Mediaboss Marketing

Supporters of the Cuban government demonstrate in Havana on July 11. (Associated Press)

To the editor: In her recent column urging a shift in Cuba policy, Jean Guerrero makes two tragic but typical mistakes.

First, she pits Cuban whites against Cuban persons of color, assuming that the prosperity of whites (it was the rich ones, after all, who fled the communist regime, wasn't it?) numbs them to the plight of their fellow Cubans.

As a white Marielito Cuban who lived in abject poverty for the first 13 years of his life under the Cuban regime's oppression, and having met many like me during my time in that country, I can assure Guerrero that in Cuba, people of all skin colors suffer the same plight.

Secondly, the assumption that economic relief will inspire Cubans to aspire to a more liberal system fails miserably when one considers China, another communist country. Anyone who thinks economic improvements or prosperity will necessarily bring about political change needs to understand the fact that regimes intent on retaining power have proved themselves unwilling to surrender any.

The U.S. economic embargo against Cuba may have failed miserably, but I was there when dollars from Miami and care packages with Lee jeans started rolling in. The communist regime and its oppression kept on ticking.

Eduardo Suastegui, Downey

..

To the editor: Cuba does have a communist government and is not a democracy, and that is also true for Vietnam and China, but companies still do business in the latter countries. Intel's largest chip plant is in Vietnam.

The U.S. was instrumental in the overthrow of democracies in Honduras, El Salvador, Brazil, Iran, Egypt and Peru, and it supported the dictators in those countries as well as in Cuba prior to the hasty departure in 1959 of Fulgencio Batista, with many millions of dollars of the Cuban government's money.

Cuba has a higher literacy rate and lower infant mortality rate than the United States. Heaven forbid that a country without white elites running it be allowed to prosper.

Story continues

Bruce Stenman, Prunedale, Calif.

..

To the editor: Brava and thank you to Guerrero. After weeks of shoddy and partisan reporting in U.S. media on the Cuba protests, here is a simple, clear analysis of the current situation between the two countries.

Crucially, Guerrero well explains the race and class dynamics that are rarely discussed in U.S. reporting on Cuba.

On the subject of embargoes, isn't it odd that no country has ever blockaded the United States for its actions in Vietnam, Central America, the Middle East and many other places?

John Newby, Studio City

This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.

The rest is here:
Letters to the Editor: I fled communism in Cuba. Everyone there is oppressed, no matter their ethnicity - Yahoo News

The curator of a major public art show in Florida has resigned after the local mayor claimed two of the artists spoke too favorably about communism and pushed to defund the show. Shortly thereafter, the event fell apart.

In a marathon city commission meeting last month, Vince Lago, mayor of Coral Gables, Florida, objected to the inclusion of artists Sandra Ramos and Cai Guo-Qiang in the citys Illuminate Coral Gables art show. The recently elected official referenced interviews that Ramos and Cai had given in the past in which he felt the artists expressed sympathetic views toward the communist regimes of their respective home countries, Cuba and China. (Ramos currently lives in Havana; Cai in New York.)

I will continue to support the arts, but not at the expense of democracy and liberty, Lago said at the meeting, a video of which is available online. It is very easy to make comments on the record supporting communism and saying that communism is a great idea, but they are here in the United States taking American money. At the end of the day, that doesnt bode well for me.

Following Lagos comments, the commission voted to fund part of the 2022 edition of the art show on the condition that the two artists be dropped from the roster.

Days later, the board of Illuminate Coral Gables announced that the 2022 show had been postponed due to extenuating circumstances beyond our control, and that its chief curator, Lance Fung, had stepped down, according to the Miami Herald.

In an email to Artnet News, Fung clarified that he resigned primarily over the censorship of my curatorial work, as did John Talley, the executive director of Fungs company Fung Collaboratives who was helping in Coral Gables. However, we also knew we needed to support all 20-plus artists we were working with by not validating false claims and speaking up for their first-amendment rights.

Lago did not respond to a request for comment.

Sandra Ramos, 90 Miles: De-construction (2011-2021).

The first edition of Illuminate Coral Gables took place in February and March of this year. Eight site-specific projects, including video projections, sculptures, and installations, went on view throughout the city.

