Fernando Dámaso, 20 March 2018 — Today the economic theory of poverty and wealth of countries is fashionable, depending on whether they have “exclusive” or “inclusive” institutions. Its authors, Daron Acemoglu and James A. Robinson, thoroughly explore it in their book “Why Nations Fail.”
Consistent with this, as long as there is a government in Cuba with “exclusive” institutions, defenders of the one-party system, that reject citizens’ initiative and private property, prohibit the creation of wealth and discourage investment for development, we will remain in the vicious circle of poverty. To speak of an “efficient, prosperous and sustainable socialism” constitutes a fallacy. continue reading
For a nation to be efficient, prosperous and sustainable, “inclusive” institutions are needed, which promote the citizens’ initiative, ensure political and economic freedoms and do not punish the creation of wealth, but, on the contrary, stimulate it.
Until now, the “Cuban scheme,” centralized, dogmatic, exclusive and obsolete, has proved convincingly to be a sovereign failure. In sixty years of the exercise of absolute power, they have not been able to come up with a real solution to any of the great economic, political and social problems.
All their efforts have been concentrated on maintaining an iron grip on the citizens, assuring the collapse of the Nation. Today Cuba is among the poorest nations in the world, with most of its citizens having annual incomes of well under one thousand dollars, since the monthly average wage does not exceed twenty dollars.
They try to hide this widespread poverty by means of the propaganda of supposed free systems of health and modern and efficient education, when in fact both services are of bad quality and, in last instance, are financed by what is not paid to Cubans for their work, given their miserable wages.
These economic and social anomalies, unchanged for six decades, due to the existence of “exclusive” institutions, have led to labor unrest, widespread unproductivity, galloping corruption, social indiscipline, loss of moral and citizen values, violence and the irrepressible exodus of the population, mainly of the youngest.
The authorities, exhausted physically and politically, are unable to propose a courageous and decent exit, insisting, with the sole objective of maintaining power, in their obsolete arguments about “the defense of the independence and sovereignty of the Fatherland,” and manipulating the better feelings of the new generations, urging them to defend the indefensible and to swear unconditional loyalty to those who have always been unconditionally disloyal to the Nation, because, instead of serving it, they have dedicated themselves to living off of it.
Neither the recent electoral farce, nor the battered so-called “guidelines,” nor the absurd plans out to the year 2030, which is written and spoken about daily in the official media, will solve any problem: they constitute simple “soap bubbles” to continue trying to entertain the unwary and ensure a few more years of exercise of absolute power.
Fernando Dámaso, 14 March 2018 — Once again, as every March 15, the Protest of Baraguá is exalted as a transcendental event in our history, which “demonstrates Cubans’ vertical refusal to accept defeat and their tenacity.”
The gesture of Antonio Maceo and his followers of the Cuba Division, to not accept the peace agreed upon in El Zanjón by the majority of the insurgent leaders, although arrogant and brave, did not address the real situation of the war and of the opportunities to continue it at that moment, where the regional caudillismo proliferated, the fatigue of ten years of struggle without achieving victory and exhaustion and loss of interest in providing the necessary resources, for the emigration that supported and sustained it economically. continue reading
With regards to the situation prevailing at that time, Enrique Collazo, in his work “From Yara to the Zanjón,” states: “Peace was a necessity imposed by circumstances, since the insurgents were, according to Sanguily, exhausted, decimated, disenchanted, hungry, without ammunition and without faith.”
Subsequent events confirmed it: fifty-five days after Baraguá, on May 9, Maceo agreed to cease the fight and left Cuba for Jamaica in the Spanish gunboat “Fernando el Católico,” placed at his disposal by General Martínez Campos, the same one who had offered to sign the peace in Baraguá.
Eight days later Lieutenant Colonel Lacret, who had accompanied Maceo on his trip to Jamaica, returned with the conviction that the cause of Cuba was lost and that no resources should be expected from abroad (in Jamaica they had only seven men had signed up to come to Cuba, and the collection to acquire weapons and ammunition added the derisory amount of five shillings, that is, ten reales of the time). On May 28, with the exception of Limbano Sánchez, Leocadio Bonachea and some others, all of the “Baraguá protestors” accepted the Pact of Zanjón and laid down their arms.
