Ariel Hidalgo – Translating Cuba

The Cuban Regime, a Colossus with Feet of Clay

“All the conspiracies, landings and uprisings, ended with the imprisonment or shooting of almost all the insurgents”

Vaclav Havel, leader of the Czech dissident, said that at any time all those who live in the lie “can be stunned by the force of truth” / Wikimedia Commons

14ymedio, Ariel Hidalgo, Miami, 21 July 2024 — The Cuban regime has proven to be a portentous giant due to several factors: its three armies that have fought on other continents; a very effective intelligence apparatus modeled on the German Stasi; very well equipped and trained repressive forces; and, as if that were not enough, the control of all the spheres of a totalitarian society.

It is not surprising, therefore, that all the violent actions of their opponents have been defeated: all the conspiracies, landings and uprisings ended with the imprisonment or shooting of almost all the insurgents. But like the supposedly unbeatable hero of ancient Greece, Achilles, whose body had a vulnerable point – his heels – that can actually happen to a regime. It’s a giant with feet of clay.

What is the Achilles heel of the regime? Well, the world where all that impenetrable force has risen is sustained on the basis of lies. It is all a lie. It is not true that the triumph of the Revolution meant freedom for the Cuban people, that it was a revolution for the good of the people. It’s not true that they put and end to the latifundios* and that the lands were divided among the dispossessed peasant, that property titles were given only to those who already owned them as pre-owners and tenants. The latifundios continued to exist, only they ceased to be private and became state-owned, which gave rise to the largest of all landowners in national history: the State.

It survives on the basis of the lie. It is all a lie.

It is not true that all the large and medium-sized companies of the bourgeoisie were expropriated to turn the workers into “owners of the means of production”; rather all were given to bureaucrats appointed by the government leadership, not for their ability but for their political reliability, continue reading

then turned into a new corrupt social class and without any productive interest that, due to its magnitude, could not be controlled by the leadership.

It is not true that the confiscation of all the small properties was carried out against the “small bourgeoisie”; it happened to independent workers, among whom were greengrocers, street vendors and even shoe shiners. It is not true that the physical integrity of those who suffered prison was respected. It is not true that the workers and the people placed their trust in the State and the single party as representatives of their interests, because a referendum was never held to demonstrate it.

The recounting of all the lies, of course, would be very difficult to list in an article like this, but it is important to say that all of them have been constantly repeated in newspapers, magazines, speeches, radio and television programs; in books, school texts and study circles, following the teaching of the great Nazi master in this “art”, Joseph Goebbels: A lie repeated sufficiently over and over again becomes a truth.

But one day that regime began to face a new type of unexpected adversary, more dangerous than all the previous ones, more than the conspirators, invaders and armed insurgents. They were groups of peaceful men and women whose only weapon was the word, who even by imprisonment could not be silenced. Why were they more dangerous? Because they had decided to speak the truth; they attacked the Achilles heel of the regime: the lie.

Vaclav Havel, leader of the Czech dissidence, said that at any moment all those who live in the lie “can be stunned by the force of truth.” And with the strength of the truth one can gain the conscience of citizens, even of those who support the repressors. And if the lies with which it has been maintained collapse, the regime loses the sustenance on which it stood.

If those who raised the empire of lies began their struggles by attacking barracks, now it is about conquering the consciousness of those who entrench themselves in the barracks

So, what is the use of having three well-armed armies, a powerful intelligence apparatus with advanced espionage techniques and trained and well-equipped repressive bodies, if those who wield those weapons, those who handle those techniques and those who have this equipment are human beings whose consciences can be surrendered before the force of the truth? If those who raised the empire of lies began their struggles by attacking barracks, now it is about conquering the conscience of those who entrench themselves in the barracks, without firearms, without killing anyone; on the contrary, only through the clarifying word and the conciliatory embrace.

The German demonstrators who later demolished the Berlin Wall said that they did not want to see the policemen sent to repress them as opponents but to “talk to them so they would be on our side; not curse them for being policemen, but for them to feel part of us, to know that they felt the same and shout the same thing: No to violence! We wanted to attract the opposite side.” In other words, the protesters did not practice physical or verbal violence. Then they blocked the entrance to the headquarters of the Stasi, the State Security of Germany, shouting “No to the violence”! And they even entered it, but the guards didn’t dare shoot because the demonstrators didn’t carry weapons or stones; they only lit candles.

In the demonstrations against the Milosevic dictatorship in Yugoslavia, the young women smiled at the soldiers sent to repress them, with flowers and Serbian flags, and they shouted at them: “You are part of the people! We are all brothers! We are all victims of those who govern!” Attitudes like that influenced the fact that later, when the dictator ordered the soldiers to leave the barracks in the middle of a large demonstration and to repress the demonstrators, they refused to obey him, and that is how the end of the tyranny came about.

Many of those who still support the Cuban regime do so only out of the fear that if it collapses, they will hold it to account for its past, so that general political amnesty must be publicly supported, which means that it would be applied both to those who are imprisoned and to the perpetrators who are not. If, on the contrary, the repressors are threatened with lynching after the fall of the tyranny, they are strengthened, because it is the same as telling them: “Keep repressing and stronger, so that you avoid being lynched.” Martí summed it up like this: “Nothing triumphs against the threatened instinct of self-preservation.”

This does not mean silence and forgetting the blame because we have to learn from the mistakes, but we must not only have the courage to ask for forgiveness but also to forgive. We have to leave resentments in the past, and then, all together, raise the new Cuba. I am not the only one saying this; but the Master [José Martí] himself: “Con todos y para el bien de todos”… “With all and for the good of all.”

*Translator’s note: Large land holdings, especially in Spain, typically worked by slaves.

Translated by Regina Anavy

____________

COLLABORATE WITH OUR WORK: The 14ymedio team is committed to practicing serious journalism that reflects Cuba’s reality in all its depth. Thank you for joining us on this long journey. We invite you to continue supporting us by becoming a member of 14ymedio now. Together we can continue transforming journalism in Cuba.

The Four Stages of Peaceful Transition to Democracy

Initially, the so-called dissidents or civic activists seem to be acting alone

Creating a unified front to defy a dictatorship or to promote democratization does not require a shared ideology but a shared strategy. / Marcos Evora

14ymedio, Ariel Hidalgo, Miami, 6 July 2024 — The stages of peaceful resistance to totalitarian rule vary from country to country. However, by analyzing liberation movements we can identify common characteristics because, in every case except that of Yugoslavia, there was a centralized economy in which the state held the reins of economic production. This required the creation of a huge bureaucracy that had no real interest in producing things and was incapable of effectively controlling the process. This led to structural economic crises, which led to public discontent.

In the first stage, dissident groups can expect only minimal support from the public. For the most part, the so-called dissidents or civic activists seem to be acting alone. They are, as Vaclav Havel would say, “generals without soldiers.” However, they represent a large silent majority afraid to say publicly what the dissidents are saying. During this period, the vast majority might participate in massive public rallies in support of the government or even join organized mobs besieging the homes of dissidents in public acts of repudiation.

The main task for dissidents at the beginning of their struggle is to denounce the violations perpetrated by the regime as defined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights or the Helsinki Accords. However, it later becomes clear that, rather than just denouncing the oppressors’ violations, it is more important to create an awareness of human rights in the minds of the oppressed. This is the first step in the peaceful struggle against a totalitarian regime, to create in the public’s mind an awareness of civil rights, not just because these rights have been proscribed but because they, the people, are entitled to them as human beings.

The main task for dissidents at the beginning of their struggle is to denounce the violations perpetrated by the regime

Dissidents also begin circulating leaflets or clandestine statements. They then move on to staging lightning-strike demonstrations, though not often and usually with no more than twenty or thirty people. Curious onlookers take note but are not willing to participate and the demonstrations usually end in arrests a short time later. continue reading

Little by little, the public begins to become aware of the dissidents’ existence (or in the case of Cuba, of “the human rights people”) — usually through shortwave foreign radio transmissions — and the concept of human rights. One could say this is the beginning of the second stage.

In this period, when someone becomes the object of abuse by authorities, there are often accusations of human rights violations or, in the case of some eastern European countries, of the Helsinki Accords. This is a sign that what the dissidents have been preaching is beginning to sink in. A larger number of people begin joining the various dissident groups.

Little by little, people stop playing by the government’s rules. They skip meetings and public gatherings but do not openly challenge the status quo. They become less and less fearful as the number of like-minded people increases. They are now in the prelude to non-cooperation, still proceeding but with great caution and not yet ready to completely abandon the pretense that they support the regime.

