A Worn-out Discourse

Osmel Almaguer

I grew up listening to Fidel’s frequent speeches.  I remember them invading the two sole TV channels that existed, as well as all of the radio stations – except Radio Reloj [literally a ticking “clock radio” station].  The newspapers were responsible for announcing these engagements beforehand and echoing them afterwards.

“Today Fidel’s going to speak, so dinner’s going to have to be earlier,” my father would tell my mother.  At the time the order didn’t seem too overbearing, back then there existed one sole truth: that of Fidel and his revolutionary followers.  Therefore, anyone who disagreed with even just one detail of his words or actions was labeled a gusano (a maggot).

In my family there could be no maggots, because we were poor before 1959 and “we owed everything we had to the Revolution.”

That’s why it was necessary to conform to it and to mind it, and the best way known to do this was by supporting it in its foreign policy and its conflict with the USA.

So what else could the Commandant’s speech be about other than praising the merits of the Cuban Revolution and condemning everything that belonged to the capitalist world?  Anything that happened in the world —from a war in the Middle East to a child sleeping in the streets of Brazil— was the fault of those “Americanos.”

This was a superficial form of assessing the unequal relations between the developed world and the rest of it.

Gradually, especially with the crisis of the 1990s, the rhetorical element of his discourse was becoming more evident, even reaching the point that —implicitly or explicitly— many people were thrilled when he stopped speaking on TV.

My family tried to maneuver unscathed in this debacle; notwithstanding, many things changed. The daily struggle for survival made all of us adopt attitudes that 10 years earlier would have been unanimously reviled.  As I grew up I copied the behavior and ideas of my father in terms of forming my own opinion about the world.  Over the years my opinion has gradually changed with the introduction of additional knowledge.

An example of this was when I began to think about the causes that led to the triumph of the Revolution, as well as those that allow the regime to remain in place and those that could force it to disappear.  To list them all would be too tortuous.

However, I believe it’s important to at least mention the:

Basic reasons for the victory:

– The strength of the guerilla army around their leader, Fidel.

– The traditions of struggle in our country.

– People’s hope that life could be different from what they had previously experienced.  The Revolution would be beneficial for “the majority,” as its proponents affirmed.  (I refuse to believe it was the revolutionary “consciousness” of people in 1959, as maintained by those who write our history books.)

To maintain itself, the Revolution has turned to:

– Measures that tend to make the distribution of products more equal, as well as their real impact on the public.

– Total control by the authorities of politics, economics, the military and ideology.

– The overuse of martyrs and national traditions as the symbolic reserves of the nation.

As for the causes of its possible end:

– The divorce between the interests of the masses and the ruling class.

– The loss of faith in the country’s highest leaders by the young generation, who —while not having stopped supporting the revolutionary process— are coming up with ideas they are not allowed to develop.

– The economic crisis caused by monoculture inherited from the colonial and neo-colonial stages, and by the US blockade and embargo of Cuba.

The last conclusion I’ve been able reach about all this is that we live between two currents, and both of them are using us for their own benefit.

Think of what Fidel says: “The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer.”

So I no longer think in terms of right or left, because neither is going to solve my problems.  Humanity’s fundamental problem lies within itself…and in that which is most intrinsic in the human being: its selfishness.  And no system exists that is capable of changing that.