Cuba and Castro and stuff

Remove all ads!

"American" is the term that the people of the USA have accepted for themselves. While confusing and a little arrogant, it is the word that the citizens of the USA use to identify themselves and no other generally accepted term exists. To make matters worse, people from the USA also tend to tell people that they are from "America" instead of the USA.

 

Actually, I think people from the USA tend to tell people that they come from "New York" or "Minnesota" or "Philadelphia" more often than they would ever say that are from "America".

 

Some people from the USA may say they are Americans but if asked I am from the USA and currently living in NJ. I think most of us identify with our home town or home state. I dislike the use of the term 'American" but there just isn't any other term. USAian?

However the topic is Cuba. Yes I would like it to be democratic in the sense that the people are free to elect their government.

 

But the proper term for the western hemisphere is actually "the Americas". Because even if you go up to the biggest category, continents, there's still two (three?): North America and South America (and Central America?). So, "the rest of America" would refer to the US, and "the rest of the Americas" would refer to the western hemisphere.

Or...you could just say western hemisphere.

 

My thread has been highjacked! Bah, language discussions are interesting to me too.
My opinion is that, even tho it's a bit annoying, it's ok for US people say they 're "americans". When they say that, I think "yeah, ok, but can you be a little more specific, cause you know, America is a big continent". So if people use that word, we'd better get used to it. Trying to modify language by force is a horrible thing to do.
You can link this, uhm, *attitude* with that old policy "America for the Americans" which kinda throws into the garbage that crappy theory that states the US didn't have an agressive foreign policy like the European countries in the 1800 - 1900's.
I'm american too. To distinguish us Argentine people from US people we call them "yankees" (yes, all of them, not just the ones that really are yankees), or simply "north americans", which is also kinda flawed. Again, this is what people here do, and we have already got used to it.
PS: on topic: Castro is in good state and good humour. When my grandma died, she too came back to "good state and good humour", and then she died. Maybe that's what's happening here? I don't think so but...

 

I think Diego Maradona will be the next Cuban president.

 

This post might get me a warning from a mod, but I have to make it.

@Liriodelagua: I'll tell you why people eat what they eat in Cuba you smart-a**; HUNGER (except some cases with several religions and likes).

Listen 'ere you know-it-all, I was freaking BORN AND RAISED in Cuba, (not some bafoon born here proclaiming to be a 'true Cuban') I know how it is in Cuba and I can tell you that it is very close (if not already) to being a 3rd world country. Sure they have good hospital plans! If you like disease infested hospitals with low medicine supply. Which is why my dead grandfather prefered to stay in his house rather then stay in a hospital.

My grandfather died there because of Fidel and his f'ing 'communist' BS, he was denied visit to the US because his 4 daughters and sons live here. Had he come he could have been alive and thriving like my grandmother is now.

Good education? Sure, if yer a communist arse kisser supporting every whim of his. For ANY good career you need to be a communist, specially for things like a Doctor or Teacher. So don't give me any 'they do as well as any other country' crap untill you've lived there and seen and heard what I have.

I'm not going to bother with the whole communism and politics crap, all governments governed by man alone are doomed to be corrupt and fail.

[ August 09, 2006, 04:47: Message edited by: Eldular ]

 

Well, it seems to me that Cuba is still a notch better than the other countries in the region despite blockades and despite the communist dictatorship, or perhaps becase of?

 

@Eldular

I have a very close friend who like you was born in Cuba and has told me some horrific stories. It seems to me that the only people who like communism are people who have never lived under it.

 

The problem in Cuba isn't communism. It's the oppressive dictator and incompetent leadership.

 

Uhm dude, you forgot to mention that those things happen outside Cuba as well. I was thinking of telling you what happens in other countries but I deleted the whole thing because it's kinda pointless. So I'll just tell you to look at what happens in other countries (besides your beloved USA).
On the food issue: I was saying that our eating habits depend on both environmental and cultural factors. There's nothing wrong in eating a dog, and many cultures (not religions) do this. If Cuba doesn't have any other choice, then they should embrace this fact, and learn ways to breed and cook dogs better. If they do have a choice, it's a matter of politics, and many aspects come into play for me to find a solution. And don't forget to always think of why this situation is happening (which should be discussed elsewhere).
You mentioned your family. I say that probably everybody here has similar stories, including me.
It's not that I like Castro or communism or whatever. It's that in my opinion Cuba isn't doing as bad as people generally say.

 

Actually, meat of any variety is one of the worse ideas for a starving nation. Livestock consumes far more our crops and water than people do in the US. In fact, 87%(!) of the fresh water in the US goes directly to livestock. The US can handle it for now (though we are rapidly approaching a point where current practices will no longer be sustainable), but in a resource strapped nation, you simply can't be wasting your precious crops and fresh water (which you must have in order to live) on livestock (a luxury).

Grain-fed beef production takes 100,000 liters of water for every kilogram of food. Raising broiler chickens takes 3,500 liters of water to make a kilogram of meat. In comparison, soybean production uses 2,000 liters for kilogram of food produced; rice, 1,912; wheat, 900; and potatoes, 500 liters.

