<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="container font-size5 content-width3">
<div class="header reader-header reader-show-element"> <font
size="-2"><a class="domain reader-domain"
href="https://www.telesurenglish.net/opinion/60-Years-of-Defending-Cuba-Against-a-Barbarous-Empire-20190101-0018.html">https://www.telesurenglish.net/opinion/60-Years-of-Defending-Cuba-Against-a-Barbarous-Empire-20190101-0018.html</a></font>
<h1 class="reader-title">60 Years of Defending Cuba Against a
Barbarous Empire</h1>
<div class="credits reader-credits">Arnold August - 1 January
2019 </div>
</div>
<hr>
<div class="content">
<div class="moz-reader-content line-height4 reader-show-element">
<div id="readability-page-1" class="page">
<p>Since Hiroshima, the United States, in its insatiable
drive for world domination, has killed more than 20
million people in 37 nations.</p>
<div>
<p>When Fidel Castro triumphantly announced the people’s
victory on January 1, 1959, it had been barely 15 years
since the United States had savagely bombed Hiroshima
and Nagasaki. This atrocity marked the passage of the
baton of barbarism from the inhumanity of World War II
to the United States.</p>
<p>Since the devastating atomic bombing, it has been
documented that the United States, in its insatiable
drive for world domination, has killed more than 20
million people in 37 nations. Innumerable murderous
invasions have taken place around the world, such as in
Korea, Vietnam and the Playa Girón military intervention
that was defeated by Cuba in less than 72 hours. All of
this constitutes an uncivilized foreign policy
reminiscent of WWII cruelty. What would have happened to
Cuba and Latin America had the Revolution led by Fidel
Castro not defeated the U.S. incursion? </p>
<p>As Washington continuously beefs up its economic and
military imperial overreach, its ongoing international
gunboat diplomacy is now backed up by more than 800
military bases (from giant ‘Little Americas’ to small
radar stations) virtually all over the world, including
Guantánamo. All of this foreign policy and more, such as
the increasing use of the Internet as the new road to
regime change (e.g. in Cuba, especially since 2014),
constitute the daily staple of arrogant threats,
murderous aggression and cynical interference by the
United States.</p>
<p>All of this happens every day on many occasions through
allied states, such as Israel’s ongoing slow genocide
against the Palestinian people. The post-WWII violation
of other countries’ sovereignty and international law
occurs with virtually no international protection. The
blockade against Cuba is a case in point of
international impunity. The peoples of the world, such
as the Cubans, can rely only on their own forces and
support from the peoples and progressive nations in the
world struggling to maintain a multi-polar world to
resist U.S. domination.</p>
<p>The Cuban Revolution has been curbing the United States
for 60 of the 75 years since the inauguration of the
‘new face’ of the post-WWII barbaric epoch. This period,
based on inhumanity to the extreme, shifted from Europe
and East Asia to the United States, only 90 miles from
Cuba’s shores. Think of this geopolitical and historical
reality as people in every corner of the planet reflect
today upon the historic significance of the 60th
anniversary.</p>
<p><strong>The Genocidal Blockade</strong></p>
<p>One can say that the Cuban Revolution has withstood the
Empire almost throughout the latter’s entire post-WWII
lifespan as the successor of the unparalleled cruelty
witnessed in WWII, which has always been on Cuba’s
doorstep in one form or another. This worldwide and
historic post-WWII order incorporates an added
consequence as far as Latin America and the Caribbean
are concerned. This additional feature stems from the
U.S. nightmare consisting of the constantly looming and
ever-threatening Latin American revolt against
colonialism and imperialism since the time of Bolívar
and Martí in the 19th century.</p>
<p>The United States has thus added a specific cruel club
against Cuba – also targeting its inspirational
influence not only in the whole region south of the Rio
Grande but in the belly of the beast itself, as Martí
called the United States, where he lived and worked.
This additional diabolical U.S. measure, imposed just
one year after the 1959 triumph, can only be called
genocide. Genocide? It is the U.S. blockade itself which
defines it as such, while of course not using the word
‘genocide.’ The blockade, striving to involve all
nations, has as its explicit 1960 goal to force the
Cuban people into submission through ‘economic
dissatisfaction and hardship.’</p>
<p>The effects of the ruthless blockade, especially since
the implosion of its allies (the Soviet bloc) close to
30 years ago (almost half the life of the Revolution),
have been devastating. Notwithstanding the problems
stemming from Cuba’s own shortcomings, every day in the
life of the Cuban family or individuals is affected by
the blockade as the main obstacle to its normal economic
development. </p>
<p>Transportation is one daily reminder of the blockade.
