Category: Reinaldo Escobar

Each of these rolling artifacts contains the history of other disasters. The seats, awnings, struts, every screw, every washer conceals at least three crimes. Even the air that inflates the tires may be illegal.

The parking lot belongs to the State, as indicated by the faded blue letters. It is as you imagine it, as a comedian friend says, which means that it works badly or at least without any controls and nobody knows how much money is collected for its use nor how many things it is used for.

The apparently unnecessary sanitation warning deserves a mention. Why would anyone expect there would be a bathroom open to passersby in a pedicab parking lot? Where else has anyone seen such a sign? Of course there should be a bathroom, and it should be clean, with water and toilet paper.

Nor is there WiFi access to the internet, nor a sign that says the parking lot does not discriminate against any person, but there it is, an image that typifies early 21^st century Cuba and, in the background, a tiny and innocent little flag that at the end of the day is the only space that seems to save itself from the disaster.

And although emotion and reason don’t usually mix in academic environments, everyone there was both reasonable and emotional. Some thought about the Cuba they lost, others about the one they never managed to achieve. From the nostalgia and frustration emerged the best threads of this fabric.

What country can we build? That is a question that can only be fully answered when – in one way or another – the illusion in which we live comes to an end. But the prophetic exercise is essential if we do not want to arrive at “the day after” with our saddlebags empty of projects.

On more than one occasion, while a precise issue was discussed, such as the critical problem of confiscated properties or the presumed overwhelming entry of foreign companies, or the need to raise the birthrate, both viewpoints promoted their different takes on the issues.

While some warned that the nation cannot be mortgaged to satisfy the claims for compensation, others prioritized full respect for property under the rules of a State of Law. Where some proposed protectionist measures to avoid strangling the initiative of small native entrepreneurs, others expounded that the solution is to stimulate the entrepreneurs and not to regulate their competition. Where some demanded subsidies for women who have more children, others aspired to a prosperity that favored growing families.

The proposals of both sides were duly noted and even balanced, avoiding rivalry, but without looking for a consensus, because this meeting of ideas was intended to develop an inventory of proposals, without pretensions of pleasing an eventual electorate, without partisanship or populism.

There are still many issues pending: education, healthcare, legal matters, culture, science and technology, among others. If the spirit of the previous meetings is maintained, both on and off the island, this nation-beyond-borders where Cubans live and dream will have taken an enormously important step. Ideas, solutions, issues for future discussions will have been compiled. The dilemmas that we do not have today, but that we will inevitably have tomorrow, when there is the freedom to have dilemmas.

It would be of some use to the social researchers gathered at the Palace of Conventions to answer some questions about “evolutionary dynamics” that have not had a clear answer in the Party or government documents.

Not included here is any specific aspect related to a particular historical fact, but the broader issues covered by the major stages are identified: the insurrectionary process, the proclamation of socialism, the arrival of the Special Period and the recent rapprochement with the United States. Following are questions on each issue, waiting for their likely responses.

1. What were the main reasons for the revolution?

a. To claim political rights usurped by the dictatorship of Fulgencio Batista.

b. To emancipate the working class from capitalist exploitation.

c. To rescue the national wealth from imperialist domination.

2. The introduction of Marxism-Leninism as the official ideology in political, economic, cultural, scientific and educational environments …

a. was the fruit of the natural evolution of the Cuban social thought?

b. was imposed by force as the only way to fulfill the revolutionary program?

c. was a condition agreed to receive the benefits of the socialist camp?

3. What is the correct definition of the so-called “Special Period in Time of Peace”?

a. A moment with acute difficulties in supplies, fuel shortages, power outages and problems with transportation.

b. The temporary waiver of enforcement of certain laws of the socialist system, and turning to the rules of the market to resolve the crisis.

4. If the correct answer to question 3 is subsection b, the end of the Special Period could be decreed only when:

a. The provisional application of the laws of the market is accepted as final.

b. External conditions prior to the implementation of the Special Period once again exist.

c. The US government has recognized that the old policy of confrontation has become obsolete and taken action accordingly and proposes changes.

5. Does the Government of Cuba recognize as obsolete the choice of armed struggle to achieve social change?

a. What steps could the Cuban government recommend that are equivalent and reciprocal with those taken by President Barack Obama?