Máximo Gómez and those who had accepted the Pact of Zanjón from the beginning (they knew the reality of the situation and acted in correspondence with it), were accused disparagingly of being “zanjoneros” for a long time.
Later Maceo settled in Costa Rica and became a prosperous landowner. Máximo Gómez returned to Santo Domingo and dedicated himself to tilling the land.
Martí praised the gesture, with the aim of mobilizing Cubans for the new war he organized, intelligently linking the men of ’68 with the new generation. However, to achieve his goals, he needed to unite the “zanjoneros” (Máximo Gómez) with the “Baraguá Protestors” (Antonio Maceo), without whom the new contest would have been impossible.
But good intentions are not enough to ensure a good decision: Baraguá is an example. Our most recent history is lavish in stubbornness.
Fernando Damaso, 6 March — On March 11, General Elections will be held in Cuba, to elect the delegates to the Provincial Assemblies of People’s Power and the deputies to the National Assembly.
What is original about these elections is that the voters will vote, but they will not really “elect” anyone, since these candidates have been “elected” previously by the National Candidacy Commission. This also happened at the municipal level. continue reading
In the Cuban elections, the only one where the elector “chooses” is at the lowest level, that is, on the block where he resides, and even there, the “election” is conditioned by the actions of the so-called “factors” (representatives of the official mass organizations, organized, controlled and directed by the Party), who veto, as possible nominees, those who do not consider themselves “faithful to the revolution,” that is, “faithful to the system.” This ensures that those who disagree or have opinions different from the official ones, do not form part of any level of the People’s Power from the base.
The Cuban electoral process, copied from the electoral processes that existed in the extinct socialist countries, but Cuban style, constitutes a great farce, with a great deal of propaganda to try to make us see what does not exist, with a single objective: to perpetuate in power characters from a single party.
The only interest of these elections, lies in the announced (and postponed) retirement of some historical elders from their posts (which remains to be seen), and the taking of their positions by some new characters, chosen and prepared by them.
Everything seems to indicate that it will be more of the same, although, perhaps, with another “look.”
Fernando Damaso, 15 February 2018 — Cuban socialism started from the premise that stripping the rich of their wealth would accomplish the elimination of poverty. An absurd premise, since the relationship is not less wealth less poverty, but quite the opposite, greater wealth less poverty.
The problem is that poverty is not eliminated by taking wealth from the rich, but by creating more wealth. However, to create wealth, we must unleash the productive forces and let them act, without a chastity belt that limits and interferes with their development. continue reading
This truth has been learned and successfully applied by most of the former socialist countries, with the exception of Cuba and North Korea, which currently are precisely the most backward and without real prospects for development.
The obstinacy of the inefficient and obsolete Cuban leadership already reaches the limits of the illogical: it prefers that the country and Cubans continue sunk in misery and backwardness, in order to maintain their absolute power until the last breath.
What happens next does not interest them in the least. Hence their excessive praise of the person most directly responsible for the national tragedy, along with his closest followers, and their insistance on presenting as victories his many and resounding failures.
However, facts and reality conspire against this false vision: it has lost all political credence and very few believe in its stories. All that sustains it is the repression and fear induced in many about the necessary changes, which, in spite of everything, will come sooner rather than later.
Fernando Damaso, 24 January 2018 — This year will mark 116 since the founding of the Republic on 20 May 1902. Although it was the time of the nation’s greatest progress and development–with important economic and social achievements, including health and education–this period has been systematically discredited and distorted during the last 60 years when only its defects have been written and spoken about. The same has happened with its presidents. To better understand them, I start the publication of their biographical sketches and presidential periods. Here is the first:
The Teacher from Central Valley: Tomás Estrada Palma
As early the first months of the year 1959, the new authorities had already launched a campaign against the history of the Republic, demonizing or legitimizing figures and deeds according to their political interests. One of the first victims was the first President of the Republic. continue reading
Don Tomás Estrada Palma was immortalized in statues and busts in cities and towns, and his name appeared on streets, schools, and even a sugar milling company. Such an honor was bestowed by those who knew him and those who, with the approval of the majority of Cubans, respected his accomplishments since 1868. In Havana, his bronze figure was placed on a pedestal on the Avenida de los Presidentes, between 5th and Calzada streets, in the Vedado district.
