Category: Miriam Celaya

I take this opportunity to share with you my joy at the birth of my second grandson, Samuel, on Wednesday, December 14th, which I have been busy with, and that’s why I have stayed somewhat away from the blog. I would like to think that my grandchildren will grow up in a free and democratic Cuba established by the will of all Cubans. I hope to get back on track soon, and I will be in touch.

Hugs to all,

Eva-Miriam

Translated by Norma Whiting

December 23 2011

If it were possible to classify years the same way winemakers catalogue wine, I would say that 2011 has been a good harvest, good for those Cubans who aspire to a future of civility and of transformations in Cuba, who have seen a gradual but sustained approach among different groups of the alternative civil society, mutual recognition of places and rights common to all, but not so for the government.

I don’t want to be at fault for any unfair or unintended omission, so I will avoid making a list of the ever-growing list of people with different tendencies, generations, professions and backgrounds, who are breaking the isolation of a society long contorted by fear or mistrust between this or that group or individual. Suffice to note that in the course of this year that network of free spaces has emerged spontaneously and freely, and one might surmise that many hopes and aspirations are pinned to that social fabric of an inevitably different and better Cuba.

In fact, I would say that, this year, the very one-party government is the one that has gone to the opposition; not because I say it, but because of the methods and procedures that it employs in its belated intent to resurrect, and in its obvious fear of the unstoppable process to weaken both new and old generations’ faith in the “revolution.” An example of this was the conspiracy orchestrated to… celebrate? the Sixth Congress of the Cuban Communist Party, based on some guidelines developed in secrecy. An event that was unexpectedly and surprisingly announced, even for the members of the single party, with the additional constraint of an agenda limited to purely economic issues. This gave the high leadership of the party an image of weakness and insecurity, and projected a climate of mistrust and reservation among grassroots activism, while it exhibited the paradox of trying to promote a campaign against “secrecy” from the standpoint of a conspiracy.

In stark contrast, sectors of the alternative civil society have been launching programs and open proposals, have held meetings and events prior to public announcement –even under the harassment and hounding of the political police- unvarnished and without dissimulation or exclusions, and they have been attracting support and good will, especially of those young people who are not attracted by the “new” official promises. The fatuous fires that loosen the frayed olive green epaulets don’t have the appeal of the future that they dream of realizing by themselves, without masters, without dogmas.

Let’s look at today’s Cuba, the one where we have lived this year 2011, and let’s recap: who hides in order to devise compromises, conferences and alliances without consultation? who denies information to the people? who maintains the monopoly of the press and media and seeks to monopolize access to the Internet? who insists on distributing and managing, enforcing the limits and the pace of the transformations they are urging to apply? who harasses free citizens? who offers resistance to the multiparty and the full participation of all Cubans in the search for solutions? who opposes democratic change? does the power of the government legitimize retaining authority by force? Why, then do they say we are “the opposition”?

Translated by Norma Whiting

December 12, 2011

A disproportionate scandal has been unleashed these past few days around a vulgar Cuban video clip officially demonized and quasi-banned by the Culture Minister himself. It is the reggaeton entitled “Chupi Chupi” whose lyrics, in fact, are such a monument to audio-visual vulgarity that it could be considered record-breaking within a genre that is prominent in Cuban music, by its crudeness and by the lack of substance of its lyrics and images, and the obnoxiousness and repetitiveness of its refrain.

It is clear from the preceding paragraph that I detest reggaeton, though I acknowledge and respect the sovereign right of the followers of this (music genre?) to fully enjoy it, provided that, in turn, it does not invade my ears with its aggressive and artless lyrics. However, I am very surprised at the virulence of the official attack on a video clip that basically does not differ too much from others of equally vulgar, pornographic and similar insipid content. And if I understand that the scandal is “disproportionate”, it’s because in a reggaeton and reggaeton performer’s fight against the formidable cultural and official press apparatus, the song Chupi Chupi and its author, Osmani García, will be able to do little to defend themselves.

On the other hand, I cannot understand such last-minute Puritanism in the face of a phenomenon that has ruled over the Cuban music scene, not in “recent years”, as the high ranking Commissioner with a doctorate in Arts and Sciences claims in an article published by the press (Granma, Wednesday, November 23rd, 2011, pages 4-5) — the artistic Commissioner appointed to sanctify censorship to the public — but for at least the last two decades. It could be said that the specialist author of the journalistic diatribe, with the rank of Faculty Professor in the Department of Musicology at the Higher Institute of Art –- such are her very polished and lengthy titles and crests — was locked in her ivory tower, just listening to classic music all this time, therefore she had not heard that, in effect, musical vulgarity has claimed the throne in the taste of a good part of the Cuban people. I wonder how someone could be a specialist in musicology and ignore the process of impoverishment that has been gnawing away at Cuban popular music in its own environment.

I say this because it is impossible to drive through the streets of this city without passing a rickshaw dispensing reggaeton in its path, out loud, polluting the environment with its low-life sounds and the marginalization of its lyrics. Some bus drivers have similar habits and share with passengers in their crammed vehicles what they consider the greatest of musical creations, assuming that they are like-minded and want to share. The same goes for many of the classic old cars that serve as taxis on fixed transportation routes, where passengers that pay their fares have to suffer, whether they like it or not, the dissemination of reggaeton at high decibels … and God help anyone who dares to suggest to the driver to turn down the volume! The driver’s abuse is worse than the very lyrics of the music. If you don’t believe it, just ask Yoani Sánchez, who on one occasion had to get out of the car because of the driver’s anger when she protested discretely. Since that time, she has decided to board protected by headphones that allow her to build a defensive anti-reggaeton barrier, and, at the same time, enjoy her own music without making trouble or bothering anyone.

But specifically against the “El Chupi” onslaught… I started to think about other reggaeton and other lyrics that for several years have occupied the popular taste. Some of these creations are more vulgar and “stupefying” than others, but all are part of a repertoire under whose influence many, who are now in their adolescence and youth, have been brought up. I remember some of those gems, whose lyrics say “suck my sweet sugar cane, Mom …” another cried out in the voice of a cat in heat “Aaaayyy, I like Yumas!*…” Another urged: “Suck, suck, suck lollipops, take them out of your mouth, and put them in your nose….” And so forth, with the same level of excessively rhythmic idiocy.

These freaks have been a constant even at children’s birthday parties, so-called cultural activities in schools at all levels of education, at the feasts of the Committees for the Defense of the Revolution, in Pioneer camping trips and — believe it or not — even at day care center celebrations, promoted by the organizers of these activities, namely, teachers, educators, school leaders, cultural promoters, trainers, etc. At such times, it often happens that competitions are held, and those children who best mimic the pelvic movements of adults with ease and are able to “get onto the floor,” are the most applauded and encouraged by adults. So, in effect, a taste for reggaeton has become a widespread phenomenon. Not by chance was “El Chupi” nominated by popular vote for the latest and recent Lucas Awards, the annual Cuban video clip contest, from which it was eliminated by the decision of the Minister, against the proposal of his highly cultured people.

