Fareed Zakaria, Get a Compass. The GPS is Broken.

CNN, by some it stands for "Communist News Network".  It's an attempt at slander that should be chuckled at.  A more fitting jab at the name would be something like "Certainly Not News".  But nonsense aside, despite all of the visually pleasing technological displays that they provide viewers, their GPS seems to be broken.  Fareed Zakaria's GPS seems to have led him to a place that can't be explained.  He would have been better off using a compass.

Mr. Zakaria never struck me as one of the boisterous TV personalities who foams at the mouth while being offensive to his guests.  And he has always been a gentleman in his defense of capitalism and the imagined rights of the powerful nations to impose on others their own ideas about how things should be.  While his recent view supporting the idea of changing US policy towards Cuba is welcome, his interpretations and characterization of Cuba's economic difficulties are severely off.

"Let's begin by asking whether the existing policy is working. In 1960, the United States enacted an embargo against Cuba. Its purpose was simple and explicit: regime change. Did it work? Well, until he retired from the presidency in 2008, Fidel Castro was the longest serving head of government in the world. Surely that's about as powerful evidence as one can get that the policy did not work and is not working."  He is sincere in pointing out the reason behind the US policy and certainly Fidel Castro was the man in Cuba who could have borrowed a sign for his desk from an American president which said 'The Buck Stops Here'.  Then the man with a GPS goes on to say "The truth is that Cuba's miserable economy is almost entirely its own fault."  Had he been holding a compass, he would have been led to a much different analysis.

The suggestion that the main problems are Cuba's own fault is one of those half-truths that leads an honest attempts of analysis astray.  Certainly Cuba chose its own course and decide upon creating a particular economic system.  But it did so at a time when there were two major blocs of international trade.  Being forced out of one by the imposition of an embargo, it made the logical decision to form itself in a way that maintained its newly won independence and became integrated in to the socialist trading bloc.  Not only was it based on survival and independence, but it allowed the nation to achieve what so many others couldn't in regards to education and medical advances.  Since the disappearance of the socialist bloc, Cuba found itself in a very difficult spot having an economy set up for a world which no longer existed.  So yes, it is how it is because of their own decisions.  But the bulk of the problems it faces now, along with transforming its system, is the set of obstacles created by laws, extra-territorial laws, created in Washington with the precise reason of trying to strangle the Cuban economy.  In that sense, US policy has been quite successful.

Surely Mr. Zakaria understands the effects of sanctions as he has explained them so well in regards to the damages they have caused to Iran's economy.  To ignore or overlook them in the case of Cuba is either sloppy analysis or just dishonest.

He wants the US to "give capitalism a chance".  I think the US should give capitalists a chance, but they would have to do so by playing by the rules that Cuba chooses if the are to participate there.  Also more importantly, Cuba has not asked for capitalism to be given a chance.  What they have asked for is a chance for free trade.  Commercial exchanges to be allowed in practice, not in name only like the many "free trade" agreements that we like to tout.  Businesses would be allowed to operate according to the laws of the places in which they do business.  That's all and it shouldn't be too much to ask. Free trade between nations is impossible if the US maintains its current and long standing policy of preventing it.  The vengeful policy has long worn out its welcome and even its goals are recognized by many as offensive.

He sticks with his imperialist attitude by saying that Washington should offer some relaxations in the policies but only if Cuba does what the United States thinks it should do.  That just simply wouldn't be any fundamental change in the current policy!  He must truly believe that the US has the right to judge another nation's political system.  That just isn't a right, it's an assumption, but one that isn't even applied uniformly, only in some cases arbitrarily.  Has the United States demanded political reforms in all countries?  Of course not.  It only make those calculated demands of some nations and it's almost always based on a strategy that hopes that reforms would lead to a political system subservient to US interests.  There is nothing humanitarian or idealistic about it.

So Fareed Zakaria's GPS has led him to the same place he started, some sort of glitch in the technology that may have been avoided by using a simple old fashion compass.  

A Choice of Words

   The ideological battle between the left and right, socialism and capitalism, is alive and well even though around two decades ago it had supposedly been settled.  Since the fall of the Soviet Union, the United States has extended its influence over the globe.  As the capitalist system has extended itself, the world has not seen less wars nor has the market provided answers to things such as hunger and housing.  In fact those problems have intensified even within the U.S. itself.

   In the country that boasts of the freedom to protest, we have seen protesters beaten and pepper sprayed and removed from the sites of the gatherings.  In the past few years people have been forced from their homes while bankers have made enormous profits after being subsidized by the people who are supposed to tighten their belts.   At the same time that people protest the unjust situation, the "free" press which is mainly corporatist, lectures the people about the wonders of entrepreneurs, as if the people are upset with entrepreneurial activity and not the fact that the largest corporations and Wall Street firms write our legislation for their sponsored politicians to make law that runs against the interests of the majority of the people. 

   In Cuba, the socialist government has been undergoing a process of implementing changes to the structure of the economy.  The economy, for the most part, was designed in a time when a socialist camp of countries existed and provided an alternative to the capitalist model.  Since this is no longer the case, Cuba has decided to proceed in a way which makes it possible to preserve the advances it has accomplished, yet at the same time become more functional in the world it lives in.

   It is no secret to the  politicians in Washington that the policy of maintaining the embargo against Cuba is useless.  There are various business groups which are clamoring to find ways to convince Washington that it is time to rethink the wrong-headed policy.  More people to people bridges are built between the two countries despite the attempts at economic isolation.

   Recently there have even been op-ed articles promoting the idea of IMF loans to Cuba. There are almost daily articles about the return of capitalism to Cuba.  The press seems to be more and more searching for ways to help  the stubborn Washington politicians to find ways to justify an about face in regards to Cuba. 

   Look, as far as viewing the changes in Cuba's economic system through the eyes of a believer in capitalism goes, it's understandable that the changes can be considered a turn towards capitalism.  But through the eyes of many believers in socialism, it should be viewed as a way of eliminating many of the bureaucratic obstacles and inconveniences that people faced on the island.  Also, it must be recognized that Cuba is intentionally maintaining the achievements it has made since its revolution in 1959.  There will not be a reappearance of homelessness, malnutrition, nor lack of medical care or an educational system which requires people to amass a debt in order to get a degree.   These are some of the things allow Cuba to be socialist.  The investments coming from abroad are all being directed towards projects that will not only grow the economy but will do so to expand and improve on the benefits that the country provides for its people. 

   Yes, there are similarities in how businesses in a capitalist society operate and how businesses in socialist Cuba do.  But that isn't what gives a country the capitalist character.  Capitalist countries allow a disproportionate amount of wealth to be accumulated in a few hands.  It does so to the detriment of many as it doesn't attempt to truly remedy the problems they face.  Minor adjustments are made because of a certain amount of pressure by the people who really do yearn for more equitable circumstances.  But always there are screams by the proponents of free markets against such measures.  They, along with their corporate sponsors spend a great deal of effort trying to convince people that the problems are actually a result of intervention in the market.  It is actually an attempt to explain why it is better for the rich to get richer while the rest get poorer. 

   Things in any type of system must be produced, sold, and bought.  That is what blurs the line between capitalism and socialism.  What differs socialism drastically from capitalism is how the society decides to make an economic system work for the benefit of the entire population.  Socialism strives for growth that is sustainable and avoids the exploitation of the workers for the profits of a few. 

   In some ways the society which Cuba aims to achieve is very similar to what the protesters all over the world are demanding for themselves.  To the dismay of the capitalist preachers, they know that the people of the world are looking for an alternative to their sermons.