Yabby wrote,

"I had read your various arguments, you are free to believe whatever you want."

And you are just as free to address the substance of those arguments including my responses to your argument about the question of free elections in Cuba, whenever you want, but preferably on another forum.

You wrote: "There is no excuse for not holding democratic elections in Cuba."

Did I ever say there was?

To be honest, I don't know if they should or should not, but given the almost unlimited capacity for the US to meddle in any elections held in Cuba, which even you have appeared to have grasped, and given the economic and social devastation that ruling pro-free-market parties wrought on countries like the former USSR after their transition to 'democracy' and would just as readily inflict on the Cuban people upon winning government, I would not rush to judgement of Raul or Fidel Castro for being reluctant to hold free elections.

Let us not forget the record of the US around the world and particularly in Latin America:

* Iran in 1953
* Guatemala in 1954
* Indo-China from 1954 until 1975
* Bay of Pigs in 1961 and subsequent support of anti-Castro terrorists
* The Dominican Republic in 1965, Chile in 1973
* Australia in 1975 (according to Christopher Boyce)
* Grenada in 1984
* Panama in 1989
* Nicaragua, El Salvador and Guatemala in the 1970's and 1980's
* Afghanistan from 1978 where it funded and armed Osama bin Laden
* Iraq in 2003
* etc
* etc

"I would not rush to judgement of Raul or Fidel Castro for being reluctant to hold free elections."

You have just made my point for me, I don't even need to look up
your old thread!

There is no excuse for not calling free elections. Yes the US
try to interfere in other countries business, so do Australia,
France, China, Russia and a host of other countries, the US is not
alone.

The debacle in Russia had more to do with peoples lack of experience
in democracy, so they voted in a drunk like Yeltsin, result being
a few Russians screwed the system and still do to some extent.
Gorbachov would have been far superior IMHO, but people have to learn
the hard way sometimes.

At least now the stores in Moscow are filled with food, no more
queing up for an hour, to get a loaf of bread.

Fact is that apart from no rights, Cubans have a GDP of roughly 1300$,
Martinique, Virgin Islands and similar places with less natural
resources then Cuba, around 10'000$ GDP.

Forget crying tears about US trade boycotts. Australian farmers
have faced US and EU trade boycotts for years, so they developed
other markets. Fidel is a fanatic who has put his pet theories
above the interests and welfare of his people. They have paid a
huge price and don't even have the option to kick him out.

Shame on Fidel!

Yabby, while I don't strongly disagree with your assessment of Castro, many of us would argue that Howard has also "put his pet theories above the interest and welfare of his people" (not that I would want to be thought of as being part of "Howard's people"). It's interesting that in the recent Australian online poll about what it is that will most influence our vote, 52% said "basic ideology". Previous polls have confirmed that most people voting on such polls have no intention of voting for the Coalition, so it's good evidence that the majority of (online) voters think that Howard's "pet theories" are not in the interest and welfare of those voting.

"many of us would argue that Howard has also "put his pet theories above the interest and welfare of his people"

Wiz, you may well argue that and you may well be right. Personally
I am not even a fan of Howard, I think its time he went off to prune
the roses etc. The point however is that Howard has put his head
on the block every 3 years, electors could chop it off at any time,
if they so decided and they still can and probably will.

Contrast that with Fidel, who has treated Cuba as his own piece
of property for around 50 years now, with the people having no
say, there is a huge difference!

What pees me off is when apologists then claim that "oh those
naughty USA is why he can't really have an election in Cuba"

Whatever one might think of Howard or Fidel, it cannot be denied
that Howard had the guts to put his head on the chopping block,
whilst Fidel continued with his own personal fiefdom, and clearly
won't let what the people think, interfere with his agenda.

BTW, if I had my choice of an Australian cabinet, it would be
something like Costello, Rudd, Mckew, Garrett, Hockey, Turnbull.
Sadly the rest of the Australian public don't agree with me :)

Yabby wrote, "You have just made my point for me, I don't even need to look up your old thread!"

Then don't.

Yabby wrote, "There is no excuse for not calling free elections. Yes the US try to interfere in other countries business, ..."

Tries?

But didn't they SUCCEED in overthrowing popular democratically elected Governments in Iran, Guatemala, and Chile and invading many more sovereign countries? Do yo think the fact that they only TRIED but did not quite succeed in bombing Vietnam back into the stone age is a great consolation to the Vietnamese?

If you are determined to claim the high moral ground over the issue of elections in Cuba, then how about also being a bit more forthright with the facts?

Yabby wrote, "Fact is that apart from no rights, ..."

No rights?

What about secure housing, free health, free education and free child care?

You seem to believe that one set of standards applies to me and a different set of standards applies to you. On the one hand you refuse to acknowledge or discuss a large number of facts on the thread http://johnquiggin.com/index.php/archives/2006/12/12/castro-and-pinochet/#comment-103920 which I consider very relevant on the grounds that I won't condemn the Cuban Government out of hand for not holding free elections, but on the other hand you expect me to acknowledge and accept a different set of 'facts' that you happen to consider important.

Yabby wrote, "Fidel is a fanatic who has put his pet theories above the interests and welfare of his people."

Well, please provide some examples. Show us in his own words what a fanatic he truly is. Show us where he "has put has put his pet theories above the interests and welfare of his people."

So, what are you waiting for?

Well Dagget, I would certainly argue that Castro's "pet theory" that capitalism is inherently evil, and instead the government should control the economy, is a significant factor behind Cuba's economic status. And BTW, I agree that democracy will cause difficulties in Cuba, if not introduced carefully. But on principle, it's pretty hard to argue that if free and fair elections were held in Cuba tomorrow and the vast majority of citizens voted against Castro remaining in power, then Castro should remain in power anyway. And without such elections, we will simply never know what the people of Cuba actually want (although polls have been conducted, generally concluding that most Cubans do want democracy).