“The revisers of History” began an attack on him and other personalities who did not share their political and ideological tendencies. Estrada Palma’s statue was cut at the ankles and removed, leaving his shoes on the pedestal as evidence of the vandalism. His likeness and name also were expunged from other public spaces and, if he is mentioned today, it is only to revile him. Why so much hatred, more than a century after his physical life, against the first President?
Tomás Estrada Palma was born in Bayamo in 1835 and was among the first who joined the war against Spain when hostilities began on 10 December 1868. In the then-Free City Hall of Bayamo, he was its first mayor and defended the abolition of slavery (which had been proclaimed by Carlos Manuel de Céspedes), but in a gradual manner.
At the hearing on 27 October 1873 in Bijagual (Jiguaní) to depose de Céspedes as President of the Republic in Arms, conducted during the Chamber of Representatives session led by Salvador Cisneros Betancourt as deputy, Estrada Palma accused de Cespedes of “attempting to undermine the unassailable rights of the people,” and of practicing a system of favoritism by awarding military ranks to debtors and undeserving friends, endangering high-level collective interests. At the site, with more than 2,000 rebel troops, were Major General Calixto García, Generals Calvar and Modesto Díaz, and Brigadier Antonio Maceo. Along with Manuel Sanguily, Máximo Gómez, and other important leaders, Estrada Palma met with Vicente García in Loma de Sevilla, following the revolt of Lagunas de Varona, so that the latter would desist from his rebel activities and respect the authority of Juan Bautista Spotorno, the recently-designated President.
On 29 March 1876, Estrada Palma was elected President of the Republic In Arms in his own right by the Chamber of Representatives to succeed Spotorno, and due to Francisco Vicente Aguilera’s inability to return to Cuba to occupy the post. On 19 October 1877, he was taken prisoner by the Spanish in Tasajeras (Holguín). Francisco Javier de Céspedes, having taken as Interim President, could not prevent the demoralization of the revolutionary troops; the Chamber of Representatives elected as his substitute, to the surprise of all, Vicente García, the rebel from Lagunas de Varona and Santa Rita, to whom it feel to reach an accord with the Spanish General Arsenio Martínez Campos and forge the Pact of Zanjón.
Tomás Estrada Palma remained imprisoned in Spain until the signing of the Pact, which won him his liberty and later relocated to the United States, where he worked in education and ran a prestigious school in Central Valley, near New York City. He established political and personal ties with José Martí,* with whom he worked closely in pro-independence activities and who designated him (upon traveling to Santo Domingo en route to Cuba) as Delegate of the Cuban Revolutionary Party.
In 1901, upon Generalísimo Máximo Gómez’ refusal to run as a candidate for the upcoming elections, Estrada Palma was nominated by his party (with Gómez’ support) to face off against the other proposed candidate, Bartolomé Masó. On 31 December 1901, while residing in the US, Estrada Palma was elected as the first President of the Republic soon to be established. He returned on 17 April and assumed the office on the very birthday of the Republic of Cuba: 20 May 1902.
During his presidency, Estrada Palma continued the reorganization of the Public Administration begun by the US provisional military government in Cuba. He allocated major resources to education, bringing to 3,712 the number of schools and classrooms, creating Kindergarten schools, summer schools for teacher training, and the National Library.
He devoted attention to the development and protection of industries, improving public safety and the prison system, construction of communication lines, and obtained compensation for the members of the Liberating Army by way of a $35-million credit. It fell to him to confront the first labor strike in the Republic, that of tobacco workers calling for better salaries in November 1902, which was suppressed due to the country’s lack of means to satisfy their demands.
