.
Meanwhile, in America, fear over the "Red Menace" continued, with the McCarthy scare just out of the way. And while Castro was at first regarded as a "progressive leader favorably disposed to democracy," as Palmer so ironically puts it (955), people soon learned, with Cuba's increasing lean towards the Communist movement, that Cuba was a force to be reckoned with. President Eisenhower was surprised by how close Communism was to his country now; Cuba was the only Marxist nation in the Western Hemisphere (942, 956). Cubans were fleeing to the Miami coast as quickly as they could. Eisenhower knew he had to deal with the Communist threat. The CIA, in secret, trained a band of Cuban refugees for what we all know now as the Bay of Pigs invasion (956). .
Of course, the question that they, the opponents of this "Communist Movement" should've been asked at this point was, is it worth it? Since 1945, the United States and Western Europe had been fighting off Communism as if it were a plague. But is it really as bad as our government makes it out to be? I found an article on the internet entitled "FAQ: Problems With Communism," with no author, but address is Canadian in origin. The first problem, it states, is "disintification." "Under true communism," argues the author, "all incomes are completely equal. When there is nothing to achieve by working harder or longer, people become idle" ("FAQ"). And from our perspective, that makes complete sense. Money is a resource we cannot live without in our country, and if we work harder and longer, we should receive more of it, right? This is a western, individualistic way of thinking, but it makes sense. .
One of the replies to the article (which can be found at http://home.eol.ca/~smithda/exeden/communistemail.html, as there seems to be no startup page for this website), an e-mail by Chris Irwin, takes a different approach to the subject of "monetary equality.