CIRCLE THE WAGONS AROUND EDDA

My dear friend Edda, a Chilean lady in Milan, Italy told me of her latest "encounter of the third kind" with one of those who choose to repeat the liberal lies and myths rather than seek the truth. She did not use these terms, I do.

The gentleman in question claims that Castro's hold on power notwithstanding Cuba is better off now than it was back in the 50s; even more, that whatever weaknesses the system may show are but the result of the American embargo; here we go again.

Cuba was discovered during Colombo's first voyage to the New World; it went through centuries of colonial domination until the very end of the nineteenth century; actually, together with Porto Rico, it was the last bastion of Spanish colonialism in the western hemisphere. While no oil or ore were available in the island, it had one of the most important resources at the time: a unique location; it was the key to the Gulf of Mexico and the last stop before all scores of vessels embarked in the long, and most times perilous, journey to Spain. These vessels were loaded with the "treasures" that were drained out of the Americas to  replenish the kingdom's otherwise depleting coffers. In fact one of the star positions in the Spanish structure of power was that of Havana's Captain General (Governor General). The new born Cuban "sacarose class", or new money created with the gains derived of the sugar industry, built schools, hospitals, hotels and mansions in order to have in the Americas what the rich had in Europe; if you take the time to visit Havana, even after more than  half a century of systematic destruction and neglect, you will find many similarities with cities like Rome, Madrid, and others.

Thus, the striving colony was the typical ambiguity of the time: an urban reality with ever improving infrastructure and rapid development, and a rural life characterized by poverty, a backward model of land property and a rampant inequity between the few rich land owners and the common peasant. Still, for whatever reasons Cuba was the sixth nation on earth to build a railroad system, even before Spain itself, which not only created thousands of jobs for the poor Cubans, but allowed for the introduction of Yucatecos, from Mexico, an later, as an independent nation, of Chinese and Jamaicans

It was this strategic location that prompted the thriving new neighbor in the north, the US, to adopt an opportunistic wait and see posture in  the case of Cuba's independence from Spain; while it allowed patriots like Jose Marti to tour the Union and procure most needed funds for the liberating efforts; it also confiscated several "expeditions" planned to ignite the flame of independence in the small island.

When the "mambises", the Cuban born rebels, were a few skirmishes away from victory and had the Spanish army sieged and in total disarray, the Americans "came to the rescue" using as an excuse a most controversial bombing of a US warship that "happened" to be paying an official visit in Havana's bay. The rest if known history: the Americans crushed the Spanish army, and frustrated our independence. A peace treaty was signed in Paris (for some reason most treaties are signed there) giving the Americans control over Cuba, Porto Rico and the Philippines; we left one master only to have a new one; however, there was a stark contrast between the quasi feudal, dying, money hungry Spanish kingdom and the thriving, land occupying, ever expanding United States of America. The former meant slavery and the possession of land and economic resources concentrated in a few hands while the latter represented a new dream of access to the wealth, of capitalistic relations of production and a more "collective" ownership of the great means of production; while as a nation is was a step backward and an embarrassing humiliation, from the economic standpoint it was a decisive step forward.

There were several tendencies in Cuba at the time being the autonomists, the independents and the annexationists the three main ones. The autonomists sought a relative autonomy but to remain under the Spanish rule, the independents sought total independence and the creation of a republic, while the anexationists believed Cuba was better off as one more state of the US.

A few years after the Spanish official demise in Cuba, and also as a result of some opposition within the island, the Americans allowed free elections for the president of Cuba and the new banana republic of Cuba was officially born on May 20th 1902. That date marks the beginning of decades of political instability, several military coups, Caribbean Kumbaya, as well as two American interventions and a "mediation". The rule was that someone, usually a retired general of the "mambises", would secure election banking of his military record, do a couple of smart moves, and later seek another term to steal the people blind, or simply backpedal on whichever good initiative he might had launched at first; however, a rising domestic bourgeoisie spent millions of Cuban pesos and or American dollars building roads, hotels, theaters, hospitals and creating an infrastructure that was to become one of the best in the whole hemisphere.