Until today, I think that promoting this type of music has spread in Cuba under official protection, aimed at a particular audience: large masses. Disseminating meaningless lyrics, keeping the public in an apathetic and lethargic state before the repetition of such empty refrains, appealing to the exaltation of the sensual and sexual as a way to alleviate the angst of so many hardships, reducing people to a state of idiocy, eroding minds and dehumanizing has been a “cultural” strategy employed by the authorities to channel and control energies, far from claims and reasoning. On the other hand, this type of thing tends to reinforce the image of a sexual paradise that is so appealing for the purposes of encouraging tourism, an economic stake par excellence for the government, only that, apparently, the image of the Cuban culture that was being presented is becoming too obscene and, for some unknown reason, they are putting an end to it.

At any rate, it is known that censure and bans only serve to encourage the consumption of the forbidden. These days, people have not stopped commenting on “the case of El Chupi,” and those who didn’t yet own a copy of the video clip ran to get it, the reverse effect of the reaction that turns subversive, and therefore, attractive, everything that upsets the authorities. Perhaps it is time for media owners to understand that banning is not what it’s about, but diversifying areas and options. It is time to open up true and total artistic and esthetic freedom and to allow all avenues for creativity to flow through. That would make Cubans a more cultured and selective peoples. May reggaeton not continue to be the only popular nor banned music. This could be another of so many beginnings we need.

*Translator’s note: Yumas are people born in the US.

Translator: Norma Whiting

November 28 2011

This week I had a brief involvement in a radio program, but, unfortunately, there was insufficient time for the issue which I was invited discuss. Of course, this is not the Cuban radio on the Island, nor do I want to make a critical assessment of the program in question in this post. I hold the show in high regard, and I’ve been honored when I was invited as their guest on more than one occasion. The radio has very peculiar characteristics, and the informative nature of the show prevents it from expanding into more substantial deliberations. But the truth is that, having just a minute or two to talk, I came away with –as we Cubans say- certain things inside me that I would not want to skip over, not because possibilities to sustain responses and counter-responses exist only in an extensive debate, but because the show’s subject revolved around the results of a survey conducted in Cuba by the International Republican Institute (IRI), an institution that has made a total of six surveys in Cuba in the past few months. Nothing about the current Cuban reality is alien to me, so let’s use our blog as virtual support to freely express considerations relating to the survey and its content.

I must start by acknowledging that, perhaps due to my academic training, despite my view of surveys as useful tools, I approach them with caution. To me, they are just that: tools, a means to an end. It is obvious that any survey implies an inevitable degree of subjectivity regarding the interests of the research conducted with the sample selection and other factors no less important, which is why sociological generalizations from a limited sampling is quite risky, regardless of the seriousness and professionalism of surveying institutions. The first thing, I believe, is that inquiries must involve arriving at new knowledge to transcend what is already known, and not merely to confirm issues already in the public domain. And though funds to conduct such inquiries do not come out of my pocket, I feel I am at liberty to question the results of this or any other survey, whether or not my opinion is welcome.

As for the distrust of government and the “socialist project” and the despair about the nation’s future, they are clearly validated in the increasing number of Cubans who leave the country, both legally and illegally, in a growing and constant wave. Viewed objectively, it could be stated that such exodus is the visible plebiscite that has been checking off a “NO” to the Castro-communist government. It can also be assured that the celebration of the VI Congress of the Cuban Communist Party this past April, with its disappointing results, has served as a catalyst that accelerated the stampede. This represents the people’s mute judgment about their faith in economic reforms. Cuba bleeds dramatically, losing in the exodus most of her young work force, many enterprising people, and the better portion of her best specialists. Isn’t this a more resounding truth than a thousand surveys?

As far as many Cubans here are concerned, it is not necessary to have survey results to verify the high levels of discontent and uncertainty we live under, or to confirm the mistrust over government dealings in the “implementation of changes” or “the renewal of the model”. And let’s not talk about the so-called reforms of the General! Just go to the license registration offices to verify the number of “permits” that are returned each day. One doesn’t have to be too clever to see that some of those who appealed to the law in order to maintain a small private business -be it a café, a restaurant or a jewelry stand- could not face high taxes and other economic challenges, and will try to survive in some other way going forward, not necessarily “legally”, given that the ultimate employer for half a century, Father State, has started, slowly but steadily, the swell (and not the “wave”) of layoffs and there aren’t many options. These elements of the frustrated proto-national business constitute, either on a conscious or subconscious level, a sector of critical and potential disaffects to the system.

At this stage of the game, Pero Grullo’s truth is valid, in that we Cubans have a miserable rate of Internet connectivity, an issue that has been published numerous times by institutions, agencies and international personalities, so it’s somewhat redundant to mention a (very fabulous) 7% rate of connectivity on the island, especially if it is known that many Cubans who have an official e-mail account in a strictly controlled national network say they “have Internet”. As it is, this figure is generous and does not reflect the true and lamentable extent of the lack of access of the vast majority of Cubans who have never had a chance to even glimpse at a web browser.

As an additional factor, a sample of 500 individuals as the number representative of a population of more than 11 million people makes me doubt the survey. The argument that “the number is valid because “these are the standard approved by prestigious international level survey agencies, therefore the results are accurate” does not sit well with me. Standardization of the knowledge or of the research can only lead to the ignorance of important factors, especially when we are dealing with sociology and politics. I don’t think, for example, that the responses of 500 Cubans living here can be as reliable and accurate as those of the same number of individuals in France, Germany, the US, or any other democratic society … those that set the standards. I regret that my answer to the IRI specialist‘s question of was so superficial, with my apologies to all the titles and coats of arms that decorate her, but I do not usually resign myself to the graces of acceptance, nor do I meekly assume the supposed intellectual superiority of an entity because there are simply pre-set standards (“unquestionable” by others) and, therefore, “good”.

Another element to consider in the Cuban case is the national paranoia, which generates a climate of self-censorship that often prevents real answers by the respondents. Reaching rates of 80-90% of anti-government criticism in Cuba is truly very difficult to achieve, even by independent Cuban journalists. On numerous occasions I have listened to evasive answers from people I’ve known for a long time, with whom I have a relationship of trust and who are critical of the Cuban reality. “I’m not interested in politics”, “I do not know anything about that, what we want is to leave”, “what’s important to me is to work out my life and my family, I don’t get involved”, or lately, they respond by imitating a trendy musical number: “I just want a little bit* so I can live”. So, I can only think that the survey takers of the Institute found the most civic 500 Cubans in all of Cuba. Such lucky guys! I don’t know if the institution fully understands their great responsibility in creating a false expectation in a nation (composed of Cubans everywhere) that has been subjected to such a long and anxious wait. Some will believe, based on these results, that reaching the end of the Cuban dictatorship is only a matter of procedure.

