http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/03/world/americas/03cuba.html?_r=1&ref=americas
This article from the New York Times is about the monumental reform policy that is to be implemented in Cuba by the end of the year: Cuban citizens will, by 2012, legally have the right to buy and own their own homes. For socialist Cuba, this is a huge step. Until now, the government has owned all property and Cubans have been perpetual renters. With the passing of this new law however, Cubans will be taking a big step into the capitalist world and will be allowed to purchase their own homes.
Drawing from our class discussions on human rights, I was completely unaware and shocked to learn that Cubans do not possess the right to own private property. After all, all of the documents regarding human rights that we have read declare the right to property (or land) to be a "fundamental" human right. Following this logic then, all Cubans have been deprived of a basic human right for a very long time.
However, this article made me realize that the human rights doctrines that we have read have all been written from the point of view of a capitalist society (hence the right to private ownership). If a communist were to write a declaration of rights, the right to property would not be included (hence communism and a sharing of resources). Therefore from a communist perspective, Cubans have not been denied a basic right (with regards to a lack of right to property). I just think it is interesting that I had never before considered that human rights doctrines are created with an economic ideology in mind (therefore all of the "Western" rights documents we have read have also been capitalist ones, as that has been the dominant economic system in the Western world since the revolutions of the late 18th century). I wonder what other differences between human rights would exist on a communist written doctrine versus one written by a capitalist.
No comments:
Post a Comment