At this stage the vast majority of the population is not willing to engage in acts of civil disobedience. Many are, however, willing to make legal appeals or apply pressure in the name of socialism or, in the case of Cuba, in the name of the Revolution. They call upon the regime to follow the rule of law, or abide by the constitution, which the government presents to the world as evidence that it is democratic but which, in reality, it is not inclined to follow.

At this stage the vast majority of the population is not willing to engage in acts of civil disobedience

In the third stage, a large portion of the public has lost its fear. Though the regime might continue holding mass rallies, it has lost its ability to summon as many people as it did before. It compensates by exerting pressure at workplaces and schools, encouraging attendance during working hours or class times.

It is also not as easy for authorities to drum up public support for acts of repudiation against dissidents and it is forced to use its own plainclothes security forces instead. In fact, it is common for such repressive police actions against individual citizens to be met with widespread public rejection. Public protests also begin occurring when authorities impose unpopular measures. These could include, for example, strikes or riots by transportation workers, or sit-ins in front of public buildings, and even acts of solidarity with a group of dissidents who are engaged in some type of protest such as a hunger strike. Something similar happened in Cuba with strikers of the San Isidro Movement in November 2020.

This is also when the first public demonstrations begin. They start spontaneously, without dissidents having to organize them. Generally, they are violently repressed by authorities. The demonstrators demanding change do not number in the dozens but rather in the hundreds or even the thousands, which destroys the myth that everyone supports the regime. This helps raise awareness even more among other segments of the population, which heralds the start of what we could consider to be the fourth and final stage.

At this point, we begin to see more dialogue among dissident groups as they begin to coalesce. We could even see a discreet rapprochement between dissidents and some reformist elements within the regime. To create a united front against a dictatorship, or to promote a process of democratization, the various factions do not need to be aligned ideologically, only strategically. This is akin to two people walking in the same direction even though their destinations may be different or they may ultimately go their separate ways. It is not terribly important if they are social democrats, conservatives or liberals. What draws them together is their goal of democracy and a shared strategy of non-violence. Together they can now call for demonstrations with a preconceived plan.

In Romania, a group of older die-hard communists who were part of the Ceaucescu regime was defeated by a coalition of parties of different stripes. We have also seen this happen with dictatorships on the other end of the political spectrum. In Chile opposition groups joined forces against the Pinochet regime to campaign for a plebiscite and free elections despite the fact that there were subtle ideological differences among them. Ultimately, they won.

This is also the stage at which activists draft manifestos and many people sign letters demanding the release of political prisoners

This is also the stage at which activists draft manifestos and many people sign letters demanding the release of political prisoners. Ultimately, amid new and much larger marches, a new united civic front emerges and calls for a general strike.

It is at this point, under these conditions, when a dialogue can be begin to either agree on a transition or to present an ultimatum to the regime. The opposition is confident that it has widespread public support and that the regime cannot manipulate them. The duration and timing at which these stages occur differ depending on conditions in each country.

In Czechoslovakia, for example, Charter 77 was the first important initiative that brought dissidents together to form united front, which greatly increased their chances of victory, which Civic Forum achieved twelve years later. In Poland, however, it took only five years from the emergence of Coss-Kor till the birth of the Solidarity trade union movement because there already existed in this country a deep-rooted Catholic faith that was incompatible with Marxism’s atheist ideology. At this time there also happened to be a Polish-born pope pope, John Paul II, who instilled a strong will for change with his phrase “Do not be afraid.”

________________________

Editor’s note: This article is an excerpt from El libro de la Liberación [The Book of Liberation]. 14ymedio is publishing it with the author’s permission.
____________

The Cuban Regime Lost Its Monopoly on Information With the Arrival of ’14ymedio’

In the last ten years, the will for change has reached the majority of the Island’s citizens.

The large demonstrations of 11 July 2021 in numerous cities across Cuba shook the bases of power / Facebook / Marcos Évora

14ymedio, Ariel Hidalgo, Miami, 23 May 2024 — If I were to describe in words what has happened in Cuba in the last ten years, I would say: a desire for change. An awakening to the reality in which Cubans lived had already occurred among the greater part of the population, although hidden by the veil of double standards. Almost no one believed in a promising future under that system, but except for a small minority, the only hope for liberation was solely individual: leaving the country.

In that decade from 2014 to 2024, the will for change began to gradually arrive for that majority, and I think we could identify three key years: 2014, 2018 and 2021. The fact that we are celebrating the ten years since the birth of 14ymedio is significant in that process, because it was the first independent digital newspaper made in Cuba. The totalitarian regime began to lose its monopoly on information.

The era of the information society had arrived in the world, but countries like Cuba and North Korea tried to put obstacles in the way of the spread of this technology among the population, because by its very nature it was antagonistic to the dominant totalitarian powers, a mechanism whose general form Marx himself had discovered almost a century and a half ago: the development of the productive forces entered into contradiction with the relations of production, only now these productive forces were no longer represented by the machinery of the typical factories of industrial society, but by personal computers, mobile phones and the Internet. continue reading

These relations of production, represented by totalitarian structures, became a brake on their development

These relations of production, represented by totalitarian structures, became a brake on their development, because their leaders realized the eminently subversive nature of those inventions. In 1991, there had been a massive protest in Regla, a municipality in the capital, over the murder of a young man at the hands of the Police, but in the other neighborhoods of the capital almost no one knew about it until the next day – and some still haven’t found out – due to the lack of effective communication. If it had been today, in a few minutes the entire country would have found out, from San Antonio to Maisí.

But since this process of information technology could not be stopped, because one could not live with one’s back to the world, Cuba had to open up more to a large part of the population, although timidly, in 2018. This exchange of ideas through blogs and of social networks was generating the will for change. And the following year this change became evident when in the constitutional referendum, despite so many irregularities and the fear planted in the people, accustomed to always agreeing – “so as not to look for problems” – power had to recognize that at least – among those who did not vote, those who annulled the ballot, left it blank or voted no, almost a third had refused to vote affirmatively.

Between 2020 and 2021, various acts of protest took place, especially in Havana, such as hunger strikes with the solidarity of many people, sit-ins in front of government offices, support from local people for victims of police abuse and even a strike among drivers. And finally, all this led, with the San Isidro Movement and the artists’ protests, to what we all already know: the large demonstrations of 11 July 2021 in numerous cities in the country that shook the bases of power.

Those demonstrations and other subsequent ones have been brutally repressed and there are still hundreds of protesters imprisoned

Although those demonstrations and other subsequent ones have been brutally repressed and there are still hundreds of protesters imprisoned, the contradictions that caused them, far from being resolved, have become even more acute, which is why, if I published, weeks before that memorable date, that the “Cuban nomenclature sleeps on a tinderbox,” now that the burden is much worse, a whisper in my ear tells me that something very big is going to happen.

Nor is the exile the same one to which I arrived in 1988, directly from a cell, the one where the oldest exiles predominated, amazed that the people did not rebel and that the Army did not carry out the military coup that they had so long expected, convinced that the dissidence that was being talked about was a false opposition manufactured by the dictatorship, which is why they threatened to kill me and even went to plant a bomb on me that by mistake caused havoc in a neighbor’s house.

Fortunately, that exile was little by little receiving the successive doses of reality brought by the mass exoduses. One day I will tell about when, immersed in deep discouragement, I abandoned everything and went to Florida International University (FIU), not to teach or receive classes, but to pick up trash from the university campus, and I met those simple workers, noble men and women recently arrived from the other shore and I received from them a transfusion of hope, the hope of a new Cuba.

____________

The Definitive Collapse of the Cuban Economy?

A recent study revealed that 21% of Cubans households on the poverty line stopped eating breakfast, lunch or dinner at some point due to lack of money / 14ymedio

14ymedio, Ariel Hidalgo, 4 March 2023, Miami — That the Cuban Government has asked, for the first time, the management of the UN World Food Program, for help to subsidize milk for children under seven years of age is a clear example of the situation that the country is going through, since the Cuban leadership has generally been reluctant to accept food aid from abroad so as not to expose the unsustainability of its economic model.

It has also been announced that recently, with the last reserves of the Cuban State, 500 tons of powdered milk were purchased in the United States, the same country that supposedly maintains an “imperialist blockade” against Cuba. It is scandalous that in Cuba there is no milk even for small children in a country whose livestock farming, in another time, was only surpassed in Latin America by Argentina and Uruguay.

The Government has also declared that the population’s basic food basket will not be able to be maintained until the end of March. It had already been said before that in Cuba not only “is nothing being produced,” mainly due to lack of a labor force in agricultural work, but that there is no way to pay to import the food. continue reading

When the Revolution triumphed, the Cuban peso was on par with the US dollar. Today, the national currency is worth less than half of a tenth of one US cent, exactly 0.042, according to an official calculation reported on February 20.