My well-respected colleague, who participated in the show, granted absolute credibility to the survey and dismissed my reservations because, as he stated, “We Cubans have lost our fear and express ourselves publicly in queues, in metropolitan mass-transportation, etc… “, which is absolutely true, as this writer has been able to experience in her daily strolls. However, cyclical collective catharsis amid a stressful situation and taking a survey (however limited it may be) without fear, in front of strangers, for a foreign institution to boot …is not the same. Does my colleague really believe that the two situations can compare? Does he think that the verbal explosion alone, in the presence of a host of frustrations can imply an anti-government political attitude or civic maturity? So what are we missing? Just will power? I think not.

For my part, I also want to believe that at least 500 anonymous, common Cubans, assumed their responsibility to express themselves conscientiously and without fear when responding to a survey, but frankly I “find it hard” to believe. Not a problem of lack of faith, but of realism. As for me, though I am convinced of the irreversible failure of the system and the inevitable end of the Cuban dictatorship, I prefer not to mislead or to sweeten the pill. I reject the triumphalism of any color or trend, and I will have validation of the rates obtained by the International Republican Institute on the day that the number of Cubans who publicly defend and support the Ladies in White is at least half of the repudiators contracted by the government to harass them; when the number of voters attending the polls in the fake elections of the so-called “people power” falls by at least 50%; when in any official meeting -of the CDR, of “accountability” of a union, of any nucleus of the Cuban Communist Party, etc.- at least 5 or 10 Cubans get up to question government policy or “higher” decisions or when simply someone shouts “I oppose the proposal.” That moment may not be too long in coming, I’m such an optimist, but, so far, Master Pollsters, what is true is that, beyond the good intentions and wishes to please, the results your surveys pose, just like the General Raul’s “reforms”, do not offer any certainty of changes.

*Translator’s note:
The traditional meaning of “cachito” is “a little bit”, but it’s possible that, when used in the song, it could refer to “a little joint” (marijuana cigarette), an alternate meaning in some parts of Latin America.

Translated by Norma Whiting

November 25 2011

Military business interests range from hard-currency stores, transportation for tourists and restaurants, to hotels in different parts of the country.

So that no one can say that the bans don’t also apply in places better favored by the dominant caste, a resolution has recently been passed banning employees of some well-known companies of the Ministry of Armed Forces from bringing portable computer devices to work. What that will mean is that employees won’t be allowed to bring to work flash drives, external drives, laptops, notebooks, mobile phones or any other “potential support for the transfer of information that can pose risks to the institution or to the country in its development of political, military, economic, commercial, scientific, technical, cultural, social and other aspects.”  How about that?

The rascal that makes an enemy out of any gadget related to computer technology is resolution 288/2011, and it’s a sort of gag order for employees of the Business Management Group (EAG), directed by Luis Alberto López Callejas, son-in-law of the General-President, and includes a number of companies operating in foreign currencies, including Gaviota. ALMEST (I don’t know the meaning of this acronym), TRD Caribe, Transgaviota, and others.

This resolution was reported to the employees in the early days of November, and although the order is apparently being obeyed, many unofficially admit that they carry their flash memories and cellular phones, contravening the order. “My cell phone line was way too expensive for me not to use it now.  I have a young kid at home and I have to be on the alert in case he gets sick or needs something,” a friend who works in one of those centers tells me.

The employees of these private military businesses are civilians, but they are subject to resolutions and circulars and are expected to observe the rules in a military fashion. In any case, the measure reflects the official terror of the possibilities of new technologies. In the face of such behavior, the referenced companies seem more like intelligence centers or offices where exchange of information takes place dealing with national security… or rather, the insecurity of the government.

Translated by: Norma Whiting

November 18 2011

A debate encounter sponsored by the Catholic digital publication Espacio Laical took place on Saturday, October 29th, 2011. The agency EFE, the leading Spanish news agency, reported the event in a very laudable manner, as published on October 30th on the digital site Cubaencuentro. The report states that “The new role that the Catholic Church in Cuba has undertaken has provided forums for dialogue where even a dissident or a controversial academician are able to exchange their views in public with a leading intellectual public official.” Additionally, it exposes details of the intervention of the founder of the Institute of Art and the Cinematographic Industry (ICAIC) and the director of the Latin American New Film Festival, Alfredo Guevara, who “gave a lecture on Cuba’s current challenges” by addressing issues of economic adjustments, the problem of bureaucracy and the need to understand diversity and tolerance in today’s Cuba.

Present at the event were Cardinal Jaime Ortega, the official academic Esteban Morales, the economist and former political prisoner of the Black Spring group, Oscar Espinosa Chepe, and a group of students, intellectuals, economists, foreign diplomats and “local and foreign journalists.” The press release does not specify who these local journalists were, but they are presumed to be representatives of the official press, since there has not been any editorial opinion about said encounter from independent journalists and bloggers.

Nor did the official media give coverage to such a significant event, though one of the topics discussed was precisely in relation to the limitations of the press in Cuba and “the concealment of information to citizens,” as discussed by dissident economist Espinosa Chepe, who was very positive about debates that are “civilized, not offensive, without exclusions or absurd prejudices, because ideological diversity does exist in Cuba”, and he indicated that it was enough just to walk outside to listen to people’s criticism. As part of his response, Guevara considered that secrecy had to end “radically”.

Another of the aspects that EFE’s report emphasizes is the opinion of many of the meeting’s attendees about “the new role being played by the Catholic Church, providing spaces for dialogue on issues of all kinds and incorporating diverse opinions” and it added that “Cardinal Ortega himself stated last Friday that the Church is experiencing a new relationship with the State and the people of Cuba, and he confirmed that the dialogue initiated last year with Raúl Castro and his government continues, and it affects all areas of national life, including the adjustment process to ‘update’ the socialist model.”

In reality, we must recognize that any debate space that opens up for dialogue in a nation so tense and fragmented as ours, will, indeed, be positive. However, it would be desirable that the intentions professed should correspond more consistently with the facts. Let’s say that no debate about the actual Cuban reality should be considered inclusive when among the participants there is barely one representative of the broad array of non-official opinion – call them dissidents — of all of society, when not one member is invited from independent journalism or from alternative civil society that has emerged ever so strongly in the past few years, and other numerous and young voices that have much to say and to which so many venues have been denied.

