Cuban Mythology
Poseidon 55
From: <LavozdeC...@aol.com>
To: <Jose...@aol.com>
Subject: Cuban Mythology
Date: Tuesday, May 08, 2001 3:05 PM
Cuban Mythology and the Avoidance of Responsibility
Jorge Benitez Sagol
Richmond, Virginia
July 3, 2000
When Germany surrendered in the spring of 1945, Nazis were suddenly in
short
supply. As if by magic, barely a single German could be found who would
admit to having been a faithful Nazi. On the contrary, the Germans
portrayed
themselves as victims who had been "deceived" by an evil Austrian
politician. According to the German myth, Hitler alone bore responsibility
for the horrors of World War II - everyone else was simply forced to follow
orders.
We Cubans now bear a striking similarity to the Germans of 1945. Modern
Cuban mythology would have us believe that Castro sprang from hell through
some sort of malevolent virgin birth. It is a convenient story that saves
us
from having to admit that Mr. Castro is a product of decades of political
corruption, thuggery, administrative abuses, executive incompetence and
civic apathy. It disguises the fact that we Cubans were willing to tolerate
rotten governments as long as our bellies and pockets were full, and we
could sing and dance our way through the national tragedy.
The myth asserts that we were deceived by an evil man who, like Satan in
Genesis, brought temptation to our island paradise. Of course, we forget
that we chose to bite the apple, or in this case, the mango.
Like all myths it is a lie wrapped around a very small kernel of truth; and
it is designed to avoid the key questions of the Cuban Revolution:
Who put Castro in power?
Who sold July 26 bonds to help finance the revolution?
Who volunteered to join the Defense Committees to spy on their neighbors?
Who accused their neighbors, colleagues, friends and even relatives of
counterrevolutionary activity?
Who celebrated the confiscation and nationalization of private businesses
and property?
Who volunteered to join the revolutionary militia?
Who went to witness the revolutionary tribunals and cheered at the
executions?
Who volunteered to serve on the firing squads?
The answer, of course, is Cubans of every class, color and educational
level. In fact, many of Castro's staunchest supporters came from the upper
middle class, the intelligentsia and even the aristocracy. Contrary to the
myth, the revolution was not brought about by an illiterate mob.
Did Castro deceive us, or did we choose to deceive ourselves? How could a
literate, cultured, well-fed and affluent people choose to partake in such
an insane experiment? Batista's quasi-dictatorship may have been a
catalyst,
but it was not the cause. Nor do the standard Marxist reasons apply in a
country that enjoyed a long tradition of social justice as well as a high
level of economic prosperity and stability.
Perhaps Castro appealed to our inflated national ego and our misplaced
sense
of greatness. Our fanaticism and lack of reasoning blinded us to the very
truths which Castro himself was making abundantly clear through his
actions,
if not his words. Castro knew how to tap the roots of the national disease
and bring the infection to the surface.
Like all dictators, Castro may have lied about his methods, but he never
lied about his goals. In his notoriously long speeches, Castro never hid
the
fact that the revolution would entail enormous hardships and sacrifices. He
stated that it would be bloody and that its failure would leave Cuba in
"ashes." Even his slogans told the truth. What could be clearer than
"patria
o muerte, venceremos?" "Fatherland or death, we shall overcome."
The Cuban intelligentsia and press knew that Castro had been a political
gangster during his student days at the University of Havana. Why did they
fail to report this? The Cuban public knew that Castro was a cold-blooded
murderer and terrorist after his assault on the Moncada Barracks. Why did
it
overlook this? Castro himself outlined his agenda in his book, "La Historia
Me Absolverá." Did no one read it? He surrounded himself with Stalinists
such as Che Guevara. Did no one notice this? It was widely rumored that the
revolutionaries were extorting food and money from the campesinos near the
Sierra Maestra and murdering them when they refused to pay their
"revolutionary taxes." Was no one concerned that the rumors might be true,
as was later confirmed by Castro's own men?
In a 1997 document titled "The Party of Unity, Democracy, and the Human
Rights We Defend," the Cuban Communist Party makes the following admission:
"The attacks on the Moncada Garrison in Santiago de Cuba and the Céspedes
Garrison in Bayamo marked the emergence of four elements that would be
decisive in making the Revolution: new young leaders headed by Fidel
Castro,
who already had a consciousness based on the precepts of Martí and
Marxist-Leninism; a new vanguard organization; the tactic of people's armed
struggle; and a program capable of uniting all the people in action
presented by the leader of that necessary 'charge to kill rogues, to
complete the work of revolutions.'"