If this symposium, structured into commissions and panels, could answer any of these legitimate questions, it would be a major contribution to understanding the last half century of our history. It would help to shed light on the shadows and contours of so many inaccuracies accumulated for decades.

We can consider the case of Commander Guillermo Garcia, still active, although he is not a member of the current Central Committee, he was in that inventory of tried and tested revolutionaries unveiled on 3 October 1965, the same day that, to justify the work of these creators of anniversaries, the Party was baptized with the epithet of “Communist,” Ernesto Guevara’s farewell letter was read, and the newspaper Granma was founded.

Aside from Raul Castro, those remaining active include Ramiro Valdés (83 years), Jose Ramón Machado Ventura (85), Abelardo Colomé Ibarra (76) and the youngest of all, Leopoldo Cinta Frías, who on 17 July of this year turned a mere 72. Added to that are Armando Hart (85), who is in a wheelchair, General Ramon Pardo Guerra, head of the Civil Defense, and Julio Camacho Aguilera, who only appears in the commemorations of minor importance. The birthdates of the latter two do not appear in any accessible register.

The implacable laws of biology lead us to calculate that the decline will be much more dramatic when the eighth Party Congress takes place in 2021

The implacable laws of biology lead us to calculate that the decline will be much more dramatic when the eighth Party Congress takes place in 2021 (if it is held at all). By then, there will probably be no one who feels guilty for the executions or the confiscations, which is the price to be paid today for displaying the crest of having belonged to the historic generation who earned its pedigree on that October night at the Chaplin (now the Karl Marx) theater, which served as the stage to present the brand new Central Committee.

In this one hundred names are two suicides (Osvaldo Dorticós and Haydee Santamaria), one executed (Arnaldo Ochoa), and one sentenced to 20 years in prison (Jose Abrantes). But most died in combat or in a hospital bed; or have gone into retirement, either through the infirmities of age or dismissals. At least none have defected (as far as we know), if that serves as a point of honor to those who did ​​the casting.

It was a troop obedient to the will of the Maximum Leader. Those who fell docilely accepted their punishments, and those who ascended humbly assumed their promotions. They silenced their differences and tried to applaud like members of the best claque. They knew when to raise their hands in approval and how to step over those compañeros who deviated from the path and, in this trance, they became skilled in the dark drafting of informers’ reports

They are already past or passing. We will have to learn to forgive without forgetting. The future, as the irreverent rocker Gorki Aguila says, belongs entirely to the future.

This organization, ubiquitous in the ‘60s and ‘70s, no longer represents the threat that terrorized so many people. It is strange, at least in Havana and other provincial capitals, that the CDR surveillance continues, a task that was presented as the original and main work of the committees. On the other hand, membership in the CDRs has become ever more formal and meaningless, as the only thing demanded from each member is that they pay the dues, which allows them to aspire to a job that requires them to be trustworthy, because they can identify themselves on the forms as a CDR member.

As a part of the attempts to “civilize” the tough forces of the CDR, political persecution is now disguised as “the fight against crime, illegalities and social indiscipline.”

One of the most common difficulties for the organization now is to complete all the assigned tasks. That is why at the beginning of the year a campaign was developed to attract young people to infuse fresh blood. According to official reports, currently 42% of the leadership positions are held by people under 35.

Another novelty is trying to revive the lost vigor of the CDRs by calling them non-governmental organizations, dedicated to acting on behalf of the community, with voluntary blood donations, organizing sporting activities and the beautification and cleaning of public areas.

In this regard, Carlos Rafael Miranda, National Coordinator of the CDRs, said in a recent interview in the national press, “We have to ensure that every CDR has its own content, that implies that its members become involved in the transformation of the community for the good of neighbors. The organization has to be useful for the neighborhood. And it is essential to our core mission, which is the unity of revolutionaries in defense of the Revolution.”

As a part of the attempts to “civilize” the tough forces of the CDR, political persecution is now disguised as “the fight against crime, illegalities and social indiscipline.” In this way they propose to give it a preventive character, even when it comes to such sensitive issues as trafficking in and using drugs. In this aspect great importance is given to the 308 “Detachments Watching the Sea,” which are dedicated to investigating and collecting drug caches that are thrown overboard along Cuba’s coasts by drug traffickers before they are captured.