One of the notable absentees at this event is the Catholic layman Dagoberto Valdés editor of the magazine Vitral, for many years and current host of the group’s wonderful magazine Convivencia. There have been many cultural, literary and civic activities developed by this group of people from Pinar del Rio, led by Dagoberto, in defense of diversity, freedom, and Cubanism; however, they don’t seem to qualify to take part in the debate of Espacio Laical.

There were also no representatives from the Cuban Law Association to offer an alternative view on the new legislation that is being announced, and the decrees that have been introduced in the very highly publicized process of government reforms.

Neither the Catholic Church nor Espacio Laical can be considered “new spaces” as they offer just the stage where discussions are confined to the thematic framework of the same old speeches disguised as reform, dictated by the same old speakers that have thrived for more than half century in the high politics of the country, apparently without perceiving any errors in the system. If those are the guiding voices, we are not before what is new or innovative, but rather in the presence of an opportunistic mutation of the same and already long-lived deadly disease.

Cardinal Ortega’s approach also seems, at the very least, ambiguous, since the idea that the Church is experiencing a new relationship with the Cuban people and their “dialogue” covers all areas of national life, including so-called process of updating the socialist model. At least regular Cubans do not seem to feel the presence of the Church in their lives, full of all kinds of shortages and lack of places to express themselves. Monsignor Ortega is far from being considered a representative of the feelings of the Cuban people, and, so far, he doesn’t seem to have as close a relationship with them as he does with the General. Nor can I understand the relationship between the purple and the olive green dialogue or their intention to renew socialism. It would seem that the Cardinal might soon receive his Cuban Communist Party membership card.

In fact, this Espacio Laical event has been full of the same secrecy that was so criticized in the encounter: there were no calls to attend, no invitation to all active opinion sectors, or media coverage of the conference and debates, or transparency. It was as if it were a conspiracy to care for a sacred venue, safe from the sacrilegious agitators who make embarrassing pronouncements, who plant themselves, who demand rights, who express themselves respectfully but without hiding their opinions. Apparently, new parameters have been established that maintains tight departments or niches, neither more nor less than the feedback of a new sectarianism, now scented with wax and incense.

Espacio Laical has often published brave and honest editorials, and has, in more than one occasion, expressed opinions and put forth questions that reflect the concerns of thousands of Cubans, but, in this case, it must be recognized that in practice it’s losing the opportunity to demonstrate true commitment for dialogue, because one cannot ignore players who have been marking the beat on the transformation of Cuban public opinion long before the government is forced to occasionally temper its discourse or to implement –much to their dismay- the limited economic and social changes that seem to dazzle the press today.

The Cardinal, meanwhile, played a positive role as a mediator for the release of prisoners of conscience, but their freeing could not have been possible without the courage and perseverance of the Ladies in White, without the sacrifice of Guillermo Fariñas and without the ongoing activities of journalists and independent bloggers. None of them were invited to the event last Saturday, perhaps because the Catholic Church delicately does not allow itself the risk of offending the speeches of the holy hierarchy with the more legitimate civil claims, or because perhaps it considers the people of this country so inept that they can only be represented either by guns or cassocks.

Thus, I would argue that the real opportunities for dialogue have been taking place spontaneously outside of institutions. The Estado de SATS (where Art and thought converge) the groups OMNI ZONAFRANCA, the Blogger Academy, Voces digital magazine, the group Convivencia, some of these spaces are inclusive, where all opinions are welcome, where debates don’t have stiff moderators surfeited with authority, or require the previous dictate of some anointed official. Good for Espacio Laical if it decides to promote and maintain a new debate forum, albeit half-hearted, but – let’s be fair — the event this past October 29th was neither so unprecedented nor a dialogue.

Translator: Norma Whiting

November 11 2011

On Tuesday, November 1st, the Granma newspaper announced on its front page something that may constitute the ultimate Cuban surrealism. “The Cuban economy will grow 2.9% this year”. Page 2 displayed the same triumphant tone in two other petty articles whose headlines bear happy and misleading portents: “FIHAV 2011*. Growing Spanish Interest in Commercial Interchange with Cuba,” and” Investments in Construction Material Industry Guarantee Sector Growth.” All very funny, really. Granma has become the funniest publication in this country, only in most cases it’s black humor.

However, though just in the two blocks encompassed by Árbol Seco, between Estrella and Sitios (Centro Habana) every day there are between four and five carts with about the same products –- onions, green beans, bananas and plantains, garlic, peppers, avocados, papaya, tomato and beans — produce prices are not only excessively high, they are higher than last year’s prices.

Just yesterday I stopped in to do some shopping at the market on the corner of Jesús Peregrino and Santiago, also in Centro Habana. Eleven tiny tomatoes, a bunch of plantains and three small taro cost me 30 pesos. Next to me, an old man in his seventies watched the price board with an incredulous and concerned look in his face. He smiled at me bitterly. Nothing doing, honey, we came in second in the Pan-American Games, so now we will eat medals. And he left, talking to himself, with an empty shopping bag.

And while the official party mouthpiece wallows in such economic recovery inexplicably born out of fiction in a country where for so long nothing is produced, ordinary people feel their pockets increasingly depressed. In recent months, for example, my neighborhood has filled with produce carts. The proliferation of “wagon pushers” is such that, according to one of them, “no more licenses for this activity are being issued because the ones they had planned on have been exhausted.” You’d think that agricultural production would have increased under the reform momentum of our General-President. Produce stands and agro-markets, meanwhile, seem to compete only in terms of prices, a “contest” among sellers that seems determined to show who is able to set the highest price for his products; markets where, in addition, the quality of what’s offered leaves much to be desired.

*Havana International Fair 2011

Translated by Norma Whiting

November 4 2011

Those of us Habaneros who were already adults in the 90’s witnessed the dismantling of the so-called “hostels” or INIT shelters, which — for the younger readers — were something like the tropical version of a cheap motel in which, for a small fee, couples who had no other adequate space rented a room for a few hours to have sexual relations. As a “solution” for the impossible task of sustaining the housing construction micro-brigades in the midst of the crisis known as “the special period in peacetime”, those hostels were fully adapted to housing and distributed as tiny apartments to families that did not have a place to live.

As a consequence, far from solving the general problem of housing, given that there were never enough hostels to provide homes to so many who needed them, they created another problem: couples without private spaces were stripped of their seedy but single possibility of having sex behind closed doors, without emptying their pockets. There has been little discussion of this, but since they closed the inns, sex was another item that became significantly more expensive and even became part of public spectacles in parks, dark corners, and stairways of familiar buildings.

But such dispossession was not something that concerned government officials. After all, this only hurt the poorest and, besides, no one would even think of bringing up such a problem in an assembly, lest they be labeled obscene or be subjected to ridicule. Mockery is already known to be the national tendency. On silencing the issue, the problem would “disappear”. Curiously, Cubans, who often boast of being sexual athletes, get very picky when discussing issues related to this. And so, the hostels, like other morally questionable sites, ended up red-listed among the many useful institutions that disappeared under this government.

