I have often questioned the existence of a single party. I think it’s exclusive, unnatural, and directly undermines the very nature of human beings. It is very difficult to find absolute coincidence of views between different people. It does not happen in the family nor in other groupings such as the block, neighborhood, municipality, province and even less in the country. Tastes differ, in music, literature, sports, arts, fashion, food, morals, etc., as in politics. To pretend that all citizens of a country accept a single vision of society, and are subject to an organization that claims to represent it, prohibiting the existence of others, is absurd.
Human beings, throughout history, have created political organizations in accordance with their common interests. So within a country and in every society, there are different ones, which may be as many as they require by their own characteristics. The existence of these is what has allowed the development and progress achieved. Where one-party systems have been implemented, they have failed. We are a good example.
José Martí is said to have created a single party. It’s true: he would had been mad if he had created more than one. No politician creates several parties: he creates only one considered to represent his own ideas. Marti created his party, but did not prohibit the existence of others, rather he competed with them in the realm of ideas, as did those who were alive in his time. The Cuban Revolutionary Party did not appoint itself the only party. Marti’s task was to unite Cubans struggling for independence, despite their differences. That was his political goal. Also he never proposed that, following independence (his reason for being), it would serve as the single party of the Republic. Its democratic ideals did not allow that.
Speaking today to a single party, and even more so to try to keep it and keep it holy for now and forever in an article of the Constitution, is as absurd as when it was established. A totalitarian aberration with no historical or logical foundation, whose sole purpose is the retention of absolute power indefinitely. The fractional Cuban nation, in need of new ideas, does not support it, especially when in the opinion of citizens the only party existing for over fifty years is exhausted both in power, and because of its many mistakes and failures and their demonstrated inability to conduct the country’s destiny, and is no longer worthy of trust.
If they are really serious about trying to find a solution to the current crisis, in addition to the proposed timid economic measures, they must take the political bull by the horns and open it to real citizen participation, allowing the creation of political organizations, the full exercise of opinion and participation for all Cubans, without arbitrary exclusions, in the political debate and in solutions, both economic and political. The nation belongs to all and not just to one group, however historic they may be.
June 16 2011