So, what threatens the Cuban people, immediately, is a famine like there has never been before, not even at the time of the so-called Special Period, when Cuba lost subsidies from the former Soviet Union. We do not know what the population will live on for a full month, but we do know its consequences: more exodus, more deaths at sea, more crime than already exists, and more protests.

Are Cubans Ready to Break the Chains?

Members of the Solidarity Resistance Group during a meeting on December 3, 2022 in Warsaw. (Government of Poland)

14ymedio, Ariel Hidalgo, Miami, 17 September 2023 — When millions of workers peacefully took to the streets in Poland in 1981, the general secretary of the Communist Party resigned, and his successor agreed with the Solidarity movement in rather typical terms of a surrender. The communist regime had collapsed.

But at that time it was not convenient for Solidarity to take power because the Russian troops were on the border willing to repeat the bloody scenario of Hungary in 1956 and Czechoslovakia in 1968. For the same reason, a Polish general staged the coup d’état and took his leaders to jail, and both of them had to wait a few years until Gorbachev declared the end of interventionist policy.

Why was Solidarity able to mobilize so many people? Mainly due to two factors:

The great influence of Catholicism on the population, together with the support of a Polish Pope.

And the influence of the struggles of a dissent that had already been preparing for years the conditions for a mass trade union movement: in particular, the struggle of the Workers’ Defense Committee (COS-COR) founded by a fighter later known as “the godfather of the Polish opposition,” Jacek Kurón. continue reading

When millions of workers peacefully took to the streets in Poland in 1981, the general secretary of the Communist Party resigned, and his successor agreed with the Solidarity movement in rather typical terms of a surrender

Sometimes providence pulls its strings in a strange way. That general, Wojciech Jaruzelski, in his childhood, was forced to flee from the communists with his whole family to Lithuania, when the Soviet Union seized part of Poland, for fear of being deported to Siberia where his father had died in a hard-labor camp. And that dissident leader had been a prominent militant of the Polish communist youth).

The conditions of Cuba, today, are not the same as those of Poland in 1981.

It was 132 years ago that José Martí, with the clairvoyance that characterized him, wrote these words: “When a problem arises in Cojímar, the solution is not going to be sought in Danzig.” Danzig is the current city of Gdansk, where almost a hundred years later the Solidarity union emerged, which implied that our problems had to be solved based on our own conditions.

We Cubans do not have that strong Catholic influence nor a Pope to support us, nor do we have a broad trade union movement. However, Cuba today has other advantages:

No country in the European socialist camp had a dissidence with as long an experience of struggle as the one in Cuba. It’s a broad movement, not trade unionist but of human rights, which contributed to the formation of a civic consciousness. Of all the social explosions in Latin America in those years, the only one carried out peacefully outside Cuba had a lot to do with an opposition that, from its beginning, declared itself peaceful, the only opposition movement that the regime has not been able to exterminate.

The Cuban people today have a resource that the Poles could not use because at that time it did not exist: the great advances in telecommunications technology, which allowed the existence of social networks, blogs, mobile phones and digital periodicals.

And not least: the absence of Russian troops at the borders that prevented or postponed the liberation of countries such as Hungary, Czechoslovakia and Poland. The Cuban leadership has only Cuban troops, whose families are part of those suffering the same calamities, so the leadership does not trust one hundred percent of those officers, especially the youngest.

To all the above should be added the objective conditions; that is, the structural and permanent economic crisis of a failed, dysfunctional economic system, which forces the leadership to periodically seek — in order to sustain itself with subsidies — powerful external allies. The hard periods described with euphemistic names such as “Special” or “conjunctural” — i.e. ’temporary’ — occur when that powerful ally is missing. Poland did not reach the calamitous extremes of present-day Cuba, because at that time it had the benefits of COMECON* and the Soviet Union.

Did all these conditions already exist when the outbreak of July 11 occurred in 2021?

Precisely, thanks to the fact that almost all those conditions had matured, that explosion of thousands of people took place in the streets. Why have we added the word “almost” in the previous sentence? Because the thousands of 11 July 2021 (“11J”), cannot be compared with the millions of Poland on the streets. That tells us that this awakening of the consciousness of freedom, despite the fact that it had already developed in a large part of the people, had not been widespread enough to reach the final victory. However, that fact, by itself, despite having been thwarted by a brutal repression, awakened many people who until then thought it was impossible to break those chains.

Difficult periods qualified with euphemistic names such as “special” or “conjunctural” [temporary] occur when that powerful ally is missing. Poland did not reach the calamitous extremes of present-day Cuba, because at that time it had the benefits of COMECON and the Soviet Union

The same thing happened in all the great feats of our history: the first battle of the glorious 30 years of independence struggles in our country had been a resounding failure from the military point of view. In Carlos Manuel de Céspedes’ attempt to take the fort of Yara, only twelve men survived. But that simple fact, known in our history as El Grito de Yara [Yara’s Scream], impacted the population in such a way that many people began to join that small group, and soon after they achieved their first great triumph, the capture of the city of Bayamo.

Something similar happened with the assault on the Moncada barracks that began the fight against the Batista dictatorship with a large number of deaths and imprisonment.

Should we regret that liberation didn’t come on11 July 2021? Everything happens for a reason. It was indispensable that this awareness be generalized, if not in the entire population, at least in the vast majority, for a secure and definitive victory for all time.

What does this mean? We Cubans have been repeating from colonial times the same cycle as the myth of Sisyphus: the dictatorship leads us to insurrection and insurrection to another dictatorship, which leads us, in turn, to another insurrection, and this happens to us, precisely, because of the lack of a true civic conscience. First, we must not give anyone all the power, due to fanaticism and cult of personality, and second, we must be aware that we are born with the right to freedom and, therefore, can practice that right regardless of the obstacles we encounter, even if it is within the walls and bars of a prison.

That gestation has been developing in Cuba for more than 40 years and is now about to mature. When this happens, no one will be able to stop the people on the way to their destination, because when the light of freedom is lit, it never goes out

Both the human rights activists and the political prisoners practiced that freedom without fear of saying what we thought, so we were freer than the jailers who guarded us. True freedom does not need to be decreed by any government, nor is it a goal to be achieved, but a path. When the vast majority of the population decides to act freely, not even the most powerful army in the world will be able to stop it. A government only governs when the governed obey. If they don’t obey, those who govern stop governing.

But this requires the awareness of that vast majority. This is what Martí was referring to in his famous criticism of Karl Marx: “But he walked in a hurry and somewhat in the shadows without seeing that they are not born viable, neither from the bosom of the people in history, nor from the bosom of a woman in the home, the children who have not had a natural and laborious gestation.”

*Translator’s note: COMECON (1949-1991) was an organization led by the Soviet Union comprised of the Eastern Bloc countries and other socialist states.

Translated by Regina Anavy

____________

The Spell

14ymedio, Ariel Hidalgo, Miami, 28 January 2023 — Václav Havel, the leader of the Velvet Revolution that liberated Czechoslovakia from communism, said that dissidents do not reject armed struggle because it is very radical, but quite the contrary, they reject it because it is not very radical.

The victory of an armed group can change the man who sits in the presidential chair and some ministers for others, it can dictate new laws, even promote a new Constitution (all this has already been done in Cuba), but not the national soul. The strength of a society is not in the mentality of those who govern, nor in the papers where the laws are signed, but in a much deeper sphere, in the degree of consciousness of the governed.

It is said that Cuba’s Constitution of 1940 was not only the most advanced in the history of the country, but also in the entire continent. But even if it had been, what good was it? It was enough that a group of soldiers treacherously seized the main stronghold of the country to throw it down the sewer and govern dictatorially. What good is the most perfect Constitution in the world if it does not take root in the civic conscience of citizens? Its validity was only twelve years, which, for the time of a nation, is equivalent to the duration of a breath. And, of course, that dictatorship lasted much less: barely seven years.

But without this awakening of the collective conscience, the spirit of tyranny reincarnated as a new leader. And since the will of an entire people has great force, and that people erected him, first on a throne, and then on an altar, he not only ruled fiercely as an absolute and perpetual monarch, but, even more, as a god who ruled forever our destiny. And that people that, years ago, did not have the courage, or even the interest, to take to the streets and massively support the students who on the hill of the university demonstrated all the decorum that that people lacked to protest against that group of military coup plotters, now filled the squares to ask for the firing squad for the opponents of the supposed redeemer. continue reading

It was like a people hypnotized, prey to a spell before the one who, in a messianic pose, insisted that we had been married to the lie, when it was precisely at that moment that they were forcing us to live with it forever. And when they, taking refuge in an ideology in which they did not believe, put all the wealth of the country in a booty bag, many were disenchanted, but it was too late. That enchantment had already taken over most of the people.

