A forum for discussion of regional topics including oil depletion but also government, society, and the future.
by vision-master » Tue 19 Apr 2011, 11:17:03
and unprecedented ecological damage to the pristine coastal areas. Capitalism will destory Cuba.......

-
vision-master
-
by Sixstrings » Tue 19 Apr 2011, 11:57:51
They're transitioning to the Chinese model. Good from them.. Chinese state capitalism isn't freedom, but it's a lot better than old school communism.
-

Sixstrings
- Fusion

-
- Posts: 15160
- Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00
-
by sjn » Tue 19 Apr 2011, 12:31:21
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Sixstrings', 'T')hey're transitioning to the Chinese model. Good from them.. Chinese state capitalism isn't freedom, but it's a lot better than old school communism.
For whom?
-

sjn
- Elite

-
- Posts: 1332
- Joined: Wed 09 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
- Location: UK
-
by Questionmark » Tue 19 Apr 2011, 17:10:42
Welcome to 1991. The Cuban govt was forced to give land grants to private farmers and allow privately run businesses to exist in the early 1990's during the Special Period in order to prevent a complete collapse of society and some serious civil unrest. This is nothing new.
-
Questionmark
- Peat

-
- Posts: 116
- Joined: Tue 01 Dec 2009, 15:21:18
-
by Questionmark » Tue 19 Apr 2011, 17:25:31
Welcome to 1991. The Cuban govt was forced to give land grants to private farmers and allow privately run businesses to exist in the early 1990's during the Special Period in order to prevent a complete collapse of society and some serious civil unrest. This is nothing new.
-
Questionmark
- Peat

-
- Posts: 116
- Joined: Tue 01 Dec 2009, 15:21:18
-
by radon » Wed 20 Apr 2011, 01:59:40
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Questionmark', 'W')elcome to 1991. The Cuban govt was forced to give land grants to private farmers and allow privately run businesses to exist in the early 1990's during the Special Period in order to prevent a complete collapse of society and some serious civil unrest. This is nothing new.
It might be a bit different this time actually. It may well be that they are not really concerned with the ideology, communist or capitalist. Rather, they are just trying to sort out the succession issue.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('EnergyUnlimited', 'C')uban authorities are reestablishing property markets:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-13125104 From this article:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'C')uba says it will allow people to buy and sell their homes for the first time since the communist revolution in 1959.
This is a single cautionary change, not a comprehensive reform. So it is difficult to derive conclusively what they are really up to.
This gives people rights to dispose of their houses without restrictions as they see fit, providing them essentially with full ownership rights. Sounds like privatization. It is likely that they will have a wave of homeless people as a result - those who sold their houses and/or disposed of their money unwisely this or that way. But they are not deterred, despite the social burden and discontent arising from the homelessness.
Further from the article:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'H')e said the party leadership was in need of renewal and should subject itself to severe self-criticism.
These are literally the words from which "perestroika" started in the Soviet Union. You would see Gorbachev saying them from the TV screen every day, especially the "severe self-criticism", the funny part. Gradual privatization of the "public" property was one of the strong real drivers behind perestroika.
In any known socialist type society with dominant "public" ownership, this "public" ownership was in essence the ownership by a few people or a single person at the top, as those were in position to make any decisions with regard to the "public" property. Cuba, specifically, is different from the Soviet Union of perestroika's time in that Cuba's present social order hinges significantly on Fidel Castro's personality.
It is not guaranteed that Cubans will accept that F.Castro's successors are in position to exercise as much control over the "public" property as their exalted revolutionary hero. In order words, those successors may lack F.Castro's legitimacy in the view of Cubans. In order to overcome this legitimacy issue, the successors may now be trying to introduce the institute of privatization.
The housing in Cuba is most likely state-owned - better to check with people on the ground. This means that if you are a party boss, you are probably living in a more or less luxurious apartments, but if and when you are sacked, you have to vacate them.
In order to be able to sell your house, you need to register it as you private property, in order words - privatize it. This way, vacating of the property is no longer an issue for a party boss regardless of his fortunes or misfortunes with the party.
Housing is a good testing ground, as it is universal. Almost everyone has some sort of housing. You will not be blamed for introducing inequality. When widely accepted, this practice may be more easily extended to other parts of economy.
This measure is not as much an indication of collapse of communism, which has been non-existent in Cuba (or anywhere) to start with, as it is an attempt to deal with the succession/legitimacy issue.
This is just a guess and observation. I am not saying that the thing that they are doing is either good or bad.