Castro vs Batista

Fidel Batista! Fidel Castro Out-Thugs Fulgencio Batista

by Larry Solomon (March 12, 2003)

Over at the Museo de la Revolucion, Fidel Castro's case against the dictator he overthrew 44 years ago is vividly on display.

Fulgencio Batista was evil incarnate, the museum earnestly instructs visitors in room after room of the once-magnificent building, formerly a presidential palace built in 1920 and decorated by Tiffany's of New York. Under Batista and his predecessors, we learn through photos and text, Cuba became a playground for crass tourists who came for sex, drink and gambling, and who crowded the country's pristine beaches to the detriment of ordinary folk. To drive home the immorality of pre-socialist times, the museum displays an original National Lottery of Cuba ticket from early in the century, a symbol of the country's fall from grace.

We learn that Batista was an illegitimate leader, the election he won stolen by manipulating the press. Worse, Batista intimidated, even jailed or killed, political opponents.

But Batista also failed Cuba by failing to invest government funds wisely. One damning display berates Batista's priorities with a list of budget line items that show government expenditures on frills such as roads, promenades and buildings. Batista's sky-high spending on telecommunications - which the display dubs as military - comes in for criticism. Another display lambastes Batista for failing to diversify the economy. Another still, which provides a year-by-year report of sugar output, accuses Batista of neglecting this all-important industry. The numbers show a downward trend, interrupted with some up-ticks, in the 1950s, and then a giant leap forward, as Castro mobilized the country to produce more sugar in one of his regime's grand economic plans.

The moral and economic rot under Batista led to humiliation and human tragedy, the museum tells us. "Many women who were denied jobs saw themselves forced to become prostitutes in order to survive," said one display. Said another: "According to a census in 1953, there were 200,000 shacks and misery huts." Said a third, also referring to the 1953 census: "40,939 people died due to lack of medical attendance and unsanitary living conditions."

The history the museum imparts is part truth, part fiction and all hypocrisy. Batista was indeed an unsavory character. He did oversee a corrupt administration in Cuba. He did undermine the halting democracy that the United States helped create after liberating Cuba from oppressive Spanish occupation at the turn of the century.

But Cuba and its U.S.-style constitution was also an economic powerhouse with potent social institutions and impressive accomplishments. A 1958 United Nations report ranked Cuba's vibrant free press eighth in the world, and first in Latin America. Despite its much smaller population, Cuba had 160 radio stations compared to the U. K.'s 62 and France's 50. It had 23 television stations compared to Mexico's 12 and Venezuela's 10. The tiny country supported 58 newspapers, fourth in Latin America behind populous Mexico, Brazil and Argentina.

Cuba once installed telephones at a rapid rate. No more. It once ranked first in Latin America, fifth in the world, in television sets per capita, and also ranked high in radios, automobiles, and many other consumer goods. No more. With the population increased and the housing stock degraded, more people suffer inadequate housing today than ever before, and sanitary conditions have become a scandal through much of the country.

The information-hungry populace in the Batista era was well-educated, as it remains. Student registration at primary schools in 1955 was 1,032 students per 10,000 inhabitants, higher than the figures for 1990 of 842. The registration rate for higher education was an impressive 38 per 10,000, about the same as it was 10 years later (34 per 10,000) and 15 years later (41 per 10,000). The country, in fact, had a long history of high literacy levels: At the turn of the 20th century, only 28% of those 10 and over couldn't read or write, not that different from the current figure, 100 years later, of 16%.

But unlike today, Cuba's economy under Batista was powerful, both domestically and in exports, and it was becoming increasingly diversified. Under Castro, its economy is in tatters, nowhere more so than in the sugar industry that Castro once promoted so heavily. Last summer, Castro announced a shut down of half of the country's sugar mills. "We had to act or face ruin," he explained. As he told NBC News just this week. "It cost us more to produce sugar than what we could sell it for."

But if Batista bested Castro in virtually every broad socio-economic indicator, he paled in comparison when it came to controlling either the electoral process or the populace. Castro executed thousands of political opponents after he came to power, imprisoned tens of thousands and caused hundreds of thousands to flee to exile. Where Batista won a disputed election, a Castro election leaves no room for dispute: Castro allows no opponents, no opposing viewpoints to appear in the press, and, because that might not be enough, his political machine ensures a good turnout by keeping tabs on who votes and who doesn't: In last Sunday's national election, Castro managed a 90%-plus "yes" vote, not quite as impressive as Saddam Hussein's 100% but, among dictators, respectable enough.