The procurement and preparation of food constitutes
another for the vast majority of Cuban people. Drastic
limits to housing renovations that often include
frustrating outdated plumbing and electricity is yet
another expression of the U.S. siege of Cuba. Health
services are deprived of close-by U.S. pharmaceuticals
and hospital equipment. Even education, which can be
seen as a ‘non-material’ service, is affected, for
example, by the need to import paper for classroom
materials, such as books, from far-off lands. </p>
<p>Yet the overwhelming majority of Cubans have not
surrendered – and are not surrendering – to the United
States, according to Washington’s script. The
60-year-old Cuban Revolution stands as firm as it was in
its very infancy in the period 1959–61.<br>
Venezuela in US Crosshairs</p>
<p>However, one has to appreciate, on this historic day
for the world of January 1, 2019, that no aggressive
U.S. policy against the Cuban Revolution is ever
discarded. After the fall of the Soviet bloc and the
simultaneously planned tightening of the U.S. blockade,
which also made it extraterritorial in the wake of this
setback in Europe, the United States went for the
jugular in the 1990s. Soon after, and with the hope of
defeating Cuba once and for all, the United States set
Cuba’s closest and most significant ally, Venezuela, in
its crosshairs. The Bolivarian Revolution led by Hugo
Chávez emerged as the first major reversal of the
1989–91 setback in Latin America, and indeed the world.</p>
<p>Moreover, it happened in what the United States
considers its “backyard.” When socialism and revolution
were supposed to be outdated phenomena of the past, in
December 1998, Chávez completed the first step of the
long struggle of the resilient Venezuela toward
revolution. It was, one could say metaphorically, that
1998–99 comprised Venezuela’s ‘January 1, 1959.’ The
United States never accepted the new Bolivarian
Revolution in Caracas, as it never swallowed the bitter
pill of the Cuban Revolution. This was the case even
more so, given that Venezuela immediately after 1989
became a close political and economic ally of Cuba based
on mutual benefit.</p>
<p>As the ultimate cynical policy, while making overtures
to Cuba for one-and-a-half years before being made
public in December 2014, the same Washington declared
Venezuela a ‘threat to U.S. security’ only three months
later, in March 2015. This contemptuous Machiavellian
policy, so characteristic of ruthlessness for centuries,
led to imposing sanctions on Cuba’s ally that were
designed to cripple it and, of course, as a hoped-for
by-product, to squeeze Cuba into submission. This 2015
U.S. Venezuela policy also paved the way for the current
U.S. approach of possible military intervention to put
an end to the Latin American nightmare come true in the
form of the Bolivarian Revolution. </p>
<p>Yet Cuba has been – and is still – heroically
resisting, even under these new unfavourable conditions,
as it also goes about forming new economic and trade
relations with other countries. Cuba refuses to kneel
before the most powerful nation on earth, a stance it
has maintained for 60 years. It is a universally
recognized fact that Cuba, Fidel Castro, his legacy and
followers today have stood up to the United States in
defence of Cuban sovereignty. Love it or hate it, there
is no escaping this historical fact.</p>
<p>The revolutionary Cuban people have earned their
well-derived reputation through blood, sweat and tears
and thus deserve the full support of all justice-loving
people around the world. Cuba is lacking many goods and
material benefits. However, the vast majority of Cuban
people, both individually and collectively, benefit from
the hard-fought-for blessing of something that we in
capitalist countries do not have: dignity. Honour cannot
flourish in the capitalist and imperialist West that
carries out war, aggression and interference in the name
of human rights and democracy denied its very own
countries. Dignity in the capitalist West is built only
from the bottom up in defiance of capital and the
Empire, whose wars of aggression bring shame and
dishonour to the peoples of the assailing nations. </p>
<p>As a result of maintaining its sovereignty at all
costs, Cuba can work out its plans for the political,
economic, social, cultural and other realms based on its
own needs and criteria. Over the period of six decades,
through the twists and turns, deceptions and successes
since 1959, this is what Cuba has been doing. Moreover,
on every major step of policy change, it does so with
the full participation of the people. Despite the
stereotype that is projected in the West, there is no
country in the world that compares with Cuba when it
comes to being characterized by debate. </p>
<p><strong>The Political Culture of Debate</strong></p>
<p>This political culture of debate is so entrenched in
society that it is an inseparable part of the political
landscape. Cubans are clearly used to openly discussing
and debating politics. It is a way of life on the
island. This tradition goes back to the second half of
the mid-19th century, when under Spanish occupation,
Cubans discussed and voted for members of four
constituent assemblies, which in turn debated, discussed
and approved as many constitutions. This took place over
