I visited Cuba a year ago for a couple days on a cruise. I had a nice time, some great people, some great venues (REALLY great venues)... but won't be going back, and it's due to systematic deficiencies (trivial examples: garbage EVERYWHERE, many toilets have to ration toiled paper (!), not to mention, no incentive to clean the bathrooms, many restaurants had bland flavors due to the inability to order specialty food items and spices and only work with the bulk items the government gives you).
Also it's frankly weird how the last capitalist era there is basically enshrined in their culture (from the cars, to the fairly-well-preserved buildings dating from that era)
Odd observational note on the people: Many are into what I'd call cults but what most would call run-of-the-mill superstitious beliefs (voodoo, etc.)
Your complaints sound like they're coming from someone who went on a cruise to almost any third world island - though maybe other destinations are better controlled by the cruise companies to take you to specific (clean) tourist ports.
Cuba is not without its problems, but much of what you describe is not unique to a third world country.
The one area you're just completely wrong about is the flavors. I was only able to stay for 10 days, but on my short trip there I stayed in locals' houses (which is quite common there - google "casas particulares") and the vast majority of the meals we had - especially the ones cooked by the people we stayed with - were extremely flavorful.
I'm not claiming socialism is great or anything - there was a potato shortage while I was there - but I'd just hope no one reads your post and thinks Cubans are eating terrible bland food...
>Cuba is not without its problems, but much of what you describe is not unique to a third world country.
>I'm not claiming socialism is great or anything - there was a potato shortage while I was there
But the point is that the countries that were third world a half century ago but have since raised themselves up to developed status did so through free market economics, while the socialist dictatorship countries like Cuba failed.
Apparently, the methods used for planning economies known until ~1990, executed with the computers and communication systems of the time, in countries that were relatively poor to begin with, ruled as dictatorships, did not work well enough while the USA and its allies actively fought "communism". That tells us nothing.
Guess which country is the richest in the Caribbean? Okay, it's the USA. It may hardly be a democracy anymore, it doesn't particularly respect human rights, but it hasn't regressed to developing status yet and it has free market economics up the wazoo. The richest independent country (as in, its mainland is in the Caribbean) is of course Cuba.
Only if you believe in the Cuban government’s numbers. Do you really believe that a country whose population lives on rations and $30/month salaries is a rich one?
According to CIA numbers[1], there are 101 economies poorer than Cuba. Do you really think they're all "communist"? Including American Samoa? Somalia isn't known for its "big government" either.
So when you say free market, it seems you really mean "not-communist", correct? Because I never said they were all communist.
It would seem fair to me to remove from that list those countries below Cuba which are in fact communist or which have a history of being destroyed by communism, those who are kept poor by brutal dictators, like many from Africa, and those recently affected by war. It seems to me those countries wouldn't qualify as free markets.
Then I invite you to check the Index of Economic Freedom[1] to see if the remaining ones are really "free market" countries..
Note that this is all based on per capita GDP numbers provided by the Cuban government and therefore highly unreliable.
> It would seem fair to me to remove from that list those countries below Cuba which are in fact communist
That would be kind of a no-op. But I guess you mean planned economies, which should of course be removed from that list.
> those who are kept poor by brutal dictators, like many from Africa
Absolutely not. To the contrary, it makes sense to remove democracies from the list. After all, we're comparing planned economies and free market economies, not democracies and dictatorships. Since I hardly think Cuba qualifies as a democracy yet, comparing it to free-market dictatorships is a more useful comparison.
> and those recently affected by war.
Sure, if we also exclude those countries affected by economic warfare waged by the USA.
But you've got a point here: A country's welfare is influenced by a lot of factors, not just its economic policies. We aren't exactly running laboratory experiments here. You can look at two countries, see which one does better, but that doesn't really tell you why.
> Then I invite you to check the Index of Economic Freedom[1] to see if the remaining ones are really "free market" countries..
I'm not interested in an index that shows how much a conservative think tank likes a country's policies. But if you insist: almost all countries with a higher GDP rank higher than Cuba on that index.
> Note that this is all based on per capita GDP numbers provided by the Cuban government and therefore highly unreliable.
