Amberal Anti-Hijacking Post.

**Amberal37** · 07-22-2009, 03:09 PM

Re: Amberal Anti-Hijacking Post.

Hi Johnnycakes, Sorry for the late reply, family commitments all good fun...

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: johnnycakes</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So as to not hijack the thread on illiteracy and the educational budget in this forum I am beginning a new thread to elicit a response to my question.

Amberal would you care to respond here?

You don't have to and I will not push the matter further nor mention it at any time in the future if you choose not to.

You posted:
"How much more abuse of the citizens by the police will occur by a totalitarian state"

My response:
I take it then that you think Cuba is a totalitarian state.
Can you tell me how you think the government of Cuba is made up, how the people that serve in the government are put there?

</div></div>

Yes, Cuba is definitely a totalitarian state (control of media, police, resources, etc.). The government (Castro) got there at the time through - a popularly supported people's revolution (I would say similar to a coup). He has remained in power for several decades since, and the reigns have since been passed to his brother. The people that serve in the government are put there by Castro, and then shown to represent the people. At this point I'm not willing to go further into the constituent of the Cuban government, but that system in Jamaica, with the mindset of the ruling class, will not offer poorer Jamaicans (predominantly dark skinned), a way out of their poverty.

No socialist system at the moment is truly socialist, or communist - there exists an oligarch that are allowed to control the resources and project power.

Firstly I also think that if socialism were practiced, it would allow those oligarchs to skim off even more resources than they do already, without the threat of being voted out, or media scrutiny, conscientious objectors, or democratic challenge.

The ruling class currently in Ja. are predominantly light-skinned (or non-African in race), and seems to hold the opinion that the darker population are inherently lazy, and cannot direct their own destiny. If the system that they used to control the government in Ja. was based in socialism or communism along similar political lines of Cuba/former USSR, et. al., then it follows that they will defer the oligarchy to the lighter/non-African groups, and as there will then be no available option to change government (except through another 'revolution' - usually violent). The current constitution and metods of operating means that there is atleast a chance through peaceful means, of someone heading and directing government that will pay more than lip service to allowing equal opportunity for ALL to progress in the society.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Of course all the proposals that you posted cannot work in Jamaica as structured.

It would take revolutionary changes and the Jamaican people are rather set on keeping both the type of non-democratic form of government they have and the failed capitalist economy they have.
They both want and fear big changes in the way things are .</div></div>

Jamaica is not a failed capitalist economy, because it has not practised capitalism where there are checks and balances, the capitalism has been corrupt, couple of examples...:
1. The national housebuilding programme seems not to be to help people to own their peoperty, but to corruptly direct government income (taxes, loans, etc.) to the contractors that are used to build the homes (Their "competitive" bidding seems to always result in the average home being built for a higher price than the private person will pay - and the quality is lower.
So I advocate that the government let each individual build their own home by equipping them with the skills to generate their own income.

2. The hotel industry, and older industries where the government sells off most of the nation's resources, does not look for the longterm benefit that can be derived from those sales. Unlike most other nations where the purpose of having foreigners invest in your country, is for the sole purpose of creating jobs - the Ja. government seems to largely rely on the one-off income from the sale or such resource, but not the long-term benefit of employment - and therefore skills training.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
The fact is they make per capita about $US1200.00 more per year than do Cubans but Cubans get free healthcare including dental and mental from cradle to grave, free and excellent educational opportunities pre-school to graduate school, guaranteed jobs, guaranteed decent places to live, a safe , drug free and nearly crime free country in which to raise a family and it is a country in which it does not matter if a poor woman with several children is married or not, their needs are met regardless of marital status. A woman does not need to stay in an abusive relationship simply because she fears for the economic welfare of herself and her children.
</div></div>
There are states based on capitalism that also have the things mentioned - free education, limited crime, good family structures, child-safety, but no country is a complete utopia, not even Cuba.

I think that there are fundamentally <span style="font-weight: bold">excellent and strong values </span>that emanate naturally from Jamaican society, but I think that the bad outputs such as the crime, are a result of people that are oppressed, feel that oppression, and have become indifferent to the political classes. They have lost faith that the government is there to protect them and look out for their welfare, and the longer that goes on, then the harder it will be for anyone new to change their sentiments.

The more I travel, then more that I see that people becomen happier when they have chances and choices. The people of Ja. are given more chances abroad that they are able to get at home. They have limited choices in how they may live their lives, and also do not see that changing in their children's lives, so in effect "nothing to lose" can be the next motto.
Socialism will not offer the choices that J'cans need to have their needs met.
In fact - apart from the drug aspect, many Jamaicans do create an outlet for themselves, but many of these are criminalised or marginalised by the government, and not replaced by effective structures so that they can be carried out more productively by these individuals.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yet I can see why they don't want socialism in Jamaica. Under a socialist economy in a poor country an individual is denied the ability to get rich which is a right that is so much more important than the welfare of EVERYONE'S family, every child, every sick person.