The fact is that twenty years later, with the growing housing crisis, the steady deterioration of housing stock, and the chronic insufficiency of construction, the authorities have opted to appeal to a supreme source: turning into housing many of the local houses and offices recently used by their institutions, plus factories that have been closed due to the regressive economic effect of the system. Of course, this is not about institutions that are strategic to the government, but those that do not produce earnings, but expenses: The Ministry of Education, of Housing, small factories, etc.

Thus, while the construction of new buildings with better dignified façades are intended only for the sectors for the faithful (“atypical” buildings for Armed Forces or Interior Ministry officials) or beautiful homes are built for the anointed with closer relationships with the power in exclusive neighborhoods of the city, such as the “frozen” area in the vicinity of the hospital popularly known as CIMECQ, near Ground Zero, a neighborhood that was for the previous highest bourgeoisie; the disadvantaged get an ancient building or an austere narrow office space turned into an apartment, where, slowly, as construction materials make their appearance, they are building, with their own hands and with moving illusion, what will be their home the day that they finally install the last coat of plaster.

Those who want to verify this can simply pick out a sector of the city and set their eyes on the details. The old tobacco factory located at Carlos III and Árbol Seco is getting the final push to be transformed into a kind of new type of rooming house which will accommodate 21 apartments for families. The old building of the micro-social in the Casino Deportivo (3rd Street, between Entrada and 2nd) is also being turned into small apartments, while the house that was a branch of the Ministry of Education on the same block was given to a more lucky family… maybe an official who is devout from one of the sacred, untouchable institutions, those that don’t get mutilated.

Mind you, I don’t regret the disappearance of the offices of so many obsolete units which, like the marabou weed*, have spread throughout Cuba for over half a century. In fact, I would love to see their return to their original condition as family homes, for example, four comfortable mansions which for decades, after having been expropriated from their rightful owners, have been used as headquarters of the provincial committee of the Communist Party. That, and not to mention the overwhelming number of buildings also occupied by other parasitic organizations: CTC, CDR, FMC, DC, Popular Power, and an endless list. The mansions of the leaders and their privileged neighborhoods, are, of course, not linked to the housing program for the poor.

Given the lack of new construction, the inability of the state to build, and the reluctance to allow work to develop from the initiative of private contractors and private enterprises of Cubans, the government has chosen to draw on the outgrowths of their own outdated institutions, a kind of social autotrophy that, somehow, looks like a graphic manifestation of the system’s malnutrition.

*Translator’s Note:
Dichrostachys cinerea. In Cuba, the plant is known as El Marabú or Marabou weed. It has been estimated that it occupies close to five million acres (20,000 km²) of agricultural land.

Translated by Norma Whiting

October 28 2011

One of the first rulings of General R. when he assumed the enthronement to power (please allow me to flatter the younger Castro’s vanity) was to create a system to detect and to put a stop to the rampant corruption that has been entrenched in the country through all spheres and at all levels. It is suspected that corruption is generalized, but the controls and audits reach only to a point … past this point, it might cause dangerous vertigo.

The first (detecting corruption) should be extremely easy. It is obvious and jumps up at you without much effort. The second (putting an end to it), is another matter. Because the General, of course, initiated from the start a process on the surface – not exactly from above — and downward, just where the pockets of the regime resent it the most, and many illustrious heads have rolled since then, including some gray-haired celebrity ones or some that don’t even have enough hair for a comb-over and only until recently were part of the trusted court of their olive green Majesties.

The first of the renowned Band of Seven to have been sacked were Otto Rivero, Felipe Pérez Roque, Francisco Soberón, José Luis Rodríguez, Carlos Lage, Carlos Valenciaga Estenoz and Fernando Rodríguez, who apparently were some sort of threat to the higher epaulets in the palace. “Revolutionaries” of the old guard, who until recently were known for their proven commitment to the regime have joined them.

Apparently, the effects of the Finance Ministry are proving more outrageous than what is prudent, so the official press has been given explicit orders to keep silent. That is, even more silent. So the media, mainly the written press, is engaged, with zeal worthy of better causes, to bring to the light of day the misuse of resources by the manager of some bakery or some agrarian co-op, but sweeps under the rug the dirt of ministries and of other senior bureaucrats with titles that are longer than their own names.

It seems that no one escapes the scrutiny of the severe comptroller of impulses of the purifying will of the General. Personally, I think it’s like a cash count, in which the incoming treasurer makes an effort to purify the accounts so that their own gains are not resented. Because in the state we find ourselves, it could be said that comptrollers have defecated against the ceiling fans, and more courtiers have been hit with feces than their majesties had thought. From ministers, managers of firms (foreign and Cuban), aviation directors, corporate officers of various magnitudes, including the brand-new and militant ETECSA, and countless numbers of minor number of minor entourages that have indeed been publicly beheaded.

But what more curious individuals won’t stop wondering, those who won’t stop misbehaving, who wonder about everything and are always full of ill-intentions, is who will be the leaders charged with renovating a model that seems to generate epidemics of corrupt leaders? What guarantees will there be that of those who will assume the responsibilities of the deposed won’t end up corrupted? What are the chances that a government that has not been able to create morally able replacements to carry out the “high mission of the revolution” will ever succeed in putting together, in the short run, a group of responsible and honest leaders? Will they create leadership schools? Will the General be able to trust anyone under the age of 75? Can we trust (and this is the clincher) the selection capability of the General?

But, in the midst of this sea of corruption of those who used to manage just a small slice of the power and the money, maybe the hardest questions to answer are precisely those that seem more urgent and logical: Are our president and his closest cronies the only “pure” ones we have left to take the helm in the midst of so many storms? Is the General “auditable”? Who is the comptroller who scrutinizes the financial dealings of the administration of the country?

Let’s sit and wait for the answer from the brand-new Comptroller General of the Republic.

Translated by Norma Whiting

October 3 2011

An article by a foreign news agency recently reported on the Internet, “Cuban Dissidents at a Crossroads”by Paul Haven and Andrea Rodríguez of the Associated Press, suffers from, at least, two of the most common and serious limitations of accredited journalism in Cuba: contempt for the nationals of this Island and an almost total disregard for the history and idiosyncrasies of the country about which they aim to “inform”.