To disenchant means to break the spell, which, in this case, is, more precisely, enchantment. And a collective spell was needed to put an end to it. That spell is a dawn in the conscience of each citizen. Only then will the sun of freedom illuminate all the fields and streets of the homeland. And the first rays of that dawn began to manifest that glorious July 11, 2021. Despite its apparent failure – not as resounding as the assault on the Moncada Barracks was – power came to shake, for which the first step of the spell was taken: the awareness that what is believed to be impossible can become possible.

The second step is to divorce that people from lies and marry them to the truth. Waking up those who are still asleep, giving light to those who are still blind, without hurting anyone, without responding to insults with insults, without threats of revenge, adding, never subtracting. When Jesus asked Ananias not to be afraid to go to Saul of Tarsus, the most brutal persecutor of Christians, and to cure his blindness, Ananias healed Saul, who became Saint Paul, the most fruitful preacher of the divine word.

And in this time of chrysalis — the time that the worm lasts inert in the cocoon — in which nothing transcendental in sight happens, all Cubans of good will, both inside and outside, must join forces to, all together, end what began on that date, flooding the national home with a deluge of light.

____________

Pablito, and Selective Historical Memory

Pablo Milanés performed for the last time in Cuba, in June, in a concert not without tension and polemic. (Pablo Milanés Archive)

14ymedio, Ariel Hidalgo, Miami, 3 December 2022 – Those who today, even after his death, reproach Pablo Milanés for what he said or stopped doing in previous times, have a very selective memory. The majority of people who lived during the first two decades of the Revolution belonged to the Committees for the Defence of the Revolution and were present at the mass rallies in Revolution Square. So did those, who, not as long ago, supported in one way or another the condemnation of asylum seekers in the Peruvian Embassy or those who emigrated from the port of Mariel. These days many of them condemn Pablito for his past, but not for anything in the world do they acknowledge criticism of their own past.

You could understand criticism of anyone who left Cuba before 1968, a period when, through the so called “Revolutionary Offensive“, everything remained controlled by the Party-State elite, when it wasn’t yet possible to work independently of the state, and it was imperative, if you wanted to get a job, to be part of the so-called “organisations of the masses”. These people didn’t really live in a totalitarian dictatorship. But to those who lived through it you have to say: “don’t ask others to do what you weren’t able to do, and don’t criticise others for doing what you too, in one way or another, also did yourself”.

If you say that Pablito was very late in correcting things in order to be on the right side of history, then what exactly is the right moment for separating the “early” from the “late”? Perhaps the day they “changed their opinion”? And if our melodic poet changed his opinion very late then what can we say about those who haven’t yet done so themselves, but could still one day do so? continue reading

And this is the message that he is sending to them: “Dear repressors, keep repressing the people. Dear police and soldiers, keep supporting the tyranny. Dear intellectual apologists, keep on defending the disgrace. All of you, carry on supporting those responsible for the misery and oppression of all the people, because, at the end of the day, the eternal condemnation of History will inevitably fall upon you”.

I don’t know about History, but with this message the ignominy will be maintained far beyond these guys’ lives, and the guiltiest people will be quite happy with this tremendous service that they are giving them.

If you announce to the defenders of a besieged garrison that they’ll all be executed when the stronghold is overrun, then nobody will surrender and the battle will be prolonged, because everyone will fight to the death at the cost of more lives on both sides, that is if there’s anyone left surviving at all.

On the other hand, it has to be said that if we are fighting for a Cuba in which all the rights and liberties of its citizens are to be respected, then you have to respect the rights of those who still believe in, and defend, the badly named Revolution, without violating the rights of those who think differently. But one needs to send a different message to those from the other side who violate those rights — a message like the one that the glorious Oswaldo Payá launched at his persecutors: “I don’t hate you Brother, but I’m not afraid of you either”.

I pity those who still call for “those guilty of the Cuban tragedy to be hung from guasima trees with barbed wire”, a view generally held more commonly among those who have suffered the least, those who ignore the lessons of history and wish for the repetition of the same mistakes that brought us to this calamitous situation; those who packed the squares and yelled for the death of those supposed guilty of other mistakes of the past and later were forced to go into exile or wound up in prison. Or, worse, like that commander of the Revolution, doctor Sorí Marín, who signed the decree of executions and was later executed himself for the law which he himself redacted. So many innocent people lost their lives in front of firing squads having been sentenced without due process.

History’s reach goes further than this; when they said that there could not have been anything worse than the machadato [1920’s tyrannical government of president Machado], and, after that was over, the mobs took to the streets to lynch anyone who was marked out as a porrista [government cheerleader], though it was never proven, and they were dragged through the streets in a general chaos which Machado himself prophesied whilst boarding the plane that took him to exile — a chaos that has continued to this day — well later came even worse: el batistato [the Batista regime]. And many said: “there can’t be a regime worse than this”. And the blood flowed, and it carried on flowing, after the arrival of a newer, and worse regime still. And today they’re still saying the same thing.

Enough. We have to put an end to this prolific chain of tyrannies — an end to hatred and reprisal, each time more shameful than the last — before we all drown in a sea of blood.

We cannot build a republic of peace on the foundations of the gallows. Or as a visionary named José Martí once said about the Russian revolutionaries of his time: “The steel of incentive is no use for the founding hammer”.

Translated by Ricardo Recluso

____________

The First Decrees of the New Cuba

The people cannot wait for the institutional formation of a legislative congress composed of democratically elected deputies or a constituent assembly. (14ymedio)

14ymedio, Ariel Hidalgo, Miami, 9 November 2022 — With the increasingly profound crisis of popular representation in the Cuban dictatorship and a government about to collapse, there will come a time when a power vacuum requires the constitution of a Civic Board composed of people who have earned the respect of the population in their struggle for freedom and democracy. For example, among others, there are Guillermo Coco Fariñas, Luis Manuel Otero Alcántara and José Daniel Ferrer, the latter two currently imprisoned.

In such a situation, the humanitarian tragedy that the people are going through cannot wait for the institutional formation of a legislative congress composed of democratically elected deputies or a constituent assembly. From the first day, urgent measures must be taken to alleviate the situation, waiting to be subsequently ratified or, if necessary, repealed, by the corresponding institutions that are later constituted.

In the era of the Internet and social networks, the participation of the largest number of citizens contributing their opinions in a national dialogue is not only possible, but indispensable. And to begin to stimulate it, I validate the right we all have to propose what I consider the first most vital and important measures of immediate fullfilment in what would not be one more reform, but a radical democratic revolution, for the achievement of two fundamental objectives in the economic field: to stimulate the productive forces and to improve the standard of living of the most disadvantaged social sectors; also, one that is more political: ensuring the enjoyment of all fundamental rights and freedoms. continue reading

This is an appeal to the entire population to begin an era of peace and reconciliation. No one should be repressed for the sole reason of having been a member of pro-government organizations during the dictatorship.

Dissolution of the current Council of State and the National Assembly.

Release of all those imprisoned for political reasons, estimated at 1,753 people.

Putting an end to the powers of the Communist Party of Cuba in everything related to state affairs, including economic structures.

Dissolution of the political police, in particular the Department of State Security and the DGI (General Intelligence Directorate), and creation of an anti-corruption and anti-crime investigation department.

Repeal the laws of the Criminal Code that violate the rights and freedoms of citizens, such as enemy propaganda, illicit association, contempt, and decree 370, better known as the “Gag Law,” which restricts freedom of expression, and abolish the death penalty.

Abolition of mandatory military service. All recruits will be able to immediately leave their military units.

Creation of a Truth Committee that has access to the State Security archives and thoroughly investigates serious cases of human rights violations, such as the crimes of the Canímar River, the sinking of the March 13 tugboat and the Bahía Honda case.

People guilty of other less serious violations must be pardoned in exchange for confessing their faults and asking the victims for forgiveness.

Seek the financing of carbon credits to end the energy crisis.

Creation of workers’ councils in the productive centers and companies of the State with the power to supervise and even replace the administrations they consider corrupt or inept, as well as ensuring that each worker periodically receives a percentage of the profits obtained.

Reduce taxes on agricultural producers and allow farmers to sell their products at market price.

Transfer as many as possible cargo vehicles controlled by the Ministry of the Interior and the Armed Forces to agricultural transport, and prioritize the supply of fuel in this branch.

Turn the Armed Forces into a peace corps in support of citizenship in cases of emergency.

Reduce the costs of self-employed licenses and taxes, and extend as much as possible the expenditures and services to which they can be dedicated, including to private teachers and private medical services.

Divert resources from the budgets of the Ministry of the Interior, the Ministry of the Armed Forces and propaganda purposes to create wholesale trades of labor instruments, raw materials and other means of production for agricultural and self-employed workers.

