Translating Cuba

The polls don’t lie. All the surveys, in Cuba and among Cubans living in the U.S., indicate that the majority are in favor of family reunification and travel to the island.

The political posturing doesn’t matter. Delfin has lived in Jacksonville, Florida since 1996 and is far from appreciating the Castros’ government. In the U.S. he has always voted Republican.

Until the 2008 elections. He voted to punish John McCain due to the position of the George W. Bush administration the theme of travel to Cuba.

“I’m betting on serious and profound changes in the economy and politics of the Castro regime. I think a broad sector of Cuban-Americans want democracy in that country. If we had felt good in our own country, we never would have emigrated. Cuba hurts. It’s not working economically. But our relatives are in Cuba. No one in their right mind would stop sending dollars and medicines. The more we send the better,” Delfin says, on his third trip to Havana in the last year.

If you want to know how Cubans living in Florida think, go to Terminal 2 at Jose Marti airport. After being gone twelve years, Sandra has returned. On the way into the old town, she looks at the the ruins of many building with moist eyes.

When her rental car pulled up the tenement where she lived, she started to cry. “I was born here and became a professional. On the roof of the tenement I had my first romances. Things in Cuba are going badly. But the country is not something disposable. Here I have friends and family,” says Sandra, who after two weeks in the capital, isn’t used to eating so much pork and drinking beer.

When a relative or friend visits their native province, the parties and binges don’t stop. Between music and rum they talk about the past. Nostalgia is a thief that steals strength.

Oscar lives in New York and wants to see the hateful travel permit — the white card — disappear. Ninety percent of Cubans on both shores do not look kindly on the arbitrary policy of the Castro brothers, authorizing who can and cannot enter their country.

Cuba belongs to all Cubans. And they should not require permission to visit it. And even being able to return, permanently, if they wish. That a high percentage of Cuban-Americans do not like the Castro regime, doesn’t mean that they agree with the tightening of the embargo. Nor with the measures proposed by Congress members of Cuban origin to restrict travel to the island.

Ernesto, a down-on-his-luck guy from Santiago who lives in Hialeah, gets angry when the topic comes up. “The problem is a personal issue for some. A family issue. The Diaz-Balarts and the Castros are related. Fidel’s oldest son, Fidel Castro Diaz-Balart, is Lincoln and Mario’s cousin. And these politicians don’t have anyone in Banes, where they originated. It’s all the same to them if people travel to the island every three years. Or if they never travel at all. They think like gringos. Their interests lie elsewhere. If, in the future, they have political aspirations in Cuba, then there will be another revolution. Castro has been a disaster. But certain politicians and businessmen of Cuban origin in Florida are no less,” says Ernest.

There is a telling statistic. In the last elections for the mayor of Miami-Dade County, last June, only 18% of Cubans voted. And those who did, preferred to Carlos Gimenez over Julio Robaina, who is in favor of restricting travel to Cuba.

In a matter of family reunification, Cubans on both shores do not accept any political arguments. They are as tired of the Castros as they are of Cuban politicians in the United States dedicated to lobbying to tighten the embargo. Both have in common setting aside the wishes of a majority.

Please, review the surveys.

July 30 2011

Globalization, like as a natural process of mankind’s development, is making strides and establishing itself across the geography of the planet, including in countries both large and small, powerful or weak, rich and poor. The word is new but the phenomenon is not: it has been building almost from the beginning of intelligent life on Earth. Its beginnings date back to the early tools produced by omo sapiens to survive in a hostile environment, and their constant adaptation, making your mind and skills flourish. Its background is the domination of fire, the working of stone, smelting of metals, the transition from a backward society to a more advanced one, the development of trade, the industrial revolution, automation, informatics and so on, until the arrival of everything that amazes us every day in our present existence. It is the unstoppable march of man towards the satisfaction of his growing needs and happiness. It is only possible in a world of freedom and democracy, and is alien to any kind of totalitarian regimes.

In it, some have and continue to progress quickly and others slowly crawl like slugs unconcerned about time. But we all, consciously or not, move inexorably toward the same goal, whether or not we temporarily mistake the route. Globalization is, therefore, a reality. It can be accepted, as the intelligent and responsible do, or rejected, as the deluded do, or even fought against, as the irresponsible do.

Given an objective reality that is not subject to our individual desires, the only option is, first, to study it deeply, and once it is understood, to seek ways and methods to connect to it and get the most out of it. To this we should devote the time available and not organize acts of rejection, burning little signs and flags to the beat of street music, accompanied by alcohol and why not? of one or another drug.

