I think socialism is better off when and if a society evolves it later in its history! Cuba is yet another example of a socialist society that started with socialism…. Sweden is one that evolved a socialist system and they are a lot better off than Cuba. Of course there are a lot of other differences between the two countries but I think the economic history can tell us something 😎
Sweden’s Social Democratic Party (SAP) built what was once the world’s most expansive welfare state — universal healthcare, generous parental leave, powerful unions, and the folkhemmet (“people’s home”) ideal that promised cradle‑to‑grave security. But the Swedish social paradise is no longer what it was.
Sweden is moving steadily toward market‑oriented systems: voucher‑based models for healthcare and education, far stricter and deportation‑focused immigration policies, and a shift from subsidized wind and solar toward a renewed commitment to nuclear power. These are not the hallmarks of a state deepening its socialist project; they are the choices of a country confronting the economic limits of its aging socialist welfare model.
In the end, whether in Cuba, Sweden, or the United States, someone has to work — and pay — for expensive social services. No system, however idealistic, escapes that basic arithmetic.
The United States has seen its entitlement and other social spending grow as a percentage of GDP relentlessly for decades, including under Republican administrations. Your own country is the most obvious of counterpoint to your reactionary rhetoric.
Two questions I have not seen answered: First, is the US embargo on Cuba helping or hurting the Cuban people? Second: Would ending the embargo help or hurt the Cuban people?
One thing is clear: The embargo has not ended the Cuban government’s hold on power. And starving people cannot be expected to lead a revolution.
Lifting the embargo would aid the oligarchs greatly while providing minimal short-term benefits to the people. Long term, the only cause of the suffering of the Cuban people is the dictatorship. How to rid Cuba of the Castro legacy powers is another question.
"This isn't working, but this is Persuasion, where we have to hem and haw about left critiques for a few paragraphs before inevitably ending up in a right wing place, every time"
It is regrettable that important political changes that promised a better life for ordinary people (Cuba and South Africa) have not been more successful. The problem as I see it is a one party system with no real institutionally recognized opposition.
This piece worked at every level: a travelogue, a journey into your mind and the journey it took me on myself. I thought about these opaque state behemoths I've been in Africa and the Pacific, the elision of military, business and state to the point there is no light between them. I remember a friend visiting Cuba full of anticipation and expectation some years back and how much his visit rended him. Thank you - it's a marvellous piece
Tho’ I do appreciate your facts on the ground report, I agree with Mac. A deeper dive into how years of harassment by our Federal government harmed not only the government of Cuba, but la gente de Cuba as well. Why not include THAT in your piece?
Concerns about a humanitarian crisis in Cuba are legitimate. Beyond that I don't understand why we have this fixation in the US about Cuba. The country's main problem seems to be that the country has nothing in particular that the world wants or needs. Perhaps we should let the Cuban people decide their future themselves with the help of the Cuban diaspora especially those who have settled in the US.
I think socialism is better off when and if a society evolves it later in its history! Cuba is yet another example of a socialist society that started with socialism…. Sweden is one that evolved a socialist system and they are a lot better off than Cuba. Of course there are a lot of other differences between the two countries but I think the economic history can tell us something 😎
Sweden’s Social Democratic Party (SAP) built what was once the world’s most expansive welfare state — universal healthcare, generous parental leave, powerful unions, and the folkhemmet (“people’s home”) ideal that promised cradle‑to‑grave security. But the Swedish social paradise is no longer what it was.
Sweden is moving steadily toward market‑oriented systems: voucher‑based models for healthcare and education, far stricter and deportation‑focused immigration policies, and a shift from subsidized wind and solar toward a renewed commitment to nuclear power. These are not the hallmarks of a state deepening its socialist project; they are the choices of a country confronting the economic limits of its aging socialist welfare model.
In the end, whether in Cuba, Sweden, or the United States, someone has to work — and pay — for expensive social services. No system, however idealistic, escapes that basic arithmetic.
The United States has seen its entitlement and other social spending grow as a percentage of GDP relentlessly for decades, including under Republican administrations. Your own country is the most obvious of counterpoint to your reactionary rhetoric.
Two questions I have not seen answered: First, is the US embargo on Cuba helping or hurting the Cuban people? Second: Would ending the embargo help or hurt the Cuban people?
One thing is clear: The embargo has not ended the Cuban government’s hold on power. And starving people cannot be expected to lead a revolution.
Lifting the embargo would aid the oligarchs greatly while providing minimal short-term benefits to the people. Long term, the only cause of the suffering of the Cuban people is the dictatorship. How to rid Cuba of the Castro legacy powers is another question.
"This isn't working, but this is Persuasion, where we have to hem and haw about left critiques for a few paragraphs before inevitably ending up in a right wing place, every time"
I envy the simplicity of your view of the world.
Much easier to just support the left every time, eh Freddie? What’s a little genocide or dictatorship between comrades?
Good questions but I think Cuba itself seems to be trying to change the system by radical change.
It is regrettable that important political changes that promised a better life for ordinary people (Cuba and South Africa) have not been more successful. The problem as I see it is a one party system with no real institutionally recognized opposition.
This piece worked at every level: a travelogue, a journey into your mind and the journey it took me on myself. I thought about these opaque state behemoths I've been in Africa and the Pacific, the elision of military, business and state to the point there is no light between them. I remember a friend visiting Cuba full of anticipation and expectation some years back and how much his visit rended him. Thank you - it's a marvellous piece
Tho’ I do appreciate your facts on the ground report, I agree with Mac. A deeper dive into how years of harassment by our Federal government harmed not only the government of Cuba, but la gente de Cuba as well. Why not include THAT in your piece?
Concerns about a humanitarian crisis in Cuba are legitimate. Beyond that I don't understand why we have this fixation in the US about Cuba. The country's main problem seems to be that the country has nothing in particular that the world wants or needs. Perhaps we should let the Cuban people decide their future themselves with the help of the Cuban diaspora especially those who have settled in the US.
ctl-F
"Fulgenico Batista"
no hits
close tab
I hope you get the slave plantations Fidel liberated back real soon bro
“Batista was worse” is a strange response to criticism of a regime that created forced-labour camps for homosexuals and dissidents.