Offer land controlled by the State to all citizens who want to make it productive, with the subsequent option of becoming owners.

Encourage as much as possible investments from abroad; in particular, of Cubans living abroad, especially investments destined for the branches of transport and housing construction.

Start a process of replacing fossil energies with renewables, such as solar panels and the use of bioethanol for automotive transport.

Convene elections to select the representatives of the people in charge of drafting and approving a new Constitution.

All these measures would be feasible to implement in a short time, not only to end shortages and increase the value of the Cuban peso, but also to raise enough resources for others that would lead the country to prosperity and social stability. For example, raising the salaries of teachers, teachers, doctors and other professionals; increasing the pensions of retirees; putting the services of hospitals for the people at the level of those that have been employed in health tourism; establishing ministries of social assistance and environmental protection, and banks in all provinces for the granting of microcredits to new microenterprises; and stimulating the training and development of new technologies in the fields of cybernetics and robotics.

To all those who doubt that measures like these would lead Cuba to become the most prosperous country on the continent, I say: let’s see what can happen in ten years.

Translated by Regina Anavy

____________

Cuban Dissidents Should Enter the Electoral Arena

“Vote for our ideas and our values.” On November 27th elections for Cuba’s municipal assemblies will be held, the first step in designating provincial governors and vice-governors. (EFE)

14ymedio, Ariel Hidalgo, Miami, 30 October 2022–The proposals by the internal opposition in Cuba, announced by the Council for a Democratic Transition as well as the newly created D Frente, to promote candidates to the municipal elections are not naïve as some critics have said. Rather, it could be said that those who believe so are more naïve. The proponents know perfectly well the barriers and risks they will face. Even if they were convinced of the impossibility that any of the candidates could reach any of the levels of that official institution, it is worth fighting for other reasons.

To understand this, it’s sufficient to review the experiences offered by the history of the dissident movement itself, such as that of the first Cuban who accepted this electoral challenge.

The first time an opposing candidate ran in an election in Cuba was 1989. Roberto Bahamonde Massot, an engineer and doctor of pedagogy, member of the Party for Human Rights in Cuba, which was one of the first dissident organizations, nominated himself as a candidate. However, his own group refused to support him, as they believed that it legitimized fraudulent elections.

Bahamonde was undaunted and decided to run in his personal capacity; he made several copies of his candidate program and distributed them in the neighborhood. On March 9th of that year, he arrived at the meeting for the candidates for delegate of District 2 in the area of La Fernanda, in San Miguel del Padrón. When it came time for nominations, he nominated himself, which caused a great stir in the asembly because he was someone who had been arrested four times by State Security and they refused his candidacy. But he did not give up and challenged the legality of the procedures. The commission agreed to repeat the meeting. He competed against the Minister of the Interior and lost with 31 votes in favor, 60 against and 59 abstentions, which was a great victory in the country of unanimity.

The fact that back then Bahamonde “lost” while obtaining over half as many votes as the officialist candidate, and that 59 people abstained despite the closed campaigning orchestrated by State Security against him, is very significant. It was clear that those who abstained did not want to vote for the officialist candidate, but did not have the courage to vote for the dissident. Were it not for that fear, Bahamonde would have flat out won with no fewer than 80 votes.

The question to ask now is: If that occurred in 1989, what would occur nowadays when almost no one is hopeful that this leadership and this model will improve the desperate conditions for the population that has launched into protests in the streets in almost every city in the country?

It does not mean they will win some seats now, because, for the same reasons, repression and fraud will be on levels greater than before. What matters is the political costs they will have to pay when they realize this, not only when facing the people, but also in international public opinion.

For those who think that these costs don’t matter to them, I want to remind you that faced with an economic situation so severe, they are in no condition to continue losing foreign aid, or deserters from among the skeletal base of popular support. Success depends, of course, on the one hand, on the opponents succeeding at reaching the population with their candidacy programs and those of the opposition in general. On the other hand, foreign lobbying is important so that any benefits the government negotiates with powerful institutions are conditioned upon allowing the presence of international impartial election observers.

The greatest support that exiles who fight for their country’s freedom can provide is not so much to exhort their compatriots on the archipelago to abstain from arguing that the elections would be fraudulent, nor to pressure governments to strictly deny any concessions to the Cuban government, but rather to exhort them to vote for opposition candidates and, better yet, aim for foreign governments to condition foreign aid on the acceptance of those observers. If the oppressors refuse, they not only lose that aid, but also what little credibility they still have.

The true battles will not really be at the polls, but rather, in the streets, in the population’s peaceful protests in defense of the rights of the people’s true candidates, all of which would further nourish the ranks of unsatisfied citizens. On the other hand, in the international arena, we’d gain allies while the oppressors get cornered further.

For my part, I’d view such a victory not only as a precursor to the final triumph of the libertarian ideals of so many Cuban fighters, but also the best way to honor the memory of that forerunner who, I know, died after being forgotten in exile.

Translated by: Silvia Suárez

____________

About Revolutions and an Unburied Corpse

The peaceful demonstrations of July 11, 2021 were crushed by brutal repression. (Image Captura)

14ymedio, Ariel Hidalgo, Miami, 18 September 2022 — That Unburied Corpse that they call “Revolution”* is the title of a small book by the author of this article, ready to be published, about Cuba and its destiny at a transcendental moment of its becoming, that of the turbulent transition to a new Cuba that begins on July 11, 2021, when peaceful demonstrations in cities in all the provinces were crushed by brutal repression. And their motivations have been embodied in an appendix to that book: the Manifesto of Cuban Civil Society, a text that is being signed by hundreds of Cubans.

The demonstrations represented what is generally known as the beginning of a “revolutionary process,” such as those that begin under a regime in terminal crisis, and conclude long after the triumph of the opposition, when radical transformations are made in the structures of society. This stage of transformation is what is generally known as revolution, defined by the Royal Academy of the Spanish Language as “a deep, generally violent, change in the political and socioeconomic structures of a national community.”

A revolution can be a positive transformation for the progress and improvement of a country, but it can also bring greater misfortunes than those that led to the beginning of the revolutionary process. So it can be said that not all revolutions are bad and not all are good, according to everyone’s perspective.

The revolutionary process begins before the collapse of the old regime and also covers the revolution itself, which begins with the triumph of the opposition and ends when the new economic model has finally been established with all the institutions of that new social system. In Cuba, that process ended more than half a century ago, in the 1960s, so it makes no sense to continue talking about that “revolution” in the present time.

But a new revolutionary process is what has begun in Cuba at the dawn of the ’20s of the 21st century. A process always begins when all the conditions are in place for change, not only the objective ones; that is, a deep crisis in every way, but also the subjective ones, when the population has become fully aware of the vital need for change, and that’s what happened on July 11, 2021. continue reading

Generally, the process begins with a shocking event like the one that occurred on that date, which was not only the result of the beginning of that awakening, something that could already be noticed months earlier with the events of San Isidro and the sitting in front of the Ministry of Culture, but is, at the same time, the cause of a large part of the population also awakening, so, although almost always at first glance those initial facts of the revolutionary processes are seen as a failure, deep down they have important consequences for the final victory.

If we analyze the revolutionary process of the fifties, for example, we see that something similar happened with the assault on the Moncada barracks that was a disastrous defeat from the military point of view, but that gave popularity to its leader and inspired many others who created similar movements, such as that of Frank País in the eastern zone, the Student Revolutionary Directory of Havana and others. Also in Venezuela, chavismo began with a failed coup attempt. In all the aforementioned cases, that first attempt sent many of the participants to prison, but then they emerged as key figures in the transformations that were carried out in the country.

We could even mention the rise of Nazism in Germany, since at the beginning of the 1920s there was great unrest among the population, both because of the economic situation and because of the humiliation imposed by the Treaty of Versailles after World War I. Hitler tried to carry out in 1923, in the name of a supposed “national revolution,” what became known as the Munich putsch, which failed and sent him to prison. What happened next is well known.

It will not go unnoticed that all these examples mentioned from the past culminated tragically for their respective populations. If we analyze all these cases, we will realize that they all had one thing in common: they came to power through violence, something that contrasts with other cases. In the definition cited by the Royal Spanish Academy, revolution is “generally violent,” which means that it doesn’t always have to be so. Neither the struggle of the Solidarity Movement in Poland, nor the Velvet Revolution in Czechoslovakia made use of violence, and we see that they didn’t lead to dictatorships.

Why? A prominent human rights defender in Cuba who was a prominent leader of the Student Revolutionary Directory and who later spent more than twenty years in Castro prisons, Jorge Vals, drew this conclusion in his memoirs: “I came to convince myself that violence necessarily involves tyranny; through armed struggle, the revolutionary becomes a puppet of a series of interests that may have nothing to do with the revolution or can even conspire against it.”