Both Ramos and Cai participated in the inaugural show, alongside artists including Kiki Smith and David Gumbs. Ramos, a Havana-born artist now based in Miami, installed a 32-foot walkway made of a dozen lightboxes as part of the project this year. The work, she said, was meant to symbolize a bridge between Florida and Cuba.

For his part, Cai, a major international artist who was born in Quanzhou, China, and now works in New York, transformed 27 pedicabs into roving, interactive sculptures, decking out each with handmade silk Chinese lanterns. The pieces belong to the artists ongoing Fireflies series.

I think the artwork is spectacular; hes an incredible artist, Lago said of Cai. But art doesnt trump my own personal beliefs, especially when youre talking about public funds.

Lago was prepared to increase the events budget from $100,000 to $300,000 prior to the postponement. The art world brings an opportunity to this community for dialogue, the mayor said at the meeting. Where my dialogue ends is people who sympathize with oppression, tyranny.

Fung, meanwhile, disagreed. With 100 percent certainty, I believe that both artists are not communist sympathizers, the curator told Artnet News. In addition to being passionate, visionary, and talented artists, they have become good friends of mine. They are compassionate, intellectual, and humanitarian people. All of these attributes, and others, led me to the decision to request their support by being a part of Illuminate Coral Gables.'

See the original post:
Plans for a Public Art Show in Florida Have Been Derailed After the Mayor Accused Two of the Artists of Being Communists - artnet News

Anton spent most of his life in Cuba before political oppression pushed him to immigrate to America in 2013.

It was not a lack of love and respect for his country that caused Anton to leave. On the contrary, Cuba was his beloved home. He never dreamed he would have to leave his life behind, but without the freedom to own property and earn a living free from government coercion, he and his wife felt they had no choice but to come to America.

PLF had the great honor of speaking with Antonnot his real nameabout the circumstances that led him to flee his own country because his individual liberty, specifically his right to economic liberty and property, and thus, his ability to pursue happiness, were threatened.

Speaking of his feelings upon making this difficult decision, he quotes a Cuban poet he has always admired: To immigrate from the country that youre born to another country is like to take a tree, a big tree, and transplant the whole tree with the root in another land.

He added, It takes time, but at the end of the day, he knew it was the right decision.

Some immigrants speak of the material opportunity that led them to America, but for Anton it was the Cuban governments quest to squash the individual that led to his exodus.

Anton and his family had committed what he describes as the three cardinal sins under communism: They were religious, they owned property (a few acres of land), and they had a history of distrust for the communist government. This painted a target on their backs and earned them a reputation as being capitalist sympathizersthe worst trespass of them all.

Antons family owned a small farm where they planted fruit and raised livestock which they would then sell to their local community. Community was important to his family. They also built churches for communities around the country.

Anton embraced the individualist mindset and used his skills to improve himself, his family, and his broader communities.

Owning property was bad enough on its own, but having the nerve to privately sell goods was a direct violation of communist principles.

His familys reputation followed Anton everywhere he went, from grade school to his first job. Communist governments make the claim that everyone is equal under their system, but Anton and his family were not treated as such.

Their beliefs were contrary to the post-1959 revolution Cuban way of life, and the family was discriminated against accordingly.

But Anton was brave beyond measure. Despite the great danger he and his family faced, they continued to build churches and feed the community.

Building an enterprise of any scale was not the communist way. Any form of entrepreneurship not sponsored by the government needed to be squashed in the name of the collective good.

As a young boy in school, Anton was taught to follow the works of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. He and his classmates were told that they would one day have one society where money would be useless. Under this ideal system, the Cuban people would work in factories, they were promised. When they finished their nine-hour shifts, the government would provide them with everything they needed. If they needed clothes, they would be given clothes. If they needed food, they would be given food.

This was the utopia the Cuban socialists strived to create. But such a system can never exist unless the individual is sacrificed to the masses.

Human nature dictates that individuals each have different wants and needs. It was of little importance to communist supporters that some may not want to work in a factory. Others may prefer goods and services not provided to them by the government. And some may not be willing to sacrifice the freedom to own property and keep the income they earn for whatever is deemed in the interest of the public good.

This ideal society does not and cannot exist.

