Debate is Good

Yesterday's debate on U.S. Cuba policy in Little Havana was well covered by Henry, who attended the event and blogged about it here. I won't add much to what Henry has already mentioned, but there was a quote in the Herald article linked above attributed to FIU Professor Lisandro Perez which struck me as very revealing:

Let's not put U.S. policy at the level of the Cuban government.

Surprising that Perez, a dialogue advocate, would say that. What's the purpose of dialogue if it isn't to attempt to compromise two different vantage points at a relatively level plane?

Perez's comment also illustrates his lack of desire for Cuba to change. Of course, we shouldn't expect Cuba to be at the same level as the United States, he says. So what if Cuba oppresses its people and denies basic human rights? So what if they don't live up to our (U.S.) standards? Remember, they're a sovereign nation. What right do we have to impose our standards on them?

At least that's my translation of what academics like Perez are trying to say when they give every impression of apologizing for the atrocities of the castro regime.

Debates like this are great, perhaps we need to have these public debates on a more regular basis. Not only are they the hallmarks of a free society, but they serve a key purpose which is to expose the feelings and interests of both sides of an issue. In the case of yesterday's debate, it's clear where people such as Lisandro Perez stand.

That's a good thing.