In February 1903, Estrada Palma ratified the Cuban-American Treaty of Relations, which insured against any economic disaster and conceded spaces within the national territory for the installation of naval and coal bases. This action reduced the initial requirement of concessions in Cienfuegos, Nipe, Bahía Honda and Guantánamo to only two (Guantánamo y Bahía Honda) and, finally, to only one–in Guantánamo– with a larger expanse.
During his presidential period of 1902-1906, Estrada Palma practiced irreproachable honesty, did not give or nor permit “botellas”** (public-sector positions which paid salaries for no work), reduced the Republic’s expenditures, maintained a just and flourishing annual budget, the sugar industry was rebuilt ***, public services were well-run, and citizens’ rights were respected.
Estrada Palma’s principal errors were of a personal and political nature, having presumed that nobody but he possessed the competencies to execute the presidency (an affliction that runs throughout our history, taken to the extreme in the last 56 years) and listening to those surrounding him who petitioned him to run for re-election. To achieve this objective he allowed frauds in the partial elections of February and, even worse, in the general ones, forcing the withdrawal of the Liberal Party which was putting forth José Miguel Gómez for President y Alfredo Zayas as his running mate.
On 20 May 1906, Estrada Palma once again assumed the presidency of the Republic against the wishes of most citizens, who wanted a change, and which provoked the so-called “Little War of August” incited by the Liberal Party. Unable to stop the events, Estrada Palma sought the US government’s intervention, which was denied, and he was ordered to resolve the situation through agreements with the opposition. He did not comply and again demanded US action from President Theodore Roosevelt, who refused and tried to remain neutral–although, to protect North American interests and citizens, sent ships, some troops, and a mediator.
Faced with this situation, Estrada Palma resigned, leaving a power vacuum which the Congress was unable to fill for not convening nor electing a President. This seemingly irresponsible behavior brought about the Second North American Occupation, which began on 19 September 1906 and lasted until 28 January 1909.
Some historians accuse Estrada Palma of having ordered the assassination of Quintín Banderas. Banderas was the brave, but undisciplined and troubled, Mambí general who had been sanctioned several times, had a summary judgment pending against him and was relieved of his command for the final 11 months of the last war, for which he did not receive back pay when the Republic was established. The accusation, supported by no type of evidence, does not fit in with Estrada Palma’s personality.
Tomás Estrada Palma, removed from power, retired to a country estate on the outskirts of Bayamo, where he died two years later, on 4 November 1908. He was interred in the Santa Ifigenia cemetery in Santiago de Cuba, near the tomb of José Martí. Despite the political mistakes he committed towards the end of his presidential period, the austerity, honesty, and patriotism that Estrada Palma maintained during the major part of his life make him one of the noblest Cuban figures of his time.
Translated By: Alicia Barraqué Ellison
Translator’s Notes: * José Martí lived in exile in New York at various times while garnering support for Cuba’s independence from Spain. ** “Botella” literally translates as “bottles,” but in this context is used as Cuban slang for sinecures. *** Which had been decimated during the Wars for Independence.
Fernando Damaso, 28 January 2018 — When reading the list of candidates for deputies to the National Assembly of People’s Power, prepared by the National Candidacy Commission (formed and directed by the Party, with designated representatives of the so-called mass organizations), I am struck by some of the elderly people which are part of it, some of them over 80 and others even over 90, although they are practically unable to exercise their duties due to their advanced physical deterioration.
I do not question their accumulated merits, real or fictitious, but the National Assembly should not be satisfied with deputies and honorary deputies: for this there are other institutional spaces. continue reading
It is assumed, although in reality it is not so, that in the National Assembly all currents of political, economic and social thought are represented and, through debate and confrontation, laws are drawn up and approved for the benefit of the Nation.
The current spawn, which represent a single thought and a single party, where only unanimity works, is a great farce. For that reason, it is possible to use the Assembly as a showcase for figures which might more appropriately be displayed in a museum.
