Raging Cynic

And, as Fidel Castro steps down, the Bush administration asserts that no changes in US policy toward Cuba will take place until more democratization occurs.

Does it make sense? In and of itself, yes. But in the wider view of who we trade with, not in the slightest. Consider how much business we do with. . .  let me think, China. Seems a fair comparison; both communist countries (on paper), both woefully lacking democratic participation, both countries with tight restrictions of expression and a good amount of rights that the UN seems to think people should have.

Where’s the difference?

We all know it: China’s rich. We could not afford to not do business with them. But what does that say about America philosophically? What would the founding fathers think of a country that would only stand by its beliefs when economically convenient?

Now, I don’t think we should go “spreading democracy” (which is already flawed for assuming democracy is spreadable and that we’re equipped to spread it) but if we have the president and willingness to not do business with a country which is, as we claim Cuba to be, such an affront to our “American Ideal” we shouldn’t act as if those ideals are second-place to money. Once we do that they become commodities themselves.

Which would be a nobler ideal: putting values aside for goods or putting differences aside for good?

This entry was posted on Wednesday, February 20th, 2008 at 2:13 am by steam and is filed under Government. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.