You may not like the drawbacks to keeping an economic system that doesn't work in Jamaica but those drawbacks like illiteracy, crime, murder, drug use, spousal abuse, homelessness, joblessness, despair, corruption pale in comparison the the ability for a relative handful of people to become very wealthy don't they?
</div></div>
Well, I would not describe Ja. as a "poor economy". I have brought varied types of educated individuals there who have immediately seen the country and it's economy as a potential goldmine.

It also does not follow that without socialism, then you cannot have an effective welfare system - but I understand that you may think this because you are American.
I don't think that it is wrong for individuals to get rich - see the fruit of their labour manifest through monetary terms (i.e. capitalism).
I think that this can maximise out the natural skills/talents of those individuals, leads that society to continually improve itself through competition, and ALL individuals to work towards self-improvement.
Similarly, the purpose of government is to ensure that there are effective structures in place to protect and help those who are UNABLE (NOT unwilling) to participate. Of course those that are unwilling, must not be penalised but be willing to look at there own alternatives.
The consequences of government not fulfilling this is for their democratic removal.

**johnnycakes** · 07-22-2009, 10:31 PM

Re: Amberal Anti-Hijacking Post.

Amberal,

I will point out just how Cuba's electoral system works in response to just a part of your response.

Cuba, like Jamaica and the United States, is a representative republic.
Unlike Jamaica and the United States political parties are not allowed to participate in elections in Cuba, not even the Cuban Communist Party.

Their system is called "Poder Popular" loosely translated as "People Power".

Under "Poder Popular" there are three levels of government not too dissimilar to the systems in the States: Municipal (city/local) , State and National.

All elections begin at the bottom or local levels with the nomination and election of Municipal representatives.

The nomination process begins with an assembly of all the people in a particular voting bloc or small area.
There is a person who is the master of ceremonies or facilitator who asks all the assembled if anyone has someone from the assembled group they would like to nominate. All anyone need do is raise their hand and they are recognized, asked for their candidate and then asked why that person would make a good representative. The nominator gives his/her reason(s) and then the facilitator asks for a second to the nomination. Once that is received that person is a nominee, goes on the ballot for representative.
The process is repeated until there is no one else who wishes to nominate anyone,
Once done all the nominees have their picture and all their bigraphical info such as education, profession, affiliations etc posted at a central place in the voting district for all the people to look at.

No one is allowed to campaign. No one is allowed to accept campaign funding since there are no campaigns, no one can run as a member of any political party.

The posting of their pictures etc is usually a formality since every candidate is a member of that community and well known to everyone.

The elections are held and anyone who gets 51% or more wins the election. If there are multiple candidates and no one gets the required 51% , then a run off is held between the top finishers and whomever of that group gets 51% is the winner.

That person becomes the local representative and serves in the Municipal Assembly.

Every six months that person must meet all those people who elected him/her and account for what he/she has done at the Assembly and if the group does not like what he/she has done they can, by a majority show of hands, dismiss the representative right there.

When this happens the nomination process begins again.

The deputies/representatives from the various local/Municipal Assemblies elect from amongst themselves the deputies for the State Assemblies and the State Assembly deputies elect from amongst themselves the deputies to the National Assembly.

The National Assembly deputies elect a 32 (not sure of the number) person sitting group that elects the President and other key official..

At each step up the people of each representative's district have to vote to certify that representatives promotion upward and this includes the president.

For the sake of time , this is a short view of Poder Popular. I can answer questions you may have but I'd like to know from you:
(1) in what way do you consider it totalitarian and
(2) where did you get your ideas of how Cuba's government is run (newspapers, TV, what specific books?)

I appreciate the time you took for such a lengthy response.

one ba fWhen

**Amberal37** · 07-24-2009, 07:23 PM

Re: Amberal Anti-Hijacking Post.

Hi Johnnycakes,
I think that I already mentioned why I think that Cuba is a totalitarian state.

Yes, I suppose most of my knowledge of Cuba must have come, though in my earlier years at uni I read a number of political books about communist (Chinese), and never quite finished that book on Che Guevara. (Many of my books are in storage as I have moved country in the last three years).

The rest I guess is from the media or internet research (unlike other topics that I have formal education in, with a passing reference to Cuba-if any). So my knowledge on Cuba can hardly be described as 'authoritative'.

However, while it is interesting and helpful having someone like yourself that has more specific knowledge to learn from, I don't see how it is fruitful for me to continue a detailed discusstion on Cuba specifically, in fact i would rather not have a discussion on Cuba specifically as I am quite dispassionate about it, so might not offer any depth to the discussion.

I think that the current political system of Jamaica is not the problem - i think having a one-party system would exacerbate the issues. Perhaps also the introduction of a third party would be desireable.

Heading towards Cuba's model is the last thing that the country should be contending with at this juncture. That is of course my personal opinion, but we all all entitled to our own.

**johnnycakes** · 07-24-2009, 10:52 PM

Re: Amberal Anti-Hijacking Post.

"I think that the current political system of Jamaica is not the problem - i think having a one-party system would exacerbate the issues. Perhaps also the introduction of a third party would be desireable."