I don't think the CIA would just parrot Cuban propaganda. If all it did was mindlessly reproducing each country's official numbers, North Korea would be #1.
It would remove North Korea, Laos and Vietnam, and a host of other countries where the totalitarian inclinations weren’t able to reach their final goals yet.
> comparing it to free-market dictatorships is a more useful comparison.
Could you list a few free-market dictatorships? Do you think poor African countries are free markets?
> affected by economic warfare waged by the USA.
It’s funny, when the US invests in a foreign country, it’s evil imperialism; when it doesn’t, it’s economic warfare.
> I'm not interested in an index that shows how much a conservative think tank likes a country's policies.
Their methodology is fully available. Do you have any criticism on their data other than that it was produced by people you don’t like?
There is a strong correlation between the economic freedom index and the OECD quality of life index. Is the OECD a conservative think tank? Do you think this correlation is just coincidence?
> almost all countries with a higher GDP rank higher than Cuba on that index.
Is this also a coincidence?
> I don't think the CIA would just parrot Cuban propaganda.
I was taking about the numbers from Wikipedia, which are about twice as high as those from the CIA. And still the CIA number seems overly optimistic, given average salaries of $30.
That, or the inequalities among the Cuba political elite and normal people strongly distort the average. Who would have thought.
> It would remove North Korea, Laos and Vietnam, and a host of other countries where the totalitarian inclinations weren’t able to reach their final goals yet.
Those are dictatorships. That's pretty much the opposite of communism. The people doesn't control anything there, much less the means of production.
> Do you think poor African countries are free markets?
What else?
> It’s funny, when the US invests in a foreign country, it’s evil imperialism; when it doesn’t, it’s economic warfare.
> There is a strong correlation between the economic freedom index and the OECD quality of life index. Is the OECD a conservative think tank?
It's an organization of countries committed to market economy.
> > almost all countries with a higher GDP rank higher than Cuba on that index.
> Is this also a coincidence?
Sorry, I meant to write "lower GDP" of course.
> I was taking about the numbers from Wikipedia, which are about twice as high as those from the CIA.
Yes, that's odd.
> And still the CIA number seems overly optimistic, given average salaries of $30.
Why should the CIA make Cuba look better than it is?
> That, or the inequalities among the Cuba political elite and normal people strongly distort the average. Who would have thought.
That is possible. It is a dictatorship after all. But what they need is democracy and redistribution, not markets. That would be like pouring gasoline into a fire.
> It always comes to this. It’s not real communism! They misrepresented Marx!
What it always comes to is liberals being ignorant.
> Yes. Somehow being able to do commerce with every other country in the world is not enough though?
Sure, it's still enough to beat many market economies. But you can't deny that not being able to trade with its very wealthy neighbour is a disadvantage.
>I thought this was an actual discussion but it’s clear you’re not interested in that.
I thought this was an actual discussion but it’s clear you’re not interested in that.
You probably think that Somalia doesn't have a free market, because if something doesn't work, it's not a free market.
> What it always comes to is liberals being ignorant.
The ad-hominem also always follows.
> beat many market economies
You call me ignorant and follow with this? Whichmarket economy is Cuba beating specifically? I’ve asked many times and you failed to name one country.
Yet you persist with the notion that a country whose population lives on rations; who has no freedom, be it political, of speech, of the press, or even the freedom to leave their country; whose main city is a crumbling town; who has no access to quality medicine (yes, despite the memes you hear from its apologists)... I could go on... you think this country is beating anyone?
Do you think an economy who survives on aid from other totalitarian states such as Venezuela or in corruption money from political friends from other countries like Brazil is beating anyone?
> You probably think that Somalia doesn't have a free market, because if something doesn't work, it's not a free market.
Your mind-reading abilities are terrible. You never stopped moving the goalposts in this conversation, and now you’re trying to frame me as an anarchist?
> You call me ignorant and follow with this? Whichmarket economy is Cuba beating specifically? I’ve asked many times and you failed to name one country.
Most countries have market economies. Just look at the GDP rankings. I'm not going to copy them for you.
Then again, you appear to believe that the CIA sugarcoats Cuba's numbers, so I frankly don't think you're open to facts in this matter.
> you think this country is beating anyone?