Without a doubt, politically-connected jobs and those who hold those jobs enjoy fertile ground in certain press agencies, which explains how Cuba has become a haven for some who, without much effort and without risk of getting a mild slap on the wrist when they get too close to tolerance limits set by the authorities, rush to “analyze” a stage that they have barely glimpsed. It seems that, to be a reporter for “the Cuban reality,” all a foreign journalist needs is a good camera, a bag with a corresponding water bottle, a couple of pairs of shorts and some cotton shirts to better withstand the heat, a dirty pair of sandals for smudging their heels while walking on the smelly and dusty streets of our battered Havana — because, in addition, they don’t usually venture out to explore the deep and provincial Cuba, the one that suffers even more than this oblivion capital — and, finally, to report to their agencies, through Internet connections. I imagine that Cuban journalistic assignments must be comparable to winning the lottery for such press professionals. After all, they will always have an opportunity to later publish a quite different Cuban reality to the one they reported while on assignment here, thus they can reap additional financial benefits while cleaning up their journalistic dignity with this exercise of retroactive ethics.

Only thus could the following statement be explained: “When ‘Ladies in White’ were established as a protest for the imprisonment of activists and journalists in Cuba in 2003, the mission of this group of women was simple: to attain freedom for their loved ones”. And the subtlety lies is in the details and the way in which ideas are placed, because the mission of the Ladies in the beginning was, indeed, the release of their relatives, but because it is a struggle waged almost single-handedly and in a dictatorship, such a task could not be as “simple” as all that. In fact, the evolution of seven years’ experience led to a deepening in the awareness of that civic movement and expanded its horizons, raising the levels of its demands.

Another trendy suggestion points to the march of the Ladies in White as a kind of Sunday entertainment, since they move “in a quiet suburb of Havana”, as if they levitate over the city without going through Centro Habana neighborhoods or others in the capital or in the provinces, which may not be as mild as the patrician Miramar neighborhoods. In such marches, they are not attacked by ordinary people, but it is a rare occasion when they are not harassed by the pack of hounds recruited by the political police (“pro-official” groups, the referenced journalists call them, instead of defining them as what they are: government employees). In fact, the attacks against the Ladies are taking place more and more often, and the violence of the henchmen’s harassment is becoming more pronounced.

Another element that the Ladies in White and their cause base their rationale on is the persistence of the well-known “gag law” that put 75 independent journalists and many other dissidents behind bars. The mere existence of this provision in the country’s legal body legitimizes repression, abolishes freedom of expression, and allows for possible future arrests for the same or similar causes, that is, expressing ideas not in line or contrary to the stipulations of the regime. The coherence of the Ladies in White lies precisely in understanding that fixing the effect is not enough, but eliminating the causes that precipitate it is essential in order to prevent its recurrence.

Some other inaccuracies, if we must call them that, emerge in the oblique analysis of reference, as inferred from a sentence as naive as it is harmful, considering the release of prisoners a fact that “left the Ladies in White without a cause” and placed “the dissident community” at “a crossroads and challenged with redefining itself and gaining the support of a society that has never seemed particularly receptive or even aware of its message”. It would seem that these blundering journalists overlook the fact that this society’s only source of information about dissidents and opposition proposals is what’s offered by the media, an absolute state monopoly dedicated to systematically demonizing and slandering any alternative proposal, that the government employs all available resources — in particular the repressive forces — to maintain a fence that prevents communication between the dissidents and society, and that civil society which was just beginning to gain strength in the Republic was demolished starting in the early years of the 1959 revolution, and five decades of mute terror has sown in ordinary Cubans either silence or the sham of phony loyalty to the government as elemental survival strategies.

In fact, the “informal poll” conducted by the AP on 30 Cubans “consulted at random”, resulting in five (16.6%) being able to identify Laura Pollan, nine (30%) Guillermo Fariñas, three (10%) the blogger Yoani Sánchez could, in fact, be considered an achievement. These results are quite flattering for the dissidence, taking into account conditions in Cuba. Just two years ago, the corollaries of such a survey would have yielded much lower figures, virtually nil.

Cuban dissidence is truly small and fragmented, as befits a country in which, conversely, the dictatorship is huge and monolithic. But again, the mistake of making woeful comparisons is made, because civic resistance here is not comparable in any way, nor does it have any intention to “emulate” the upheavals that took place in the Arab world. Comparing Cuban social reality, not just with the Arab world, but irrationally — for its addition — with those of countries like Great Britain, Spain or Greece, can only be classified as a childish fantasy or a perversion. The aberration is further strengthened when seasoned journalists dab the olive-green autocracy with rosewater.

“And though political freedom may be lacking in a country that was ruled by one or another of the Castro brothers for over 50 years, the government left the (dissident) movement partially without argument when it allowed for greater economic opportunities in recent months, and when it promised more reforms soon”. (Parenthesis added by this author). Viewed in this way, the growing discontent, the many expressions of protest, and the demands for rights that are taking place across the Island in increasing waves, and despite beatings, rallies and arrests suffered by protesters, would seem the mere nonsense of occasional rioters and that this country should have enough with a handful of kiosk-type, pint-sized reforms.

What these foreign reporters don’t explain how to justify that the resistance has been gaining strength precisely in recent months, when we Cubans have “greater economic opportunities” thanks to the called-for and misnamed “reforms” of General R. Castro, which, rather than transforming the country’s socioeconomic plight, have become the latest government defense parapet against public opinion, and a kind of safety valve, despite their shortcomings, in the presence of raising pressure in Cuba and the irreversibility of the general crisis, barely a precarious rein to brake the inevitable end of “the model”.

And here is more evidence of a trick of the subconscious of those who, without knowing us, often look at us with condescension and qualify us disdainfully, because, while European grumblers are known as “outraged” and can afford the luxury of marching in the thousands, despite all the imperfections of democracy, they have the rights that even foreign journalists don’t question, and the opportunity to elect who their leaders will be; there isn’t much for us, the Cuban outraged, to do. But, in perspective and adapting each situation, the Cuban dissident movement would be comparable and even superior to the protests that are taking place in the free world, for theirs is a universe that has access to information and social networks, with unions, civic organizations, rights and freedoms, all the choices that are denied to us.

It is true that the “traditional” Cuban opposition has lacked in consistency, sound strategies and connection to society as a whole. The root of the evil lies in, among many other causes, civic orphanhood of a nation that was never known for being responsible and where politics is always a subject “for others” to see to. But, at their inception, European transitions have never been characterized by having brandished great political plans that hailed multitudes, or by the abundance of leaders who were of great importance or of large-scale social impact, and none of this ever deterred the changes that took place.

Obviously, some observers hope in vain for an impossible miracle to happen in Cuba, while certain accredited journalists seem to be expecting that nothing really takes place that would threaten the tropical affair of a journalism that is bland, irresponsible and without ethical commitments.

