What do you think about this "success" that socialist are trying to promote? Was there really any success or as any socialist central planning the success was made by the little liberty that was left to operate under the regime?
p.s. Although as you can see the situation in Cuba then (and today, also) - I wouldn't call that some success. They look like Englishman in 19th century!
This is how they present their story:
http://www.powerofcommunity.org/cm/index.php
When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1990, Cuba's economy went into a tailspin. With imports of oil cut by more than half – and food by 80 percent – people were desperate. This film tells of the hardships and struggles as well as the community and creativity of the Cuban people during this difficult time. Cubans share how they transitioned from a highly mechanized, industrial agricultural system to one using organic methods of farming and local, urban gardens. It is an unusual look into the Cuban culture during this economic crisis, which they call "The Special Period." The film opens with a short history of Peak Oil, a term for the time in our history when world oil production will reach its all-time peak and begin to decline forever. Cuba, the only country that has faced such a crisis – the massive reduction of fossil fuels – is an example of options and hope.
I have not watched the doc, but reading the introduction it looks more like a "success" of localism or communityism, than socialism.
Where did you get the central planning and socialism aspect, is that talked about in the doc?
Socialist: The sheer destruction wrought by our central planners was really intended to get people to learn that they can't trust the state, and that they have to fend for themselves.
We had the best intentions, we swear, and since you learned to cope and didn't die of starvation, it made you stronger and was therefore a good policy, right? Right?
You can read in the post that it was success of the government and the people. Even if we assume that it was "success" of localism, still what the website I've posted says is: let's use central planning to stop climate change - central planning was proved as succcess in Cuba in 1990s.
"We had the best intentions, we swear, and since you learned to cope and didn't die of starvation, it made you stronger and was therefore a good policy, right? Right?"
I agree my friend - socialist propaganda always is bullcrap and doesn't make sense. If we take the Austrian position (as we have in our lifes) and see the costs as subjective in their nature and define them only as an opportunity cost, then how socialists can tell that some of their policy was success? Were the pyramids in Egypt success? Or if people use their time and energy as they wish and not building pyramid - what would happened then? Would they be luckier or..,? Socialism doesn't have a logical standard of evaluation of their success and failute. That is the main reason why they always present their policies as succcess, unless they are extremely tragic and can't be shown as good, efficient actions!
I don't know the situation in Cuba, but the story doesn't make sense at all. Still, I need to hear from you guys...especially from someone who know what really happened!
The people from Cuba I have spoken to say they are glad to be out of there. The standard of living is akin to what a caveman would have.
My humble blog
It's easy to refute an argument if you first misrepresent it. William Keizer