Like it or not today’s world is globalized. Just take a look at our own lives to prove it: we eat food of all kinds produced in many countries, wear clothing and footwear also of multiple origin, we heal with internationally produced medicines, we are transported in vehicles of various brands and countries, electrical and electronic equipment come to us from all corners of the globe, and so on endlessly. But not only that, but in producing these products, dissimilar materials are brought from multiple regions and in many cases, their component parts are produced in different countries and assembled in others. That is, the reality of the production, trade and information has broken national boundaries and has made ​​the world a global village, where have both some kind of participation and shared responsibility and mutual dependence, including even for the crises.

Before an event of this magnitude, the result of human development and not from any the desire or Machiavellian plot of any empire, which is not the reason, to refuse to admit it and bury one’s head in the ground, like ostriches, so as not to see, is nonsense.

What’s more, to claim now raise the banner of sovereignty, independence and the homeland, is an epochal blur, since it corresponds to earlier times, when nation states were formed and consolidated nation states and not the current era, when we remove borders, create unions, create a single currency, laws, etc., as is the case with the European Union, just to mention one of the most important.

Those who use these symbols to mobilize the masses against globalization, should remember the futile efforts of the feudal lords to defend their coats of arms to the forces of the new symbols of nations in training, the consolidation of the feudal state and the subsequent introduction of capitalism. It is a step forward for humanity and not a flashback, as we expect to see. The question here is: do we open ourselves and integrate into a globalized world and make progress, or close ourselves off remain isolated and perish.

28 June 2011

On page 10, national news, in the Granma newspaper of Friday, June 22, in the Letters to the Editor section, there is a letter signed by J. Llorente Lopez titled: Nevertheless, Raul speaks to us in Spanish!

The topic is the implementation of the update of our economic system.

First, I’m shocked that this gentleman refers to the economy, in a country where it is practically nonexistent.

If we’d done everything the leader of the Revolution has been indicating to us for years, many measures that we are now forced to apply to save our Revolutionary process, including some not very popular ones, wouldn’t have been necessary.

The way he expresses himself, this gentleman is or was a leader. Then, where was he when the brilliant ideas they now talk to us so much about were being badly applied?

Further along in his long letter he says: Raul calls the the elimination of the bureaucracy, procedures to relieve the population, to resolve the problems we now have of indiscipline and disorganization, to resolve the salary problem.

Again, I ask you: Who increased the bureaucracy, creating three and four seats or jobs where one qualified and efficient person, someone who did their work, would have been sufficient?

Who structured and created countless office procedures to resolve every type of management? From a simple prescription, a ticket, buying a school uniform, obtaining a birth certificate, to the simplest process, to name just a few, such that they all require navigating a labyrinth with the usual loss of time and a inexcusable physical and mental exhaustion.

Who lowered wages and disproportionately and excessively increased the price of food and necessities? Who established as a standard using two currencies?

Mr. Llorente, I speak Spanish, and I think it is quite clear. With all due respect, if you actually exist, I say that I as a simple citizen of this country, I am not guilty of these measures taken and implemented without popular consultation.

During all these years, these same characters who now pose everything you stated in your letter, have been and are the most responsible given their posts and positions held, to comply with and enforce all such brilliant ideas to which you alluded. If you consider the mea culpa accepted, I do not.

July 31 2011

In the Plaza de la Revolution they erected a few years ago a statue of Camilo Cienfuegos, a hero of the struggle against Batista, who enjoyed great sympathy and popular support and who died in an accident in October 1959. Camilo is undoubtedly a national icon, but it seemed excessive to modify the building of the Ministry of Informatics and Communications, leaving almost half of its offices without windows, sacrificed to the plaza to place a “twin” sculpture to that of Che placed decades ago, which presides over an original wall on the facade of the Ministry of Interior.

From the monument to Marti you can see both, and in an effort to match them there is a signed statement at the bottom of each sculpture.

I don’t doubt the phrase, “Hasta la victoria siempre!” — Onward to permanent victory — was written by Che, but the phrase, “Vas bien, Fidel” — You’re doing fine, Fidel — raised my doubts. For many years Fidel’s famous question — “How am I doing, Camilo?” — has been raised in tributes to the disappeared commander without anyone mentioning the response, that is now perpetuated (or better said, perpetrated) in metal in front of everyone.

I’ve talked to people who heard that speech of January 8, 1959, delivered at the Columbia army base, and no one remembers the answer. I read the speech, recorded in the stenographic record of the office of the Prime Minister, where anonymous responses are mentioned, but there is no reference to the phrase imputed to Camilo.

