>I hope that I have educated you to this end. In short, if you are looking
>or socialism, don't look to Russia, Cuba or China. Look to the
>"capitalist" economies that have "dared" to institute socialist policies.

One of the easy traps to fall into when discussing things at this level
of generalization is the tendency to lose sight of important differences.
While I agree that Russia, China and Cuba are not attractive models for
future societies, I think it is a mistake to lump all three together as
examples of pseudo-socialist tyrannies. Particularly in the case of Cuba,
we should acknowledge that it is a mixed bag of admirable and deplorable
attributes, and not simply dismiss the Cuban experiment completely. Each
system has come into being in a particular historical and cultural
context that has been as influential in shaping its course as any general
model of development has been.

First, the negatives: Cuba is a one-party dictatorial state that is not
particularly tolerant of dissent, and has responded rather harshly to
internal critics--the legitimate kind, as well as the CIA stooges who
dream fondly of the good old days under Batista. As many have pointed
out, however, such measures are not at all odd for a country under
constant military and economic threat from outside--particularly when the
threat is coming from the world's strongest power. Unfortunately, we will
never be able to know how democratic Cuba MIGHT have been had this
threat not been maintained for the past four decades. Certainly, the
measures enacted to limit dissent in wartime by the capitalist
democracies (e.g. the US in the Civil War and WWI) aren't really that
different from what the Castro regime has kept in place while under
constant attack (economically or through CIA-sponsored terrorism).

At the same time, the Cuban system has created, by far, the highest
standard of living for the greatest number of any Latin American country.
Literacy, basic medical care, housing, education, are unparalelled in a
Latin American context. Cuba's medical system is so well developed that
they continue to send doctors to other countries for humanitarian work,
most recently to South Africa. It is only recently, with the introduction
(under severe economic pressure) of limited "market reforms" that Cuba
has seen the reappearance of some of the features that are ubiquitous
elsewhere in Latin America: poverty, malnutrition, prostitution, etc.

My point here is simply that there is much to be learned from, and much
that is valuable in, the Cuban example. If nothing else, it shows that
when freed from neo-colonialist rule, it is possible for an agrarian,
third-world country to make substantial improvements in standards of
living, education, and health care. None of which excuses the oppression
of genuine dissidents, religious people, homosexuals, etc. that have gone
on, and continue to occur, under the Cuban regime. But let's not simply
lump Cuba in with Stalinist Russia, or the state-capitalist tyranny in
China. Important, sometimes subtle differences exist and need to be seen
and appreciated.

Robert Goodby