Time for change in Cuba
David Steffen
Issue date: 1/22/09 Section: Opinion
Many Hillsdale College folk cringe at "big government" and bemoan any action suggesting Washington, D.C. may be overstepping the founding fathers' original bounds.
Yet most on campus fall silent on a heavy-handed example of government intervention. For 46 years, the government has banned us from visiting a place outside U.S. jurisdiction - Cuba.
"Who cares?" you ask. "There's always Aruba or Cancun... Plus, many Americans don't travel abroad to begin with."
However, the principle is that the ban restricts personal freedom and is not a matter of protecting the U.S., with the Soviet threat gone and another missile crisis there unlikely.
"But they're communists!" Please open your eyes to America's booming trade and tourism with communist China and the 1,071,000 barrels of Venezuelan oil we guzzle daily. Meanwhile, President Hugo Chavez has corralled nuclear Iran and various South American nations into a new anti-American bloc.
President Barack Obama has expressed interest in loosening regulations on travel to Cuba. However, he aims to mainly ease travel bans on Cuban-Americans to Cuba, which currently allow just one visit per three years. It sounds unlikely Obama will lift the embargo.
It hasn't budged the intended target - the Castro regime - while depriving the innocent Cuban people. Embargos function in certain situations. Take 1980s Apartheid South Africa. The ruling white class (4 million strong) enjoyed Mercedes, glitzy malls and other Western goodies. The embargo helped topple the Apartheid regime.
But Cubans make $20 monthly. An embargo means nothing to a people already in desperation. The embargo would most affect Castro and friends, who have seemed to make do without American goods. In an already impoverished land, ever-present deprivation - the embargo - tempts no one. Western incentives do.
Therefore, allowing a free flow of Cuban-American trade and tourism would be a catalyst for democracy and a free market. Already, President Raul Castro made concessions to Cubans demanding Western goods.
Yet most on campus fall silent on a heavy-handed example of government intervention. For 46 years, the government has banned us from visiting a place outside U.S. jurisdiction - Cuba.
"Who cares?" you ask. "There's always Aruba or Cancun... Plus, many Americans don't travel abroad to begin with."
However, the principle is that the ban restricts personal freedom and is not a matter of protecting the U.S., with the Soviet threat gone and another missile crisis there unlikely.
"But they're communists!" Please open your eyes to America's booming trade and tourism with communist China and the 1,071,000 barrels of Venezuelan oil we guzzle daily. Meanwhile, President Hugo Chavez has corralled nuclear Iran and various South American nations into a new anti-American bloc.
President Barack Obama has expressed interest in loosening regulations on travel to Cuba. However, he aims to mainly ease travel bans on Cuban-Americans to Cuba, which currently allow just one visit per three years. It sounds unlikely Obama will lift the embargo.
It hasn't budged the intended target - the Castro regime - while depriving the innocent Cuban people. Embargos function in certain situations. Take 1980s Apartheid South Africa. The ruling white class (4 million strong) enjoyed Mercedes, glitzy malls and other Western goodies. The embargo helped topple the Apartheid regime.
But Cubans make $20 monthly. An embargo means nothing to a people already in desperation. The embargo would most affect Castro and friends, who have seemed to make do without American goods. In an already impoverished land, ever-present deprivation - the embargo - tempts no one. Western incentives do.
Therefore, allowing a free flow of Cuban-American trade and tourism would be a catalyst for democracy and a free market. Already, President Raul Castro made concessions to Cubans demanding Western goods.
Be the first to comment on this story