Do any of the above install themselves as a group in a large metropol and begin to develop their own culture? You can't compare a social phenomenon on such a large scale (Miami Cubans) to isolated political groups spread out. W/ the exception of Mexico, the majority of Latino immigrants to this country from 1950-90 were fleeing a military dictatorship either directly or indirectly. And yet, no group matches the Cubans when it comes to irrationality and venom.
I honestly am trying to figure out where you are coming from with these feelings. Let me ask you an unrelated question, maybe it will help me out. What is your opinion about the "Madres de Plaza de Mayo"?
I do wonder what would have happened in Cuba had the USA had not taken such a consistently hard stance against Fidel. I'm no expert on Cuba, but would he have had a regime that had less of a siege mentality, and been at least a bit more liberal? Perhaps things will start to move politically once Fidel and Raul Castro are dead.
The view that "Dayum! Miami Cubans can be kinda nutso" is beyond universal. I've encountered it in Spain, Santo Domingo, Puerto Rico, Peru, Mexico, all over the US and Canada, amongst Latinos in France, amongst Cubans in Paris and Madrid, amongst career bureaucrats in DC. I remember as a kid sitting at the kitchen table discussing my aunt's impending move to Miami and the likelihood of having to deal w/ this reality. One of my colleagues in grad school took a job in Miami and this was a huuuuuuge factor, as in... when weighing the pluses and minuses of a job in Miami vs. somewhere else, dealing w/ reactionary Miami was at the top of the list of negatives. Then there was the theater of a boy being kept from his father by a community of zealots back in 2000. I honestly have no idea how this is coming across as strange to you. Unless you're full of shit or you sincerely have never come across this view. What a trap. Group of defiant and brave women who provided a powerful protest against a military dictatorship; eventually got used as political pawns by the left, viciously attacked and maligned by the right; some let the fame get to their head, others became powerful social leaders and visionaries. In other words... nuance.
Yes and no. Cuba/US relations need to be seen as a dance. It takes 2 to tango. Fidel needed a devil, and the US happily provided that. The revolution is really entrenched. More important, ppl in Cuba do NOT want Miami to take over. The way that you dismantle communism is to introduce capitalism, which is why the embargo is so stupid. Once Europeans started going there for tourism, that was the beginning of when so many ppl really stopped believing in the system. And when Clinton liberalized travel restrictions... wow, things really shifted. My family says that it wasn't until we started visiting that they saw the plan mind control of consumption there. For instance, they hadn't eaten a head of lettuce in 5 years, and they hadn't thought of that 'til I went there and bought a head of lettuce at the tourist store. In about '97, they noticed that there was more cabbage (easier to grow) and a little bit less lettuce. The following year there was even more cabbage and less lettuce. By year 3 it was 75/25 cabbage to lettuce ratio. By the 5th year, no more lettuce period. Instead of being up front about the need to grow more cabbage, it was done in a manipulative way. And it got exposed by exposing ppl to capitalism. Seems trivial, but these things add up and destabilize the regime.
Of course there's a lot of politics and ideology involved in how people look at this. But, I thought you were more "nuanced" than other people. At least you advertise yourself as being more nuanced. So, I expect better from you. You'd think a nuanced person, before judging, might try to delve into what factors may have caused the Cuban exiles to act a certain way, what experiences they might have gone through, and in what ways those experience may differ from the experiences of other victims of dictators. Or perhaps not. Have you? No trap. I thought I'd ask, because in Argentina many have described these victims of Videla in similar terms as those you use to describe the Cuban victims of Castro. Words like crazy, irrational, full of venom and so on. Of course, that is because these women continued marching long after others deemed it was necessary, and because they allowed themselves to be used politically, and because they greatly exaggerated the evils of an evil dictatorship -when the truth is that it wasn't really necessary to exaggerate anything, because the evil already spoke for itself, and was already much more than enough to indict the regime. And these are elements that to some extent these women share with the Cuban exiles. But those who criticize victims like the Madres obviously don't look at the big picture, they don't understand the factors that led them to fight as they did, because such people lack... Exactly. Just as you seem to lack "nuance" in the case of the Cuban victims of Castro. I still haven't really figured out whether it's personal or ideological in your case.
