way of an article and certain offenses. Armando
Chaguaceda
In recent days the writer Arturo Arango published in the English newspaper El Pais "Cuba: the managers of the future", text, recognizing the inherent diversity of the Cuban social fabric and its cultural and ideological plurality, he realized some of the positions of the state and the Cuban population to current demands and processes of change. The article, which appeared so clear (but always debatable) major issues for the Cuban nation, saying gambling and trends in the first instance motivated offenses and insults on the part of some exiles and opponents of the Cuban regime. Probably, though that was not news, the text also burning up more than a bureaucrat island.
Arturo's work comes at a time when the polarization of recent weeks seems to tone down efforts by the church hierarchy to the cessation of acts of repudiation and release of sick prisoners. These efforts seem to find a sympathetic hearing from the Cuban government and open channels of dialogue particularly valuable in the present and, above all, the immediate future. Chronic joins the countless stream of letters, statements, analysis and counter, which have saturated cyberspace so far this year, and where the positions of demonization or apology to the Cuban regime (as each such functional in style and story) have restricted the dispassionate gaze spaces (in a good sense of this attitude) and suggestive as those Arango offers.
At one point the author presents us with the existence of two groups: those seeking to restore capitalism and those who prefer to reroute or reform the current system. Then he says that some would hold (consciously or inertial) a State bureaucratic, centralized and others, including ranks, believe that socialism is only sustainable if it is democratic. This would require a first review of the above, briefly, by Arthur.
complicate the issue we suggest that many of those who today defend the current model, from positions of power or the militancy of base-open the doors to the establishment of capitalism in dissimilar ways: by delaying or rejecting socialist solutions (cooperativization enlarged self-management, democratic planning, market controlled) preferring the nationalization or privatization, to prosecute and punish the debate and citizen initiative (including within institutions and official announcements) and to prepare, through nepotism, corruption and selective migration, the capture of positions in the local business community and the world market as a way of instituting a proto with the protections and resources bureaucratic apparatus. Arturo
poses the problem of Manichean views on Cuba, but it does exemplify the vision question reduces the island actually a monolithic government that acts on a body of disciplined citizens. Certainly it is uncertain as fragmentary echoes of discussions convened in 2007 (official results, once again, we hid), through the prickly street talk, until the recent election results show that the range of dissent and dissatisfaction has been growing in recent years.
But one thing is to account for social diversity and political pluralism and a recognition of structural factors that delimit. Because it is primarily the state who has the ability and responsibility not to stifle criticism by the public and channel it into effective proposals to improve the consumption, the rights and morals in collaboration with civil society, formal and informal. In that sense it would seem that within institutions there are two views are not explicit but visible: one that bets on business as usual and even sabotage the timid measures in place (as in the distribution of land) and promoted by the president, who prefers to go with caution and avoid traumatic and reversible reforms, introducing changes in key areas such as agriculture and services.
What happens is that both have an overly optimistic view of the time, and they seem to ignore the exhaustion of the capacity of a population that has resisted heroically for the sake of social justice and national sovereignty, two decades of accumulated suboptimal, growing inequality and rampant corruption. Population relied on the promises of structural and conceptual changes made three years ago, Heat relay national leadership, and then were gradually disappearing from the blurring of speech and political practices. Outcome cornering criticism, proposals and hopes the fourth of the frustrations and rupture.
other hand who are reinforcing the monochrome look, in unison, most of the Cuban press (print, radio and television) and right-wing media in exile. In the first, its space-related exceptions to the cultural world and efforts like those of Bohemia, or Juventud Rebelde-armored remain stark and profound criticism or delivery us fed and wrapped in a declarative language so that loyalty and militancy looks which is heard at the bus stop or at the dinner table. The second need
obscure the existence of actors, ideas and proposals democratic left, to put all its symbolic capital (and material) in the hands of the opposition linked to the policies of Western governments and the international right. So advocates of socialism raised renewed Arturo are in a difficult position, marginalized by the mainstream media and foreign officials, receiving a barrage of Tyre and Trojans by refusing to assume the defense as a mere submission institutional or ideological criticism as a rupture.
In that address, Arthur rightly points out the need to understand the various trends, actors and expressions, inside and outside Cuba, and the interaction between them builds the future and the present. Reminds us that arise from the art (and answer) many questions everyday about the economic crisis, the strategies of survival and civic costs.
But perhaps most valuable of the article is that, in accounting for those who do not want a society of exclusion, marginalization, intolerance, profound inequalities, Arturo captured the essence of initiatives such as those gathered in the Red Centre Critical militants of critical engagement with the Cuban socialism. And they have achieved, coupled with the wide recognition domestic and foreign, harassment and the disqualification of officials and Cuban exiles, with similar arguments to be subject to "manipulation" of "others." However
anecdote about the meeting of young intellectuals of the 90 with Armando Hart and his sentence "Since we made our revolution that you do their part" deserves consideration, which touches me closely. When young artists (in 1990 or 2010) do not delegate questions like these in the wrong hands the flags of their activism, only asking that the "major", that have been their example and have experience and irreplaceable institutional linkages, specifically commit with what they preach from their art galleries and political philosophy, both within and outside the island not delegate role, but we claim solidarity.
Especially since the struggle to expand opportunities for rights and participation for all of us and in situations of injustice because members of those groups have supported through no fault of uncertain outcome, without reasons of cost-benefit calculation. Attitude which, paradoxically, has not always been reciprocated, under multiple arguments and despite sharing much of the criticism, representatives of the Cuban cultural field to private initiatives.
I think nothing sums up better the ideas of Arthur (and good part of the Cuban leftist intelligentsia) that simultaneously demand respect for national sovereignty and real dialogue, without exclusion and intolerance, with all Cuban citizens. Where young and old can exercise their leadership in the face of institutions, with an informed and unfettered discussion and weigh all the colors of our present and imagine the best future for our nation. One where the participation of people no longer invoke or ornament-bearing role and autonomy and able to confront powers restored wild market and bureaucracy that facilitates onanism. Against this background
would continue the debate, banishing places common insult or professional staff, who try to account for our cowardice genetic mecenarismo cheap or enthusiastic collaboration, either with the "Castro regime" or "Media Terrorism in Falsimedia." The guilt, something very peculiar to the medieval Inquisition, the harassment of McCarthy or Stalinist trials should not take away the dream with so many things to do.
0 comments:
Post a Comment