Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dayuhan who wrote (17007)	4/15/2000 10:18:00 AM
From: greenspirit	Respond to of 769667

Interesting point of view Steven. And I understand where you're coming from with regard to the poor really not being free. I guess here is where we part ways in our thinking in this particular area. Yes, the poor person returning to say the Philippines may not be free in an economic sense. However, the possibility of freedom exists. In other words, there is hope. When freedom is stripped away in a political sense, hope resides in the death of the political leadership, or severe upheaval. Not in ones abilities, or good fortune. There are (relatively speaking) wealthy Philippine people. They have access (although severely limited from an American perspective) to achieve economic success. Furthermore, there are laws which protect human rights. And although they're not applied as well as we might hope, they appear to be moving in the right direction so-da-speak. No such opportunity exists in Cuba. And if it does, it's almost completely dependent on Castro or the political leadership. People are treated very similar to property in Cuba. You are a warden of the state. It's more closely aligned with slavery. Keeping people housed (for all practical purposes) in a prison to be used as slaves of the state, is on a much lower moral level than semi-free people mired in poverty to me. The main reason poverty exists in other nations is because of past regressions toward a communist, or dictatorial state. Therefore, treating nations differently because of their political models, on the surface, makes some sense. However, I do not completely agree with our two tiered policy, and if it was up to me I would end the Cuban embargo and trade (in a limited way) with Cuba. Seems to me, it's just as likely to move them toward freedom if you trade with them then, then if you didn't. And once they become free, the damage economically of communism may not be as great. Additionally, not being willing to address the political model involved and pretending that freedom doesn't matter when deciding the fate of a young boy, to me is relativistic nonsense. Freedom matters! And we as Americans have shed blood all over the world in order to give people the opportunity to be free. Completely ignoring it's importance in the Elian case goes, against our core values as a nation. Given all the issues involved, I still cannot see the logic in not allowing the American relatives a chance in court to argue for custody of Elian. After all, what real harm is there in that? Michael