far.
 
He also said he never wanted power, he said he wasn't going to expropriate foreign-owned property, and that his revolution was about installing a democracy.

So, he's 0 for 4 so far.
I don't recall Castro ever executing sole ownership of the revolution (nor am I sure how that would even work). I would suggest that Castro and his associates appropriated a democratic revolution for their own ends.
 
There is life outside of the suburbs?:eek:
There can't be. How would human life exist without mile-long malls, grocercy superstores, and batcrap crazy soccer moms in minivans? USA#1!

All the batcrap crazy soccer moms now drive SUVs. Try to keep up. :p
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom