>Joanna, there's so much that could be said in response to these
>sorts of arguments. Firstly, I think you confuse consumer goods with
>luxury goods. People do actually need to consume things you know,
>and the fact is that there are many things that are in short supply
>(to put it mildly) in Cuba that hardly fall into the category of
>luxury goods. Yes, I know that's partly due to the embargo, but one
>could with equal justification say that it goes back to an almost
>total dependence on the FSU. Cuban people will tell you the
>difference between before and after 'the fall' in terms of their
>standard of living. I think it also needs to be pointed out to
>people, particularly US citizens, who express the sentiment that you
>do above, that they are actually quite free to go and live in Cuba.
>This makes me wonder: Cuba is the best place in Latin America to go
>and live, but it doesn't quite beat the old US of A, or what?
It seems to me that many of the people who dismiss consumer goods are more likely to be middle-income or richer, just like those who embrace voluntary poverty.
>The myth of socialism in such countries still has a powerful grip on
>the intellectual imagination of the West. This is unfortunate
>because it helps to block the revolutionary project. There are those
>among us, the [expletive deleted - ed.] and the Joneses and other
>luminaries of the Leninist left, who will still argue that Cuba
>represents the future. Imagine the pathos when the true state of
>affairs finally dawns.
Unambiguous dismissal isn't much better than unambiguous embrace. The Cuban revolution can claim some real achievements in education, health, and the provision of basic goods - their social stats are closer to those of the U.S. than those of the Dominican Republic. But it all comes at a high cost - political and cultural repression. I guess what I'd conclude from this is that as long as the U.S. remains fully fanged, this is the best a poor country can do. So we've got to get down to business & defang the U.S.!
Doug