Those who revile Batista often point to a decadent economy that relied on mafia-run casinos, prostitution and other demeaning jobs servicing tourists. Tourism was important under Batista - Havana was an east-coast alternative to Las Vegas, complete with the sex and gaming, and the same mafia owners - but never as important as tourism has become today. Cuba's once diversified economy is gone and Castro is now putting all of his hopes in attracting tourists.

To do this, Castro's Cuba now permits prostitution, it winks at sex tourism - tourist guide books even include sections on the country's once-taboo gay and bisexual scenes - and, as under Batista, the country unabashedly invests heavily in tourism. Earlier this year, Castro inaugurated a US$100-million resort on the island's northeastern coast, broadcast nationwide, to underscore the importance the government places on the new five-hotel complex of 944 rooms able to house 1,500 tourists.

Tourism is now Cuba's No. 1 source of foreign income, with 1.6 million visitors generating about US$2-billion last year. More tourists come from Canada than from other important sources of foreign exchange, chiefly Germany, Britain, Italy, France, and Switzerland. Castro, like Batista, is eyeing one other important tourist market.

"Our friends from the north are not in this list," Castro said with a grin, referring to Americans that can't travel to Cuba due to U.S. government regulations.

Some day soon, perhaps, Castro's dream may be realized, and Cuba's economy may once again benefit from U.S. tourism. If it does, Cuba under Castro will have recovered one of the benefits that the country once enjoyed. Forty-four years into the Revolution, Castro will have achieved all the failings, real and perceived, that Cuba had under Batista, and it will have retained few of the virtues.

 

If Castro had not taken power, Cubans would be working in free zone sweat shops and the country would be in a much worse state than it is now, something like Jamaica.

 

Its funny to hear the sneering reference to "sweat shops". Do Cuban plantation workers not sweat for their monthly rice and bean quota? Or is it just that they should shut the hell up and be grateful for their glorious socialist poverty? Cuba couldn't have done much worse than it did under Castro.

 

Atleast before Castro, Cuba had a thriving tourist industry. It was the hottest place to travel too.

Oh and they wouldn't have that pesky embargo on them, they could actually drive modern cars and have cool stuff like TVs and DVD players. Castro is nothing more then a tyrant who has pummeled his people into submission using brute guerilla force under a warped guise of communism.

He wont be missed when he finally dies.

 

Its still way better than the conditions they would face being subjected to the free zones. Cuba would be like Jamaica probably. Jamaica is a great place to travel, but you don't see the hell the people are going though.

Television is over rated. Health care and being literate are more important than television. You seem to forget that the only reason we Americans can live such comfortable lives and own things like DVD players and TVs is because our country uses the cheap labor of millions of workers in other counties. I seriously doubt that many cubans would be living in American conditions if they had a "thriving economy".

What you have to understand is small islands like Cuba don't get to have thriving economys. They depend on the export of raw materials, in Jamaicas case bananas, and in Cubas case sugar. If those economies go into debt and have to borrow money, they are subjected to free trade without barriers. The small counties are essentially ass raped by industries of larger countries. The majority of the population is paid $30 a month to work in sweat shops like 12 hours a day every day. Corrupt governments are kept in power by the larger countries (specificly the U.S.) and the people in those governments would enjoy good living conditions, but the rest of everyone (the majority) would be subjected to hell much worse than the poverty under Castro.

Nobody, especially Cubans, should be "greatful" for anything. That would be saying it is good enough, and its not good enough. There is always room for improvement, but you don't have to be picky to see the improvements that need to be made in todays society. They are obvious.

There are too many examples of what Cuba would be like if Castro didn't rule it. You can't compare Cuba to America, and you can't assume (as you did) that they stand a chance in the global economy as the larger countries do.

Cuba is also pretty poor because we don't buy their sugar. We don't buy bananas from Jamaica either because our companies want complete monopoly of the banana industry.

Castro is not perfect, but now you understand a little better why I support some of what he has done. What is better: a dictator who gets it right most of the time, or a two party system where both partys represent the upper class and can't seem to please more than 51% of all the political involved people.

I've heard much about Cuba, but I don't assume anything. I look at what we have done to the islands like Cuba and are doing to those islands, and I look at what Cuba is, and I see that the Cubans have choosen the lesser of two evils.

