Historical Bits & Pieces 1930s-1950s

[K Frame]

"He confiscated all U.S. properties on the Island,  5,911 businesses worth $2 billion worth..."

Read what I wrote, Richard.

He confiscated everything after the major land holders refused to negotiate on his plan to compensate for the renationalization of Cuban land.

I've already addressed the killings that Castro's troops carried out. When you get right down to it, Castro's rise to and consolidation of power was, compared to many similar incidents, virtually bloodless. I'll also remind you that during the American Revolution Tories didn't escape the wrath of revolutionaries, sometimes even at the hands of revolutionary governments.

Also as I noted before, Castro came to power in 1959 as a socialist, yes, but not as a Communist. Even Richard Nixon didn't believe him to be a Communist. He only declared a Communist state AFTER American intentions towards Cuba became known. He needed an ally, and the easiest way to get an ally when you have two competing superpowers is to declare your affiliation with one of them. Since Castro had tried to curry an American affiliation, but had been rejected and invaded, what would you expect him to do?

[Art Eatman]

One thing about the Bearded Wonder, though, Mike:  He sure went at it hair, teeth and eyeballs about screwing over his own people.  Just 'cause you're mad at the U.S. doesn't strike me as a reason for Secret Police and all the other horrorshows he and his sycophants have perpetrated.

Art

[Sylvilagus Aquaticus]

http://history1900s.about.com/library/photos/blycastro.htm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3808431.stm

I'd heard about the existence of a letter from Castro to FRD in the 1940's, where Castro, as a young teen, asked FDR for $10. USD. Seems to me I read about it in American Heritage magazine in the 60's-70's. Found a copy of the letter by Googling.

It makes you wonder how things would have/could have changed if FDR had pulled a fin out of his wallet and sent it to him. For that matter, if Truman hadn't snubbed Ho Chi Minh....

http://hnn.us/roundup/comments/11737.html

http://www.asianartnow.com/ho/pages/ho_why.html

http://www.utpjournals.com/product/cras/322/ho_chi_minh1.html

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&newwindow=1&safe=off&q=Truman+Ho+Chi+Minh



Regards,
Rabbit.

[K Frame]

What's that saying about he's a son of a bitch, but he's OUR son of a bitch, Art?

In that sense, Castro is no different than virtually any of the other dictators that the US has opposed OR supported over the years. It's true that one repressive government replaced another repressive government, but the United States was crucial in the ultimate creation of BOTH.

I find it to be very troublesome when people speak as if Castro is the perpetrator of all that is evil in the world, and that what he wiped out was some sort of tropical utopian Eden. Nothing could be further from the truth.

It's questionable whether the Cuban people are better off now than before, that is true. If we as a nation wanted to better the plight of the Cuban people, we'd lift our economic sanctions and allow direct tourism. Castro's getting older, and the infusion of dollars into the Cuban economy could help bring about a radical change once he kicks.

[K Frame]

The Truman administration had a nasty habit of screwing the pooch in Asia.

Take, for example, the "sphere of influence" speech made by, I believe, Dean Acheson. It neglected to mention South Korea, which gave the North Koreans the final justification for invading. Prior to that the Russians and Chinese had been holding Kim back, denying him the support he needed to invade. When it seemed as if the United States would stand on the sidelines in a general Korean war, support poured into the North.

And what about China? The United States roundly supported Chiang's government, despite reports from any number of military advisors in Korea that A) Chaing's days were numbered, and B) Mao's forces, while Communist, would not be adverse to opening discussions with the United States.

Then we have the Vietnamese fiasco. Why the United States tried to curry favor with De Gaulle's government over the issue of recolonization of Indo China is completely beyond me.

[Art Eatman]

Yeah, Mike--and don't forget John Foster Dulles' view of a monolithic world communism, with no separate national interests...

Still, to beat the Castro dead horse some more, what has always stood out to me was the seeming enthusiasm for repression, even when it hasn't been needed.

Sure, there's the US embargo, but it's sorta standing out in the rain, all alone.  If Cuban socio-economic policies were worth a hoot, they'd actually have medical supplies and plenty of food.  At one time they were nearly self-sufficient in foodstuffs; there were oil wells and ranches.  Hard to make a living off sugar cane.

I dunno.  Russia exported wheat prior to The Revolution, and during the days of the Russian Empire the literacy rate declined.  But, conversely, after the end of the British Raj in India, the literacy rate declined, along with food production; not all empires are created alike...

Wacky world.

Art

[grampster]

I have always wondered what would have happened to Castro if we had never put forth the embargo and encouraged all Americans to go to Cuba and enjoy the sun and scenery and the renowned good will of the Cuban people.

  I have hunch his direction may have been entirely different, or at least his grip may have loosened to the point that he was overthrown.

[K Frame]

Hey, have I said, anywhere, that Communism as a socio-economic theory/model of government is GOOD?

No, no I didn't.

Once again, though, I think that Communism was largely forced on Castro as a matter of expediency, not the other way around.

As for his repressiveness, I think we can start ticking off all of the needlessly repressive governments in the world and still be naming names tomorrow morning. And those are just the ones that we've supported over the years. And, as I noted above, we can put the US Government at the top of that list to serve as the anchor.

Then, if we started on the ones we didn't support one way or the other, or were enemies with, we'd be here another day or so.

[Art Eatman]

One thing about US repression:  Folks who want to can still bad-mouth it to TPTB and not get beat on.  Folks can still wander freely about the country, hitchhiking with a backpack or luxurying along in the family BlueBird.  Folks can still wander around with guns, whether on a hunting trip or basic self-defense.  

Art

[K Frame]

Hum...

Did I say anywhere that all repressive governments act in exactly the same manner?