Dude. There's a sitting US Senator who advertised himself as a victim of Fidel, that his family had to flee communism... ... when his family came a couple of years before the fall of Batista. THAT is nothing "personal" about me or anything of the sort. It speaks to the nutso/reactionary factor of Miami Cubans. And I've said this numerous times in this thread: it's this reactionary bs, the universal acceptance of fabricating anti-Castro evidence that distracts from the real crimes perpetrated on Cubans now exiled in Miami. So please spare me the "Wull, you don't care about victims of dictatorship" malarkey. That dining room table conversation I mentioned above? It was btw my father (arch conservative, had to escape Cuba to save his life after less than a year in the country, followed by Cuban spies in the US into the early 80's), my aunt (socially and fiscally conservative except when it comes to women's rights, now lives in Miami), and my oldest brother (registered Republican, businessman, fiscally very, very conservative). Are Republicans not allowed to say, "Golly. Marco Rubio is a lying SOB who fabricated his life story to placate a community that relies on blind allegiance to anything and all things anti-Castro"? You're essentially dismissing the reaction of what is now the majority of Miami Cubans: most of them didn't give a rat's ass about Guillen's comments. It was that reactionary segment. But it's ok for Alberto to point that out -- especially b/c of the hilarity of the fact that it completely destabilizes his entire argument and he doesn't even see it -- but if some lefty points it out it's b/c they have an agenda? It's been 50 years, bro. The psychoanalyst fainting couch is now antique. The Gheys are now in a bidding war b/c they all want it in the bay window w/ French doors opening to it, and it'll go so well w/ the bear claw porcelain bathtub. The thing is that what they experienced dictatorship-wise is pretty much par for the course. Not that I would wish that course on anybody, but I've heard of worse. For starters, you're talking about a miniscule sample in the Madres vs. a massive group in Cuban-Americans. Quite different. I said it was a trap b/c the extended history of the Madres -- beyond their 15 maybe 30 minutes of fame internationally -- is particular to Argentina. If you're not Argentine or if you haven't lived there you're not privy to all that you mentioned. Revolutionary Cuba, on the other hand, is global. It had incredible reach and/or influence: 1. politically -- we almost went to nuclear war against USSR; for the Latin American left it continues to be a high point and Fidel represents strength vis-a-vis the threat of the US 2. culturally -- see the ubiquitous face of Che throughout the Americas and Western Europe 3. economically -- it is estimated that the US loses about $2 billion/yr by having the embargo; wealthy Cubans left and set up shop in Miami and put that city on the global map. It is now considered the cultural and economic capital of Latin America
It is not par for the course. The main difference is that when it comes to most 20th century Latin American dictatorships, we know fairly well what happened. In Argentina, for example, the actions of the Videla regime were very extensively investigated, there was a human rights commission that came up with extensive findings that are generally accepted to be true, so we know what happened. We can say for example approximately how many people were killed, tortured and so on. In Cuba, the likelihood is that we'll never know all that happened. We are dealing with a closed and secretive regime, with almost absolute power over its society, spanning almost four decades, extremely intrusive, and with complete control of the media. For example, I think we'll never have any realistic idea about how many people were killed by the Castro regime. Some exiles say there were hundreds of thousands of dead -which to me seems ridiculous, particularly considering the population was barely over six millions. On the other hand Castro himself has claimed that not one person was ever killed, which also seems ridiculous. The truth is somewhere in between, but realistically we'll never get to it. And that is why there is a real danger that Cuba could become subject to ideology-based revisionist history, much more than any other Latin American dictatorship. We are seeing it already today. As you pointed out, Guevara and Castro are very popular in Argentina today, even though they were much more unpopular during the 50s and 60s when Guevara was alive and fighting alongside Castro. There are several reasons why it is so, which I think a nuanced individual like yourself can figure out. I think it's important to know as much as we can about what happened in Cuba, because considering the revisionist history and the attractiveness at face value of some of the ideological ideas behind it, I fear that we are in danger of making the same mistakes again, and as someone who loves Latin America it pains me. We know the official version from Cuba is full of lies, and so is today's revisionist history that results in his present popularity in Latin America. That's why they need to find a way to balance it out with the stories of the exiles, while they are still around. And that is why I am very interested in these stories, regardless of how crazy and irrational you tell me those people are. Even if that were true to some extent that they are crazy and irrational, it still would be very important to get at their stories, and to delve into why they became that way. Alberto clearly has a story. I, for one, would like to hear it. I would think a nuanced individual like you would also like to hear it. But instead, all you've been doing is nitpicking at his posts and insulting him, in an attempt to discredit him and I suppose try to shut him up. BTW, if you have stories from your relatives, I'd like to hear them too. And ideally I would hope you try to tell them as they were told to you, without your own "nuanced" editorializing.