All efforts to mask the repressive face of the institution become useless when the highest levels require the immediate mobilization of the “rapid action brigades” to confront any opposition demonstration. Then, the community’s guileless benefactors go from being willing to donate their own blood, to willingness to shed the blood of others, and the vocation to work together to improve the neighborhood becomes a fierce intolerance of divergent thinking.

The eclipse on this night of celebrations is not announcing anything good.

The Soviet Union no longer exists and Cuba is the only dictatorship in Latin America, where the last guerrilla has promised to lay down his arms. There are no colonies in Africa, and the greatest danger facing the developed countries of the western world is not communism, but Islamic fundamentalism. All the world’s leaders are closer than ever to reaching a global accord to save the planet from its environmental hazards. It is a different world today and Cuba cannot remain the same.

The meeting, which will last three days and includes the participation of 150 heads of state and government, has as its goal to discuss the new objectives of sustainable development; it opened with the speech of Pope Francis and in the course of it the proposals of Vladimir Putin and Barack Obama will be heard.

The presence of Raul Castro interrupts a 15-year absence of a Cuban leader in the General Assembly and will be the prelude to what will happen next month, when this forum of the United Nations again votes a resolution against the American embargo of the island. It has been speculated that the US delegation will abstain, which would be unprecedented in American foreign policy.

Most likely among all those present none are left of those who witnessed Fidel Castro’s marathon dissertation. Nor have the promises made that day, to make Cuba an island of hope, survived. The task of Raul Castro will be to erase the delirium and demonstrate sanity.

One day in 1970, he poked his head around the door of my classroom at the University of Havana’s Journalism School, asking for me by name. He came to return a notebook that I, in my infinite youthful daring, had given him with the intention that he would read what I then thought were poems.

Germán (I omit his surname out of common decency), who was already an informer for State Security and sat behind me, asked me where I knew him from and all I could think to say was, “He is a neighbor of my brother-in-law.”

Today I don’t know what I should repent of more, my boldness in having given him those tasteless verses to read, or of having denied him in such a cowardly way. In compensation, I have spent all these years spreading his poetry among the young who have no access to his work, and shamelessly quoting him whenever the occasion allows it.

Let others undertake the exegesis of his verses, the analysis of his behavior, the chronicling of “his case,” which was a watershed in the romance between the intellectuals and the Revolution. Here I just want to mention him with a free interpretation of the first two lines of his book Fuera del Juego (Out of the Game): “The poet remembers, he has a lot to do here!”*

*Translator’s note: Padilla’s poem, Out of the Game, reads: The poet! Kick him out! / He has no business here. / He doesn’t play the game. / He never gets excited / Or speaks out clearly. / He never even sees the miracles.

Obituaries: The Guardian, The LA Times

We Cubans have no need to reconcile ourselves for religious, regional, ethnic, linguistic or other reasons of any nature, other than the ideological differences introduced on the island beginning with the promotion of the class struggle backed by Marxism-Leninism.

The unity that is proclaimed from the official discourse implies the exclusion of those who have political ideas that differ from those posited by only permitted party. This unity is understood in the context of the dictatorship of the proletariat, under which there can be no possible understanding reached with the “class enemy.”

The unity that is proclaimed from the official discourse implies the exclusion of those who have political ideas that differ from those postulated by only permitted party.

This unity is alien to reconciliation, because the reconciliation to which we are exhorted from the pulpits does not imply the conversion of the disaffected into militants, but the acceptance of differences on both sides in an equality of conditions. I remember the poet Heberto Padilla pointing out, “reconciliation and capitulation don’t rhyme.”

We’ll see if this spirit of reconciliation ends with insults and beatings against those who emerge from the church to march peacefully through the streets on Sunday to demand respect for human rights and freedom for those still imprisoned for political reasons.

The rulers clad in their guayaberas who listened to the Masses and homilies are the only ones who have the capacity, or rather, the authority, to issue the order to stop the repression and to categorically prohibit the repudiation rallies. This coming anniversary of the organization that was created so that some Cubans would monitor and betray their compatriots will be an excellent occasion to demonstrate that the holy words did not fall into the void.