That paragraph is nothing more than a confession of what many in Cuba
already knew by the time of the assault on the Moncada Barracks on July 26,
1953; namely, that Fidel Castro would implement with total ruthlessness the
tactics of Lenin and Stalin. Yet Cuban journalists, intellectuals and
politicians from that era still insist that they were "deceived." Were they
idiots or collaborators?
Of course, Castro's rise to power must be understood within the framework
of
Cuban pre-revolutionary ideology. Cuba's middle and upper classes had
strong leftist leanings since the dawn of the Cuban Republic. Non-Cubans
find it hard to understand how an entrepreneurial people with a talent for
making money could embrace socialist ideals; but this is precisely the
Cuban
paradox. This odd contradiction also distinguishes Cuba from the rest of
Latin America and explains in large measure why, in a region full of petty
"revolutions," Cuba alone succeeded in building a totalitarian state
modeled
on the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany.
Proof of Cuba's pre-revolutionary socialist tendencies can be found in the
1940 Constitution, the health care system, the labor laws, the educational
system and the role of women and minorities in the professional and
political life of the nation. In Cuba, the social inequities that prevail
throughout Latin America were tempered by the middle and upper classes'
sincere commitment to social justice. Unfortunately, the nation's high
level
of social compassion did not translate into a commitment to civic and
political responsibility. Socially responsible Cubans were willing to
tolerate and even embrace flagrant political abuses by politicians who
viewed public service as nothing more than a means of accumulating personal
fortunes. Amazingly, due to the nation's ability to generate wealth, the
island prospered in spite of graft and corruption.
Twentieth century Cuban history is beyond comprehension. The same middle
class that was pushing Cuba toward ever higher levels of economic and
social
development in the 1950s also had an anarchistic streak to accompany its
leftist politics. Capitalism, socialism, anarchism and excessive
nationalism
make a very volatile mixture which sooner or later is bound to explode. All
four ingredients could be found in the Cubans of Castro's generation.
The situation was exacerbated by a journalistic corps that had little
interest in the facts but gloried in its ability to write flowery and
pedantic Spanish. Clarity and truthfulness were not considered virtues by
Cuba's journalistic and literary elites. The old verbosity can still be
witnessed in the convoluted editorials from Miami's Cuban press as well as
from the surreal ravings printed in Granma, the Cuban Communist Party's
official newspaper. Castro's eight-hour long speeches are the product of
his
literary upbringing and his generation's penchant for poetic redundancy.
Castro and his contemporaries have an almost pathological inability to get
to the point, a fact that jeopardizes the exile community's ability to
state
its case in the United States, a society that prizes clarity and
conciseness.
The same Cuban intellectuals who in the 1950s either supported or neglected
Castro, now lament the fact that the world seems oblivious to Cuba's
plight.
These men and women, who flirted with Socialism and even Communism at the
University of Havana, now profess a brand of right-wing politics that would
make Franco blush. Furthermore, they claim to be outraged at the fact that
the West overlooks Castro's crimes. Where was their outrage during Stalin's
purges, the Chinese Revolution, the Chinese conquest of Tibet, the North
Korean invasion of South Korea and the 1956 Soviet invasion of Hungary?
They
had plenty of opportunities to observe the horrors of Communism, but they
never protested until it was Cuba's turn to suffer. Even then, how many
demonstrations did they organize in Miami to protest the Soviet invasion of
Czechoslovakia in 1968? How many demonstrations did they organize in Miami
to protest the Tiananmen Square Massacre in 1989?
The sad fact is that we Cubans have been grossly insensitive to humanity's
suffering during the 20th century - yet we expect everyone to "feel our
pain." The law of reciprocity spares no one.
Perhaps the final and most important question that Castro's generation must
answer is, where was its outrage when Batista staged his infamous coup on
March 10, 1952? Why did Cuba tolerate such a travesty? What kind of people
would allow a petty thug like Fulgencio Batista to usurp power and set the
stage for the Western Hemisphere's first and only totalitarian communist
state? Batista's coup was irrational even by Cuba's bizarre political
standards. Even more irrational was the Cuban people's lack of commitment
to
democracy and the rule of law.
The coup should have provoked mass demonstrations and a general strike -
but
it did not. On the contrary, Batista enjoyed substantial popularity among
all sectors of Cuban society, and he had surprisingly good relations with
Cuba's Communists. Furthermore, what kind of army would validate a soldier
with Batista's dubious record? The answer is simple, an army that is
completely devoid of professionalism - an army without honor or ethics or
any sense of duty to the Republic and the Constitution. The final proof of
the army's incompetence would be seen toward the end of 1958 when Castro's
ragtag forces made their final dash to Havana with only token opposition.