One thing that Fidel has always been able to do is to present what are apparently rational and sane arguments to any criticisms of the regime. It amazes me how he can lie so effectively. if you had no understanding of the history of Cuba, his every word seems reasonable, plausible and indeed believable. When Oliver Stone interviewed him in the documentary "Looking for Fidel" regarding the case of a group that pirated a ferry a few years ago, Castro stated that he had no control over the decisions of the Cuban courts. When Stone mentioned that due process was not observed and that the defendant's had no time to mount a defense, Castro stated that he as president was duly sworn to enforce the laws of the land and the court merely enforced the laws passed by the legislature. They received a fair trial and had due process. Statements like these are truly laughable given it was a kangaroo court and that the laws in the books for trying to leave Cuba are harsh with long prison sentences or the death penalty. When asked about the death penalty given the three hijackers, Castro again responded that those were the laws of the nation. That his hands were tied by the laws as was the court. Furthermore, he stated he had no influence on the laws passed. Of course this is a total fabrication and lie on his part. While clearly, hijacking the ferry placed the lives of others at risk, and is a crime, requiring time in prison, giving the death penalty to people so desperate to escape Cuba is even harsher and more brutal than the actual crime. You raise excellent points regarding the allure of the revolution and what I would consider to be the glorification of two charismatic, yet deeply evil murderers, Fidel and El Che. I for one have never understood the deification and the culture of personality these two tyrants have achieved among leftists and liberals. In reality differences of opinion with either would land you in prison or get you executed. uclacarlos needs to shut up about his objections to the Miami Cubans. He has noted his objections. He clearly is biased in his beliefs and his opinion is irrational. In fact I find it the height of irony he stridently expresses his opinion, yet assails the right of people to voice their opinion on issues that they experienced, while his knowledge on the subject is mostly second hand from relatives. Clearly he never lived in Cuba. If he had he would keep quiet and allow these people to vent. Carlito, everyone is entitled to their opinion, regardless of how those opinions irritate you. So learn to be more accepting of points of view different from your own. Heck, you sound like Fidel trying to silence divergent viewpoints. Perhaps you are a tyrant in the making and have failed to self actualize that facet of your personality. I gather you are under 30 years of age, so have some patience. The nice thing about getting older is you become wiser and more tolerant. Furthermore, the reality is that given the revolution is now 53 years old, most people that experienced hardship and loss due to the revolution are dead or have with time and assimilation in the US and other countries tempered their feelings about the revolution. They are resigned to speak about it, but powerless to affect change politically in Cuba or here in the US except for local elections in Florida and specifically Dade County. In another ten years the hardline voices will be reduced even further either by death, dementia or apathy. Look what happened with Ozzie. Nothing, no protests after he returned from his five game suspension just as I predicted. So stop being so irrational on this issue. Recognize people have a right to protest and express outrage and lighten up.
High quality post, ASF. Kudos. In my (academic) experience, the downfall of fallen and sometimes current military dictatorships comes from the impulsive need of the military to keep meticulous records. At some point, the Castro regime will end and historians will be able to sift through the archives. Again, as far as the secrecy... it really is par for the course. Sorry. I lived in Spain under Franco, and do you want to know the real reason why I went to Cuba to visit my elderly aunt? Of course to finally meet her and my cousins. But I wanted her stories of the represalias (reprisals) after the Civil War in the early part of Franco's regime. And I never got them. And I had to come to terms w/ the fact that she was dead set on going to the grave w/ the secrets. And that's her right. As a Spaniard, living w/ the secrecy of a dictatorship has marked my entire life and that of my grandparents and my father. Apart from living in a fading dictatorship -- by the time I was born it was already a dictasuave -- I grew up in LA in the mid 70's and 80's surrounded by tons of immigrants fleeing military and/or fascist dictatorships, ppl from all over Latin America, the Soviet Bloc (Armenia, Romania), Southeast Asia (Cambodia, Vietnam). Both my parents were teachers and they made it a point to bring these stories home w/ them. Compared to what I had seen and felt as a small boy in Spain, and compared to what I heard from others from around the globe, the Cuban plight was nothing out of the ordinary. It