The curious thing is that, so far, the Government has not clearly told its people that the country is faced with two options: maintaining the planned socialist model proposed in the guidelines of the 6th Party Congress, where the predominance of the socialist state sector continues; or take a leap without a protective net to the market economy.

Ordinary Cubans might feel more inclined to give up the benefits offered by “a prosperous and sustainable socialism” as promised by Raul Castro.

If this dilemma were submitted right now to a referendum, the desire to preserve the so-called “internal order” would probably win. If, however, there was an open public debate where people of all opinions could participate, perhaps the results would be different.

The government’s room to resist the temptation to open up to the US proposals is expressed in a temporal dimension and depends on external factors as diverse as the results of the parliamentary elections in Venezuela or the recovery of the Chinese economy.

But before the offering of tangible empowerment through private initiative, ordinary Cubans (that vague social category) might feel more inclined to give up the benefits offered by “a prosperous and sustainable socialism” as promised by Raul Castro.

One of the main reasons to believe in this paradigm shift is that Raul Castro has not ceased to insist on the gradual character of his reforms, in which everything is done “without haste, but without pause,” making first small, limited local experiments because of the widespread fear of making mistakes.

To bet on the success of these reforms requires a high level of faith and this subjective component will only work if people can expect substantial results in a shorter time frame, especially in a population that has accumulated so many frustrations after having had to tighten their belts over and over, while waiting for the “bright future of socialism.”

Obama is now offering Cubans a faster solution, if the Cuban government gives way and if it changes the internal order that today is the principal obstacle to the flow of investments or, to put it more rudely, for (private) stores to be filled with goods and to allow American business invest in (private) bus and railway companies for public transportation, and to allow people to get up early in the morning and to search Google from their own homes for a chicken curry recipe.

This appears to be the main thing, the rest is filler, or rather the wrapper.

The Cardinal gave a press conference with the capital’s journalists in his office at the Diocese, the details of which appear in the Havana Tribune (partially quoted in theonline site Cubadebate) where he urged Havanans to “receive the pope with an open and receptive spirit, and look on him not as someone important, distant and great, but as a close friend.”

The official organ of the Cuban Communist Party, in its Tuesday editorial, emphasized that Francis “will see our patriotism, and the arduous and fruitful effort of the Nation to exalt the human being, for its justice and culture; for that better world that is not only possible, but indispensable.”

The newspaper Granma said that Francisco “will see our patriotism, and the arduous and fruitful effort of the Nation to exalt the human being“

Both calls, the political and the ecclesiastical, made reference to the 80 years of diplomatic relations between the Vatican and the Republic of Cuba, but the cardinal downplays its importance, emphasizing that what is significant is “what the Catholic Church can do, from its authority, in support of restoring confidence in man, its capacity to confront the challenges of History at this time, and of Nature, affected by man himself, with excessive consumerism and the overexploitation of resources.”

When Granma summarizes the most important moments in these relationship it evokes “the visits of Commander in Chief Fidel Castro Ruz to the Holy See in 1996, those taken to Cuba by the Supreme Pontiffs John Paul II in 1998 and Benedict XVI in 2012, as well as the positive meeting held last May by the President of the Councils of State and of Ministers Raul Castro Ruz with Pope Francis, in the Vatican.”

Jaime, without abandoning the first person singular, recalls, “In my capacity as Archbishop of Havana, I have received them, and always as Cardinal. I was named Cardinal 21 years ago by John Paul II. Later he came to Cuba and I welcomed him.” And later he continues, “I received him with great affection. It was also a joy to receive Pope Benedict and John Paul II. I have been very close to them, and both Benedict and Francis have always had a great knowledge of Cuba, a special affection toward our country, and a closeness to me.”

In what may have been the most lively moment of the press conference, held in the Havana bishopric, one of the journalists asked the Cardinal one of those questions that in the state media environment is considered provocative, “Many are asking, will you bring up the issue of Cuba?” To which Jaime Ortego, who never misses an opportunity to miss these kinds of opportunities, responded laconically, “This event, without a doubt, will leave traces in the life our Church and in the life of our people.”