Whether your claims are lies, hyperbole or correct: Of course it does. Do you think Cuba is the poorest country in the world?
Your claims also don't have anything to do with market or planned economies.
> Do you think an economy who survives on aid from other totalitarian states such as Venezuela
Neither Cuba nor Venezuela are totalitarian, they're authoritarian. Those are not synonyms.
> Your mind-reading abilities are terrible. You never stopped moving the goalposts in this conversation, and now you’re trying to frame me as an anarchist?
“Totalitarianism is a political concept of a mode of government that prohibits opposition parties, restricts individual opposition to the state and its claims, and exercises an extremely high degree of control over public and private life. It is regarded as the most extreme and complete form of authoritarianism.”
Hi sctb, I’m given to understand that you’re one of the moderators here. I’ve tried to contact you twice in two weeks through email without a response, so I’m concerned that it’s hitting your spam folder. Is there a better way to contact you? I don’t feel good about inserting my comment in an unrelated post like this, but I’m unsure what else to do.
If the discussion isn't proceeding in a thoughtful, constructive fashion then don't proceed. Downvotes are fine—flags if a comment or submission breaks the guidelines.
It depended on the restaurant. I got the feeling that some restaurants somehow had access to special flavorful ingredients, and some did not. I would not be surprised if this was simply the corrupt side of life in a communist-run institution.
We have a favorite Cuban place in the States (shout-out to Corazón de Cuba in Long Beach, Long Island) and the owner said that he is able to make much more flavorful food in the states than he was in Cuba proper
> Also it's frankly weird how the last capitalist era there is basically enshrined in their culture
No, I think your first list perfectly enshrines the effects of modern day capitalism on modern day Cuba...
> garbage EVERYWHERE, many toilets have to ration toiled paper (!), not to mention, no incentive to clean the bathrooms, many restaurants had bland flavors due to the inability to order specialty food items and spices and only work with the bulk items the government gives you
I spent about 10 days in Cuba as part of a scientific research trip just before Obama eased the restrictions. What disturbed me the most was how many Cuban scientists I met who truly believed the Cubans would cure cancer for the entire world if it weren't for the American "blockade."
Aside from the government propaganda, a lot of South American & Caribbean countries have the same issues you've outlined. (Though the lack of toilet seats has so far been pretty unique to Cuba in my travels most of the poorer countries are definitely BYOTP.)
One thing that really stood out to me about Cuba when I went was their odd transition to "private property" which this new constitution vaguely addresses. When I was there (in 2014 or 2015?) Cubans were allowed to "own" real estate but the government could force them to "sell" the property at any time, at the price specified by the government, and only to the seller selected or approved by the government. It didn't seem that "ownership" came with many rights or benefits.
As for the "voodoo" I think that's fairly common in the Caribbean/South America as well. There are "voodoo markets" in Haiti & Togo, for example. And the "witches market" in La Paz, Bolivia is... something if you're into being surrounded by dried llama fetuses.[1]
> What disturbed me the most was how many Cuban scientists I met who truly believed the Cubans would cure cancer for the entire world if it weren't for the American "blockade."
But don't these scientists know that they are way to lazy to cure cancer anyway because in socialism, people have no motivation to work?
> When I was there (in 2014 or 2015?) Cubans were allowed to "own" real estate but the government could force them to "sell" the property at any time, at the price specified by the government, and only to the seller selected or approved by the government.
Cubans aren't lazy. By a long shot. I found them to be some of the most innovative and indeed they have quite the "hacker" culture given the very limited resources available to them.
And you're right, I didn't explain the property rights clearly. I commented in a rush and that was a mistake.
> Cubans were allowed to "own" real estate but the government could force them to "sell" the property at any time, at the price specified by the government, and only to the seller selected or approved by the government
What I meant by this (but did not clearly articulate) was that "homeowners" can not only be forced by the government to sell at any time (similar to eminent domain) but also need permission from the government if they want to sell. And even when they've been given permission to sell they don't list it on the open market or even have an assessment (as would happen with an eminent domain action). Instead, the government simply assigns a price to the property and then assigns a potential "buyer" for the predetermined price. If that "buyer" isn't interested, the government will assign another. I'm sure you can see how this system can easily be exploited by government administrators to obtain the most desirable property for themselves and their "friends" at an artificially low price.