On the street it is thought that, at least out of simple decency or out of respect for the citizens and themselves, some of the nominees should not be on the list, and rather should give way to representatives of the new generations, but this, it seems, was not the order that the National Candidacy Commission received. Instead, they were told to keep them until the last breath.
Today, January 28, the anniversary of the birth of José Martí, the greatest of all Cubans, it is good to remember this thought of his: “Only strong heads resist the poisonous vapor of power. The despotic spirit of man attaches itself with mortal love to the pleasure of looking down from above and commanding as an owner, and once having enjoyed this pleasure, he feels as if his life been torn up by the roots when they deprive him of it.”
Fernando Damaso, 9 January 2018 — I have always respected those who avoid extreme positions, which, in short, do not lead to anything good even if, at certain times, they might be considered correct.
The Pact of the Zanjón was a wise and intelligent decision, which responded to the reality of the time in which it was signed, although it was rejected by some and criticized historically by many, and its signatories with disparagingly referred to as “zanjoneros,” ignoring all their accumulated merits during years of struggle
The Baraguá Protest was an example of stubbornness, which did not respond to the reality of the moment, although it was approved by some and its participants honored by historians. In short, it lasted only a few days and, in the end, the “Protestors,” with a few exceptions, accepted the Covenant they had repudiated. continue reading
Without the the Pact of Zanjón it would have been impossible to preserve and rebuild the forces that, years later, would participate in the War of Independence that ended in 1898, since these individuals would have been decimated and their main leaders sacrificed in vain.
Years later, with the acceptance by the most reasonable Cubans of the Platt Amendment, the emergence of the Republic would have been impossible, because the US occupation troops would not have left Cuba, and Cuba would have become a protectorate, without actually constituting Nation, regardless of everything bad that would have flowed from this.
If. in the 1930s, the intelligence of certain groups had prevailed instead of their ambitions, the reality would have been different, and the country would have moved more quickly on the path of development.
If, in the decade of the 50s, those who worked for a political and non-violent solution had triumphed, instead of those who believed in armed struggle, we would have avoided these six decades of backwardness and misery.
That is, betting on the extremes has never been synonymous with wisdom, although some people are more attracted to noise and hubbub than to good sense. It would be convenient if, in the days and months to come, the latter would prevail.
Fernando Damaso, 22 December 2017 — It seems that moving tombs and monuments from place to place has become a common practice. Now it turns out that, without consulting the citizen, where the real people’s power supposedly lies, the equestrian statue of General Calixto García Íñiguez which, since the 1950s, has been installed in the Malecón and Calle G roundabout (Avenida de los Presidentes) in El Vedado, has been moved from the Plaza Municipality to the Playa Municipality.
Nor have I heard or read any opinion from a recently elected deputy from these municipalities: it seems that in making the decision they were not consulted.
The public explanation given to the press is laughable: “To avoid its deterioration, due to its proximity to the sea.” continue reading
This means that for the same reason, those of Antonio Maceo and Máximo Gómez, also near the sea, will be moved. And the multiple iron sculptures installed by the Historian of the City on Avenida del Puerto along with Roberto Fabelo’s bowl on the Malecón at Galiano.
Will it also happen with the anachronistic Martí of the Anti-Imperialist Bandstand and with the bandstand itself, built by the sea, making this part of El Vedado ugly?
It is explained that there will be a park with a star, a large Cuban flag and a bronze plaque built in the space where the monument was, explaining that the monument was here and the reasons for its move. I suppose that a budget has been established to replace the large flag from time to time, due to the effects of the saltpeter and the strong wind.
I think that maybe this is no more than a temporary park, similar to those that are built where buildings collapse. Will anyone be interested in such a magnificent place?
In short, these measures only serve to lacerate the identity of our towns and cities, depriving them of part of their architecture, which is also their history.
Fernando Damaso, 12 December 2017 — Attuned to the recently concluded so-called “general elections,” which did not really interest anyone or represent any change in the political life of the country, different articles have appeared in the written press comparing these elections with those held in Cuba during the era of the Republic, as well as others that continue to be carried out in most democratic countries. Among other points of discord, one article compares the candidates of then and now.