Not only is the livestock consuming more water, but it is also consuming mass quantities of food (which also takes water to produce) that could have just been fed to people directly for a much higher yield. For every 6kg of plant protein fed to livestock, we get 1 kg of animal protein in return. Livestock also contributes to land erosion and fossil fuel consumption.

[ August 09, 2006, 00:33: Message edited by: Drew ]

 

A horrible opinion based on TV, which is an international factor of lies, specially the news. But I guess that's why they call them 'opinions'.

On the other hand, I'm glad to finally see some posts that I agree with/make sense.

Oh and;

Bulls***.

 

Drew: that's the materialistic (I think it is, in english) point of view. Some cientists use it to prove why cows are sacred in India. For me, it's a too rational explanation that leaves out the human factor. I think humans eat what they can eat, and this is determined by availability and culture at the same time. Apart from this, I wonder if dogs and cats are considered as livestock and if those numbers still apply. Anyway, it's a difficult situation.
Eld.: man, why do you even bother to post if that's all you're going to say? Do you think you're the only one who has suffered because of the goverment? And yes, we only see nice beaches and stuff, but we never hear of them doing what the big countries do (wars, ethnocentrism, resource stealing, cultural invasion). Maybe if you had mentioned freedom of speech or how they treat some foreign people, then I'd have had to agree.
PS: don't pity yourself. It's lame.

 

Not really. And it most definitely considers the human factor. You need to understand that, in poor nations, livestock is grown for the wealthy. That livestock takes food out of the mouths of the poorest of society in poorer nations. If, for example, the US were to stop all of its animal agriculture it would have enough food to feed another 800 million people.....nearly 3 times the population of the US. We certainly don't need to stop animal agriculture (yet), but a resource strapped nation like Cuba can't afford to throw away two thirds of its food and most of its fresh water for livestock production. Letting people starve to death so the wealthy can have steak gives a hell of a lot less attention to the "human element" than reducing livestock production in order to improve crop yields and conserve water.

 

I post because last time I checked I'm allowed to post (with in limits, of course).

You don't hear what they do bad at all, so don't give me that s***. Rarely do they say anything on TV about how bad Cuba is doing, in the US anyway.

I'm not 'pitying' myself, simply arguing with just about anything you say that I disagree with.

 

I have to say that from the admittedly little I have heard about Cuba, it's been in really bad shape for close to 20 years now. With the fall of communism in eastern Europe, one thing that didn't get much press at the time is the Soviet Union also cut off all of its funding for Cuba as well. At that point, Cuba gradually went into the gutter. The main reason why you don't see Cuba engage in things like wars, resource stealing, and cultural invasion is because they simply don't have the means to do so.

In the U.S. we don't get very much news from Cuba. However, from the few news stories I have seen, and by the accounts of people I know who have lived there recently, Eldular's description of Cuba as a 3rd world nation is accurate. I remember the one show I saw that said there were still many cars operating in Cuba that are 30 or 40 years old. They keep fixing them because they can't afford to import new cars. Quite the far cry from the U.S. where few people drive cars that are even 10 years old.

I have no way of knowing if everything that Eldular is saying is correct. I have never been to Cuba (obviously, as I'm a U.S. citizen), and the few people I know from Cuba haven't been back (again obviously) in the 10 or so years since they've entered the U.S. However, from everything I have heard Eldular's comments are more correct than incorrect.

 

Comparing Cuba to the US or most other western nations it sure is of a lesser standard of living. Just no comparison, what one should keep in mind though is the situation in the other caribean nations which is absolutely atrocious. Now, many people say that without communism Cuba would be at the same level as the western democracies while others say that without communism Cuba would be like their Caribean and Latin American neighbours. I am more prone to think it is the second option and whatever horrors Castro has committed and they are many Cuba has managed to be a bit better off than their neighbours and this despite a heavy blockade from their northern neighbour. That blockade is the main reason for the financial situation in Cuba.

Also when it comes to dictatoring (killing, disapearing people and so on) Castro seems like puppy dog compared to his right wing counter parts in the rest of South America. Now if we only could find a nice place and a nice communist leader that could try out the theory without resorting to opression it would be interesting.

 

Ty Aldeth, Cuba indeed has old cars. Heck, even countries like Iraq have better cars. Keep this up and Cuba will eventually have no cars/start making their own.

joacqin: I too believe communism can actually be a very good government if propertly made and held. But such a government would be too close to perfect to exist (IMO).

 

Without communism, Cuba would be a wealthy country today. I'm sure a major League Baseball team would be located in Havana. Just 15 minutes from Miami by plane, it would be a major tourist destination, and its agricultue, ie tobacco, sugar, fruits; would be big in the US.
Lets not forget the average monthly pay in Cuba is less than $5 US, and Fidel Castro has an estimated net worth of over $550 Million. So his version of communism is probably not the same as Marx.

Once his regime loses power, the Cubans in America will return to help the nation reestablish itself in the new world.