In 1940 Fulgencio Batista, name to be remembered, won the elections and became president. Please bear in mind that at that moment Europe was at war, the Nazis were murdering Jewish in concentration camps, women had no right to vote in many countries and the communists were banned in many others. Well, believe it or not, Fulgencio Batista called the Partido Socialista Popular ( the Cuba Communist Party) to join his cabinet and draft the most revolutionary constitution ever passed in Latin America, not only granting voting rights to women, but allowing all political parties (Communist included). Batista came and went, others followed, there were booming periods and there were economic downturns. No amount of rich Cuban families were able to wipe out the pockets of poverty in some cities and particularly in the rural areas. Corruption of public servants was rampant. Yet, while each president had his own book and his own crowd to accommodate none of them changed one key issue: the economic ties with the US were sacrosanct. Many claim that Cuba was a mono crop economy, that is true in part, but our dependence on sugar cane brought the following successes, and I defy anyone who wants to challenge them to visit the office of FAO in Rome and look for the statistic of 1958.

Cuba had a little over 5 million people, 3 universities (Havana, Santa Clara and Santiago de Cuba) and several university faculties that did not reach the level of a university as such; it had several "Escuela Normal" where hundreds of thousands of teacher obtained a mid level diploma every year. It had private and public schools, in the rural area they were much less available to be honest and it was difficult to find schools beyond the elementary level. In 1953 Cuba had its first color television broadcast, while color TV in Europe was mainly a thing of the 70s. In 1957 Cuba's sugar output was 7.5 millions of metric tons. Cuba imports sugar now.
The per capita ownership of radio sets, TV sets, cars, refrigerators and other appliances was only third or fourth in the Hemisphere (including the US and Canada). The Cuban Telephone Company, and many other corporations with names in English were just a way to facilitate investments from wealthy Americans, but their main shareholders were Julio Lobo, Gomez Mena, the Sarra family, Bacardi, and many others. In 1958 there were many more Italians applying for permanent residency in Cuba than Cubans fleeing to Italy; nowadays Italy is one of those countries to which we flee (I am an Italian citizen). The Cuban peso was quoted one to one with the US dollar.
Yes, Batista violated the law and seized power in 1952 installing a dictatorship for several years, and there was torture, and flagrant violations of human rights. He turned a blind eye to Mafia infiltration in the business world in Havana, several hotels were partly owned by Lanski, Al Capone, and other thugs. Cuba was a fiscal paradise, the laws were not strictly applied, but so's Monte Carlo, the Cayman Islands and so many other fiscal havens.

So Fidel came to power, in a violent fashion but yet with a lot of support among the people, nobody can deny that; in one of his endless speeches he promised the following:

1- Free elections in six months
2- His was a platform of independence and nationalism (whatever that meant then) with no Communist ideas.
3- Cuba would be self sufficient and wold not have to depend on foreign meddling on its economy (whatever that meant too)
4- Cuba would eliminate prostitution
5- Cuba would no longer be a mono crop economy
Then in the course of these long years he has repeatedly promised so many things like freedom, economic development, nonalignment, etc, etc.

1-  Free elections have NEVER taken place since
2-  Other than a continuous anti American standing he has associated with the Russian Empire, with the terrorists and with anyone who seize powers by violent means and promises to tilt to the left.
3-  Cuba does not produce anything; it now imports sugar, and is not able to feed its own people
4-  I don;t have to tell you that Cuba is THE hottest sex destination where European old farts with bulging bellies dripping off their pants can get laid for a buck or two, for a meal or even for a smoke. My beautiful island has become the world's whorehouse.
5-  That was the only kept promise, Cuba is no longer relying on one crop, but relies on none.

Now the usual lame, far fetched excuse for this mess is the U S embargo. Not anymore. The US is Cuba's NUMBER ONE source of food now. Bill Clinton allowed two exceptions to the embargo: food and health products. What is more, Cuba's number one source of income are the remittances sent by us, the traitors, the scum, the terrorists; he hates us, but loves our money.

The liberal way has always been that of enjoying the "goodness" of the west and then loath them and renege them; my humble way has always been that of asking: "would you live in Cuba like an average Cuban?, would you like for your country the status quo that prevails in the island, and that has prevailed for over half a century? The answer to both questions in then and again NO; then I ask my third and last question: "Why should I be happy with something you don;t want for yourself?". The truth is that there's an intrinsic racism in the left: if you're black, poor, or any minority you have to be a liberal. The right is made of a bunch of fat cats with no regard for the common man. This stereotyped way of reasoning does nothing but offend my intelligence