As Anton expressed, We are not in a perfect world. And, what happened in Cuba in 1959 when the revolution took power, they took everything from the rich people. They made everybody equal. So, everybody in the end was very poor. There was no incentive for people to work, no incentive for the farmers to grow food. There was no incentive for people to go to factories to work because, again, in a perfect world, this idea that they are talking about is nice, but like I say, were not in perfect world.

Communist regimes make grandiose promises of free stuff and equality, but there is no such thing as a free lunch, and equality of outcome is a perverse distortion of equality of opportunity. As Anton explained:

In my opinion, nothing in life is free, because yeah, its like that you are try to kill me and give my stuff away for free. Really?

He continued: People have good intentions, I understand this, but I will have to say that the way to the hell is good intentions.

The sanctity of the individual is undermined by collectivists ideologies, both in our own country and abroad. By placing the collective good before the sanctity of the individual, socialism and its more extreme form, communism, jeopardize our ability to live freely, peacefully, and productively without interference by government.

While our free-market, democratic system has helped keep full-fledged socialism and communism at bay, other countries have not fared so well absent these economic principles, as Antons story shows. We should use his story to be vigilant in protecting our capitalist system from the threat of socialism.

Anton laments that, thanks to American filmmaker Michael Moore, westerners have developed a false perception of socialism, especially when it comes to Cuban healthcare.

Michael Moore never went to our hometown hospital. He went to the best government hospitals. When he came back, he said that Cuba is a paradise.

He does not deny that the doctors in his country are talented, but they are underpaid. Doctors are expected to work without incentives. They bring home $40 to $50 per month, according to Anton.

The concept is free, he says, but in the reality it is very expensive, and as a Cuban, we are paying for this. Instead of bringing home an income and deciding for yourself if you would like to spend the money on a doctor, you are left with no choice.

And the education in Cuba is often not sufficient to train doctors; they have to go to other countries, like Brazil or Venezuela.

When we say free things, personally, we dont believe it. They are not free. This is a lie.

It was with a heavy heart that he and his wife eventually had to make the painful decision to leave their children, grandchildren, and friends behind in Cuba. It wasnt just their own lives they feared forthey also feared for those involved in the organizations they were active in.

If we dont leave the country, he thought, We will have serious problems, especially the part of the organization that we work over there in Cuba. The motive that I had to leave Cuba was more for safety and security, not just for me and my wife, but also for what was being done in Cuba.

So they left their old life behind and came to America.

The textbook definition of socialism is when the collective, or the government, controls the means of production, distribution, and exchange. Communism takes this further, giving the government total control over economic and even social issues.

Anton explains that each self-described socialist and communist country has adopted its own version of what this economic system means, despite what the actual definition may be. When asked the difference between socialism and communism, Anton explained that there is very little difference between the two.

In America today, many people push for socialism as a means of getting to equality. Anton would like to give advocates of such a system, like Senator Bernie Sanders, the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps they arent talking about the same kind of socialism that destroyed his own country. But having seen the horrors of collectivism first-hand, he knows to be wary of such ideologies.

Anton has adapted to his new life in America. The freedom to hold and express ones own opinion is among his favorite aspects of American way of life. Unlike Cuba, in America, he loves talking to people with a host of different beliefs. He may not always agree, but he treasures the freedom they are allowed to exercise.

Our American government was instituted to keep each individual sovereign, possessing an inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of our own happiness, something Anton did not have in Cuba.

One core concept all our Pacific Legal Foundation cases have in common is the principle of individualism. Whether we are fighting for equality before the law, property rights, economic liberty, free speech, or separation of powers, protecting the individual stands at the center of all we do.

When organizations like PLF fight for the dignity of the individual here in America, we are doing it to protect our countrys founding principles that have helped us maintain our freedom while other countries have crumbled.

PLFs main focus is law. But Antons story gives an example of how law and economics go hand in hand. Without the freedom to pursue his own happiness and earn his own living, there was no individual liberty. Socialism cant work on a foundation of individual liberty.And under such an oppressive government, there was no one to fight for him.

We should remember Antons powerful words: Cuba was heaven before 1959; when he left, he says, it was hell.

