- holds a complete monopoly, both vertical and horizontal, in all sectors of the economy, and is, in essence, the only legal employer;
- that restricts all aspects of a worker's life, both in and out of the workplace;
- that does not recognize any right of association or freedom of expression, and will fire you and possibly have you incarcerated for such violations;
- that outlaws independent trade unions and jails its leaders, permitting only the "union" controlled by the Corporation;
- that does not permit collective bargaining or any form of demonstration against the Corporation;
- that barely pays a subsistence wage, and nowhere near a "living wage", except for its executives who enjoy the full perks and luxuries of power;
- enables the exploitation of its workers by foreign corporations who can bypass the typical labor and human rights afforded to citizens of their home nations;
- that allows for only limited external investment, and then only by exploitative foreigners who the Corporation never cedes a controlling interest to;
- that does not allow its workers or stakeholders any say in management decisions;
- that is supposed to provides for its workers education, health, and retirement, but funds none of these adequately, does not permit workers to use providers not owned by the Corporation and then permits no complaint about their poor quality;
- that works in an environment where all competition is outlawed and has absolute barriers to entry;
Sounds like a corporation that no one, much less a progressive supporter of worker's rights, let alone human rights, should ever support, right? Although this sounds like an entity taken from the pages of Orwell's 1984, such a corporation does exist in reality, and it's named the Republic of Cuba.
What boggles the mind is how many in this country (from both sides of the political spectrum) and in supposedly more progressive Europe, support the further exploitation of the workers of Cuba by lifting or weakening the embargo and thereby enriching this corporation and its partner corporations, and rewarding and empowering its executives.
While most international labor groups (AFL-CIO, ICFTU, etc.) commendably condemn Cuba for its oppression of workers, why don't many of our political leaders or candidates speak out about these and other human rights abuses in Cuba?
7 comments:
Pablo,
I agree. Obama states that he is against the currently purposed trade agreement with Columbia because it does not include workers rights clauses.
So it would be reasonable to expect that if his position on workers rights remained consistent, then he would require similar clauses in any dealings or trade offs with the Cuban Government.
But then again, expecting poloticians to be reasonable might be wishful thinking.
Very wishful thinking but we need to maintain our right to help our brothers and sisters something that under the current administration is not possible
I'm not trying to pass any judgment, good or bad, on the merits of current policy with this post. I am simply of the thought that shining a brighter light on the current condition of our "brothers and sisters", namely the human and labor rights they cannot enjoy, as well as making those that oppress them accountable, is a pretty good way of helping their plight.
I am also making the point (maybe implicitly) that many companies in Europe, Canada and other Cuba-trading nations are complicit in the exploitation of Cuban workers, and have not advanced the rights of Cuban workers, as many supporters of lifting the embargo claim will happen.
Why not? Because American companies stand to win by getting themselves a piece of that pie, and politicians of every stripe would love to get them on the table before the pie is gone. You can't expect companies that don't care much for workers conditions all over the world to care for them in Cuba. Companies care to make a buck and with few exceptions they love it when governments make it easy for them.
And remember that while Obama can be for or against, the inclusion of working rights clauses is in teh hands of Congress.
I know full well why these companies, including prospective American ones, want to lift the embargo; they would profit in the exploitation of Cuban workers who have no rights, human, laboral or otherwise. But that doesn't mean I think we should support a policy of indulging them.
I am a supporter of free trade with free people, but lifting the embargo would be tantamount to allowing US companies to trade with countries where workers are enslaved.
I hope Sen. Obama realizes this, and I suspect it undergirds his support of the embargo.
I know that capitalism has a dark side. When capitalism goes unregulated greed takes precedence and corporations abuse and take advantage of disadvantaged people.
However, when capitalism is executed properly it serves as the catalyst for raising the economy and quality of life for an entire country. When the time is right to lift the embargo (whenever that may be) capitalist principle and corporations will be key to the restoration of a vibrant and prosperous Cuban economy. Yes, they need to be regulated to ensure they are not taking liberties against the Cuban people, but I view them as a major tool for the rebuilding of Cuba.
Hopefully, the Cuban-American community will provide leadership when that time comes. For example, a cigar company created in Cuba, generating authentic Cuban cigars, employing Cuban people (in an ethical manner of course) and ideally re-investing a portion of profits in philanthropic programs geared towards helping the Cuban people.
That is a dream model that all Cuban-American entrepreneurs will hopefully strive for one day. Now if only the Current Cuban government would just get out of our way.
Preach on, bcamelo! (Although in my case, you're preaching to the converted)!
But let's be clear about one thing: Capitalism does not currently exist in Cuba (see this definition). The foreign companies doing business with Cuba are engaged in economic activity with an absolute monopolist, and thus no free market exists there. Just because Cuba has courts and judges, does not mean the rule of law exists there, and similarly, just because foreign corporations invest and operate in Cuba and token reforms have been announced doesn't mean that Capitalism exists there either.
Going further, if the embargo were lifted unilaterally while Cuba maintains its current Marxist policies, it would not mean that a flood of "American Capitalism" would help usher in new freedoms and prosperity, no more than the European, Canadian and Latin American versions have brought about (namely, nothing). Of course, true Capitalism would benefit the great majority of Cuban people, but economic activity with Cuba in the aforementioned scenario (which is activity directly with the Cuban state only and not its people) would exclusively benefit the state and would only increase its chances of survival.
Post a Comment