I even had access to a first-hand version that said that Camilo, behind Fidel, was conversing jokingly while Fidel was haranguing the people, and the question was rhetorical, a way of calling attention to himself, as so many teachers to when they catch a lack of attention in a disruptive student.

Were descendents of spiritualists Alan Kardec or Blavatsky summoned to hear that answer? Only through the supernatural could the strength of a statement Camilo did not make in life be explained. And if, in this coda, he could not have been serious, nor has he been serious in approving a monument with an historical falsehood.

Regarding the speech, which I recently read for the first time, since that day I’ve always had a pigeon on my shoulder, I recommend that EVERYONE read it. It is not as long as those that came later. From it one can prepare a balance of promises and failures, much more accurate than a response from the great beyond.

August 1 2011

There are two laws in Cuba: the first, written in ink, the second in frustration and pain. The first, a symbolism that rests on sterile paper, in the Constitution and legal codes, which allegedly belong to all Cubans, without distinctions of any kind, and its romantic spirit, theoretically, we are all equal in powers and rights. This is the one quoted by the army of large, medium, small and tiny leaders, always in tones very momentous as the culmination of the dream of heroes. This is the one of the front page of the newspaper Granma, which extols vibrant speeches that seemed touched by hand from the dais or the bench or from the comfort of the high offices, which vows that “… Every citizen is entitled to lodge complaints and petitions to the authorities and to receive attention or relevant and timely responses appropriate under the law .”(*)

But a second law, unwritten but consistent with reality is one of abuse with impunity and contempt, of the silent complicity of the authorities who pretend not to hear of the atrocities, the law that crushes those who aspire to exercise their rights as they can only be exercised: naturally and without consultation. A law that is not written, but with enough the power that from its summit it frowns, such that all the institutions and momentous leaders fold. But though they fold under the branches of power, the free man resists.

If that happens, then, that for having exercised the right referred to above (*) two physicians are deprived of the right to exercise their profession for something they didn’t do–which they can prove–and then their union betrays them, helping to arm the lie and papering over their own members; if these workers are directed over a dozen times to the Minister without ever receiving a response; if the Attorney General of the Republic turns a blind eye to the obvious inconsistency of the charges that have nothing to do with true facts; if those guilty live happily unpunished: how can the presumed legal system of this country be viewed, other than standing on its head?

The worst thing is that this is not a selective violation, the a cruel point against an obscure official against two workers, because if that were the case we would not have already faced five years of sanctioned affronts. What is truly serious is a State of No Laws persists which is conducive to injustice and impunity, which allows someone to abuse their power against the rights of others with the most absolute audacity anywhere in Cuba, at any time and against any innocent. He who proceeds in this way — whomever is allowed to do it — betrays the legacy of the Founding Fathers, betrays his people and darkens the future of the country.

Everything confirms it: the “official” written law is left at the bottom of dusty file, while the royal law flies over us, and as a sword of Damocles, a grave threat to the people of Cuba.

(*) Article 63 of the Cuban Socialist Constitution now in force.

21 July 2011

Six years ago, when Fidel spoke of increasing wages, we were all very excited because after several years of scarcities and needs this would help bolster our economy in the home. Substantial increases were expected, according to job performance and level of expertise.

The long-awaited moment arrived and as dentists we saw an increase of only 33 pesos (about $1.30 USD) in our monthly salaries. The corridors were witnesses to the comments, to everyone’s anger and disappointment. My husband, Dr. Rodolfo Martinez Vigoa, and a colleague and friend, Dr. Jeovany Jimenez Vega, had the idea of writing a letter explaining the needs of workers in our industry, and comparing our wages to those of other sectors such as Cuba’s Security Services (SEPSA) for example. As a result of my helping them to collect signatures, I was fired from the position I had occupied for several years as Chief of Services for the Dental Clinic of Artemis.

To me, it seemed only right to sign that letter, to express my way of thinking, and so I rebelled and in this way came to know the gross and dirty ways used by this government and its party to maintain its “Revolution.” A “Revolution” that preaches democracy, justice and respect for human rights. A “Revolution” that preaches that everyone pays according to their performance, according to their ability. A “Revolution” that does not practice what it preaches.

As a result of all this, my husband and his friend were declared ineligible to exercise their profession in late 2006. Would I sign this letter again? Yes I would sign it 100 times and I would also sign the letter from my husband and his friend in which they detailed every problem and every concern. I would do it again.

We are not slaves!

