The magazine Palabra Nueva (New Word), of the Archdiocese of Havana, in the section dedicated to sports, apart from analyzing the current situation of the different disciplines in the country, is doing important work in rescuing figures forgotten or disqualified by the official press, due to what they practiced before January 1, 1959 (the day of discovery, because the 2nd was they day Christopher Columbus arrived, as a poet friend likes to say), or continued to practice after they were out of Cuba, without links established with the new authorities.
It also informs us about the current Cuban athletes, not belonging to the “government stable,” who triumph in the different countries in world sports, in baseball, as well as football, boxing, swimming, volleyball, basketball, wrestling, athletics, etc., who, despite the narrow political opinions of the authorities to marginalize them, and even the absolute silence around them, declaring them non-persons, are as Cuban as those living on the island, and are also a source of national pride.
No country in the world rejects their children, living wherever they live and succeeding wherever they succeed, because they are an indissoluble part of them, independent of their political opinions and their acquiring, or not, another nationality in a given moment. Luckily history, despite the opportunism and cowardice of some of those who write, always places everyone in their rightful place. It’s all a question of time!
Thus, in a not too distant future, our sports stars will be together with athletes from before and today, from inside and outside, receiving the same respect as citizens. For now, we are grateful to Palabra Nueva for what it does, showing that in sports, too, we are one people dispersed across many shores, all of us valued and honored.
The López Serrano building, a work of Mira and Rosich, architectural jewel, constructed in 1932 and located at No. 108 13th between 11th, L and M in Vedado, has suffered a progressive deterioration for years, with the authorities doing absolutely nothing to stop it.
Looking around its exterior is to discover doors closed and boarded up and the glasswork in ruins, chipped walls, gardens turned into trash dumps, sewer water, and everything conspiring against its existence and its inhabitants, in a display of a complete lack of respect for the city and its citizens.
It’s noteworthy that next to it is the Camilo Cienfuegos clinic, operating in hard currency, and a few yards away on 15th and Linea between L and K, the residence occupied by the National Headquarters of the Committees for the Defense of the Revolution (CDR), both of which received continuous maintenance, including frequent painting, as if these
The Lopez Serrano
facilities are more important and valuable than the Lopez Serrano building. It seems there are abundant resources for these types of institutions — collection points for hard currency and politically-ideologically focuses– and scarce resources to save our architectural patrimony.
We need to firmly demand that the authorities repair and maintain this property, which gives an appearance to the city and makes it unique, before a group of complacent architects declare that its structural problems were caused by construction errors, and approve its demolition, something that has happened repeatedly (the Alaska Building at M
CDR National Headquarters
and 23rd and the Pedro Borras Astorga Hospital in the block of G Street, 27th, 29th and F, also in Vedado). We can not continue to allow these types of buildings to disappear, leaving us with a tiny little park in the space where they were, waiting for better times. Architecture is also an important component of national identity.
The theme of a lack of spaces to voice opinions has been a constant in this last half century of our national life. It has always started as a request for an opening to the authorities themselves and, using the pretext of a powerful enemy ninety miles away, their refusal to grant it.
The practice of recent years has shown that if citizens want to express their opinions they have to open their own spaces (independent journalism, blogs, twitter, etc) and, whenever possible, also use those of the government as well as others that exist.
This happened recently at the so-called Anti-Imperialist Bandstand, with the musician Robertico Carcassés: he took advantage of a government space to express his opinions as a citizen. This is something absolutely valid and shows courage, something most of his critics lack, as they seem to go along with the absurd demand that “criticisms and opinions are to be expressed in the right place at the right time to the right people,” a real straitjacket to avoid anyone’s doing so.
If, in all these years, every citizen had acted with civility and expressed his opinions honestly, taking responsibility for them, many of our problems would never have reached their current magnitude.
It has been precisely the lack of this civic exercise that has allowed our leaders, despite the multiple errors they have committed, to perpetuate themselves in power and to hold onto their positions in society, refusing to cede them, despite the speeches and lukewarm measures put into practice in recent times.
As long as the voices of citizens are not massively reverberating in the ears of the authorities, demanding the necessary changes and reforms, these voices will fall on deaf ears, so that the authorities may continue to act in their own interests, turning their backs on the true interests of the nation.
When the “update of the model” was announced a few years ago, it was seen by many as a possible though certainly very limited way to slowly stimulate the country’s stalled economy. The first disappointment came with an absurd list of medieval-era professions in which self-employed workers were allowed to engage. The most optimistic observers felt this was only the beginning and that more options would be added later. Since nothing was said about regulating the exercise of these professions, it was thought that more information would be forthcoming. Some even more optimistic observers dreamed that authorization would later be extended to small and medium-sized businesses.
After a few years and the addition of only a few more medieval-era professions, regulations and stipulations began to be established. By then even some less bright citizens began to realize that the “update” was nothing more than a shell game, a stalling tactic not unlike that of “blind man’s bluff.”
Let us remember that slavery was replaced with feudalism, which represented an advance in economic productivity. It later gave way to capitalism, which constituted an even greater advancement by introducing new means and methods of production. Karl Marx, whose work is considered the pillar of socialism and communism, argued that socialism would be superior to capitalism and would advance the engines of productivity even further, fulfilling the ever growing needs of humanity until true communism was ultimately achieved. Lenin later altered and co-opted this theory to make it conform to circumstances in Russia and provide it with a theoretical and allegedly scientific basis. What later came of all this theory and practice is all too well-known.
Nevertheless, it makes no sense for Cuban authorities, who call themselves socialists, to impose medieval methodologies and practices on self-employed workers. To expect artisan craftsmen to be able to supply the private marketplace in the 21st century without also allowing small and medium-sized business access to industrial production constitutes a mistake of major proportions, or at the very least a serious misunderstanding of how material goods are produced in today’s world.
Cuba and Cubans are familiar with capitalism with all its pluses and minuses, though more so with the former than the latter. We are familiar with socialism too, though in this case with more of its minuses than pluses. Trying to impose medieval methodologies and practices on the output of the self-employed (they dare not call them private sector workers) is a ridiculous political and economic policy. Those who think and act in this way are doing nothing more than demonstrating their by now well-known inability to resolve Cuba’s problems.
For some time, concerned and alarmed by the rampant deterioration of the buildings in the city, I have dedicated some time to exploring its municipalities: Central Havana, Cerro, Diez de Octubre and the neighborhood of El Vedado, in Plaza. The ruinous state of what were once were magnificent examples of the different types of architecture is a source of pain and sadness, but even more so are the jewels demolished, mutilated, damaged and transformed for the worse, both by the authorities and the population, in a display of ignorance, irresponsibility, indifference and disinterest for the urban richness, violating all established norms and regulations.
Here, as in other cases, the laws, decrees and regulations have been “wet paper” — worthless — ignored by those who had the duty to uphold and enforce: the constituted authorities at different levels, from the municipality to the nation. The damage is done and is irreversible and, worst of all, it has not yet been halted, despite recent and too late attempts to do so, more formal than real, which are usually objects of propaganda by the official press.
Like many citizens, I ask myself: Who will pay for all these crimes committed against city’s patrimony? Will those responsible ever be tried and punished, both those directly responsible (the administrators, company directors, etc.) and those ultimately responsible, which were those who were in charge over the last fifty-four years? It is right and just to punish citizens who violate the laws and regulations regarding the decoration and buildings, but it would be even more right and just, to also punish those who ordered or allowed (and who still are) demolitions, mistreatments, mutilations and transformations of valuable buildings and similar atrocities.
When a country, the government in power is the first to not value or respect the main components of national identity, including the architecture, it is highly unlikely that the majority of citizens will do so. There’s good fishing in troubled waters! In order to demand, you have to start by setting a good example.
Importing traditions (the circus of the yellow ribbons* is one example) seems to be the fashion, with the goal of entertaining the public, despite great governmental dedication and the poor treatment of the citizens, with respect to the spectacle mounted on 12 September.*
If it’s about traditions, instead of importing them, it would be convenient if the authorities restored some of the democratic ones that existed during the fifty-six years of the Republic, which were abolished at the stroke of a pen.
I will not dwell on the festivals and the line, which are also worthy, but those in another group, within which we can cite: the right to freely express opinions, and to make them available in the corresponding organs of the press; to elect the president of the country and his counterparts in the provinces and municipalities, through a direct vote of the citizens, in elections where candidates from different parties compete; to all the free development of private initiative, without medieval laws or regulations, which present obstacles and impediments; to facilitate free access to information for all citizens; for parents to be able to decide which school — public or private — they want to educate their children; to respect differences of all kinds; to decriminalize wealth; to let the provincial and municipal organs of power possess real power to solve the problems of their communities, and to stop being mere appendages of the central power; to let the unions respond to the interests of the workers and not to those of the Party, the government and the administration; to let social organizations multiply and for belonging to them to be truly voluntary, according to the interests and desires of each person.
There are many other democratic traditions that also should be restored, but those mentioned are enough.
If this were to happen, which seems almost impossible currently, then perhaps we could start to believe in the good intentions of the government to resolve the problems of the Nation.
*Translator’s note: Fernando is referring to the “circus” around the government’s decision to drape Cuba in yellow ribbons — an American tradition but not a Cuban one — to demand the release of the four remaining spies in prison in the US, and the dance party mounted at the “Protestdrome” on September 12, in support of this objective.
A Castro goon harassing a group of Ladies in White holding posters of the former political prisoner Orlando Zapata Tamayo who died in prison on a hunger strike.
The word esbirro*, to designate someone who committed acts against human dignity, including torture and murder, sheltered by the impunity of service to the Government, began to be used in Cuba during the dictatorship of General Gerardo Machado, back in the 1930s. In the 1950s, during the dictatorship of General Fulgencio Batista, it was taken up again.
Duly constituted authorities are one thing, necessary in any social system to maintain citizen order and peaceful coexistence, acting in accordance with the laws, and it’s another thing to have people (men and women) who, sheltered by that same authorities, commit acts against people, whether physical, moral or psychological.
On coming to power in 1959, it was declared that there would be no more “esbirros,” and that members of the armed bodies would act respectfully towards citizens, as they should. The majority of Cubans applauded this declaration. But with the passage of time, certain words and promises were forgotten: today, the “profession” is one again practiced.
Those who exercise it today employ psychological torture and, often, “going in with hands and feet,” use physical aggression (what are they but the beatings of those who think differently, be they men or women, with contusions, broken heads and arms, loss of teeth, etc?). Not to mention economic harassment, abuse and humiliations. Numerous events, related by the victims themselves, confirm it, as do the numerous images captured by cellphones and put on the web. As you see, we have those who exercise the profession again, although they promised us it wouldn’t happen again.
When a government has to go to these people to instill fear, it shows weakness and the inability to compete in the realm of ideas, although they organize and engage in prolonged “battles” for that purpose. In addition, whomever practices the profession and is used today, will be abandoned to his fate tomorrow, and will have to answer for his acts before the justice of a democratic society. Our history is rich in examples. It’s hard to know if our current “practitioners,” the active esbirros and the esbirros-in-training, have thought about that.
There are “government esbirros,” who are paid monthly salaries for positions in the gang, and the “self-employed esbirros,” who, although not paid salaries, receive certain collateral benefits, such as to not be interfered with if they practice illegal economic activities, protected by the facade of “Revolutionaries,” according to the dogmatic content that the authorities give this word.
These characters, to feel safer, only arrive on the scene by government call, making an appearance at times and places they indicate. They easily stand out as the most “enraged” among the “enraged people,” the official euphemism for the mobs mobilized against those who think differently and act accordingly. Among these “enraged,” their activism and violence are in direct relation to the amount of “dirty laundry” they treasure.
This profession has always been reason for scorn, even by those who use them. It’s a shame to see how young people of both sexes, and people not so young, lend themselves to it, erroneously believing they are carrying out a patriotic task in defense of the nation. Sadly, it’s a mistake that will always weigh on their lives. More than hated, they should be pitied, because what they are doing is mortgaging their own futures as free citizens in a democratic society.
By Fernando Dámaso
*Translator’s note: Esbirro translates variously as goon, thug, henchman.
Words, by the tens of thousands, are an integral part of languages. They serve to define and differentiate objects, natural elements, people, feelings, actions…. in other words, everything material as well as immaterial. They are constantly undergoing a process of change. Although some fall out of use, other new ones arise as humankind develops. As such, there are neither good nor bad words. The difference depends merely on how, where and when they are used.
Over the last half-century Cuba has lost many material things (agriculture, industry, transportation, housing and other things) as well as many immaterial things (values, morals, civility, respect, good education, good habits, social discipline, tolerance and so on).
In an attempt to “rescue” (a fashionable verb these days) some of the latter, there has been a “clarion call” or a “call to arms” to restore them as quickly as possible. We have a tendency to either “fall short” or “over-react.”
This worries me because after “falling short” for decades — allowing things to be lost while doing absolutely anything to prevent it in spite of warnings by many citizens — we are now “over-reacting” by trying to solve the problem with slogans, promises and repression (as evidenced, for example, by demands for fines and sanctions in agriculture and roadway construction).
These only address the superficial symptoms. They do not get to the root cause, which lies in the breakdown of family life and the educational system. This stems from educating and training generations that in large part were blinded and preoccupied by Pharaonic schemes and messianic ideas which demanded the total commitment of one’s time to the promise of a bright future that we can now see was never to be achieved.
As the old saying goes, “You pay for education over the long-term.” We now have evidence of its validity: Without education at home and with inadequate education in the schools, the consequences were unavoidable. We all agree on the need to confront and resolve this issue since it poses a direct threat to healthy social coexistence. Education and training are necessary but be careful of excesses! They have never yielded good results.
The profusion of heroes by decree, both Heroes of the Republic and Heroes of the Workers, has always caught my attention, especially when from time to time there is a new crop. They are recognized for military actions, for spying, for cutting cane, for scientific achievements, for baking bread, etc.
Céspedes, Agramonte, Maceo, Gómez, Martí, and others, did not require any decree in order to be heroes: the people, who alone have this right, designated them. More recently this was repeated with Mella, Villena, Guiteras, Frank País, José Antonio Echevarría, Camilo Cienfuegos, etc. All of these, maybe some more than others, are enduring heroes.
Not so with those appointed by decree, who, for lack of a fixative, are perishable and tend to disappear along with the system that produced them. Where are the thousands of prefabricated heroes in the former socialist countries, mainly in the former Soviet Union? Hardly anyone remembers them, and most have been swept away by the wind of time, like dry leaves fallen from trees. So, with any luck, it will also happen here. In practice they are heroes unknown to most of the population, who had nothing to do with their appointment as such, made in response to the short-term political interests of the authorities in power. The few who are known can at most enjoy their fifteen minutes of fame while it is necessary to use them, requiring the constant inflation of publicity; when it stops, they deflate like a homemade hot-air balloon.
It turns out that those appointed by the people continue enlarging after death, while the others disappear and are forgotten. The problem of our heroes is too serious to be taken lightly. Just take a look at history!
The yellow ribbon tied to an oak tree, while waiting for the return of a loved one temporarily absent, is a beautiful and touching American tradition, which speaks volumes for the values of this people. Why then, has the consideration of their use in Cuba this coming September 12th, caused such an outcry among Cubans here and over there? It turns out this call has a faulty origin: it is made by an ex-spy who has served his sentence, in support of four others who are still serving theirs, and are in prison in the United States. This unmasks the political intention hidden behind a faked humanism, which is nothing more than trying to obtain through emotional means, what has not been obtained through legal means: the release of the four. It happens that most will not accept a pig in a poke.
Cuba is indeed a country where the authorities have tried, and in many cases have succeeded, in deleting their national traditions. Where does this come from now to introduce traditions and, moreover, from the country considered the eternal enemy?
It is good to remember that, by government dispositions, traditions were abolished, such as Christmas Eve (December 24), Christmas (December 25), the Epiphany (January 6), the anniversary of the Republic (May 20), Easter and other religious traditions. In addition, the Feast of New Year (December 31) and New Year (January 1), were stripped of their original meaning, and given political connotations: the eve and the triumph of the Revolution.
If that was not enough, the Carnival of Havana, one of the most internationally recognized, along with that of Venice, Rio de Janeiro and Mardi Gras, lost its roots and popular essence and became a grotesque official caricature of what had been. Even the symbols were banned, banishing Santa Claus (also imported from the neighboring North), and the old man with the scythe over his shoulder, representing the year that was, and the baby in diapers, the one that is arriving.
Of these, so far, for circumstantial conveniences with the Church, only Christmas (December 25) has been restored along with, and for the same reason, some activities related to the Virgin of Charity del Cobre and Easter.
Everything they abolished was done against the will and the feelings of the majority of the people, without consulting with them. These are the reasons why the average Cuban, although having by driven, for years, by the syndrome of the flock and acting in line with it, trying not to lose his social crumbs, within himself rejects this new political imposition disguised as noble sentiment, forcing him to do something he doesn’t want, with the sole purpose of being considered politically correct by the authorities. Is it worth it?
The ex-spy René, recycled as a hero by decree, in a sentimental address to the people of Cuba, in prime time on National Television made a call — authorized by his superiors, because here no one can make a call on their own — for people to wear yellow ribbons and to tie ribbons of the same color around trees, houses, cars, pets, etc. this coming 12th, as a demand for the release of his four brother ex-spies and also heroes, who are serving sentences in the United States.
The following day, delving into the topic in the Roundtable program, perhaps alerted that here, unlike there, there aren’t a lot of ribbons of any color, and those available can only be bought in CUCs (convertible pesos, i.e. hard currency), declared that it can be any object of this color: a button, T-shirt, skirt, scarf, and so on. In support of his proposal, he explained that it was a tradition of the American people to do this for their loved ones, far away for whatever reason, while awaiting their return.
It strikes me that here, where national traditions have not been and are not much respected, this gentleman intends to introduce a tradition, and one that is nothing less than that of our eternal enemy.
Seeing is believing!
It might have been interesting had this tradition — with song and all — been introduced when thousands of Cubans were fighting foreign wars in Latin American and Africa, while their worried relatives awaited their return home. Then, it would have been greeted with great spontaneous acceptance.
Now, with regards to the four spies, it really touches very few, although I can say without fear of being mistaken that this yellow day will dawn in Cuba, because the herd syndrome — used on multiple occasions — will work. The Party, the authorities and all the governmental organizations and institutions are already concerned with bringing about this new ideological task.
To do this, the directors and managers of companies will demand that their workers wear the ribbons, and the most diligent are already doing so, getting the fabric, cutting it into strips, and handing them out to everyone, in order not to fail. In the schools, the principals are demanding it of the teachers and they, in turn, of the students, indicating, perhaps, that without them no one will be admitted to class.
Although this national entertainment, organized to divert people’s attention from their real problems, will not have any effect on the American people, concerned about more serious and far-reaching issues, the saga of the five-less-one will serve the so-called groups of solidarity, organized and subsidized by the Cuban government around the world, and the occasional political clueless, to demonstrate against the empire.
The authorities seem to have given the order to shut down so-called “shopping houses” (small private stores run by the self-employed), which now face the threat of being taken over and having their inventory confiscated. Several days ago the Council of Ministers issued Decree no. 313 and took other similar measures outlining the procedures that must be followed when dealing with goods and furnishings involved in criminal trials and subject to administrative confiscation. The decree establishes the bodies that will deal with storage, preservation and disposition of these goods as required. In other words it codifies the redistribution of the seized goods to lucky recipients in order to avoid discussion and blowback.
It is a kind of tug of war. One day something is authorized but, as soon as enterprising citizens see a way to legally improve their economic status through their own initiative, it is outlawed. There is no way to advance, only regress to the same old stagnation, which kills off any hope of real change.
These actions are repeated so often that the “updating*” has become like bubble gum. It is a continual back and forth, constantly inflating and deflating, losing credibility each time. Increasingly, the policy is not being taken seriously by citizens, who have not lost their ability to think for themselves.
As long as the authorities fail to offer a realistic program, they will just keep wasting time. Without a well-defined and clear roadmap for solving the nation’s crisis — one without so many potholes, detours and backtracking, all summed up in some generic “guidelines” which are more theoretical than practical — everything just gets more complicated and any solution just becomes more difficult.
How nice it would be if they just put their feet on the ground, set aside failed utopian ideologies, and stopped hoping for new Messiahs to come along and “pull their chestnuts out of the fire.”
*Translator’s note: The Cuban government’s term for Raul Castro’s program of economic reform.
Cuba has serious medical problems at home. There have been cases reported of cholera, tuberculosis and dengue fever — already at epidemic levels — and other illnesses that have not been seen for decades in this country. In towns and cities there is also a disastrous sanitation and epidemiological situation which has been exacerbated by inadequate health services in clinics and hospitals. Nevertheless, the government of Cuba has reached an agreement with its counterpart in Brazil to provide the services of four thousand doctors to that nation. As the saying goes, “streetlamps outside, darkness inside.”
Forget all the folderol from the publicity release which talks about “solidarity and friendship with the Brazilian people.” The reason this agreement came about is because it serves the interests of both parties. For Brazil it is political. Its government hopes it will help win votes in a future election. Economic reasons drive the Cuban government, which hopes it will bring in cold, hard cash.
It is no secret that this is a juicy business. Of the four thousand dollar monthly salary paid by the Brazilian to each physician, the Cuban government will expropriate three thousand five hundred. The rest is to be “enjoyed” by the employee, within rules and limitations established by the ministerial branch which handles these things. This is nothing new. It is how these missions work and have always worked in most of the fifty-eight countries in which they operate.
Since the production of goods for export has gone from bad to worse here — notwithstanding the “updating” (as Raul Castro’s economic reforms are known) — the business of exporting services has become one of the principal means for generating hard currency. Since most of what is collected remains in the coffers of the state, it can offer professional services at much lower prices than other countries, whose quality is often no better, giving it a competitive advantage.
Meanwhile, if you are over here, try not to get sick. But if it cannot be avoided and you want to get better, look for a doctor who is a friend, one of those who doesn’t give a hoot about “ideological orders” and is a “friend of friends.” But if you cannot find one, then look for a healer (every neighborhood has one) and plenty of herbal medicine, which some call natural. (And if you are a believer, it would not hurt to look to the supernatural as well.) Because the idea that this is a “medical powerhouse” is nothing more than a story as old as that of “the good pipe.”
*Translator’s note: A reference to a circular question that never gets answered, similar to “Who’s on first?” from an old American comedy routine.
Though it has no leading role in socialism as it is practiced in this country, the self-described “new Cuban left” is trying to find its place in the current economic, political and social debate, one in which no one is participating. Perhaps it is inertia that leads it to simply repeat certain well-worn arguments put forth by the government, which are far removed from historical reality.
When referring to the Cuban Republic, the “new left” accepts as fact that it was a neo-colonial and subjugated pseudo-state, constrained by the Platt Amendment and subject to foreign interference. It assumes that only a tiny minority lived well while the rest of the population suffered in misery without education, health services or employment opportunities. It also believes that discrimination against racial minorities and women was rampant. The current authorities have been incessant in their demonization of past eras, facts and historical figures, while some have accepted these claims as absolute truths and go on repeating them.
The reality is that the situation was not quite so gloomy. Cuba was one of the most advanced countries in the world in terms of agricultural and industrial production, health services, education, salary levels and labor rights. Its gross domestic product was also one of the highest in the region, making it an attractive destination for immigrants from other countries. It had an established and thriving middle class, and both its population and cities were continually growing, both from an economic and urban standpoint as well as in terms of infrastructure.
In fact, most of what we still have of value we owe to the republican era. To ignore this truth — even keeping in mind the political situation as well as other shortcomings and problems that existed at the time, and that still have not been resolved — is like listening to only half the story.
When referring to the disastrous years of socialism, however, the new Cuban left characterizes it as true, authoritarian, statist and Stalinist. It focuses attention only on its distorted features, blaming them for all its failures, as though it were not the system itself — independent of its atrocities and its leaders — which has failed wherever it has been tried.
When discussing the future, the “new left” rejects a return to the past, presuming it might lead to something as ridiculous as a return to pre-1959 capitalism. It accuses those who propose abandoning Raul Castro’s model of being responsible for a possible loss of independence and sovereignty (language which daily falls further out of use in a globalized world) or for subjugation by the neighbor to the north. It is a perhaps unintentional reprise of an official rhetorical phrase: “You are either with me or against me.”
The only thing that Cuban socialism has distributed equally throughout the population — which does not include of the tiny elite which hangs onto wealth and power — is poverty. This is the equality that its domestic and foreign supporters applaud. Cuban socialism has enjoyed fifty-four years of missed opportunities, which makes it highly unlikely that the population will be inclined to give it further opportunities either in the present or in the future.
As the popular saying goes, the Castro model’s “last fifteen minutes are up.” Therefore, new opportunities present themselves to other political, economic and social initiatives which can and must include all citizens who care about Cuba. They cannot, however, impose narrow concepts, whether or not they are what we call socialists, democrats, participatives, critics, conservatives, liberals, capitalists, anarchists, rationalists, centrists, decentralists, pluralists, reformers, etc.
It is only natural that this political opening would occur after years of living under a single economic, political and social ideological mindset. The wide variety of new ingredients should produce a dish capable of satisfying the palates of most of our citizens. But this dish cannot be prepared by one single chef. It has to take into account the opinions and participation of those who will consume it, and must include economic development, freedom and social justice.
The goal is to enter the current global jet stream and advance along with it in ways to be determined by citizens exercising their full democratic rights, with participation by everyone but without new and ridiculous political, economic and social experiments or the kind of one-party nationalism that has left us light years behind the world’s democracies.
For some time there has been a consolidation of some of the spaces for analysis and discussion of issues that directly affect society: Critical Space; the magazine’s Temas’ Last Thursday; Dialogue in the Cuban Pavilion; the meetings of the magazines Lay Space and New Word; the independent Estado de SATS project and others.
They range from those closest to the government positions, to some that occupy intermediate positions, and to those the furthest away. It’s true that they are still few and some, in order to meet, must overcome many obstacles, and even confront the misunderstanding and fear of many, and the veiled or overt repression from the authorities, according to the current political temperature.
Usually they arrange a panel and guests specialized in the subject to be discussed, along with the participation of interested citizens. After expositions by the main speakers and discussion of those among different specialists, with the help of a moderator, they are opened to audience participation, usually managing to achieve a constructive and positive environment, in the context of differences in points of view. Some, without public participation, such as Citizen Reasons, have a panel of experts who analyze and discuss the topic in question, with the help of a moderator, which is then edited, reproduced and distributed on CD.
Conspiring against these spaces are two factors: one of a material nature and one of a political nature. The first is a given, because the sites involved, as a rule, are small and do not allow the presence of large numbers of people. Thus, their real influence is rather limited, but then try to disseminate the analysis and debate through different media (written text, email, USB, CD, etc.). Conspiring against the latter are the limited economic options.
The second is a given, first, because the government officials invited, regardless of their positions, have never been present in any of the spaces. Because of this, all that is analyzed and discussed is done so the context of the opinions of those with no real power, and without direct confrontation with the holders of authority and resources.
This brings immediate consequence, that the results are not known to the authorities concerned and, if they become so, it is only through a third party, often in an incomplete or distorted way, depending on their interests.
Unfortunately the authorities, rather than take advantage of these practices of civil society to support good governance, cling to the false and failed method of making different policies in closed compartments by think tanks, to later be approved higher up, and then sending them down (the word says it all) to the base for analysis and discussion, in order to give a veneer of democracy.
It’s no secret that at the base level the analysis and discussion are superficial and formal, and whatever is proposed is quickly approved to be done with it, as everyone is more concerned about the immediate problems of daily survival.
Anyway, it’s healthy to maintain, develop and expand these spaces, despite their limitations. Perhaps, when the participation of citizens is increased, and gains still more in seriousness and prestige, government representatives will have no choice but to someday accept the occasional invitation and participate, duly authorized by their superiors. This would be a sign that dialogue is possible.