The article asserts that candidates of that time were corrupt and opportunistic and that they did not represent citizens, dedicating themselves to getting rich at the expense of the State’s resources. What if they did! continue reading
However, they all had a full name, a record of their service, proposals for the government and followers. The ones we have now are totally gray, lack names and surnames, are only known in their own homes, if at all, at lunch or dinner time, they lack a record of service, have no proposals and no followers. They are, in short, simple strangers, who pass through their offices without sorrow or glory, they agree unanimously and are lost, when they leave, among the population.
The article also says that the bourgeoisie and the wealthy were criminals, and that they had obtained their riches by exploiting the workers and the peasants.
Before these assertions some questions arise: Who built our towns and cities? Who developed the country? Who built all the valuable things we have today? We must assume that it was not the workers or the peasants who were exploited.
If everything happened that way when everyone was bad, why, now that everyone is good, does nothing work and the country, instead of advancing, has retreated?
Perhaps we can find in this trend the current reluctance and apathy of most Cubans. We have stopped believing in the storytellers and their stories.
Fernando Damaso, 6 December 2017 — We have always considered Carlos Manuel de Céspedes as the Father of the Nation and José Martí as the Apostle. Recently a Mother of the Nation has been imposed on us. It would not be unreasonable to assume that soon they will also impose a female Apostle. Along that absurd path, grandparents and grandmothers, aunts and uncles, brothers and sisters and even male and female cousins “of the Nation” could also appear.
Recently that indigestible Cuban Television program ’The Roundtable’ decided to address the subject, with the theme: “The Granma … is the Nation.” [Ed. note: This “Granma” is not a grandmother but rather the name of the yacht that the Castro brothers and their compatriots sailed from Mexico to Cuba, to launch the guerrilla actions that ultimately triumphed as the Revolution. The previous owner of the yacht had named it after his grandmother, and so it remained, ultimately giving its name to a Cuban province and the Communist Party’s daily paper.] Thus, if we follow this idea, even a soccer ball could be the nation, regardless of being kicked by everyone. The same could be said about a baseball.
When the sacred symbols are manipulated so festively and disrespectfully, we must seriously concern ourselves as citizens. It is something that should not be allowed or accepted, no matter who it comes from.
Fernando Damaso, 23 October 2017 — The moving of the remains and mausoleums of Carlos Manuel de Céspedes, the Father of the Nation, and Mariana Grajales, the mother of Maceo, from their original locations to the area near the mausoleum of José Martí, whom we Cubans call the Apostle, and the monolith of the “historical leader” (Fidel Castro), continues to be a topic of discussion among Cubans.
If this transfer had been made before placing the anachronistic monolith in place, when the area belonged mainly to José Martí and other heroes, it might have been acceptable, although this idea of relocating remains, according to the political conveniences of the moment is reprehensible and carries overtones of outdated totalitarianism and socialism. continue reading
It recalls the game with the remains of Stalin in Moscow’s Red Square, which were first located next to Lenin inside the latter’s mausoleum and, years later, when the dark side of Stalin’s character was publicly revealed, they were removed and buried near the entrance, with a simple pedestal without a bust.
This move now, whatever they say about it, reflects deep manipulation, perhaps with the aim of attracting visitors to the site and, therefore, as a collateral gain, towards the monolith.
And as if the manipulation was not enough, Dona Mariana is also supposed to be granted the title of “Mother of the Nation,” something that no Mambí (fighter for Cuban independence) gave her nor did any of the veterans of the War of Independence, as if it happened with Carlos Manuel de Cespedes. The greatest title of Doña Mariana’s is that of being the mother of the Maceo, and that of having accompanied them in the first independence struggle: she does not need another.