"It's 2 p.m.! Time to coordinate the torture and execution of political prisoners! Dick, get on the phone with the Palestinian Authority and those clowns in the Sudan. I just love it when I can hear the screams in stereo!"

I must have missed that one when I typed it.

"Folks can still wander around with guns, whether on a hunting trip or basic self-defense."

New Jersey, New York, California, Massachusetts, National Park Service parks, Washington, DC.

As opposed, say, to Vermont, Alaska, Virginia, and Pennsylvania.

Not to mention Ruby Ridge, Waco, TSA...

Some of these things, aren't like the others, some of these things, just don't belong...

What was that that someone recently said about repressive governments not acting exactly the same as all other repressive governments.

To hear some talk over on The HighFiringRoadLine, the United States is currently worse than Stalin's Russia, Mao's China, Le's Vietnam, Rhee's Korea, Noriega's Panama, Marcos' Philippines, and the Taliban's Afghanistan all rolled into a single entity...

[Art Eatman]

Hey, you think the weirdlies who wander in to THR are strange, some of the professional "U.S. is All Bad" types at macrumors.com and some other boards sound like they're outpatients from the State Home for the Bewildered...

Art

[Paddy]

A point to remember from the 1930s is that good and loyal Americans believed that the Great Depression was an indicator that Capitalism had failed.

As glaringly obvious as that connection is, I had never made it before.

FDR's Keynesian econmics touting in the media didn't help, what with the call for government intervention in money matters.

My dad was in the CCC's prior to WWII and spoke very highly of FDR's 'make work' projects during the Great Depression.  I've also heard other old timers refer to FDR with great respect, although today some see him as the bringer of socialism to this country.  I do know that the 'FDR Democrats' are a world apart from today's Democrats.

How about Nixon's trip to China?  I supported it at the time (voted for Nixon twice, and I think history will vindicate him).   Would China be where it is today if Nixon had not made that trip?

[Art Eatman]

My mother was the one who shed the light on "capitalism failed".  The Communist Party was quite active around the UT campus there in Austin.  Her reason for not associating was that the activists were rather grubby and smelled bad--which helped immensely during the FBI background check for her Fulbright Professorship in 1949.

There's no doubt that the CCC and WPA helped a lot of people.  When you're broke, any money is a help.  The thing people don't realize about the FDR era is the dramatic increase in federal power over daily life.  Less than what followed from LBJ's Great Society stuff, but it certainly sowed the seeds that LBJ cultivated.  What really was affected was the creation of a mindset on the part of much of the public that it should look to the feds for help when any sort of problem arises.

At the time, only a Nixon could have made overtures to "them Commies".  No way Carter could have done it.  Maybeso Reagan, but Reagan's focus was on Russia--which was possible because of Nixon's "rapprochement".  It would be interesting to contemplate the ramifications of Reagan's pursuing peaceful relations with China while rattling sabers at the USSR.

Art

[Sylvilagus Aquaticus]

"The Communist Party was quite active around the UT campus there in Austin."

They still are. Some of them graduated and went into local Austin politics.

Yes, Art, my daddy was an Aggie, but I went to one of the rural UT satellites. I got the worst of both



Regards,
Rabbit.

[Paddy]

Under FDR we got something in exchange for money spent. Roads, bridges, national parks improvements, etc.   LBJs Great Society OTOH was just a huge transfer of wealth from the producers to the non-producers who didnt have to do an ounce of labor for welfare, food stamps and housing.  As you point out, there was no work and no money during the 30s.  The 60s were a time when anybody with some gumption could prosper.   It is interesting to note that the current accumulated debt of this country is about equal to the welfare expenditures since LBJ, and yet we continue to have a dependent class of poor people.

Nixon was as hardline anti communist as they come, although his domestic polices (EPA, wage and price controls) were liberal.

Senator McCarthy is another one I think history will vindicate (when and if we ever emerge from this current environment of leftist extremism)  I was born in 1946, so I missed the HUAC hearings, but the Venona documents, released in the mid 1990s proved McCarthy was right.

[K Frame]

"As you point out, there was no work and no money during the 30s."

All due respect, that's a massive oversimplification.

Money still existed, it was just very, very tight.

National unemployment peaked at an estimated 25% in 1933. Yeah, that's crushing, but that's also indicative that the economy was still moving at some pace (as opposed to the total collapse some often claim) given that 75% of the eligible workforce still had employment of some type.



"Nixon was as hardline anti communist as they come, although his domestic polices (EPA, wage and price controls) were liberal."

He was also a very practical anti-communist. He reopened relations with Communist China, which had been severed in, I believe, 1948.


Funny when you consider that the Chinese Communists also confiscated American property.

[Paddy]

IIRC, there was also a huge drought in the Midwest back in the 30s.  Skeeter Skelton referred to it as the dust bowl days.   Apparently, those were some hard times.

[K Frame]

Yes, the Dust Bowl just compounded the misery for many Americans.

The term Okie rose out of the depression as a description for those who picked up and moved west looking for better opportunities.

John Steinbeck's "The Grapes of Wrath" is set in the depression and recounts the Joad family's trials. Fiction, but based on fact.

[Art Eatman]

Hunt up Woodie Guthrie's "Dust Bowl Ballads".  His songs give some insight into the woes of the lower economic strata.

A saving grace for many during the Depression was that there was still a rural base for many to fall back on.  People moved back in with parents or kinfolks at "the old home place".

My father went to work for the Texas Highway Department after graduating from UT in 1933.  The treasury of the State of Texas was behind on its income, so for him to cash his paycheck meant a one-percent discount at the Texas Warrant Company; two percent at a bank.

Art