See more here:
One Cuban immigrant's story reminds us of the importance of fighting for individual liberty - Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF)

For decades, communist China has been wielding its influence in African countries, establishing strong financial interests and working to convince growing nations that its authoritarian communism is a better form of government than democratic models of individual liberty and economic freedom.

While not a typical kitchen-table issue for Americans, Chinas stronghold on Africa poses serious national security and economic problems for the American people and human rights issues for many Africans. Thats why our elected leaders need to be taking immediate steps to reverse this course.

US taxpayers are by far the largest contributors of humanitarian aid to the African continent, and private American philanthropic aid is enormous. Yet the Chinese Communist Partys influence means that many African rulers side with Beijing over Washington on key strategic issues in places like the United Nations -- from glossing over human rights abuses to preventing a thorough investigation of the causes of the coronavirus outbreak.

Chinas influence takes several forms. First, African nations have long needed to develop their infrastructure, including roads, buildings, and communications networks, and China is sometimes the only willing lender. That also means that Chinese state-owned companies have been the main entities doing the building.

But things get pretty nefarious after that. China has built extravagant palaces and government buildings for free in many poor countries to gain even more influence with government officials. Burundi, the worlds fifth least-developed country, got a new $22 million presidential palace. Zimbabwe is about to get a $100 million Parliament building. Liberia got $66 million in new government buildings. All this money spent in some of the worlds poorest countries didnt help struggling citizens one iota.

Beijing also helps many African leaders maintain their hold on power. Those leaders often direct Chinas no-strings-attached aid to their own birth regions, to Cabinet officials, or to other places that will ensure they stay in power.

What problems does this pose for the US?

From a national security perspective, China is our primary global adversary, and it uses its influence over African nations to constantly undermine democracy and spread the poison of authoritarianism.

America and the entire world are safer when the planet is populated with democracies, because democracies dont go to war with one another. Moreover, the US military is constantly on guard against Chinese aggression in the Pacific. With Africas huge Atlantic coastline, it would be considerably more dangerous if China developed a base of operations in the Atlantic as well.

From an economic perspective, Africa has abundant natural resources that the rest of the world needs, and China has considerable influence over the export of these resources to other nations. For example, minerals such as cobalt and manganese are critical to the manufacture of many advanced technologies. Chinese companies dominate the global supply chain of cobalt, especially in Africa. If the Chinese government sees a strategic advantage in doing so, it may try to cut off the US and the rest of the world.

From a human rights perspective, the Chinese Communist Party supports leaders who keep their people under their thumb by working with them when others wont. It encourages some of the continents most brutal dictators to maintain their authoritarian governments. Not only does China prop up these authoritarian dictators, Chinese companies also have notoriously poor labor standards in Africa and have little regard for workers welfare.

Chinas outsize influence also means that many African leaders are consistent supporters of Chinas agenda. Many of Africas 54 nations vote with China at the UN, including voting for Chinas chosen candidates to run UN agencies (like the World Health Organization). Chinese candidates at global rule-making bodies help China champion its preferred standards for emerging fields, especially in tech. If Beijing is successful, it will lock in standards that advantage its own companies in fields that will shape the global economy for decades to come.

African nations also comprised almost half of the signatories of a 2019 letter defending Chinas human rights abuses of its Uyghur Muslim population. And building momentum at the UN for holding China accountable for its lack of transparency over the coronavirus outbreak will be difficult.

For these reasons and more, its critical that the United States counter Chinas influence in Africa. Senior US officials should be regularly engaging with many African countries, negotiating free trade agreements that benefit both the American people and the citizens of these nations, and encouraging investment from US companies interested in Africa.

The US must also promote the fact that individual liberty and economic freedom are what brought much of the world out of the desperate poverty we witnessed just decades ago, and they are proven antidotes to the oppression and poverty that plague some African nations today.

Doing these things doesnt just serve the American interest, it serves the people of Africa; and the emergence of more democratically led nations in Africa serves the interest of a more peaceful, more prosperous and more stable world.

Kay C. JamesKay C. James is president of The Heritage Foundation. -- Ed.

(Tribune Content Agency)

By Korea Herald (koreaherald@heraldcorp.com)

See the original post:
[Kay C. James] Why Americans should be concerned about communist Chinas outsize influence in Africa - The Korea Herald

By PAUL PETRICK

When it comes to ostentatious displays of grandeur, there aint no party like the communist party.