Translated by Norma Whiting

September 30 2011

My dear friend Marta Cortiza, married to my other friend, the blogger Eugenio Leal, often used the phrase in the title of this brief posting whenever she called me: “Hello Miriam!, How are you? I’m calling just to make an appearance”. And after the usual introduction we would often get entangled in long conversations that covered topics as varied and contradictory as the sociopolitical situation in Cuba and the world, the minutiae of our families, or the exchange of recipes. I found speaking with Martha as easily natural and spontaneous as if we had been born and raised together, and as if we could read each other’s thoughts.

Just a few years were enough to enhance our extraordinary friendship, forged in the toils and blows that being part of the demonized group of dissidents implies in Cuba, running the same risks and having common interests and shared hopes. Marta’s rare personality combines both a strong will and permanent appeal. She is one of those people who, almost without being noticed, with unmatched candor, becomes essential and close in her affections.

Almost a year ago Little Martha, as I call her in jest, left Cuba. She reunited with her children and grandchildren in Miami and left her many friends here part of her cheerful spirit that still accompanies us in our bustle and blogger meetings. She is cofounder of the blogosphere but never started her own blog. She encouraged our work and supported us from its very inception, and I know that she is linked with our destinies so all the alternative Cuban blogs are thus a little bit hers too.

For this reason and because this is the first time that I cannot congratulate her personally on her birthday this September 26th, I wanted to dedicate this small note as a poor present. If any readers walking the streets of Miami recognize this lady with her warm smile, her honest eyes and her white hair, let it be known that she is a friend of the Cuban free bloggers, that she is a part of us, and that we love her dearly. Here’s to your health, Little Martha! May you have many more, and that I will soon be able to hear your voice on the phone often, uttering that phrase, so nice and familiar: “hello, Miriam, just making an appearance!”

Translated by Norma Whiting

September 26 2011

The independent Cuban blogosphere has had an impressive growth in its few years of existence despite low Internet connectivity on the Island. Most blogs that have been set up and kept open during this time are autonomous spaces arising by the spontaneous free will of their respective administrators and, although the authorities insist on including almost all under the generic label of “dissidents,” (in Cuba the slightest sign of independence automatically implies “subversion”) the truth is that at least some of them are not particularly concerned with political issues, with accusations or with the social criticism of the Cuban reality.

In spite of that and without denying that inspirations for criticism abound in a reality such as ours, the continuing growth and diversification of the blogosphere into themes and interests that have nothing to do with the ideological over-saturation we have endured for over half a century is something to celebrate. For that reason, among more powerful ones, I wanted to dedicate a brief overview of the recent birth of a peculiar blog. As far as I know, Cuba did not have a personal blog devoted to culinary and gastronomic topics, irrespective of some, like the blog “Through the Eye of the Needle“, where my friend Rebecca Monzo sometimes inserts one or another recipe. The new space (Voy Caliente), with strong interests in fusion-kitchen; with dietary proposals in line with current world trends and also the bearer of a refreshing ideas segment of young Cuban restaurateurs, brings a little spice to a blogosphere that continues to grow. Each new blog is a sign of the health of the spirit of a consolidated online community.

And if some of my readers find it surprising that a blogger so stubborn and free thinking would pay special attention to a blog seemingly far removed from her everyday comings and goings and her strong voice, I must say that I have reasonable grounds for this, not only because Jorge Ortega Celaya, principal of the new blog, is a great young chef who aspires to someday have his own restaurant with the personal seal of his talent, and whose creations I have often enjoyed, but because this blogger is my oldest son. So the adage “the testimonial is up close and personal” is fulfilled to a T.

Thus, just like I welcomed my son to the world in January 1980, today I want to welcome the blogger, born to the same virtual space I have dwelled in for a few years; a place where – just like he did in real life — he must carve a course for himself. I wish him, of course, all the luck in the world.

Translated by Norma Whiting

September 23 2011

Though my regular readers know I don’t usually publish work that I have not written myself, I decided to publish, as an exception, an article from attorney Wilfredo Vallín Almeida, president of the Cuban Law Association (AJC), my friend and traveling companion. The decision reflects the importance of this partnership for its work in support of the rights of Cubans and the unique and valuable efforts of such a meaningful undertaking in a country lacking in freedom and civic-mindedness. The work of this group of lawyers is as necessary to Cubans as it is dangerous to authorities, hence the official interest in sabotaging its work and trying to distort the nature of the organization and the morale of its members.

Readers can get more information about these events in the forums of the Association, where a series of six works by attorney Mr. Vallín will be published starting today.

I urge readers to follow the posts, since the organization is currently awaiting an answer regarding its application for legalization, and it is the only organization that has filed a legal complaint against the ministration of justice in Cuba for that cause, creating a precedent hitherto unheard of in the history of civic resistance in Cuba in half a century of dictatorship.

Thanks and a big hug,
Miriam Celaya

Disrespect and Right of Reply

Wilfredo Vallín Almeida

This past September 12th, two lawyers from the Cuban Law Association (AJC) in the province of Artemisa got a subpoena signed by sub-Lieutenant Javier Rebozo Pérez to appear before him at the Alquízar State Security Department the next day.

The lawyers of the AJC decided to attend though the first violation was already included in said citation, -this is something we’re used to about the political police- and because neither complied with Article 86 paragraph 3 of the Criminal Procedure Act (they don’t specify the subpoena’s subject), and were, therefore, null and void.

Although they were each “interviewed” separately, the points addressed by the officers in attendance at the meeting can be summarized as follows:

1. Reasons for the presence of such persons in the Cuban Law Association.
2. Ambiguity regarding the aims pursued by the AJC.
3. Counterrevolutionary character of the President of the Organization.
4. Attorney Wilfredo Vallín’s relationship with known figures of the opposition to the current Cuban government.
5. Source of the economic resources that the AJC seems to have access to.
6. Discredit which the Organization will shortly be subjected to through the national media of mass communication.

With the right to reply that any human being should have anywhere and against anything deemed insulting to his dignity, we will answer, one by one, the above points, but in our own way, that is, without hiding our identity behind assumed names, without hiding anything (since there is nothing to hide), and for anyone who wants to know, especially when it comes to our fellow citizens.

We will start with something that was not listed above, but one we consider essential to address. We will respond because, in the face of slander, one cannot remain silent, but –this must be made clear- the Law Association does not recognize that the Cuban State Security Department has any jurisdiction in this matter.

And we don’t recognize its jurisdiction here because:

1. From the beginning of its establishment, the AJC took on the task, UNDER THE LAWS THAT DO EXIST IN THIS COUNTRY, THOUGH SOME DON’T LIKE IT, to be respectful observers of the tenets of those laws, and to conduct ourselves ethically before the Registry of Associations, The Ministry of Justice, and the national courts that have to do with the ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS that, ACCORDING TO THE LAW, we have followed to date.
2. Up to the time I am writing this, we have not received from any of those involved as counterparties, (those we do recognize as bearing the title of AUTHORITIES, and not the mere agents of the same), any expression, in any form, disqualifying of our actions.
3. The decision of the highest organ imparting justice in the country, the Supreme Court, which acts in our power, recognizes the right of citizens (and therefore ours) to peaceful association, provided that the legally required formalities are followed. We find it hard to admit that the State Security Department is ignorant of this.
4. In our view, the intervention of the political police in a completely legal process that develops under the laws established by the institutions authorized to do so, in the hands of authorities competent to decide, is, first and foremost, a lack of respect for the nation’s judiciary powers, and the denial of basic citizenship rights we supposedly enjoy.