sucked then and it still SUCKS now, but it's kinda normal as dictatorships go. Maybe it was/is the emphasis on the loss of property and a lack of putting some privileges in context (2-3 maids is NOT the same in Latin America as it is in the US), or the fact that everybody claimed they had a house in Central Havana over-looking the malecon -- that damn beach must span the entire island of Cuba, I remember thinking as a little kid! Maybe my "lack of sensitivity" stems from the fact that my mother's Dominican side can be seriously B-lack, and I always felt they were slighted by Cuban friends of the family. (In LA, Cubans, Dominicans and Puerto Ricans flock to each other b/c of the cultural similarities, so I was always around Cubans.) As a Dominican, I always understood the real power behind the sustained Revolution: the improved position of Blacks in Cuba, and at the time there were noooooo Cuban Blacks around, but we knew plenty of Black Boricuas and of course a ton of Black Dominicans. So if the 3 nations were so similar, where were all the Black Cubans? Why did they stay? Why were Black Dominicans ever so happy to leave? Although as a boy I didn't really understand the history of Trujillo, I felt it. I saw it play out in the racial dynamics within my family. So when I read about Trujillo as an adult, my family history made sense, and it made sense that even after the fall of a fascist like Trujillo, Blacks still left b/c nothing had changed. Add to that Miami's lies about historical figures. It's actually a fascinating dynamic: what Fidel means in Cuba (reviled, truth be told) vs. what he means in Miami (reviled, worse than Hitler) vs. what he means in Lat.Am. (anti-gringo, revolutionary hero) Even more interesting is the figure of Che: loved in Cuba b/c he's the anti-Castro, a safe figure to "love" while openly/secretly dissing the regime. The ppl's historical version of Che is actually the closest to objective history you can get. They openly reject some of the official party line about Che b/c he represents what the Revolution could have been if Fidel hadn't ****ed things up. Then there's the regime's Che, then there's Miami's Che -- a LOT of misinformation about him on both accounts -- and finally the cleaned up version of Che throughout the Americas and Western Europe. When you look at these figures and how different groups present "history", you see everybody's agenda. Just to be clear, I have zero interest in Che as a good or bad figure in history. I am interested in the process of adopting a vantage point to view and present him as an historical figure. I've said repeatedly that the reactionaries aren't the interesting ones. They distract from the interesting ppl that have stories to tell. If you want the stories to get out -- and you're not the only one -- then what needs to happen is that the reactionaries need to be ignored.
Wai' wai' wai' wait. The opinion that Miami Cubans can be irrational in their blind hatred of Fidel ... is irrational. Ok. Please justify any of the following: 1. Marco Rubio lied about fleeing Castro's Cuba in order to get in good w/ Miami Cubans, who btw pretty openly diss Cubans who came before Castro. This entire equation is irrational: lying about your family history, giving a shit about whether or not someone came before or after Castro. 2. An entire city holding a young boy separated from his father as a hostage. You're right. They both speak of the beautiful rational nature of Miami Cubans. bullshit. You're lying. I have zero problem w/ ppl expressing their opinion. And I have utter contempt for anybody that would "assail the right of ppl to voice their opinion". So stop making shit up. I'm calling on Cubans to learn to pick their battles. Whining incessantly about minutiae makes everybody think you're crying wolf. And first hand. I've been there. Also, my expertise is Latin American vanguard poetry, so let's just say that I'm kinda sorta familiar w/ Cuba on more than one level. You mean like the actual Cuban exiles who lament that these ppl keep getting air time? Wrong again. Actually, what is happening/already happened is not so much the death of the old generation but the arrival of economic exiles w/ a radically different perception of what was and is Cuba. It doesn't hurt that the old school is dying off of course. (And I've already mentioned the Elian Gonzalez effect.) The allure has everything to do w/ a history of dozens and dozens of military interventions and de facto invasions in Latin America, military and economic support of right wing dictatorships throughout the hemisphere, etc. So Che/Fidel embody a direct rejection of US interventionism. Just an fyi: I don't remember everything exactly, but I know that historians are saying that much of what the exile community attributes to Che were not his doing. It's important to remember that b/c of the nature of a Revolution and how ppl left, how they arrived in the US w/o the time and/or resources to do proper objective history, word of mouth ended up being the ppl's history. So this oral history ended up serving more the need to express anger and frustration rather than an objective re-telling of events. (If such a thing can really exist.)