20 June 2011

July is almost over and I have not heard or read anything about the operation of fiber optic cable which, with great optimism and media hype, was laid between Cuba and its Bolivarian sister [Venezuela]. In military life I imagine they’ve finished the implementation plan, but must be keeping it secret like all things there. In civilian life, the authorities in charge take prophylactic measures. The departments with access to the Internet apply new versions to stop recording the sites their surfers access, and to more carefully wipe clean their browsing history, because this makes you a candidate for losing your connection time, the nightmare of any “State” navigator.

The cable couldn’t be the exception to Cuban plans, whose completion date is set by the turn of events and does not adhere to any reality. That must be the explanation for it being the end of July and civilians continuing to get slow connections, very slow.

July 29 2011

“The chocolate is over!” screamed my two friends, as I opened the door that night of July 31, 2006. They were alluding, with their improvised slogan, to the latest plan pushed by Fidel Castro to distribute a chocolate quota to every Cuban through the ration market. When the doorbell rang there were only two hours left before the first of August and Carlos Valenciaga, Fidel’s personal secretary, had already read a proclamation on TV announcing the unexpected illness of the Maximum Leader. The lights at the Council of State remained lit — oddly — and an anomalous silence settled over the city. During that long night, no one could sleep a wink in our house.

As they reached for their second glass of rum, my friends began to count how many times they had planned for that day, predicted that news. He, a singer-songwriter; she, a television producer. Both had been born and grown up under the power of the same president, who had determined even the smallest details of their lives. I listened to them talk and was surprised by their relief, the flood of desires for the future now unleashed. Perhaps they felt more free after that announcement. Time would bring them to understand that while we were chatting about the future, others were ensuring that the package of succession was neatly tied up.

Five years later, the country has been transferred, entirely via blood. Raul Castro has received the inheritance of a nation, its resources, its problems and even its inhabitants. Everything he has done in the last five years stems from the imperative not to lose this family possession, passed on to him by his brother. The slow pace of his reforms, their timidity and superficiality, is marked in part by feeling himself the beneficiary of the patrimony entrusted to him. And what, you wonder, of my friends? When they realized that under the younger brother the repression would continue, that the penalization of opinion would remain intact, they distanced themselves, frightened. Never again did they knock on my door, never again did they enter this place where, in 2006, they had come screaming, believing that the future had begun.

30 July 2011

Our authorities have the absurd habit of changing the names of streets, parks, shops, businesses and even some public places, according to their short-term political interests. Thus, Presidents Avenue, El Vedado, built during the Republic and along which appear monuments, statues or busts of various Cuban presidents, degenerated into a the so-called Avenue of the Latin American Presidents (not of all of them, just the “friendly” ones). Previously, the site dedicated to the American Presidents (taking the Americas as a whole), was the beautiful Fraternity Park, next to the Capitol building. In its conversion to Estrada Palma (the first President) all that is left on the marble base is a pair of shoes, near the Hotel Presidente, an outstanding display of cultural vandalism, and Jose Miguel Gomez was saved at the junction with Calle 29, as his monument was so huge. The spaces provided for the others have been occupied by statues or busts (some quite poorly executed artistically) of Bolivar, Alfaro, Torrijos, Allende, etc., in a strange hodgepodge of history.

The Avenida de Carlos III, has long has imposed on it the name of Salvador Allende, but only a tiny minority of people call it this. The same thing happened to Reina (renamed Simon Bolivar), Galiano (Father Varela), Monte (Maximo Gomez) and others, all of which ordinary people still call by their original names. This extends to sports venues, where most of the ballparks have names that have nothing to do with their sport, whether it be swimming pools, facilities for basketball, volleyball and others where elementary logic suggests they should be named for the respective leading figures in that sport.

Recently a rally held at the Acapulco Park in Nuevo Vedado got my attention; in one of its corners they have erected an unimaginative and completely oblivious to the design of the park monument dedicated to Vietnamese leader Ho Chi Minh. It turns out that they have renamed it Ho Chi Minh Park (when they dedicated the monument, it called Liberty Park). At the ceremony, which they repeat every time some important Vietnamese visits, the only ones participating were the students from a nearby high school, in full uniform, Vietnamese students studying in Cuba and a few selected officials. A political assembly that passersby observe from afar, since it has nothing to do with them or with the neighborhood. I don’t know if the Vietnamese have noticed.