As long as there is competition, the little countries suffer. The laissez faire (or however you spell it) that was around in the early 1900's is DEAD and its never coming back, no matter how hard the democratic shuts their eyes and wishes. We live in an age where large industry dominates and you either give up your soul to get a business major and go underhanded to get rich (exploit people to pay back your loan) or your business fails.

If you want me to elaborate on anything I said, please ask. I still think its incredibly ignorant to compare Cuba to the United States though.

 

Ever been to Mexico or Costa Rica? I'd rather be in either than in Cuba. And actually I'd rather be in Jamaica too. There's something about freedom.

Or maybe you just take a free press for granted and think its a luxury poor countries could do without?

Actually, the countries making those products are getting richer. Kind of a win-win situation, which is something communists have never been able to grasp.

You probably would have said the same about Taiwan or South Korea in the 1960s, which weren't much better off than Cuba. Look at them now.

You mean like Singapore and Hong Kong?

Canada and Australia are also natural resource based economies.

No, joining the WTO is voluntary. And you're getting it backwards - if they go into debt they have to borrow money? I think borrowing the money comes first.

How was the huge improvements of living standards seen in countries like South Korea "getting ass raped"? Looks to me like the losers are the ones in Cuba, who struggle for nothing.

Ever heard of subsistence agriculture? That's the altenative. Development is a ladder. You start at the bottom. Through capitalism, you can rise. With socialism you stay on the bottom.

Yes, what are the odds that a small economy like Taiwan or South Korea can compete against a giant like America? Pretty good, as it turns out. China is booming, because they learned that lesson. Why do you want to keep Cubans in poverty?

Cuba has a population of 12 million. I'm sure that the 6.2 billion people in this world outside of the USA can eat all the banana's Cuba can produce. You need another excuse.

No actually, you seem like another apologist for communism who lives comfortably is a free society.

If he is getting it right most of the time, why is his country a poverty stricken mess devoid of basic freedoms?

Except that they don't. Look at Estonia. Are you just making this stuff up because it sounds good?

And you are speaking from experience, presumably.

 

Green, well said.

 

Wouldn't that largely depend on the domestic economic policies of this non-Castro Cuba?

I ask that because I've began to see that the economic condition of most countries is influenced most by the economic policies of it's government. Countries with good economic policies seem to get good results and those with bad policies seem to get bad results.

 

"Ever been to Mexico or Costa Rica? I'd rather be in either than in Cuba. And actually I'd rather be in Jamaica too. There's something about freedom."- I'm all for freedom. I don't see why we should censor anything, or even be forced to dress certain ways. Why can't we wear hats in school? Why don't guys wear dresses? Not all communists are authoritarians, and in my opinion the purpose of authoritism is to supress the general will. China is a good example.

"Or maybe you just take a free press for granted and think its a luxury poor countries could do without?"- I don't think that; however, I know many conservatives who do.


" You seem to forget
Actually, the countries making those products are getting richer. Kind of a win-win situation, which is something communists have never been able to grasp."
And what happens when you over produce? Thats something capitalists have never been able to grasp. The 20th century was the rise of Capitalism, and the 21st will be the fall of it. Soon people will be forced to become class conscious. It could be ten years or it could be fourty, but the sooner we establish international socialism, the better.


"You probably would have said the same about Taiwan or South Korea in the 1960s, which weren't much better off than Cuba. Look at them now."- They aren't 90 miles off the coast of the United States. Cuba would resemble the other Latin American counties.

Marxists view democratic socialism as the next stage of society after imperialism, and it ultimately will be.


"You mean like Singapore and Hong Kong?" Like Jamaica and Guatemala.

"Canada and Australia are also natural resource based economies." A single raw material, and we don't buy from countries where the multinationals don't dominate.


"No, joining the WTO is voluntary. And you're getting it backwards - if they go into debt they have to borrow money? I think borrowing the money comes first." Yes, it is voluntary, but what happens when you can't pay back the money your barrowed? The WTO doesn't care if your country goes into debt, because they are out to exploit you. Otherwise, they would refinance. They aquire more debt (but instead to the WTO) after they barrow money. Conditions that would be imposed on Cuba would include dropping all trade barriers, and some unfair tariffs that would make it so they couldn't compete. Thats what they did to Jamaica, and thats what they would do to Cuba. Cuba isn't in Asia.