In 17th century England there were two revolutions, one violent (1642-1648) that led to a long period of instability, dictatorships and wars; and another peaceful one, the so-called Glorious Revolution, begun in 1688, which gave rise to the Declaration of Rights, the antecedent of other historical declarations such as that of the U.S., that of France and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of the UN, and the constitutional monarchy, a model so stable that it has lasted to this day.

The Cuban dissident movement never made use of violence. The demonstrations on July 11 were peaceful, and they have continued to be peaceful. Violence, in today’s Cuba, has always been started by the repressive forces, not the opposition. And that’s one more reason for hope.

*Translator’s note: The published title of the book appears to be “El Libro Prohibido: La realidad oculta tras eso que llaman ‘Revolución Cubana'” (The Forbidden Book: The hidden reality behind what they call the ‘Cuban Revolution’). A laudatory review of the book (in Spanish) can be found here. A click of your browser should suffice to translate the review to English.

Translated by Regina Anavy

____________

Cuba: Protests and the Declaration of the Civil Society

Last Thursday night, the population of Nuevitas took to the streets in protest against the blackouts lasting more than 10 hours. (Screen capture)

14ymedio, Ariel Hidalgo, Miami, August 24, 2022 — To those who asked when the Cuban population would return to take to the streets, when another July 11 would be repeated, it must be said: the people have already taken to the streets in many cities every day. Every day is July 11. And this is just the beginning, because, curiously, it’s the authorities themselves who give the signal for the protests to begin.

That “signal” is called a blackout. And apparently they are going to happen more and more frequently. They thought they had found the formula to prevent any mass protest in a city from spreading throughout the country: cutting off the internet, but they themselves are inadvertently putting into practice another formula to summon them: cutting off the electricity.

The difference with July 11, 2021 is that it was then face-to-face and held at the same time in many places at once, like a disadvantageous frontal war against a powerful enemy. Now, it is more like a guerrilla war, where even darkness is the best ally.

However, last week, the people of Nuevitas not only protested in the streets, but also faced the dictatorship’s attack, and there were injuries on both sides. All the demonstrations have been peaceful, but the population cannot be asked to turn the other cheek in the face of a brutal repression that makes no distinction for age or gender.

So where is all this going to go? Because cutting off the Internet no longer works for the regime, when today no city or town waits for a San Antonio de los Baños to initiate a protest. There will come a time when every town and city is protesting in the streets, and the whole country will shudder with another social explosion, this time more forceful, and then no one will be able to stop it.

The only thing that would be missing today is the common position of that civil society in rebellion, something to which Manuel Cuesta Morúa, vice president of the Committee for the Democratic Transition, was referring when he made a proposal a month after those glorious protests last year: “I think that what should happen now is to translate the social explosion into a political proposal.” And he added: “This has to be led, coordinated and activated by civil society.” continue reading

Prominent philosophers such as Spinoza and Kant agreed to define civil society as “a collective body constituted by the individuals of a society, which is positioned outside the limits of the State.” Civil society, being composed of all those who participate in that community, has a moral force superior to the State, so the State must submit to it, and not civil society to the State, especially when the party leadership that controls it was not elected by the citizens. Jean Jacques Rousseau went much further when he said: “The voice of the people is the voice of God.”

When it comes to civil society, a declaration that reflects its common position cannot be ideologized, because it would contain all the diversity of a political tuning fork, but it must address the concrete problems that are affecting us all. And this is precisely what was reflected, in just two pages, by a group of Cubans in their Manifesto of Cuban Civil Society. In a few days they collected more than 80 signatures from inside and also outside Cuba, “since the Cuban nation extends beyond the Cuban archipelago to any part of the world where there is a Cuban identified with the collective aspirations of his compatriots.”

The manifesto, which aims to collect thousands of signatures, doesn’t ask anyone for anything, but demands respect for all our legitimate rights and the release of all those imprisoned for practicing or defending them. Each signatory must give the details of his name, profession or activity he carries out, the organization to which he belongs if any, city and country where he resides, and send them to concordiaencuba@outlook.com, to proclaim to the world and to the oppressors, that the Cuban people are already on the move and that nothing and no one will be able to stop them from reaching their destination: a homeland of freedom and life.

Translated by Regina Anavy

____________

Cuba’s Transition and Plans of the Castro Regime’s Business Mafia

With the death of López-Callejas (center), the potential of a Cuban Putin was aborted before birth, and the consolidation of that mafia business is on hold for the moment.

14ymedio, Ariel Hidalgo, Miami, August 8, 2022–Following a trip to Russia in 1992 to attend a seminar on the transition in Cuba, I published La transición que los cubanos no debemos hacer [The Transition We Cubans Should Not Make] in the Miami Herald. The Soviet Union had just crumbled and Yeltsin was in power. I posed the following question to the vice-director of Izvestia, a newspaper that was part of the old USSR, “To whom does Izvestia belong?” For me, this was a key question to which the response was, it “theoretically” belongs to the Russian Federation.

In a way it made sense, because at that time the newspaper was already in the process of being handed over to a great businessman, Vladimir Potanin who, at the same time, was the country’s Vice President. Marxism was no longer discussed and neither was socialism. Russia was taking its first steps, still wobbly, toward a business mafia camouflaged by a discourse that was beginning to be tinged with nationalism. The man charged with directing the transition to the end, Vladimir Putin, had resigned from the KGB a year earlier, and four years later would become part of the Yeltsin administration.

A similar process had begun in Cuba, except that the person supposedly destined to lead it died suddenly. General Luis Alberto Rodríguez López-Calleja, who is the father of one of Raúl Castro’s grandchildren, was referred to as the “tsar of the Cuban economy” for his role as the head of Gaesa, the most economically powerful conglomerate which controls the most important companies in the country. Last year he became a delegate of the National Assembly and a member of the Politburo, the senior leadership of the totalitarian party which governs the country.

The only thing missing was to replace President Díaz-Canel, who was provisionally placed in that position by Raúl Castro to take the fall for the disastrous results of the policies implemented by the leadership. His resulting unpopularity would justify this substitution. However, this last step for López-Calleja did not come to pass. Thus, the potential Cuban Putin was aborted before birth, and the consolidation of the system of a business mafia under the “godfathership” of the Castro family is on hold for the moment.

This occurred amid the deepest crisis it Cuba’s history and of uncontrollable popular protests across the country.

At this crossroad, what can the Castroist elite do? And when I say “Castroist elite,” I refer to what remains of the octogenarian — and now nonagenarian — “historic leadership.”

A. It could do nothing, just allow all the businesses to disintegrate under their own weight and let civil and military bureaucrats appropriate those means of production as new capitalists, on condition of being accountable to that leadership and in particular, to the “family.” This is one form of abandoning that antiquated model which has been proven unsustainable, and spawning another model more similar to the Russian than the Chinese. However, because the public is already aware and desperate, this would require violently repressing popular protests and demonstrations in a new kind of Tiananmen — a very dangerous thing as it could face sedition by young generals whose loyalties are not beyond doubt.

B. Secure asylum for themselves in an allied country without extradition continue reading

laws, while abandoning their minions and underlings to face the chaos and grave dangers of an overwhelming popular tsunami, while they peacefully live out their few remaining years or months with their families and their ill-gotten funds, but clear of danger.

C. Replace Díaz-Canel and his team with reformist officials whose image is more acceptable to the people and international public opinion, to spur hopes for short- and medium-term solutions, and allow them to implement changes toward a partial economic and social opening, at least until the so-called historic leaders disappear naturally. In that case, it would be a revolution in reverse, to release from the state the assets that had been under state control, still under the supervision of this elite who would retain some power, at least until their physical disappearance.

Any one of these three options is possible, but regrettably the most likely, in my opinion, is option A, due to the obstinacy they’ve always demonstrated to remain in power at all costs; and the least likely, for the same reason, is option B.

Option C would be the most intelligent, and there are several possible candidates, all unthinkable under normal circumstances. For example, one recently mentioned by several media sources would be Armando Franco Senén, the former director of Alma Mater, who was fired in April for tackling controversial topics which apparently caused discomfort among authorities. The expulsion, which spurred the resignation of the entire editorial team, occurred at the urging of the National Committee of the UJC and, in particular, Nislay Molina (at the time in charge of the ideological arm of the organization of young communists) who said, “We should have fired you a long time ago.”

I mention Senén due to the unexpected fact that, shortly after, Molina was relieved of her duties. In contrast, he was promoted to an important position at Palco, a state group less powerful than Gaesa, but with several companies under his control. This promotion was celebrated with much fanfare by Palco exactly one month after López-Calleja’s death. For a bureaucrat “to fall up” is a common event among the acolytes of the regime who make mistakes, put never among critics of the regime, no matter how moderate.