And yes, I seriously linked to the Daily Mail. It certainly isn't always the best source of information but I was intending to share the photos and that link had the most variety. As I've been to the witches market, I found both the photos, and the information in the article, to be accurate and added to the conversation.
Your snarky attitude, on the other hand, adds little to HN. A quick look through your comment history makes me wonder whether you might benefit from a review of the Guidelines.
What's so odd about Voodoo being popular in Cuba is that Communism, the philosophy of the government, is militantly atheist (as Marx said, "religion is the opiate of the people.")
I think I'm allowed to have a very negative opinion of unfounded belief systems, given the damage they've done the past 3000 years up to and including the present U.S. "fakenews is whatever I don't believe is true" administration
Well, the government-controlled media pushed pretty hard for a "yes" vote. That's unfair, but it's less than vote fraud.
The examples in the article sound like the vote count was reasonably accurate. (When someone against attends the vote count at their precinct, and says that it was 400 for, 25 against, and the official total says 86.85% for, that's probably an un-finagled tally - unless the ballots were stuffed before the count.)
"Dissidents, who were divided between those who advocated a ‘no’ vote and those who called for abstention so as not to legitimize a process they deemed a fraud, reported a few incidents across the country of members being temporarily detained or harassed."
Yes, I saw that. Presuming that it was "a few", I assumed that it hadn't affected the vote much.
I mean, it still shouldn't happen at all. But you could detain a million people and it wouldn't be the cause of an 85% yes vote among 8 million people.
Closed governments can more easily manufacture consent than open ones. In open societies, it costs a lot more, but the victims gladly pay for it. But manufactured is manufactured, either way.
You haven't lived under a closed government, and it shows. Here's what happens in Russia (a far more "open" government, because it only controls like 90% of their press and not 100%) during elections. Citizens "can and do" monitor vote counting. The very same citizens (mostly government employees such as local administration officials, schoolteachers, municipal employees, etc) also engage in ballot stuffing, count rigging, and multiple voting, to the point where the vote percentages rounded up for the officially sanctioned candidates show up as prominent spikes on vote count distribution. I.e. if there's an "understanding" that the "right" candidate should get 80% of the vote, they round it up to pretty much exactly 80% by subtracting votes from other candidates. And if that doesn't work, the government controls the very electronic system ("GAS Vybory") which computes the final tally.
You can even see evidence of all of the above on Youtube, but nobody gives a shit, because nobody believes anything can be changed. Heck, most people don't believe anything _should_ be changed, because aside from the brief period in the 90s (of which the US "cured" Russia by directly and openly helping Yeltsin secure a win in a runoff election), that's the way it's always been there.
Heck, with the recent ballot-related shenanigans in Broward County FL and elsewhere, I'm not sure everything is 100% sanitary with this stuff in the US either anymore.
And in case the downvote brigade thinks I'm making this up:
I can 100% guarantee that in any such elections all of the aforementioned "irregularities" happen on a massive scale. If you believe that an autocratic government is going to yield power peacefully, you're beyond naive.
Seems like the people were offered a mixed bag: Have some direly needed reforms now in exchange for cementing the power of the party, which was already solid to begin with.
Honestly, let us just keep Cuba a toy socialist country as it is and not boycott it. Otherwise, where would we point to when we want to show real world socialism? Assuming that Maduro is on his way out, of course.
I think the "recognition of" only refers to the immediately following "private property", not the whole list in that sentence. I've often thought natural languages could benefit from a grouping operator :)
> There are references to {markets and {recognition of private property}, foreign investment, small businesses, gender identity, the internet, {the right to legal representation upon arrest} and habeas corpus}.
61 comments
[ 5.9 ms ] story [ 222 ms ] threadAlso it's frankly weird how the last capitalist era there is basically enshrined in their culture (from the cars, to the fairly-well-preserved buildings dating from that era)
Odd observational note on the people: Many are into what I'd call cults but what most would call run-of-the-mill superstitious beliefs (voodoo, etc.)
Cuba is not without its problems, but much of what you describe is not unique to a third world country.