Batista's coup and the apathy of the Cuban people sealed Cuba's fate. This
phase of our history is made all the more tragic by the fact that it did
not
have to happen. Prosperous, literate, hard-working people should not fall
prey to men such as Batista and Castro. Where did we go wrong? How could we
Cubans, the heirs to 2,500 years of Greco-Roman civilization and centuries
of Iberian culture, ruin ourselves in an orgy of self-destruction? Could
this be the reason why we developed a complex mythology built around a
theory of imposed deception?
Well, Castro did not deceive us. We chose to deceive ourselves. We chose to
metamorphose from a civilized, peaceful nation into a barbaric, warlike
people willing to follow Castro's imperialist dream. Unfortunately,
imperial
conquests usually lead to ruin, and Cuba has not been exempted from this
basic law.
The Cuban Empire is a touchy subject that makes even Castro's enemies
uncomfortable. But it is an issue that must be addressed because it is
central to the revolution. Cuban imperialism is a by-product of Cuban
nationalism. Oddly enough, both Castro and many older exiles find common
ground on both subjects, a fact that explains why Cuban Americans are often
reluctant to discuss Cuba's crimes in Angola.
At the height of its power in the early 1980s, Cuba had troops and advisers
in El Salvador, Nicaragua, Colombia, Angola, Congo-Zaire, Namibia, Somalia,
Ethiopia, South Yemen, Afghanistan and Vietnam just to name a few. Angola
was, of course, the crowning jewel in Cuba's colonial empire. It was a
virtual Cuban province governed directly from Havana. Castro hoped to
eventually use Angola as a staging area for the conquest of the ultimate
African prize, South Africa.
However, South Africa proved elusive. The collapse of Eastern European
Communism between 1989 and 1991 completely altered the last phase of the
anti-apartheid struggle, and the Left-leaning African National Congress
wisely decided to abandon Marxism and embrace the West. Not only did the
Soviet Union collapse and leave Castro stranded, but Nelson Mandela,
Castro'
s old ally and admirer, left him holding the bag. By cozying up to the
United States, Mandela effectively betrayed Castro and dashed his dreams of
an African empire. Cuba would never profit from South Africa's enormous
mineral wealth. For an old Galician racist like Castro, this was the
ultimate humiliation. Not only would he never own South Africa, he was
outwitted by a black man.
American pundits refer to Cuba's colonialist excursions as proxy wars
fought
on behalf of the Soviet Union. This, however, is not entirely accurate.
Cuban imperialism addressed four basic revolutionary needs:
It provided a diversion from the drudgery, misery and despair of daily life
under the revolution.
It gave the army something to do far away, rather than stay at home where
it
might get restless and conspire against the regime.
It would provide Cuba with the colonial wealth necessary to exist
parasitically.
It would fulfill Cuba's manifest destiny and provide it with a level of
glory and renown appropriate to a great people.
The final reason may be the most important. It alone addresses the
frustrations and yearnings of Castro's generation. It also explains the
reluctance of many Cuban Americans to address, much less condemn, Cuban
imperialism. The empire has been a source of pride in spite of the fact
that
it was launched by a murderous megalomaniac. It also provides the exile
community with the last component to its great myth - Castro's
invincibility.
Castro the Great. Castro the Invincible. Castro, the man who brought the
United States to its knees. This is all part of the myth. Ironically,
Castro
's greatest enemies are also his greatest admirers. By elevating Castro to
the status of a demigod, we Cubans absolve ourselves of responsibility.
That
is why we seldom talk of Castro the Imbecile or Castro the Incompetent. The
myth demands that we maintain a parent-child relationship with Castro. Only
then can we blame the revolution entirely on him.
But Castro is not our father, and we are not his dysfunctional children.
Eventually we must assume responsibility for our actions.
The first responsible action entails an honest admission of our failure.
Failure is not a crime, but the unwillingness to acknowledge it is. There
is
no shame in admitting that we failed as a nation. We certainly have not
been
the first people to experience a self-inflicted disaster. The least we can
do is learn from our mistakes and ensure that we do not repeat them.
Once we feel comfortable with our confession, then we must take it further
by admitting that we created Castro. We put him in power, and we keep him
in
power. We supply him with money. We travel to Cuba on his terms and obey
his
laws while staying there. We massage his ego by reacting to his every move
and granting him psychological power over us. We shamelessly promote him
even as we claim to hate him. We must remind ourselves that he is nothing
more than an old, immature thug - an embarrassing leftover from the
University of Havana's silly political gangsterism. He has no role to play
in the modern world.
We must accept the fact that change is inevitable, and even if the
revolution had never happened, the Cuba of the 1950s would have
disappeared.
We must live in the present with an understanding of today's reality
instead
of an unhealthy desire to return to the past.
We must embrace the dissident movement in Cuba without snobbishness or
condescension. We must treat our compatriots on the island as our equals
rather than snub them