Keep in mind that neither the Cuban people nor their
government has ever attacked or invaded the United States or engaged in acts of
terrorism against the United States. It’s always been the other way around.
It’s been the U.S. government — i.e., the national-security state, specifically
the Pentagon and the CIA — that has always been the aggressor in the
decades-long conflict with Cuba.
What has been the justification for U.S. aggression
against Cuba? From the beginning, it’s been that Cuban leader Fidel Castro is a
communist and a socialist. And so what? Under what moral or legal authority
does the U.S. government target a foreign leader for assassination or a foreign
country for invasion or terrorism owing simply to the ideological perspective
of that country’s leaders?
The warped values that have come with the U.S.
national-security state’s war on Cuba are well-reflected in the criminal
conviction of the Cuban Five, a group of Cuban agents who came to the United
States to ferret out acts of U.S. terrorism that were being planned for Cuba.
For that, they were convicted in U.S. federal court of being “spies” and given
long jail sentences.
You see, in the eyes of U.S. officials, a country
that is targeted for regime change by the U.S. national-security state is
supposed to passively accept its fate at the hands of the U.S. Empire. It’s not
supposed to resist a U.S. military invasion of its land, as Cuban forces did at
the Bay of Pigs. It’s not supposed to avoid assassination attempts at the hands
of the CIA-Mafia partnership that was trying to murder Castro. It’s not
supposed to try to ferret out terrorist attacks on Cuban businesses and
industries.
To resist the U.S. Empire’s attempts at regime
change is considered a criminal act. That’s why those five Cubans were punished
even though they were doing nothing more than trying to defensively protect
their country from U.S. terrorism.
Meanwhile, U.S. officials continue to bray about
Cuba’s jailing of American Alan Gross, who was caught distributing satellite
telephones to Cuban citizens in violation of Cuban law. He’s now serving a
15-year sentence in Cuba. U.S. officials are hopping mad over that, pointing
out that it’s legal to distribute satellite telephones in other countries, an
obviously irrelevant point given that Gross did it in Cuba, where it’s illegal.
More important, Gross was being funded by the U.S. government, whose goal
continues to be regime change in Cuba.
The irony is that when one considers Cuban
socialism, the fundamentals aren’t really much different in principle from
those embraced by American statists. Consider the two socialist programs that
Fidel Castro is most proud of: free public schooling and free
government-provided healthcare in Cuba.
Now, ask yourself: What American liberal opposes
free public schooling and free government-provided healthcare? Answer: None.
Not one single American statist, liberal or conservative, favors the repeal of
public schooling or the repeal of Medicare and Medicaid. It’s only we
libertarians who favor the immediate repeal of these two major socialist
programs, along with all the others.
Moreover, if you compare the judicial system
established by the Pentagon on its side of Cuba, you’ll immediately notice the
remarkable similarities with Cuba’s communist judicial system: military
tribunals, no trial by jury, torture of prisoners, indefinite incarceration
without trial, no right to speedy trial, no right to confront witnesses,
presumption of guilt, secret proceedings, and abuse of criminal-defense
attorneys.
What Castro did was carry statist economic
principles to their logical conclusion. While President Franklin Roosevelt, for
example, nationalized gold, converting Americans who were caught owning what
had been the official money of the American people for more than 100 years into
felons, Castro nationalized everything.
While American statists favor taxing the rich and
giving the money to the poor, Castro went all the way and just took all the
wealth from the rich, including their big mansions, and redistributed it to the
poor.
While American statists favor the concept of a
government-managed economy, Castro embraced the principle to the full extent
through strict government control over all economic activity.
That’s why Cubans have always been on the verge of
starvation — not just because of the embargo but also because they were being
squeezed at the other end by all that socialism.
This commonality of beliefs between American and
Cuban statists is best manifested by the mindsets of Cuban-American members of
Congress, who are the most steadfast opponents of lifting the half-century-old
embargo against Cuba. The truth is that their beef with Castro is personal, not
ideological. Their commitment to statism is as ardent as Castro’s. They don’t
want genuine freedom, as libertarians do, they just want to see Castro replaced
by their own statist dictator — a pro-U.S. statist dictator, like the pro-U.S.
Cuban dictator who preceded Castro, Fulgencio Batista.
After all, those Cuban-American members of Congress
who insist on the continuation of the embargo are imposing the same type of
economic control on us — the American people — that Castro imposes on his
people. The embargo is an infringement on the economic liberty of Americans,
not Cubans. It’s Americans who are strictly prohibited from traveling to Cuba
and spending money there. If they’re caught violating the law, they are subject
to fines and imprisonment — by the U.S. government, the government that
purports to stand for “free enterprise.”
It’s time to end this idiocy. It’s time to end the
U.S. national-security state’s war against Cuba. No more regime-change
operations. No more assassination attempts. No more invasions. No more
terrorist attacks. No more embargo. Leave Americans free to travel to Cuba,
spend money there, and interact with the Cuban people. Free the Cuban Five and
permit them to return home. There is no better time than now.
About the author: Jacob G. Hornberger is founder and
president of The Future of Freedom Foundation.
This article was published by The Future of Freedom
Foundation.
No comments:
Post a Comment