The one area you're just completely wrong about is the flavors. I was only able to stay for 10 days, but on my short trip there I stayed in locals' houses (which is quite common there - google "casas particulares") and the vast majority of the meals we had - especially the ones cooked by the people we stayed with - were extremely flavorful.
I'm not claiming socialism is great or anything - there was a potato shortage while I was there - but I'd just hope no one reads your post and thinks Cubans are eating terrible bland food...
>I'm not claiming socialism is great or anything - there was a potato shortage while I was there
But the point is that the countries that were third world a half century ago but have since raised themselves up to developed status did so through free market economics, while the socialist dictatorship countries like Cuba failed.
Guess which country is the richest in the Caribbean? Okay, it's the USA. It may hardly be a democracy anymore, it doesn't particularly respect human rights, but it hasn't regressed to developing status yet and it has free market economics up the wazoo. The richest independent country (as in, its mainland is in the Caribbean) is of course Cuba.
Or are you listing St. Kitts as not independent, because it's part of the Commonwealth?
Trinidad and Tobago is richer though (at $32,520 GDP/capita vs Cuba's $22,237).
And I respect your honesty for checking other countries after proving me wrong...
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas...
No, that would be absurd, considering free markets have as little to do with democracy as with freedom.
So when you say free market, it seems you really mean "not-communist", correct? Because I never said they were all communist.
It would seem fair to me to remove from that list those countries below Cuba which are in fact communist or which have a history of being destroyed by communism, those who are kept poor by brutal dictators, like many from Africa, and those recently affected by war. It seems to me those countries wouldn't qualify as free markets.
Then I invite you to check the Index of Economic Freedom[1] to see if the remaining ones are really "free market" countries..
Note that this is all based on per capita GDP numbers provided by the Cuban government and therefore highly unreliable.
[1] https://www.heritage.org/index/ranking
That would be kind of a no-op. But I guess you mean planned economies, which should of course be removed from that list.
> those who are kept poor by brutal dictators, like many from Africa
Absolutely not. To the contrary, it makes sense to remove democracies from the list. After all, we're comparing planned economies and free market economies, not democracies and dictatorships. Since I hardly think Cuba qualifies as a democracy yet, comparing it to free-market dictatorships is a more useful comparison.
> and those recently affected by war.
Sure, if we also exclude those countries affected by economic warfare waged by the USA.
But you've got a point here: A country's welfare is influenced by a lot of factors, not just its economic policies. We aren't exactly running laboratory experiments here. You can look at two countries, see which one does better, but that doesn't really tell you why.
> Then I invite you to check the Index of Economic Freedom[1] to see if the remaining ones are really "free market" countries..
I'm not interested in an index that shows how much a conservative think tank likes a country's policies. But if you insist: almost all countries with a higher GDP rank higher than Cuba on that index.
> Note that this is all based on per capita GDP numbers provided by the Cuban government and therefore highly unreliable.
I don't think the CIA would just parrot Cuban propaganda. If all it did was mindlessly reproducing each country's official numbers, North Korea would be #1.
It would remove North Korea, Laos and Vietnam, and a host of other countries where the totalitarian inclinations weren’t able to reach their final goals yet.
> comparing it to free-market dictatorships is a more useful comparison.
Could you list a few free-market dictatorships? Do you think poor African countries are free markets?
> affected by economic warfare waged by the USA.
It’s funny, when the US invests in a foreign country, it’s evil imperialism; when it doesn’t, it’s economic warfare.
> I'm not interested in an index that shows how much a conservative think tank likes a country's policies.
Their methodology is fully available. Do you have any criticism on their data other than that it was produced by people you don’t like?
There is a strong correlation between the economic freedom index and the OECD quality of life index. Is the OECD a conservative think tank? Do you think this correlation is just coincidence?
> almost all countries with a higher GDP rank higher than Cuba on that index.
Is this also a coincidence?
> I don't think the CIA would just parrot Cuban propaganda.
I was taking about the numbers from Wikipedia, which are about twice as high as those from the CIA. And still the CIA number seems overly optimistic, given average salaries of $30.
That, or the inequalities among the Cuba political elite and normal people strongly distort the average. Who would have thought.
Those are dictatorships. That's pretty much the opposite of communism. The people doesn't control anything there, much less the means of production.