150 years ago while, at the time, the main detractor of
Cuba’s current constitutional reform – the United States
– still had an 18th-century constitution worked out
behind closed doors by a handful of slave owners and a
wealthy few. </p>
<p>When the Revolution won out on January 1 sixty years
ago, Fidel appeared on the balcony of the city hall in
Santiago de Cuba to address the crowd in an interactive
way. In fact, from that day on, Fidel contributed to the
resurrection of the political culture of debate, which
had been kept largely in the background by U.S. colonial
domination, apart from some short periods, for example,
the revolutionary upsurge in the 1930s and the approval
of the 1940 constitution. </p>
<p>The political culture of debate, as mutually fostered
since 1959 by the new leadership and the humble in
favour of the latter, is best captured by Che Guevara:
“At the great public mass meetings one can observe
something like a dialogue of two tuning forks whose
vibrations interact, producing new sounds.” Furthermore,
highlighting how the people participated in decision
making, Guevara remembers: “Fidel and the mass begin to
vibrate together in a dialogue of growing intensity
until they reach the climax in an abrupt conclusion.” He
concedes that “for someone not living the experience,”
it is a “difficult thing to understand,” referring to
the “close dialectical unity between the individual and
the mass in which both are interrelated.” Faithful to
his appreciation of the individual’s role, Guevara
concludes: “The mass, as an aggregate of individuals,
interacts with its leaders.”</p>
<p>The latest example of this political culture of debate,
perhaps one of the most historic since 1959 (even though
one would never know it by relying on the corporate
press in the West), just took place. Discussions were
carried out from August 13 to November 15, 2018 to
review the Draft to renew the 1976 Cuban Constitution.
In all places of work, educational institutions and
neighbourhoods, major changes were suggested. One of the
most significant by many Cuban accounts is the issue of
the term ‘communism.’ It was originally contained in the
1976 Magna Carta as the goal of the Revolutionary
process but was deleted in the Draft. It came back as a
result of the public discussion as a colourful
expression of Cuba’s political culture of debate, which
is so ingrained that no force can smother it. The battle
of ideas was waged mainly by revolutionary bloggers and
writers. </p>
<p>To sum up the changes, the 1976 Constitution was
worded: “…the construction of socialism and the progress
toward a communist society.” The 2018 Draft submitted to
the people for debate and input was worded: “…toward the
construction of socialism.” The final December 2018
revised version, which took into account the debate and
will be submitted to the citizens in a referendum to be
held on February 24, 2019, is worded: “…toward the
construction of socialism and communism.”</p>
<p><strong>Participatory Democracy Toward Protagonist
Democracy?</strong></p>
<p>This latest change in article 5 is no small matter.
When the news broke last July 2018 that the Draft
eliminated the word ‘communism,’ the international press
in the West yelled victory: ‘Cuba gives up communism!’
However, the idiosyncrasy of Cuba’s political culture of
debate put a damper on the euphoria and, at the same
time, blew to bits the ongoing media terrorism, namely
that ‘communism is imposed from above.’ As a poetic
twist of fate, it came from the grass roots. While the
debates were organized at the base and provided the
opportunity for every citizen to contribute and argue
for their respective views, one had to be very
pro-active to raise the ‘communism’ controversy.</p>
<p>The Draft was, after all, proposed by the entire
leadership and the Cuban Parliament. Thus, this latest
experience in Cuban democracy went beyond participatory
democracy toward protagonist democracy, which, in my
view, is a qualitatively higher form of participatory
democracy. It is not the first time in Cuba’s unique
experience in consultation that radical changes came
from the grass roots. However, this one on ‘communism,’
watched by the whole world, is in a class of its own,
Thus, on the eve of the celebration of the 60th
anniversary of the Cuban Revolution, this is a very
fitting tribute to the Revolution and its architect,
Fidel.</p>
<p>Now that the Cuban Revolution has recharged its battery
with Fidel’s legacy of debate and exchange, it is ready
to confront all current attempts by the barbarism of the
North and their allies to divide the people and the
leadership of Councils of State and Ministers, and to
denigrate President Miguel Díaz-Canel. This desperate
attempt to sabotage the movement for renewal based on
principles will be responded by a resounding ‘Yes’ in
the February 24 referendum and a vote of confidence for
the new Cuban leadership under Díaz-Canel. No force on
Earth can smother the Cuban political culture of debate.
It can defeat any disinformation and divisiveness by the
U.S.-led campaign.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
Freedom Archives
522 Valencia Street
San Francisco, CA 94110
415 863.9977
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://freedomarchives.org/">https://freedomarchives.org/</a>
</div>
</body>
</html>