The festivities in Tiananmen Square commemorating the Chinese communist partys 100th birthday on July 1 were a sight to behold. Donning a Mao suit and standing behind a podium adorned with a hammer and sickle, Xi Jinping general-secretary of the Chinese communist party spoke of a national rejuvenation through the continuing implementation of socialism with Chinese characteristics, threatened the partys enemies, and pledged to thwart any attempts to avoid Chinas desired anschluss with Taiwan.

Xi did everything to invoke the ghosts of communist dictators past short of taking his shoe off and banging it on the podium. But under the communist pageantry lies a less obvious similarity between the Chinese dragon of today and the Russian bear of yesteryear. That is the way in which Chinese communism like its Soviet cousin is tinged by historical aspirations.

Communism is not an Asiatic or Russian growth, as some maintain, so observed Whittaker Chambers, who died 60 years ago in July an anniversary that, aside from this Point of View, will go as unnoticed as Chambers 120th birthday last April.

In its Soviet form, it has been shaped and colored by Russian peculiarities.

At the time of his death, Chambers was at work on the long-awaited follow-up to his smash 1952 autobiography, Witness a book that had as much to say about communism and the non-communist West as it did about his life leading a Soviet espionage ring of perfidious public servants in Washington, and his subsequent repudiation of that life.

The sequel was set to be called The Third Rome, and the unfinished work comprises the longest section of Cold Friday a posthumously published collection of Chambers writings that was released in 1964. In it, Chambers explains how communism like every successful faith that takes hold among a foreign populace appropriates existing cultural myths and objectives.

The Third Rome was an expansion on a Time magazine essay Chambers wrote analyzing the 1945 Yalta Conference, The Ghosts on the Roof, in which he imagined spectral figures of the slain Romanov family looking down with counterintuitive approval as Stalin secured Soviet domination of Eastern Europe in the post-war order drawn by the Allied powers.

Chambers could see how Soviet foreign policy during the Cold War embodied the Russo-centric belief in Moscow as the seat of a third Roman Empire the successor to Rome and Constantinople. Traditionally, this belief encompasses the notion that Russias manifest destiny is to lead a Pan-Slavic empire with the ultimate objective of reconquering in the name of Christianity, Constantinople and the holy land from Islam.

This belief also encompasses the notion of Russian moral superiority vis--vis a supposedly decadent West, giving rise to an idea present in Russian culture for centuries that the Russian people are destined to redeem the world. This messianic impulse, Chambers observed, was adapted and exploited by Lenin in his rise to power, and allowed him to persuade enough of his countrymen that worldwide communist revolution was the vehicle by which Russia would bring about mankinds redemption.

If Chambers lived today, he might pen an essay suggesting the ghosts of the ancient Chinese emperors were gazing approvingly at Xi. For Chinese communism has successfully embodied a traditional Sino-centric belief analogous to the Third Rome that China is the middle kingdom.

This is the notion that Chinese dynasties had once occupied the center of the world culture prior to a period spanning between 1842 and 1945 whereby China suffered foreign domination and control. Conscious of that humiliation, the Chinese communist party now claims to be the agent by which China will resume its traditional role as the middle kingdom, displacing the United States as the pre-eminent world power a goal the ChiComs intend to achieve by 2049, the 100th anniversary of the Chinese communist revolution.

To this end, China launched its Belt and Road Initiative, whereby China seeks to occupy the center of international trade networks by turning weaker nations into economic clients. Using its vast wealth built from decades of predatory trade practices China makes infrastructure investments around the globe designed to trap sovereign borrowers in debt.

Like a loan shark, China then uses its leverage to extract concessions from its victims.

Upon Chambers death, novelist Arthur Koestler stated The Witness is gone, the testimony will stand.

President Bidens cancellation of the planned National Garden of American Heroes which was to include a statue of Chambers leaves Chambers testimony as all that remains standing in tribute to his profound insights.

Chambers did not live to see the Third Rome collapse, only to be replaced by a Fourth Rome in Beijing. But he would have understood it.

And by understanding Chambers, so can we.

Continued here:
As Fourth Rome rises, looking back at communism of the past - The Riverdale Press