Talk:Cuban exodus
Caribbean Start‑class Mid‑importance | ||||||||||
|
Cuban exiles in Mexico
- I've read that alot of Cuban exiles have used the other forms to leave Cuba besides the United States. The Yucatan specifically has been a landing point for them. Does anyone have info on this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.182.122.220 (talk) 05:14, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Is "exile" the right term?
After all, these are mostly people who left Cuba by choice. That doesn't fit the normal definition of "exile". 75.76.213.106 (talk) 03:10, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
Yes, it is the right term
I - They left by choice thinking they would return once this "little Castro thing" would blow over. Eventually they realized they could never return, although they wanted to.
II - The Merrian-Webster definition of "exile"- 1 a : the state or a period of forced absence from one's country or home b : the state or a period of voluntary absence from one's country or home 2 : a person who is in exile
So yes, exile is the right term.
Usertubes60 (talk) 06:19, 14 June 2010 (UTC) Usertubes60
- Just keep in mind that the total set of Cuban American people are not all "Cuban Exiles" -- this article pertains to the subset of Cuban Americans (arguably a minority) who self-identify as "exiles" due to the political persecution (or threat of persecution) that prompted their departure from the island. They have been criticized for the use of this term (I can dig up citations for this if necessary) by some other groups of political "exiles," such as Chilean exiles (who had fled Pinochet's rule), who claim that the repression (in Chile) they themselves sought refuge from, is not comparable to the reason for Cuban exiles having left Cuba (ostensibly because they were "persecuted" for affiliations to odious groups such as the mafia/CIA or to Batista's inner circle). 8.14.69.218 (talk) 21:50, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
Disagree - "exile" is _not_ the right term
Merriam-Webster is not the be all and end all of dictionaries, but even the "voluntary" clause there has the implication of a temporary state that ends with a planned return. Few (if any) of the self-described "exiles" have any intent to return to Cuba. For example, Marco Rubio wears the mantle of "exile" or sometimes "son of exiles" (at least when it suits him) even though he was born here, his parents left Cuba voluntarily, they subsequently returned to Cuba several times, and they entered this country on a permanent immigrant visa. Further, most current "exiles" _can_ return to Cuba, on either a permanent or visiting basis (the latter something that non-Cuba connected Americans can't do), which further diminishes any claim to exile status. "Refugee" is a term that likely applies (at least to the first generation), but for some reason that term is rejected by most of the Cuban "exile" community. 108.74.28.81 (talk) 23:59, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
Government in exile idea
Should there be mention of discussions in past, and recent history, of forming a Cuban Government in exile? --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 03:02, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
- Yes that would be good information to include. CID (Matos) is probably the best example -- the book "The Cuban Exile Movement" actually has a lot of good information and commentary about the constant obsession in Miami of forming a government-in-exile and treating the eventual return of the exile government as something assumed. There are numerous cases of exiles speaking of "When the Castro regime falls and we take power again..." etc. The specificity of plans laid out (for once this supposedly inevitable day does come) is painstaking, as it would take a pretty complicated flow chart to explain any of the numerous the economic strategies that folks like Huber Matos have already outlined for post-Revolution Cuba. Luis Posada Carriles said a few years ago "maybe we'll be in Cuba this year -- we've already won this fight, we've just yet to collect" (close paraphrasing -- see youtube for this footage). Evidently, as the Cuban Revolution's leaders have *far* more popularity in Cuba than any prospective government led by Matos or exiled Batistianos (especially after years of anti-Cuba terrorism coming from Miami, and slander against the "Miami Mafia" in a million Castro speeches), the exiles are finally having to face up to a rude awakening: the idea of their eventual return to power in Cuba is not such a sure thing. In fact, it looks like it's very probably not going to happen, and that the Cuban Revolution, at least in quasi-socialist form, may continue well past Fidel Castro's death. There was a Wikileaks cable in which a government official spoke to this: http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Global-News/2010/1216/La-Revolucion-will-outlive-Fidel-Castro-says-US-cable-from-WikiLeaks -- If this is indeed becoming the official attitude of the US government, it represents a radical break from their past policy of acting under the assumption that one day they'd be able to return the folks in Miami to power in Havana. 8.14.69.218 (talk) 00:53, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Significant number?
in the part about the boatlift, it says that of the 120,000 Cubans who fled, "a significant number" are believed to have criminal records. What the heck is "a significant number"? I don't think that sort of "information" belongs in the entry, until some actual numbers can be provided. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.52.162.244 (talk) 23:59, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
Prominent Exiles - Alvero?
Does Ernesto Alvero merit being listed in "prominent exiles?" He is not on the level of Huber Matos or Carlos Franqui, and there are many exiles who have since become CEOs who are not listed. I think it should be removed, if not it should be brought into line with the general format of the paragraph. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.247.237.226 (talk) 18:17, 27 March 2011 (UTC)