Amberal,
What would you think of having NO political parties in Jamaica as it is in Cuba and instead have people elected as individuals to serve as representatives to a particular area?

What purpose do parties have except to perpetuate the power structures in respective countries and haven't all political parties sooner or later become corrupted by the legal bribery system known as campaign contributions?

Do you think that the two-party system in Jamaica (or the United States ) is capable of representing the people who elect them or will it be as it has been and the political parties owe their support to those who support/pay for them?

**Amberal37** · 07-25-2009, 10:59 AM

Re: Amberal Anti-Hijacking Post.

The MPs are supposed to be the representatives serving a particular area - and they are elected locally. Would it make them more effective it they were non-partisan I don't know if that would eliminate/reduce corruption (them working more for the own PERSONAL benefit, as opposed to their electors') once they are IN 'power'.

I have had to think personally about why I care so little of the two parties in Ja, and perhaps it has a lot to do with my experiences growing up there, leading me to believe that it should be about what the governments will do to progress the economy. So I have always withdrawn myself from partisan discussions.

I think that there needs to be an element of continuum in any country (some have Queens/kings, some Presidents, some Mullahs Dalai Lamaa, Ayatollahs, whatever), meaning that if there ever was a vacuum in political representation, then some sort of overall administration is looking out for the country's welfare.

I think the most sophisticated voter is one that goes to polls and considers his/her basic needs, and how the proposed rep. can meet those needs.

The Jamaican voter has been miseducated to believe that a particular PARTY either IS, or IS NOT right, not whether their specific policies meet their needs. And I think that this polarisation of the voter has dampened the basic instinct that people have to vote for what they feel is best for them, not partisan attachments.

So perhaps I am agreeing by saying that because of that polarisation, removing or changing the CURRENT 2-party system might be beneficial to JA. One way of this changing would be to consider replacing the Governor General position with one that is elected every so many year (term cycles I also think are crucial).
Perhaps also another way is for those MPs to have local non partisan meetings with a rep from each community - say once every six months, that are minuted and posted in a public forum (say internet, the town hall etc,. These meetings and agenda could be used to monitor progress on agenda items.

I don't think that it is effective to have open vote in a public forum, a secret ballot gives people the opportunity to vote on their real personal preference without feeling intimidated - so don't agree with the "show of hands" policy, and based on population sizes, you don't always get all of the potential voters to gather in one location - so I am sure if that is effective also.

What certainly needs to happen is more accountability. Developing the Jamaican the media and now also the internet can help with that.

**johnnycakes** · 07-25-2009, 10:00 PM

Re: Amberal Anti-Hijacking Post.

" I don't think that it is effective to have open vote in a public forum, a secret ballot gives people the opportunity to vote on their real personal preference without feeling intimidated - so don't agree with the "show of hands" policy, and based on population sizes, you don't always get all of the potential voters to gather in one location - so I am sure if that is effective also."

Amberal, a few points on the paragraph above and then a point on political parties.

The "open vote in an open forum" does not take place in Cuba. They have an OPEN nomination process and then a secret ballot like every other democracy. The open nomination process guarantees that anyone who can get nominated and have his/her nomination seconded becomes a candidate.

There is no problem in getting all the voters in a Cuban voting district to gather because that is how the Cuban electoral system is set up. It is deliberate so that everyone can participate which is what democracy is all about.
In Cuba 95-97% of the voters participate in their elections, not because they are forced to but because they want to because their participation is meaningful and part of being a good citizen in Cuba.

The "show of hands" process takes place ONLY when the gathered electorate
has before it a (rare) motion to remove the current representative for poor performance . No one is going to make any such motion without good cause so their are never any issues of coercion.

That's all on the Cuba electoral system.

In a multi party electoral system such as exists in Jamaica and the U.S. and many other countries there are usually two or three parties that hold all the power and third parties are rarely successful.

So anyone wanting to serve in the government really has to belong to one or the other powerful parties.
In order to get the nomination in those parties, a prospective nominee would have to meet the party's principles or lack thereof. No one rises to the top in a party without the rest of the party members being sure that that particular candidate would NOT rock the boat, not try anything outside what the party has always done and for whom.

Parties almost always guarantee no change and corrupted or unprincipled officials.

The most corrupting factor is money . Corporate interests and the interests of the rich are what is served. Perhaps it is more accurate to say that the parties both slavishly serve capitalism in their own way.

The fact is that capitalism, the kind practiced in the world today DOES NOT WORK in poor, heavily indebted Third World countries.
It cannot correct the economies of the Third World because capitalism is what causes the problems of the Third World where half the people struggle to exist on 1-2 dollars a day.

Under capitalism there simply is not enough of the necessities of life to go around for everybody if 10% of the country owns 80% of the wealth and in countries like Jamaica that is exactly what both parties unequivocally support.

How can you fix the unfixable?

Were it possible, it would have been done already.

Power and money are intertwined and rule.

They will not allow that situation to be corrected.

Amberal Anti-Hijacking Post.

Amberal Anti-Hijacking Post.

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

ads