“This event, without a doubt, will leave traces in the life our Church and in the life of our people,” said Ortega

Although the two convening parties coincide in affirming that there has been unity of action with regards to preparations and ensuring the visit’s logistic base, it is clear that each one sees the issue from different viewpoints. While the Cardinal focuses on the conduct toward the Pope with a loving tone, the official text takes an emotional distance in these dealings: “We will listen to the words of His Holiness with respect and attention, demonstrating that we are a cultured and noble people, which, as a worthy host, will present its history, culture and traditions; immersed in the process of updating its socioeconomic model, committed to the defense of national sovereignty and to preserving its social conquests and achieving the greatest wellbeing for everyone without exclusions.”

The rest of the program, already published, includes a meeting with president Raul Castro, the holding of a Mass in the Plaza of the Revolution in Havana and another in the Calixto Garcia Plaza in Holguin, the meeting with bishops, priests, monks and nuns, seminarians and lay people; the greeting of young people and Cuban families, and the final Mass in the Sanctuary of the Virgin of Charity of Cobre, Patroness of Cuba. Neither of the two sources mentioned again that a meeting between the Pope and Fidel Castro is on the schedule.

I tried to convince him that this was not “politically correct” in our publication (which was, preferably, distributed abroad) because it gave the impression that the commander possessed an enormous personal fortune, which he could dispose of at will. The official stood up and slammed his fist on the desk telling me that I didn’t understand anything. “The most important thing is that this trip is not to go on an excursion abroad, but a gift from Fidel. This is what makes it a moral stimulus!” he shouted.

What has happened now, it seems, is that this “petty cash” has disappeared from the nation’s budget and that in certain circles of power it was mentioned as “the commander’s account.” The final use of these funds was the investment in the Battle of Ideas, dissolved by Raul Castro.

Now it is intended that the material incentives not be considered “undue gratuities” but one more method of payment

Now it is intended that the material incentives, those that cost money, such as a week in a hotel in Varadero, depend on the resources of some company, both for the Vanguards and the Heroes; thus these expenditures are not considered “unearned gratuities” but as another method of payment, deducted from the earnings of the business and obtained thanks to the extraordinary efforts of its best workers.

Trabajadores, the publication of the CTC, wonders if it would be so difficult for entities and ministries that have in their ranks these Heroes of Labor, to finance – with their profits – one week a year with a companion, at no cost, at one of the first class tourist centers. It also suggests that those who have cars are helped to acquire spare parts and tires. There are barely 150 of these nationwide, many of them retired.

The problem is that all this remains restricted under the crass chapter of material stimulus and no longer has the charm of being “a gift from the Maximum Leader.”

In most cases, these decisions involve family dramas and the relocation of the “deserter,” sometimes temporarily, other times permanently, into a workplace far from their capabilities and personal ambitions. However, the hemorrhaging of talent does not stop and at times increases in a threatening manner.

If Cuba had not lost all the creative potential that has chosen emigration, today we would be one of the countries with the greatest human capital in the world. Because, unfortunately, those who leave are the entrepreneurs, those with the necessary self-esteem to believe, right or wrong, that they can survive and thrive in a competitive environment.

All of them had to choose between two betrayals, one against the system that supposedly formed them and one which they would have made against themselves if they had remained faithful to a project they had stopped believing in.

If Cuba had not lost all the creative potential that has chosen emigration, today we would be one of the countries with the greatest human capital in the world.

After having tried every arbitrary measure possible to prevent doctors from abandoning the country, the Cuban government just announced that “Health professionals (…) have the opportunity, if they wish, to rejoin our National Health System” and in a parallel manner they let be known other immigration modifications to increase the grounds for repatriation of other emigrants who are affected by the restrictions.

Now, in a gesture promoted as an act of generosity on the part of the Revolution, they are trying to replace Cubans who once escaped in search of better destinations, in a situation to reverse what the government classified as treason but which, in the majority of cases, was simply the renouncing of wearing a mask.

The question is, why not just once and for all abolish all the absurd migratory restrictions; why can’t Cubans see in their country a safe and welcoming home to return to and leave whenever they want, and for whatever length of time best suits them.

The Cuban government is the one who is lost, not because it must choose between two betrayals, but because it cannot allow itself the luxury of choosing to respect the most elemental rights. They have no choice but to change everything or to continue to behave as vulgar dictators.