> Do you think poor African countries are free markets?
What else?
> It’s funny, when the US invests in a foreign country, it’s evil imperialism; when it doesn’t, it’s economic warfare.
You have heard of the embargo, haven't you?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_embargo_against_...
> There is a strong correlation between the economic freedom index and the OECD quality of life index. Is the OECD a conservative think tank?
It's an organization of countries committed to market economy.
> > almost all countries with a higher GDP rank higher than Cuba on that index.
> Is this also a coincidence?
Sorry, I meant to write "lower GDP" of course.
> I was taking about the numbers from Wikipedia, which are about twice as high as those from the CIA.
Yes, that's odd.
> And still the CIA number seems overly optimistic, given average salaries of $30.
Why should the CIA make Cuba look better than it is?
> That, or the inequalities among the Cuba political elite and normal people strongly distort the average. Who would have thought.
That is possible. It is a dictatorship after all. But what they need is democracy and redistribution, not markets. That would be like pouring gasoline into a fire.
It always comes to this. It’s not real communism! They misrepresented Marx!
Utopias would work so fine if it weren’t for the real world.
> What else?
I thought this was an actual discussion but it’s clear you’re not interested in that.
> You have heard of the embargo, haven't you?
Yes. Somehow being able to do commerce with every other country in the world is not enough though?
Have you heard the left wing party line on any third world country? “We need to stop commerce with the imperialists!” Well, they got it in Cuba...
What it always comes to is liberals being ignorant.
> Yes. Somehow being able to do commerce with every other country in the world is not enough though?
Sure, it's still enough to beat many market economies. But you can't deny that not being able to trade with its very wealthy neighbour is a disadvantage.
>I thought this was an actual discussion but it’s clear you’re not interested in that.
I thought this was an actual discussion but it’s clear you’re not interested in that.
You probably think that Somalia doesn't have a free market, because if something doesn't work, it's not a free market.
The ad-hominem also always follows.
> beat many market economies
You call me ignorant and follow with this? Whichmarket economy is Cuba beating specifically? I’ve asked many times and you failed to name one country.
Yet you persist with the notion that a country whose population lives on rations; who has no freedom, be it political, of speech, of the press, or even the freedom to leave their country; whose main city is a crumbling town; who has no access to quality medicine (yes, despite the memes you hear from its apologists)... I could go on... you think this country is beating anyone?
Do you think an economy who survives on aid from other totalitarian states such as Venezuela or in corruption money from political friends from other countries like Brazil is beating anyone?
> You probably think that Somalia doesn't have a free market, because if something doesn't work, it's not a free market.
Your mind-reading abilities are terrible. You never stopped moving the goalposts in this conversation, and now you’re trying to frame me as an anarchist?
At least try to be honest.
Most countries have market economies. Just look at the GDP rankings. I'm not going to copy them for you.
Then again, you appear to believe that the CIA sugarcoats Cuba's numbers, so I frankly don't think you're open to facts in this matter.
> you think this country is beating anyone?
Whether your claims are lies, hyperbole or correct: Of course it does. Do you think Cuba is the poorest country in the world?
Your claims also don't have anything to do with market or planned economies.
> Do you think an economy who survives on aid from other totalitarian states such as Venezuela
Neither Cuba nor Venezuela are totalitarian, they're authoritarian. Those are not synonyms.
> Your mind-reading abilities are terrible. You never stopped moving the goalposts in this conversation, and now you’re trying to frame me as an anarchist?
I don't frame you as any kind of socialist.
Both are totalitarian.
Can't confirm, it's just frustrating and I should have stopped earlier.
Honest question.
We have a favorite Cuban place in the States (shout-out to Corazón de Cuba in Long Beach, Long Island) and the owner said that he is able to make much more flavorful food in the states than he was in Cuba proper
No, I think your first list perfectly enshrines the effects of modern day capitalism on modern day Cuba...
> garbage EVERYWHERE, many toilets have to ration toiled paper (!), not to mention, no incentive to clean the bathrooms, many restaurants had bland flavors due to the inability to order specialty food items and spices and only work with the bulk items the government gives you
Aside from the government propaganda, a lot of South American & Caribbean countries have the same issues you've outlined. (Though the lack of toilet seats has so far been pretty unique to Cuba in my travels most of the poorer countries are definitely BYOTP.)