They justify this by saying that when she died José Martí sent a wreath of flowers in whose ribbon said “Mother,” is too farfetched like something from the Historian of Havana, who,for a long time. became the historical oracle of the authorities. It would be good to remind him of an opinion from our Apostle: “There is no spectacle, in truth, more odious, than that of servile talents.” (Volume 13, page 158 of his Complete Works).
Although, according to what we were told then, the “historical leader” asked that his name not be given to any public establishment, institution, avenue, street, etc., what is being done now is worse: they are trying to place it, in importance, next to Céspedes and Martí. The Fathers of the Homeland deserve respect.
As if that were not enough, a white stone coffin, with bones brought from the Pantheon of the Veterans, dedicated to the Unknown Mambí Soldier, has now been located in the Hall of the Lost Steps of the National Capitol.
Everything seems to indicate that this funerary addiction will continue.
Fernando Damaso, 3 December 2017 — Human beings are born and they die. Before being born they never existed and, after death, they cease to exist. In their honor monuments can be erected and their names given to streets, avenues, plazas and public establishments, but they are not there. Depending on their deeds, good or bad, they will be remembered with love or with hate.
José Martí died on 19 May 1895 and on that day his life cycle ended. What has endured afterwards are his thoughts and his ideas, but he did not live another day after that date.
For Antonio Maceo, what endured after his death on 7 December 1896, is his military exploits and for Máximo Gómez, after 17 June 1905, it was his brilliant strategy of war.
Other Cubans who are closer in time live on in their music, like Ernesto Lecuona, in their painting, like Wifredo Lam, in their theater, like Virgilio Piñera, or their poetry, like Nicolás Guillén. None of them accompanies us on a day-to-day basis nor do they go back to the places they visited during life, or greet or embrace those who shared with them the days of their existence, because it is impossible.
Lately we have been spectators of an absurd and grotesque phenomenon: trying to present as a living being someone* who died a year ago. To do this, they have used all possible means, including overflowing masses, amazing expressions and even special mourners, in a real circus show. Something truly shameful, which should embarrass the organizers.
Remembering is good, but excesses do not generate respect, rather they generate repudiation. This lesson should be well learned by politicians.
Fernando Damaso, 26 November 2017 — Maintaining the concept of “perpetual revolution” is convenient for government authorities because, in this way, those who do not agree with them are not against the government, but against the “revolution,” that entelechy turned into a myth, and confused by most of the citizens with the Nation and the Fatherland. It is a primitive formula that has given good results for sixty years.
Revolution is simply a violent change in the political, social or economic structures of a State. Nation is a human community generally established in the same territory, united by historical, linguistic, religious and cultural traditions and economic ties to a greater or lesser degree. The difference between the two is notable. continue reading
All revolutions have a beginning and an end, totally unrelated to the wishes of those who execute them: in the case of political, social or economic revolutions, they begin with the assault on the established power and end with the institutionalization of the new power. They are ephemeral phenomena, although their consequences and effects extend over time, beyond the periods of their own existence. The Cuban Revolution is no exception: it existed only during the transition stage.
To speak of the Cuban Revolution today, as if it were still a current event, and even worse of the “Revolutionary Government of Cuba,” as it is often written in official statements, in addition to referring to something that does not exist, is illegal, since, what the Constitution recognizes is the Government of the Republic of Cuba. It seems that this absurdity responds to the need that the “old revolutionaries” have to maintain their “histories” and to defend their old conceptions, without daring to insert themselves in the present.
They are addicted to the little word (economic, agricultural, industrial, educational, cultural and other revolutions), although over time, despite having tried to erase the so-called bourgeois period, changing the political, social and economic structures, and also the names of many towns, companies, businesses, and health, educational, cultural and other centers, as well as plazas, parks, avenues and streets, they have become well-off leaders and officials, with higher standards of living than those of the bourgeois they fought, with the difference that the old bourgeois lived off their own resources while the well-off leaders and officials live at the expense of the people’s resources.
They will continue to call themselves “revolutionaries” until the end of their days, but their revolution has long since ceased to exist.
Fernando Damso, 8 November 2017 — In these days of November, in the absence of more important occupations, the Cuban Government has taken on the task of being the apologist for the October Revolution, something that even the Russian Government itself has not done.