It can't be blind hatred if people actually were incarcerated for political reasons and had relatives and friends killed. As to Marco Rubio, I don't know who he is and if he lied to garner votes I have no use for him. As to Elian, we need to remember that Elian's mom left Cuba with her son in a raft or boat to escape to a better life in the USA. She died a sea. I feel for the kid being returned to Cuba, but he should be with his father. You fully understand why they wanted Elian to remain in the US. They believed he'd have a better life here. Certainly, he would live in a free society unlike Cuba. You understand the sentiment. The problem is the fact that both Cuban Americans and the Cuban government used Elian as a political football. I'm sure the Cuban government took good care of Elian and his dad, gave them a nice house and material goods that they previously only dreamed of having. It was a positive for the revolution. People returning for a change, not fleeing Cuba. I'm lying? When? Calling me a liar is laughable. Sorry, must be because I don't fit your vision of a Miami-Cuban mouthbreather? Get over yourself. I'm not a Miami Cuban. All of your posts have been spent trying to discredit my remarks and to pigeon hole me in your categorization of a Miami Cuban. Nuance for you is the bitch. More importantly, you are a hypocrite since your fail to acknowledge the right of people to express their opinions. So the reality is that you are willing to support people voicing opinions that you concur with. However, since the Miami Cubans are too whiny for your taste you will discount what they have to say. If they were lying or exaggerating I would agree with you. I honestly don't find their protests any different from any other group protesting injustices and denials of basic human rights. Glad you visited. Poetry, que lindo pero que tiene que hacer poesia con nuestra conversacion? Amusing for it to come up in this conversation as a way of authenticating your knowledge of Cuba. Regarding El Che, Fidel put him in charge of La Cabana prison and he relished executing political prisoners. He did the same during the revolutionary campaign. He routinely executed people that were suspected of being against the revolution. Let's not paint him as some romantic figure running around freeing the oppressed. He was no different from any other right wing or communist dictator. He oppressed those he claimed to free. Oh the irony. I shed no tear when he was captured and killed in Bolivia. Live by the gun, die by the gun.
Uh. Perhaps right where I ... you know... quote you? You know, THE PART THAT WAS IN BOLD??? Maybe? I don't know. Just throwin' that out... "Hey, y'all need to learn how to pick battles" is in no way attempting to deny anybody a right to free speech. To claim that it does = blindness. Bitch away. Have at it! Nothing's stopping you. Just don't be shocked when the whole world says, "God DAMN you bitches bitch a lot!" y no te hacen caso. The thing is w/ communities suffering from trauma, an isolated individual grievance gets subsumed and passed off as collective. So when Rigoberta Menchu discusses her brother dying from pesticide fumigation, the "brother" is actually part of the collective (indigenous) community but gets claimed as the personal. No doubt that many ppl were unjustly treated and even killed. That's what dictatorships do. Remember, my father escaped Cuba by the skin of his teeth. But if we truly wish to have a workable, effective foreign (and domestic) policy, it's imperative to keep facts straight, and more important, it's imperative to pick the proper battles. Miami's always bitching about something. They need to chill a bit if they want to get their voices heard. #Bythewaythat'snotencroachingonfreespeech 'Til then, they come off as bat shit crazy w/ a blind hatred of Fidel. (And I don't at all blame them for hating Fidel. I hate him myself.) Sure. And it doesn't warrant holding a small boy hostage from his father. #blindhatred Coooooonnnnnnniiiiiiiiiiooooooooooooooo. Es la misma vaina, 'chacho. Miami Cuban isn't a physical state. It's a state of mind. Yup. It's like the story "the boy who cried wolf". You should check it out sometime. Although it might task your reading comprehension skillzzzz. Have you ever been to Miami, and more specifically, have you seen an actual protest? I'm not talking about protesting really big stuff, but the minutiae. They're comedic gold, bro. They're just sad and pathetic. And they're constant. Not as amusing as your attempts to discredit my knowledge of the country. I've done pretty extensive research on Cuba and I've taught about the culture and history at the university level. It's not my area of expertise, but I'm pretty well versed in the subject. When have I painted him as some romantic figure? Or is that yet another invented story you're making up about me. Now, b4 I say what I'm about to say, which is going to send you off into a pity party about how callous I am... Remember: dictatorship = bad. Still there? Ok: Par for the course for dictatorship. Heck, the US of A post-Independence was hardly about liberty and justice for about a decade. (Yes, I know that Fidel's dictatorship is on its 6th decade and liberty is foreign concept there.)
Muchacho you really are insufferable. Tienes que ser uno de los tipos mas antipaticos en BigSoccer. Siempres tienes que tener la ultima palabra y tu siempres esta correcto y todos otros posters son imbeciles. Si alguin tiene una idea opuesta no es suficiente que existe una diferencia de opinion, no tu tienes que insultar. Sabes, eso es prueba que quisas tu opinion no es la verdad. La realidad es que tu arogancia y opinion que tu sabes mas que el resto del mundo te deja con un falsa vista sobre este y otros temas. Hay tremenda differencia entre la realidad y lo que tu crees sobre este tema.