One thing that really stood out to me about Cuba when I went was their odd transition to "private property" which this new constitution vaguely addresses. When I was there (in 2014 or 2015?) Cubans were allowed to "own" real estate but the government could force them to "sell" the property at any time, at the price specified by the government, and only to the seller selected or approved by the government. It didn't seem that "ownership" came with many rights or benefits.
As for the "voodoo" I think that's fairly common in the Caribbean/South America as well. There are "voodoo markets" in Haiti & Togo, for example. And the "witches market" in La Paz, Bolivia is... something if you're into being surrounded by dried llama fetuses.[1]
[1]https://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/travel_news/article-52738...
But don't these scientists know that they are way to lazy to cure cancer anyway because in socialism, people have no motivation to work?
> When I was there (in 2014 or 2015?) Cubans were allowed to "own" real estate but the government could force them to "sell" the property at any time, at the price specified by the government, and only to the seller selected or approved by the government.
AKA eminent domain?
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/travel_news/article-52738....
Seriously?
And you're right, I didn't explain the property rights clearly. I commented in a rush and that was a mistake.
> Cubans were allowed to "own" real estate but the government could force them to "sell" the property at any time, at the price specified by the government, and only to the seller selected or approved by the government
What I meant by this (but did not clearly articulate) was that "homeowners" can not only be forced by the government to sell at any time (similar to eminent domain) but also need permission from the government if they want to sell. And even when they've been given permission to sell they don't list it on the open market or even have an assessment (as would happen with an eminent domain action). Instead, the government simply assigns a price to the property and then assigns a potential "buyer" for the predetermined price. If that "buyer" isn't interested, the government will assign another. I'm sure you can see how this system can easily be exploited by government administrators to obtain the most desirable property for themselves and their "friends" at an artificially low price.
And yes, I seriously linked to the Daily Mail. It certainly isn't always the best source of information but I was intending to share the photos and that link had the most variety. As I've been to the witches market, I found both the photos, and the information in the article, to be accurate and added to the conversation.
Your snarky attitude, on the other hand, adds little to HN. A quick look through your comment history makes me wonder whether you might benefit from a review of the Guidelines.
Voodoo is not a run-of-the-mill superstition/cult any more than a major abrahamic religion is. It is a valid, recognized religious practice [1].
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Vod%C3%BA
https://www.salon.com/2014/11/17/6_reasons_why_religion_does...
The examples in the article sound like the vote count was reasonably accurate. (When someone against attends the vote count at their precinct, and says that it was 400 for, 25 against, and the official total says 86.85% for, that's probably an un-finagled tally - unless the ballots were stuffed before the count.)
"Dissidents, who were divided between those who advocated a ‘no’ vote and those who called for abstention so as not to legitimize a process they deemed a fraud, reported a few incidents across the country of members being temporarily detained or harassed."
I mean, it still shouldn't happen at all. But you could detain a million people and it wouldn't be the cause of an 85% yes vote among 8 million people.
You can even see evidence of all of the above on Youtube, but nobody gives a shit, because nobody believes anything can be changed. Heck, most people don't believe anything _should_ be changed, because aside from the brief period in the 90s (of which the US "cured" Russia by directly and openly helping Yeltsin secure a win in a runoff election), that's the way it's always been there.
Heck, with the recent ballot-related shenanigans in Broward County FL and elsewhere, I'm not sure everything is 100% sanitary with this stuff in the US either anymore.
And in case the downvote brigade thinks I'm making this up:
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=russia+ballot+s...
https://www.globalresearch.ca/us-meddling-in-1996-russian-el...
I have no doubt that vote stuffing happens in Russia and many other countries, but that doesn't mean it's happened in this election.
For the good of the people.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Warmonger. Murderer.
Gobshite.
Honestly, let us just keep Cuba a toy socialist country as it is and not boycott it. Otherwise, where would we point to when we want to show real world socialism? Assuming that Maduro is on his way out, of course.
> There are references to {markets and {recognition of private property}, foreign investment, small businesses, gender identity, the internet, {the right to legal representation upon arrest} and habeas corpus}.