Nobody denies that what happened in Russia in 1917 was not momentous or moved the world at that time, but soon it was shown that theory was one thing and practice was another: arbitrariness, repressions, impositions, crimes, genocides of entire populations, backwardness, misery, lack of freedoms and other evils were enthroned in the distant country, until the experiment disappeared seventy years later, for the good of the subjected countries of Eastern Europe and for humanity. continue reading
Today’s Russia, and the countries that formed the former Soviet Union, are something else entirely. The Russian Revolution is simply ancient history and lacks validity in the current era, except for the eternal dreamers of global communism.
It is striking, that official speeches and writings only refer to the so-called “heroic years” of the experiment, and say nothing about the many black years that were imposed on millions of citizens with arbitrary arrests, deportations, forced labor. and summary executions, all in the name of the “luminous communist future.”
Much is said and excerpts from the book of the American communist writer John Reed’s “Ten Days That Shook the World” are published, where the “heroic stage” of the revolution is related, but it is not told what happened to the writer and his Russian wife, when they were forbidden to leave the country, although for political convenience their remains are located at the foot of the walls of the Moscow Kremlin.
It would be helpful, if one wanted want to know the true story of the experiment, to read “Doctor Zhivago,” the novel by the Russian writer Boris Pasternak, which tells the cruel reality of those difficult years, from the perspective of ordinary citizens.
Fernando Damaso, 6 October 2017 — It has become an everyday occurrence that, with every anniversary of some political, economic, social, medical, juridical, pedagogical, scientific, artistic, agricultural, industrial, ecological, military, etc. event, it is credited to the late Cuban historic leader.
It gives the impression that everything done in Cuba in the last 58 years has been due to “his original ideas and brilliant intelligence,” and no thanks to anybody else. Everything points to his monopoly on good ideas, among many other things.
The fact is that, in totalitarian regimes, everything supposedly positive always is down to the current dictator, and everything negative to his subordinates, who are incapable of understanding him correctly. But, there are limits which cannot be crossed, without looking ridiculous and being mocked by the people, that’s to say, the locals taking the piss. continue reading
In the case of Cuba, it has not been like that, and everything said and written about it bears the unmistakable seal of fawning adulation, without the slightest inhibition on the part of the adulators.
Gerardo Machado was “The Illustrious One” in the thirties, and his works filled the media of his time, but his regime didn’t last any longer than eight years. And Fulgencio Batista was “The Man” in the fifties, and the same thing happened, but his government didn’t go on for more than seven years.
In spite of everything you can criticise about some of their actions, both of them left important achievements which can be admired, even today — the Central Highway, the National Capitol, enormous hospitals and educational institutions, roads, bridges, tunnels, avenues, streets, plazas, parks, aqueducts, drainage systems and other public works.
Nevertheless, today’s hero is the one most responsible for the country’s prolonged economic, political and social crisis, as a result of his repeated errors and failures. In truth, his legacy has been one of intolerance, destruction, poverty and misery, and very little worth remembering. It all needs to be “rescued,” that verb that is so fashionable in Cuba today.
Health and education, his principal “successes,” which were already making progress year on year during the Republic, are being used as a shop window to the outside world, with the objective of political preaching to the gullible, in praise of a disastrous system which is not, and never will be prosperous, efficient or sustainable, let alone sovereign, independent and democratic.
With most Cubans more worried about survival than thinking about him, as we approach the first anniversary of his death, the authorities have chosen to use these occasions to start his premature glorification. They are trying to offer up an idyllic image of his character, to legitimise him in the eyes of history, a difficult enough task in view of his mountain of blunders.
We know that those who have exercised power for long periods of time try to create myths. Then, subsequently, there has always been a process of taking them apart, to see them in the clear light of day. In this case, we have to get on with the second stage.
If it doesn’t happen, they will continue to manipulate history in the interests of spurious political interests and ideologies, far removed from reality, poisoning generations to come with falsehoods and lies.