We must remain vigilant to facts such as these because López-Calleja’s death and the growing protests may have resulted in the elite discarding option A to lean toward C.

But all this is hypothetical. The only thing we can say with clarity is that in the near future, Cuba cannot continue being what it has been until now. Continuity of the current model will not be possible. History itself has shown this.

The model of a state-run centralist monopoly, misnamed “real socialism” is not viable and that is why it did not require military interventions, coup d’etats nor armed insurrections for all of socialist Europe to implode. Even China, to avoid collapse, had to make capitalist reforms. This is why Cuba, to sustain itself, always needed subsidies from a foreign ally, something which it no longer has and is not on the horizon. Nonetheless, its leaders are dead set on keeping it.

In Russia, the formerly communist oligarchs were able to impose a business mafia system because a strong opposition did not exist, but rather a few groups with notable personalities such as the Committee on Human Rights in the Soviet Union, the Helsinki Group and Memorial, all of whose members together do not exceed the double digits.

In contrast, in Cuba there is a dissidence, which totals about a hundred organizations with thousands of members with a history of almost 40 years of struggle, and a movement which has resulted in a popular trend of civic activists in the arts, known as “artivism,” which along with access to new telecommunications technologies has gained a meteoric strength impossible for the powers that be to stop, let alone extinguish, it.

Translated by: Silvia Suárez

____________

The Counterrevolutionaries Are on the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Cuba

Third Plenum of the Central Committee of the Cuban Communist Party (PCC), on December 16, 2021. (Revolution Studies)

14ymedio, Ariel Hidalgo, Miami, 3 June 2022 — In a previous article, I stated that a revolution is a radical transformation of the structures of a society and that, therefore, there has been no revolution in Cuba for more than 50 years. Revolution was what was carried out during the first nine years by the leadership that took power in Cuba in 1959. So, why do those who govern continue to speak in the name of something that ceased to exist so long ago?

The question only has one answer and a very simple one: to hide, behind that word, what really began to exist in Cuba: a tyranny. As the economic model that emerged is dysfunctional – the older Castro himself confessed it shortly before he died: “it doesn’t even work for Cubans” – that leader did the only thing he did for the next fifty-odd years, every time the rope tightened around the neck, there were nothing more than reforms, a word that means “to change the form,” just to achieve a respite, but leaving the essence intact. Tyranny is still tyranny, and nothing has rescued the population from all its calamities.

But now very few believe in his reforms. It is about changing “everything” so as not to have to change anything, or at most, make fearful and insufficient concessions, as if trying to save the life of someone who is dying of dehydration with doses from a dropper and not with a bottle. Also, when they see that the dying person has any signs of recovery, they remove the drip as they have done many times. In other words, the reforms generally have a short term of life, because they have already fulfilled the objective they sought (to give some hope to calm people down, accompanying that, of course, with the usual mass exodus). continue reading

What, then, are those who are called “counterrevolutionaries”? If there is no revolution, there can be no counterrevolutionaries. If opponents are called that because they want to radically change the structures of that system that has become a tyranny, then, by definition, the true revolutionaries are those opponents, whether those who govern like it or not and those who oppose it like it or not. Do those opponents want to radically change that system or not? Well, that’s called a revolution.

Enough of deception and let’s speak the Spanish language correctly. Let’s not follow the game of those who disrupt the terms as a propaganda strategy. There are no counterrevolutionaries in Cuba, and if there are, they are on the Central Committee of the Communist Party and not behind prison bars, if we bear in mind that those who seized power in Cuba betrayed the ideals of that Revolution for which so many Cubans gave their blood. Not only for refusing to reinstate the 1940 Constitution and to hold free elections, but also for not satisfying the social demands of that Constitution, such as putting an end to the large estates and distributing the land among the peasants, since they neither eliminated the large estates nor distributed the land, but they converted the latifundios into state estates by having the State absorb 70% of the arable land.

Don’t let the opponents call you “counterrevolutionaries,” a term that was accompanied by another, “worms [gusanos],” an epithet that the Nazis foisted on the Jews. That’s where they took it from. It was the brainchild of Joseph Goebbels, Hitler’s shadowy propaganda chief.

On second thought, what’s wrong with a worm? Isn’t it a laborious little animal the creator of fine silk? The great Chinese sage of 2,400 years ago, Lao Tzu, said that when the worm believed that everything was already lost, trapped inert in the cocoon, it was when it was closest to reaching everything, because “what he called death, the world called butterfly.” The butterfly is the symbol of transfiguration, the symbol of freedom that we Cubans should put everywhere, because it represents the destiny of the new Cuba.

So while we might just as well reject that “worm” moniker, we might as well take them at their word, but instead of seeing it for what it is today, see it for what it will become and do what worms know how to do: break out of the cocoon and take flight in a wonderful winged world of many colors.

____________

Cuba: We Need Another Revolution

It would be logical to question the representational legitimacy of Cuba’s ruling elite after the widespread demonstrations that took place in almost every part of the country on July 11, and the brutal repression that followed. (14ymedio)

14ymedio, Ariel Hidalgo, Miami, May 17, 2022 — When the so-called Ten Million Ton Sugar Harvest of 1970 failed and a young teacher from a trade school called for “a revolution within the revolution” at a mass rally, he was on the verge of being arrested. The Cuban revolution had been completed just two years earlier and no one dared speak of another revolution. What we did not realize at the time, however, was that a radical policy — the expropriation of all private enterprise — was about to alter the very structures of society. That was the operative phrase: radically change the structures of society.

By that point, the revolution had already been hijacked. The two main objectives of the revolution — the overthrow of the dictatorship which had come to power in 1952 after a military coup, and the restitution of the 1940 constitution to be followed by free elections — had not been met. Those who had taken up arms styled themselves “the Centennial Generation” but, with their final “revolutionary offensive” of 1968, the leaders who emerged from that generation abandoned Jose Martí’s principle of “with all and for the good of all.”

At the end of that nine-year period of dramatic transformation — also marked by the execution and imprisonment of many comrades-in-arms who had fallen victim to that betrayal — what actually emerged was a totalitarian dictatorship and a dysfunctional economic model.

Nevertheless, we kept talking about “revolution.” This included the former dictator, who used the term till the final days of his rule in reference to the revolution of September 4th, twenty-four years earlier, which he himself had betrayed. History was repeating itself, but more dramatically, in a spiral of betrayals.

Given the widespread demonstrations that took place in almost every part of the country on July 11 and the brutal repression that followed, not to mention the deep economic crisis and widespread discontent over the lack of basic rights, it would be logical to question the representational legitimacy of an elite which has, since 1959, been proclaiming itself the vanguard of the Cuban people.

In its past sixty-two years, and despite more than half a century of periodic reforms, this ruling elite — now institutionalized as the Cuban Communist Party — has not been able to extricate the country from this structural crisis. The situation only improves when a generous donor appears on the horizon with a life raft in the form of subsidies. continue reading

No one seriously believes the U.S. embargo is the problem, especially these days. The term “brutal Yankee blockade” has lost all meaning now that Cuba freely trades with American farmers.

What has become clear is that the main cause of the disaster is the economic model itself, which has proved to be unsustainable. Reforms have come and gone but the system remains. The true etymological meaning of the word reform implies a change of shape, not a change of substance. The structure has always been left intact when what it needed was a radical overhaul. But this was never acceptable because that is what revolutions do, and it had already been done in the 1960s.

One month after the July 11 demonstrations, Manuel Cuesta Morua, coordinator of Progressive Arch and vice-president of the Council for Democratic Transition, clearly stated that what the demonstrations were calling for was radical structural change. “I believe what should be done now is to translate the social uprising into a political proposition. This must be led, coordinated and implemented by civil society,” he wrote. On August 21, a letter signed by 284 Cuban intellectuals and artists, living both on the island and overseas, was sent to President Diaz-Canel. It stated, “The time has come for Cuba to move forward on paths different from those you and your government have drawn up for Cubans [to follow].”

No matter how traumatic this word might be for many Cubans, in both cases it refers to the same thing: a new revolution. We are no longer talking about “reforms” but rather radical changes to the structure of Cuban society. This is no longer about the simplistic dilemma — socialism or capitalism — framed by those who currently hold power. We are talking about something very different from what existed before 1959 and what came after: a revolution of those from below, for the good of all Cubans.

Given the urgency, the changes that must be made without delay require transparency. Not catchphrases to disguise hidden motives such as “a revolution as green as palm trees” but rather specific statements about what is going to be done. I think there is a consensus that the state should stop exercising direct control over business activity. In other words, stop micromanaging the managers. The state, which has a history of expropriating corporate monopolies, has itself become one giant monopoly.