Undoubtedly, the authorities of the city and country have the right to name avenues, streets, parks, etc., but please, build them first rather than rededicate existing ones; it would be much easier and less expensive than changing existing, and therefore historical, ones. For me and the neighbors who live in Nuevo Vedado, Acapulco Park was, is and always will be the Acapulco Park. I think, the same thing happens with the neighbors of other places.

These names are also part of the much touted national identity. They constitute the heritage of neighborhoods, areas and cities. Changing them for short-term political expediency shows disrespect for the citizens (who are not consulted) to whom they really belong, because they live in the area around them, and also shows a lack of culture and civility. The defense of national identity is demonstrated by deeds and not speeches. Hopefully this nefarious practice, which has failed wherever there have been efforts to impost it (St. Petersburg will always be St. Petersburg), will cease once and for all, not further complicating the lives of future historians with so many name changes, which almost everyone ignores.

July 7 2011

The Methodist Pastor Yordi Alberto Toranzo Collado, rector of “Trinity” Church in the city of Santa Clara. Source: Google Images.

Seeking the Kingdom of God and His Righteousness, has been the Methodist Pastor Yordi Alberto Toranzo Collado,, rector of the “Trinity” Church in the city of Santa Clara, who swore before the Altar of God to seek the Kingdom of God and his Righteousness. The same inscription is in a stained glass image of Jesus with outstretched arms, leading the church whose rector, with the consent of the Holy Spirit, Yordi leads in that city, this image offers a welcome to the people of Santa Clara who pass in front of the temple and gather there.

So the Rev. Yordi Alberto Toranzo Collado, encouraged by the sense of justice, left his house and walked a few blocks to join the grieving family of Soto García, Sunday May 8, the feast of Mother’s Day, as he does and is called on to do, not only as a minister of God, but to all the baptized.

It is sad to see how Monseñor Ricardo Pereira Díaz, Bishop of the Methodist Church in Cuba, a few days later and prompted by fear of State Security through the Department of Attention to Religious Matters and the Ministry of Justice and the Council of State, called for the removal of the pastor to the town of Santa Cruz del Norte, of Havana province. It is painful that an authority of the Church of Christ for the Republic of Cuba serves the government better than he serves his flock and their pastors.

Monseñor Pereira, I am a witness of this town of Santa Clara, where the adages of contempt continued against the temple, the sign that announced the Municipal Party Headquarters, the place which was operated as the Methodist Church in Cuba, I remember as a child (because I am from Santa Clara), how the workers of the Municipal Part bought eggs and called the children studying the Mariano Clemente Prado primary school, located across from the church, to through the eggs at the Reverent Pedro Mayor and his wife Ana Luise whom I remember with much fondness.

Now as a priest of Christ I do not understand, nor will I ever understand, the position you have taken agasint Yordi, his place is to be at the side of justice and I am very sure that this is being denied by the ministry in which you preside. Reflect and ask for the light of the Holy Spirit and say with us:

“We want Yordi in Santa Clara.”

June 28 2011

I don’t think there’s a government in the world that devotes as much attention to what happens in the United States as that of Cuba. The neighbor to the north occupies the greatest space in official statements and the national media, something that never happened in the Republican era when, according to the authorities now, we were a colony of the Empire.

It is striking that everything is said and written focuses on the negative aspects, without dedicating a single line, not one minute, to showing something positive which, without a doubt, must exist, given its great development would be incomprehensible, its attraction for migrants, and the important place it occupies in the international arena.

Many of our commentators, not to mention the authorities, must have as their reason to exist dedicating commentaries and articles to ranting about the powerful neighbor, convinced that, in this way, they are assured of continuing to receive their salaries, and will avoid joining that numerous legion of the “available,” the ultimate euphemism for the unemployed. Thus, it is in the game of participation, whether it is those in politics, the economy, etc., just like those concerned with culture or sports. Everyone contributes their grain of sand to avoid being disqualified.

In the world of advertising there is an old axiom that states that when the message is excessive and saturates its receptor, it produces the opposite of the intended effect. In other words: it creates repulsion for what it is promoting. This has happened with this systematic campaign to discredit: every day there are more Cubans wishing to emigrate to this country and every day too, our population is more influenced by their habits and customs, now being ever more Americanized than before. So much has been said about the big bad wolf, that everyone wants to meet him!

Being measured and limited has never been one of the strong points of our authorities in the last half century. To repeat to the point of boredom the same old arguments and worn out slogans has been a constant: quantity has supplanted quality. Hence, the enormous volume of discrediting news and writings about the United States, which sometimes border on the ridiculous. As with other campaigns, this one too has failed. The reality has been imposed.

June 4 2011