"How was the huge improvements of living standards seen in countries like South Korea "getting ass raped"? Looks to me like the losers are the ones in Cuba, who struggle for nothing."- And look at how expensive health care and college is getting here. Capitalism is necessary and beneficial for a peroid of time, and since Asian counties more recently adopted it they are still on their way up (China will soon be the strongest economic power on the planet, stonger than the United States); however, if you look at the United States and Europe it is clearly hindering our progression and we need to move on.

"Ever heard of subsistence agriculture? That's the altenative. Development is a ladder. You start at the bottom. Through capitalism, you can rise. With socialism you stay on the bottom."- Which is exactilly why the lowest stage of socialism will occur in the highest stange of Capitalism, which Lenin believed was Imperialism, unless you believe in Ultra-Imperialism (which is kinda a dumb theory and I haven't seen anything supporting Ultra-Imperialism yet, of course I may be ignorant). I think the Anarchists want subsistance agriculture (or some of them do), but Marxists have looked ahead at how we will soon ultilize industry. Its pretty simple, instead of the money being given to all the rich so they can own ridiculous amounts of land and property it will be given to the poor so they can afford health care and other necessitys.

"Yes, what are the odds that a small economy like Taiwan or South Korea can compete against a giant like America? Pretty good, as it turns out. China is booming, because they learned that lesson. Why do you want to keep Cubans in poverty?"
I want international socialism, which would end Cuba's poverty. Now, what are the odds that we wouldn't take advantage of Cuba if they dropped their trade barriers?

"Cuba has a population of 12 million. I'm sure that the 6.2 billion people in this world outside of the USA can eat all the banana's Cuba can produce. You need another excuse."- Well, bananas would be the only thing they would be producing that wasn't produced in the free zones (like Jamaica), or maybe sugar (sugar or bananas, doesn't matter). They'd be stricken with horrible poverty, and no health care, as opposed to now they can afford to send doctors to other countries.

"No actually, you seem like another apologist for communism who lives comfortably is a free society."- Do you even know what Communism is? I can see that Cuba is backwards. I'm not advocating we grow bananas. I'm saying we should better utilize our industries, and to do that we need to make them ours. I'm living really comfortablly: I mean, look at how happy I am and how much I am enjoying my freedom to be exploited.

"If he is getting it right most of the time, why is his country a poverty stricken mess devoid of basic freedoms?"- Because its doomed to be a poverty stricken mess devoid of basic freedoms (for the time being), and if he hadn't gotten it "right" it would be much more poverty stricken and more or less (probably less) free.

"Except that they don't. Look at Estonia. Are you just making this stuff up because it sounds good?"- They do if they need to get a loan from the WTO, and the poor lose no matter what.

"And you are speaking from experience, presumably?"- Its common sense that the money is taking advantage of poor people. Everybody knows that.

 

And what would happen if the WTO (which the multinationals control) got to make Cuba's policys? They'd be bad policies (for Cuba) and cause bad results in Cuba. I was defending Cuba and their particular condition.

 

Are you saying that this non-Castro Cuban gov't wouldn't be deciding on it's own domestic economic policies?

 

Castro dont let regular cubans on the internet so that petty much closes this thread . You can feed the rest of that shit Castro is great to the fish in the florida straights.

 

About the only merit castro have is having a nation run like the Nazis did only 90 miles south of key west hell even Hitler would had gotten a kick out of that.

 

It would be forced to drop its trade barriers and not make policies. Cuba would be forced to submit to the multinational corporations. Thats not the case in some other small counties but it is the case in Cuba.

 

Could you give me a few examples specificly how Cuba can be compared to Nazi Germany?

 

What trade barrier? no problem building fancy Hotels for turist.

 

really? if true i will call him a bastard

 

This coming from the guy who thinks China is teh gr3atest1!11!!

Newsflash, China has the internet censored for it's citizens. They even paid Google and other Net Search engines to automatically bar anything that is deemed pornographic or unpatriotic to the government.

Did you know that Hippy.com is banned in China?


Oh btw, Mr. China-rox, have you seen the latest animal cruelty video to come out of China? China has little to none animal protection there and the puny laws they do have are not very enforceable.

It's a video of a woman crushing a live puppy while wearing high heels.

 

I saw that video. It was the sick. I couldn't watch it.

 

I forced myself to watch it and cried long and loud. I made sure my daughters were down for their nap first. No need to traumatize them.

It makes me want to kill people. I would love to go to China, hunt that bitch down, and skin her alive before crushing her skull with some tacky hooker heels.