But that is easier said than done. In whose hands would these companies end up? Would they be sold or auctioned off to foreign investors? (Would these investors even be interested in sinking money into obsolete or badly deteriorated means of production?) Would these companies be returned to their original owners? This would likely involve lengthy lawsuits by numerous plaintiffs. Would this begin a long process that would just end up replacing one bureaucracy with another?

The members of this bureaucracy — generally chosen for their political reliability than for their competency — are still smart enough to realize that, if the system that appointed them were to fall, their days at the heads of these companies would be numbered. In such a scenario, they wouldn’t think twice about grabbing whatever they could. In that case, who or what would be there to stop them?

So here is my proposal: On day one, immediately send out a memo to all rank-and-file workers at state-owned businesses and factories that, henceforth, they will be allowed to earn bonuses from the fruit of their own labor. They must be exhorted to take over their workplaces, expel their respective directors and replace them, on a provisional basis, with workers’ councils elected by workers themselves.

Could Cuban workers be responsible enough to form management boards with competent people? Let’s remember that Havana’s Hilton Hotel (now the Habana Libre) was not owned by the Hiltons but rather by members of the restaurant workers union, who contracted with the Hiltons to run the operation because they thought the famous hoteliers were better equipped to manage it.

There are many examples from different eras in various countries of companies on the verge of being shut down, either because they were unprofitable or because of labor disputes, which were successfully revived by workers themselves. One such example from the Clinton era is United Airlines. During a strike for better wages, employees were given shares in the company. Later, they decided not just to forego a salary increase but actually decided to lower their salaries. Another example is the British mining company Tower Colliery, which was losing money and facing closure due to the free-market policies of Margaret Thatcher. It was able to survive thanks to the efforts of the workers themselves, who managed to acquire it and turn it into a successful company.

The Anson Construction Company in Illinois is owned by its workers, who are even willing to work on holidays in order to make more money. No one who is not an employee is allowed to own shares in company. Many other examples could be cited.

The leaders that came to power in 1959 underestimated and wasted the nation’s enormous human capital and clipped the wings of its enterprising people, who have the capacity to turn Cuba into one of the most prosperous countries in the world. What we are talking about now is giving them the freedom they need to spread their wings and take flight.

____________

Letter from a Cuban Addressed to the Left Around the World

“Tyrannies do not stop being what they are because they define themselves as left or right,” says Hidalgo. (Archive)

14ymedio, Ariel Hidalgo, Miami, 6 March 2022 — The person who’s writing to you, a former professor of Marxist Philosophy in the high schools in Havana, and author of a book that was chosen as a supplementary bibliography for all writing careers on the history of the labor movement in Cuba and the first Cuban socialists, wishes to alert you of the mistake which, due to ignorance or fanaticism, could tarnish your names before the possible damning judgment of future generations, for placing yourselves on the wrong side of history.

I do not question your good intentions, your loyalty to the cause of social justice and your commitments to all those human beings in this world who suffer from misery, exploitation and oppression, but the Cuban regime is not what you have believed it to be, and it is necessary that I warn you, with words pronounced by José Martí, who was the numen of Cuban independence, about “the violence and hidden rage of the ambitious who, in order to rise up in the world, begin by pretending so they’ll have shoulders on which to rise up, frantic defenders of the homeless,” which did not mean the renunciation of that ideal, since he himself declared that such attitudes “do not authorize souls of good birth to desert their defense.”

I do not question your good intentions, your loyalty to the cause of social justice and your commitments to all those human beings in this world who suffer from misery, exploitation and oppression

On September 23^rd, 2019, the New Politics Journal, considered an “independent socialist forum,” published one of my articles addressed to the Democratic Socialists of America, who at the Atlanta Convention had expressed their support for the Cuban Government. In it, I told them that “the social economic system established in Cuba without a plebiscitary consultation was copied from the Russian Stalinist model, an arbitrary and opportunist interpretation of the Marxist theory of socialist revolution, which returned to the most reactionary aspects of Hegelian thought embodied in The Philosophy of Law about a State that should absorb all civil society and all individual wills.”

Teaching classes to workers in the so-called workers’ faculties in the 1970s, I received numerous testimonies from my students of repeated conflicts of interest between the administrations designated by the State and the rank-and-file workers, which made me question the repeated assertion that these were the owners of the means of production, and motivated me to carry out the investigation of the Cuban economic-social system that concluded, as a professor in a pre-university institute, with a manuscript where I expressed my disagreement with the politics and the economic model established in Cuba, which years later would be published abroad under the title of Cuba, the Marxist State and the New Class.

continue reading

I was just proposing a different model of socialism. However, the consequences were my expulsion from the country’s educational system in 1981 and, later, under the accusation of “left-wing revisionist,” I was sentenced to eight years in prison in a sentence that added: “and as for his works, destroy them by fire.” As if this were not enough, I was held incommunicado in a narrow walled cell in the death rows of the Combinado del Este prison for more than a year. Such was the fear of the words of a man almost naked but not willing to keep the truth silent.

I was just proposing a different model of socialism. However, the consequences were my expulsion from the country’s educational system in 1981

The prison brutalities that I would witness, as well as my subsequent encounter with many other innocent convicts imprisoned solely for expressing their ideas, led me, along with five other prominent political prisoners, to join what would become the first group to defend human rights, which can be considered as the main nucleus of the current dissident movement spread throughout the country today.

I have not yet thanked in the way they deserve many left-wing intellectuals, such as Noam Chomsky and many others, both in the United States and Latin America, for having signed letters requesting my freedom, as well as the campaigns of international institutions, such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, thanks to whom I was released in 1988 after seven years in prison.

But the left must reevaluate its vision and its position with the Cuban regime, and its peers in Venezuela and Nicaragua, just as they previously condemned Pinochetism in Chile and Francoism in Spain. Tyrannies do not stop being what they are because they define themselves as left or right. On the contrary, they contribute, as Stalin did in the Soviet Union, to spread a denigrating image of just causes, so they must free themselves of that defamatory ballast.

I have condemned in many articles the embargo imposed by the United States on Cuba, above all because it has served as an alibi for the Cuban historical leadership to present itself as a victim, obtain international support, and justify all the economic nonsense of its misrule, because in reality, Cuba It is one of the main trading partners of the United States, and another type of blockade has been more damaging: the one that this leadership has imposed on its own people for more than sixty years.

But the left must reevaluate its vision and its position with the Cuban regime, and its peers in Venezuela and Nicaragua

It is time to tear down the lies raised for many years about what is still called the “Cuban Revolution,” because that revolution ended in 1968 to give rise to what I have described as “reverse socialism,” because in that year, with the so-called “Revolutionary Offensive,” not only were the workers not empowered but, on the contrary, what little they had was taken from them: grocery stores, cafeterias, barbershops, laundries, grocery and food stalls, and even street vendors, such as ice cream carts and shoeshine boys, among others.

It is said that there are no longer monopolies in Cuba. In reality, a monstrous absolute monopoly has arisen, the State itself, which has devoured everything, from which we can affirm what Martí himself said about monopolies: “an implacable giant sitting at the door of all the poor.” The lands were not distributed among dispossessed peasants, nor were the large estates eliminated, but rather they were nationalized, so that the State became the “supreme landowner” — which Marx spoke of in Volume III of Das Kapital — which continued to exploit the farm laborers.

A similar fate also befell the workers of the cities in the different confiscated companies: businesses, industries, banks and the media, among others, at the head of which officials were appointed, not because of their ability, but because of political loyalty, bureaucrats who because of their inability, and above all their proclivity to corruption, have dragged the country into misery and plagued the population with endless calamities.

Many of the struggle comrades of that leadership opposed to this model were imprisoned or put to death. Tens of thousands of people went to jail and around two million preferred to face the rigors of exile.

The thousands of Cubans who took to the streets in dozens of Cuban cities on July 11 were not protesting the problems of the coronavirus, as some media said, but the most repeated word at that event was “freedom.”

The comparison is eloquent. If we call the Batista regime a dictatorship, what should we call this one?

The architects of the assault on the Moncada Barracks during the Batista dictatorship that caused the death of numerous people only received sentences of up to 13 and 15 years and were granted amnesty two years later. In contrast, the protesters of July 11 did not kill anyone or use any violence, but the regime began with a brutal repression, resulting in at least one death, many injuries and more than 1,300 detainees, of which more than 700 still remain in prison, including 32 minors, with prosecutor requests of up to 20 and 30 years in prison.

The comparison is eloquent. If we call the Batista regime a dictatorship, what should we call this one?

I will not tire you with more details that could fill many pages. I only ask you to reason what I have exposed to you without passion and draw your own conclusions, and above all, to take into account from which side of history do you want to be remembered.

____________

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: