It is true that José Martí founded a political organization, the Partido Revolucionario Cubano (Cuban Revolutionary Party), Fidel Castro founded the Partido Comunista de Cuba (Cuban Communist Party), and many people in our country and the world, just like them, have maintained their membership in the different institutions that they have erected so that from them they can work towards and develop their respective proposals. Notwithstanding, they disrespect or do not know the rights of the rest of their compatriots to legally create organizations and launch them towards their Motherland’s paths of history for the benefit of the nation and the interests of all her children wherever they might be.
The justification so often bandied about by the Cuban government and its mouthpieces — that in Cuba we have a single party system because Martí founded only one party — is ridiculous. If we depart from that weak argument, then we must answer that we should have refounded Martí’s party a few years ago – we owe it to him – as a political alternative to the existing Communist party. Or is it that this is a right that only pertains to descendants of the Movimiento 26 de Julio (26 July Movement)? That they respect everybody’s rights – not only a part of them – and legalize Cuban organizations, is the best way to honor Marti, the Apostle. Let us unfurl one of the mottoes of his profound political thinking, collaborating with all and for the benefit of all which is the best way to truly fulfill his dream, and restore, based on ethics, the inalienable right for all times of creating new parties.
It is true that José Martí founded a political organization, the Partido Revolucionario Cubano (Cuban Revolutionary Party), Fidel Castro founded the Partido Comunista de Cuba (Cuban Communist Party), and many people in our country and the world, just like them, have maintained their membership in the different institutions that they have erected so that from them they can work towards and develop their respective proposals. Notwithstanding, they disrespect or do not know the rights of the rest of their compatriots to legally create organizations and launch them towards their Motherland’s paths of history for the benefit of the nation and the interests of all her children wherever they might be.
The justification so often bandied about by the Cuban government and its mouthpieces — that in Cuba we have a single party system because Martí founded only one party — is ridiculous. If we depart from that weak argument, then we must answer that we should have refounded Martí’s party a few years ago – we owe it to him – as a political alternative to the existing Communist party. Or is it that this is a right that only pertains to descendants of the Movimiento 26 de Julio (26 July Movement)? That they respect everybody’s rights – not only a part of them – and legalize Cuban organizations, is the best way to honor Marti, the Apostle. Let us unfurl one of the mottoes of his profound political thinking, collaborating with all and for the benefit of all which is the best way to truly fulfill his dream, and restore, based on ethics, the inalienable right for all times of creating new parties.
In the section Acuse de Recibo (“Acknowledgement of Receipt”) of the daily Juventud Rebelde (“Rebel Youth”) for 9/25/11 there is an article titled El Potín, y mucho más (“The Potín and Much More”), where a citizen and the journalist show the deplorable state of this formerly elegant commercial establishment, with regards to the paltry services it provides and its anti-hygienic facilities. The article by itself is sufficiently explicit and I will not repeat it, rather use it as the foundation to delve and expand on the problems of the so-called State Gastronomy.
If this Potín in El Vedado (at the intersection of Línea and Paseo) is in crisis, its sibling in Old Havana (O’Reilly Street) is a sad reminder of the past: the only remains are its name embossed on the granite floor and the deteriorated facade, the once elegant place turned into a primitive and dark warehouse. Something similar has happened with the majority of the gastronomic establishments that existed in the decade of the fifties, that were the pride and points of reference of our city: either they have ceased to exist, most converted to ruins, or they are true slums.
The same fate overtook the so-called Beach Clubs, belonging in their time to different workers’ or employees’ federations (telephone, hardware, retailers, bank, pharmaceutical, etc.) that were handed over later to the unions, and today (and for many years) in death-throes and in a total state of abandonment. Why were they nationalized? Maybe to let them be destroyed?
Such measures, demonstrating their absurdity with the passing of years, can only be explained in the minds of people ambitious for power, who desired to be absolute rulers of everything, without taking into account their shortcomings, nor thinking about the social consequences of their adventurous decisions. Nowadays, when there is so much talk of updating the Model, even if the lost is irretrievable, it would be good that the eternally failed State Gastronomy should be laid on the table, along with other problems, and that real steps be taken for handing them (with their dilapidated facilities and inadequate equipment) to entrepreneurs who, in the short time of running their businesses, have demonstrated initiative, responsibility, organizational capacity, efficiency and quality, things that state entities have never accomplished (and much less maintained).
If we must learn from mistakes, as the never tiring refrain of mass media goes, at least we can begin to move forward learning from this, giving it a solution, so we can end, once and for all, all the discredited and inoperative gastronomic slums, called cafeterias and restaurants, that constitute an offense to our cities and towns.
Tuesday the 27th, the government published in the Gaceta Oficial de la Republica (Official Gazette of the Republic) a legislative package that regulates the sale and donation of automobiles between private citizens. The new legislation will become effective October 1st.
A collaboration with Rafael Leon Rodriguez, General Coordinator of the Cuban Democratic Project from the event “Cuba today, Cuba tomorrow” that took place Saturday, September 17 in Miami, FL.
The latest measures adopted to make self-employment more flexible, after the publication by the Official Gazette of the extraordinary issues 28 and 29 last Friday September 9th, containing the resolutions and law decrees that legalize them, drive one to think that the political will of the highest Cuban authorities exists so as to continue down the path of economic reforms. Some reductions in tax quotas, the raising of the number of customers allowed in private eating establishments (“Paladares“) to 50, and the lowering of minimum quotas for renting rooms by 25% attest to this.
Despite many material limitations, since wholesale markets have not been established, an important sector of society directs its interest toward these new modalities of employment and economic pursuits, that already amount to 181 approved activities.
On the other hand, expectations regarding modifications to Resolution 259 (private profit from use of productive land) that entail being able to hold farms beyond ten years, the possibility of building permanent housing on them and the long-awaited increase of areas assigned to this production mode, push forward this new sphere of agricultural production.
Since the Sixth Congress of the Communist Party last April, during which the nominated Guidelines for Economic and Social Policy of the Party and the Revolution were approved, to date, one can state that a deceleration in the implementation of some of the measures that affect the population directly, such as elimination of subsidies for the basic family basket, and the reduction of payrolls in some work centers, which would increase unemployment. These government political decisions certify that there is a preoccupation on the part of authorities with preventing social irritants that would endanger their control and public order. Nonetheless, one can visualize their intention to confront State bureaucratic resistance to changes, since these, in some measure, affect the special interests of the strata of society dedicated to the administration of the State.
In the midst of a global economic crisis, when unconditional supporters of Cuba’s governing elite continue to diminish and with unfavorable prospects of their being able to stop this process, it is significant that they stay the course in the direction chosen for the transformations that have been proposed. We know that the conservation of political power has been, and is, the first priority of the authorities, guaranteeing thus dynastic succession, and from this comes the immobility towards recognizing an independent civil society and political opposition and the signing of the United Nation’s Pact of Civil, Political, Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
Nonetheless, and independently from the causes that motivated it, Cuban authorities decreed an amnesty last year that benefited a large number of political prisoners or prisoners of conscience and allowed many of them to leave the country with their relatives. They have reiterated that by the end of the year they will liberalize, in some measure, travel restrictions from or into Cuba for Cuban citizens, and will end legal obstacles for the sale, purchase and transfer of houses and automobiles. All these measures have been happening and developing without external increased flexibility towards the authoritarian government by the forces that participate and in fact have influence on the Cuban topic: the government of the United States with their embargo and the European Union with their Common Position.
On several occasions the thesis of the double blockade has been supported: the embargo of Cuba by the US government and the blockade from Cuban authorities toward the people with regards to innumerable restrictions to liberty and rights that limit their chances of reaching a dignified standard of living. In some fashion, we find ourselves now in a transitional context that can facilitate, after a fifty-year wait filled with obstacles and failures, a peaceful aperture towards a democratic state based on the rule of law that will allow us to succeed in the search for liberties and the common good. Any way you look at it, the so-called Government Economic Model is a failure and has no solution. Against it conspire, not only the natural laws of economics but also the State bureaucracy, with its endemic petty corruption and the aging of the ruling caste.
With regards to civil society, independently of a specific cases and facts, the non-violent political opposition has not demonstrated, to date, that it possesses the ability to mobilize the population so as to impose its demands, although increasingly it has become the popular reference point for the nature of real change. Nonetheless, Cuban totalitarian authorities, certainly concerned by the current events in the North of Africa and other potential conflict areas, seem irritated and react, in certain occasions disproportionately, to situations that don’t justify it.
There is an imaginative collection of varied prospective visions regarding Cuba, arising as much from current living circumstances as from our recent history and the supposed events that, in a near future, could develop. A part of these visions includes specific elements that are shared and essential for Cuba to steer in the direction of liberties and democracy. Among them are:
The liberation of all prisoners held for non-violent political motives that still remain in prison, after the last amnesty.
Ratification and implementation by Cuban totalitarian authorities of the United Nation’s Pact of Civil, Political, Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
Recognition by the Cuban totalitarian authorities of an independent civil society and of political pluralism in Cuba.
Implementation of the right to information, the right to inform others and access to the Internet
Another topic of transcendental importance is the participation of the Cuban diaspora in the reconstruction of the nation. Not only from necessary economic considerations, but also towards the reconstitution of the plural national spirit and restitution of its traditional unique traditions. In this direction, the totalitarian authorities of the islands have an obligation to recognize the nationality of all Cubans who live in foreign lands, including recognition of double nationality in those cases where new legislation created to this effect deem it appropriate.
In another sphere, ingrained opinions are debated regarding the need to obtain unity among the different sectors of the non-violent political opposition. Some prefer joining rather than uniting. Historically, the Cuban non-violent opposition has been plural, and this has defended it from the insidious activities of the political police, among other matters. Joining, based on common arguments and aspirations, appears to be what is most convenient.
There is a long list of potential steps that could be taken to move in the direction of nursing and providing impulse to the irreversible political changes in Cuba; in summary, it would be enough to bring back the magic formula of creating bridges and removing obstacles, so as to bring closer, in trust, in solidarity and in peace, all of us, the Cubans.
Rafael Leon Rodriguez
General Coordinator
Cuban Democratic Project
San Cristobal de la Habana, 11 September 2011
The problem is the street. General Raúl Castro will not permit an Arab Spring in Cuba. He will do whatever needs doing to detain irate opponents. He wants to isolate the potential short-circuit that could turn into a street protest.
The island is a petri dish for cultivation of popular anger. The logical erosion of 52 years of ineffective government, with a handful of absurd regulations in the political, migratory and economic spheres, incapable of putting on the table with any stability meat, vegetables, fruit, and other food and a glass of milk, at accessible prices, all provoke annoyances among the population of the heart of Cuba.
It converts the street of certain poor neighborhoods, marginal and primarily black, like San Leopoldo, Los Quemados, Palo Cagao, Zamora, Pocitos, Belen, Colon, Jesus Maria into ticking timebombs.
A sensitive abrasive surface of the matchbox. With the smallest scratch it can catch fire. If one analyzes the policy of Intelligence Services to dismantle, terrorize and silence the street dissidents, we see a worrisome scaling of violence the last few weeks.
Other than beatings and verbal abuse, they use official alternative media to inflame the anger of their sympathizers. The mobilization orchestrated by government bloggers under the label “Twitter #y no saldran a la calle” is condemnable.
It has always been profitable business for the Castro brothers to polarize civil society. Belittle those who think differently. The spent speechifying accusing dissenters of being “turncoats, mercenaries and annexationists” is old hat and puerile.
Fatherland is not synonymous with Socialism or Fidel Castro. Mercenaries, as defined in the United Nations statutes, are those outsiders that through the exchange of money are at the service of a foreign government.
It is not the case. All the street dissidents are Cuban born. Even the accusation by the regime that they pour onto the street for money is not compatible with mercenary behavior.
In any event, we could call them “salary men”. But I ask myself – what sensible person would risk beating and prison for 30 convertible pesos, as the government media claims?
It’s one or the other: either they are insane or they are desperate. Moreover, the theory that all opposition sells itself for a fistful of dollars is risible. Is there nobody honest enough to dissent for ideals?
State Security has never seized firearms or C-4 from opposition members. Not even a firecracker. The only things they have seized have been computers, telephones and books. Then, they are peaceful. And have a right to protest in public to show their disapproval of the government.
To speak of annexationism in the 21st century makes us laugh. Annexationism was an undercurrent of the 19th Century, that, by the way, was embraced by many of the fathers of Cuban independence.
Nobody in their right mind wants to raffle away the Fatherland nor tender it to any foreign power. It is only smoke and mirrors from the Castro regime media that seeks to discredit those who oppose them.
If anybody has allied themselves, dangerously, almost in an annexationist way, it has been Fidel Castro himself. Up to 1992, an article in the Constitution of the Cuban Republic recognized the alliance between Cuba and the USSR.
The island had Russian military bases like Study Center #11, or Finca Lourdes, devoted to electronic spying. And nobody in the Cuban parliament stood up to denounce it.
Yes, it is true, the Platt Amendment and the concession of a military base in sovereign territory in Guantanamo elicits repudiation. But the intelligentsia and the politicians of the era expressed their unhappiness in all forums, Congress included.
Beginning in 1959, Castro’s dictates could not, and still can’t be questioned. They are divine laws. Sacred. Absolute. With all its blemishes, the Dissidence is a mirror help up to today’s society and the ills suffered by the governing hierarchy.
There is an opposition sector, banal, corrupt and comfortable. There are also honest opposition members with initiatives of dialog and future.
Lately a certain academic racism has sprung between some of these newly minted dissidents. But not in all. There are valuable and talented citizens in the opposition spectrum. It doesn’t matter whether 30 or 70. Age is not a determinant.
What it is about is not letting one be carried away by excessive ego or craving for the limelight. To come together must be the goal. The carrot and stick strategy that State Security follows is on balance defensive.
On the one hand, they allow meetings, debates and even teaching to certain determined opposition groups, and on the other, they use paramilitaries for verbal lynchings and beatings against those that protest in the streets. They must know why they follow these tactics.
Opposition members, independent journalists and alternative bloggers must set aside conspiracy theories or apparent actions of secret services. They have no proofs in their hands. They are not mind readers either.
Those who publicly oppose the Castros, whether through a blog, web, opposition party or shouting in the streets, whatever their positions they are not enemies.
The enemies are the corrupt procreated by the regime itself and the clans that emerged during 52 years in totalitarian power.
Watch: Video of the clash between opposition members and government loyalist, this last September 24th, in Rio Verde, a suburb of Havanna. Read: Tomakjian case changes last names of Castro regime in a power readjustment.
It is true that José Martí founded a political organization, the Partido Revolucionario Cubano (Cuban Revolutionary Party), Fidel Castro founded the Partido Comunista de Cuba (Cuban Communist Party), and many people in our country and the world, just like them, have maintained their membership in the different institutions that they have erected so that from them they can work towards and develop their respective proposals. Notwithstanding, they disrespect or do not know the rights of the rest of their compatriots to legally create organizations and launch them towards their Motherland’s paths of history for the benefit of the nation and the interests of all her children wherever they might be.