The shortage of space will result in us having to replicate the rest of the points made at the beginning in the few next AJC blog posts and in those friendly publications that have offered to publish this.

Just one last thing for now: The AJC has a president with a well-known name by those who do not seem to even trust their courts. There is no need to call lesser members. You can call him, and he will be sure to respond without the need for a subpoena.

Translated by Norma Whiting

September 19 2011

For Cubans, accustomed to living at such a slow pace that time seems to pass only through sheer inertia, as if we belonged to the dizzying world beyond our borders, that other dimension of this universe, recent weeks have begun to make a difference. The Cuban reality has become less apathetic and linear – the obstinate legacy of CAME-style socialism that artificially changed the natural dynamics of a western country — and, suddenly, multiple simultaneous events begin to occur, apparently unconnected, but, when viewed together, respond to the system’s failure and the long accumulation of errors in the sociopolitical and economic life, inevitably pointing to the advent of an era in which accelerated changes can occur in any direction and in an unpredictable manner.

Almost on a daily basis, incidents have been springing up, such as arrests, threats, house confinements, repudiation rallies in various parts of the island by the repression forces and other supporters of the regime, and there have even been raids against presumably prostitute homosexuals these past few days, in the middle of Parque Central, before the vacant eyes of a marble apostle, which ended with the death of a 34-year-old young man in circumstances not clearly established. The common denominator of the victims of the official repression is their claim to universally recognized rights and peaceful methods of struggle, in sharp contrast to the brutality that has been applied in most cases to try to suppress the growing public unrest.

Each day, apparent fear of the authorities is becoming more evident and dissident sectors more visible in the country. Each situation seems favorable to break the false calm that hides behind a slight, though sustained, increase in the contained nonconformity: the parks around the National Capitol, the Mercado Único, the Our Lady of Charity procession on September 8th, the free and spontaneous meetings of citizens’ debates in private homes – whether in Miramar, Nuevo Vedado, or in any other neighborhood in the capital or throughout the country — the growth in independent journalism and in the number of bloggers and even a Christian church in one of the busiest boulevards in Havana that has caused an unusual interruption in the traffic flow and a spectacular deployment of police and Interior Ministry special forces.

Suddenly, without warning, events that just a couple of years ago were unthinkable are taking place. Coincidence? I think not. And there are reasons to believe that the situation may become ever more complex. There is evidence that the repressive actions only serve to stoke the fire of insubordination. More than five decades of totalitarian control have been able to slow the process, but not to prevent it. The accumulation of frustration, lack of perspective and, above all, the despair, don’t provide an environment conducive to the application of repressive measures. The government, whether it likes it or not, should be walking on eggshells.

If this rare situation in the country were not enough, the regime finds itself nearing a complex international juncture that will influence, perhaps decisively, the course of events. Among them are: the elections in Venezuela that could decisively change the current circumstances and force the Cuban government to take urgent steps for changes, the US elections, which could favor the sectors most prone to toughening the sanctions against the regime and thus directly affect revenues to the Cuban economy from several sectors, with an immediate effect on society as a whole; the continuance of the Common Position of the European Union, which tends to isolate the dictatorship, and the global economic crisis, among other things.

While this horizon, full of storm clouds, looms over our near future, the Cuban government continues to further damage its already ruined reputation by supporting dictatorships in North Africa and the Middle East, in solidarity with the most repudiated global satrapies; removing the credentials of foreign media representatives; developing its partnerships with new regional leaders, and acting heavy-handedly towards the growing protests inside the country.

Today, when dictatorships are being annihilated, when citizen protests and governmental intolerance converge dangerously, just when the new rhythm that marks the era may affect despotic powers more so than those lesser individuals deprived of freedom, the Cuban reality is wiping out the old adage “the devil knows more because he is old than because he is the devil”. So, our extremely old rulers are, without a doubt, devils, but they are absolutely not showing us any proof of their wisdom.

Translated by Norma Whiting

September 12 2011

Some signs are so “timely” that they cannot be by chance. A few days ago (Tuesday September 13th, 2011, p. 5.) the newspaper Granma published a full page article that justifies that in 1956 the then young revolutionary F. Castro accepted financial assistance — $50,000 US Dollars! — from former Cuban President Carlos Prío to organize the expedition that would bring together the aspiring guerrillas and the yacht Granma.

The writing, which at times seems taken from a comic strip where the exaltation of the hero is what matters the most — the bold main character swimming across the Rio Grande, an incognito voyage, to elude the vigilance of the evil ones, conspiracy, danger — is only a fragment of a book published by the Publications Office of the State Council, which makes me suppose that the whole book would make Tarzan himself turn pale with envy.

However, what is curious is that the largest newspaper in Cuba, the official organ of the PCC, up to now had devoted several lengthy articles accusing the opposition and civil society groups (Damas de Blanco, independent journalists and bloggers, among others) of having received financial support from abroad, but had not felt compelled to remind its readers of the moral purity of the olive green pedigree … despite the dubious origin of its funding. To this day, as far as I can remember, it had not devoted the same dissident-burning space to argue the tremendous sacrifice of the Venerated one, as he felt so forced to bow before those monies at the time, without its donor suspecting that he was helping to make possible the establishment in Cuba of the longest dictatorship in this hemisphere. Never before was it acknowledged that those “ill-gotten” $50,000 were well worth the humiliation of the leader of the Cuban Revolution!

So the official lampoon shows that what determines the morality of money is the cause it supports, not its source. Since it’s so, I don’t see any moral conflict in which dissidents, whether they are opponents, journalists or any other representatives of the broad front of dissatisfied Cubans, receive some monetary support, especially considering that the government does not seem too concerned about the origin of the capital of many foreign investors in Cuba, nor has it shown any squeamishness in appropriating a not-so-insignificant part of family remittances from the enemy empire, without us knowing for sure what these honorable revenues are used for.

Consequently, if what is dignifying about money is the principle underlying the support, and if that principle is endorsed by groups and individuals who advocate democracy, plurality, inclusion, freedom of expression and, finally, the aspiration by Cubans to exercise all their rights and to bring an end a dictatorship, I cannot think, right now, of a better destiny for the highly demonized funding.

Translated by: Norma Whiting

September 16 2011