Alejandro Armengol

For decades, Cuban emigres in Miami have clung onto the belief that bringing freedom to Cuba means reestablishing a political system that is governed by market principles. That isn’t true. Capitalism and democracy aren’t synonyms. They might coincide, but they don’t have to.

If any professional class has been harassed in Cuba post-1959, that has been its doctors. They have had to suffer the orders, and whims even, of a power that has always considered them to be one of its most valuable resources.

If Raul Castro leaves day-to-day administration, he will only be looking for a “successful” way out of his greatest failure: the attempt to move the country towards a more efficient economic structure within an authoritarian regime.

Behind the anti-moderate rage dwells an eagerness to courageously come out on top, when in reality there is cowardice in its origins and its results. It’s an old ruse which has been dressed up, both in Cuba and among the exile community, as intransigence, patriotism, fighting spirit, anti-imperialism, anti-Castroism and whatever word is on hand to undermine its meaning.

With Raul Castro’s government in power, Cubans are now less equal than others, but among them: it’s still very hard to be like a foreigner. What a country to establish itself as a colony and metropolis at the same time, while declaring its own citizens inferior to others.

One of the most defining aspects of Raul Castro’s government is his fight against corruption. Of course it can always be alleged, and especially in Miami, that the main corrupt people in Cuba are members of the ruling elite…

All of the statements made by the opposition recognizing Trump and his concern for human rights and political prisoners in Cuba are nothing more than a revelation of their ignorance – or in the best of cases – pure opportunism and interests to line their pockets.

Cuban-American dissidents, activists and legislators continue to make contradictory statements which the press eats up and amplifies without questioning: they speak of strengthening or fostering Cuban civil society while referring to the regime’s totalitarian nature, calling the changes implemented mere “cosmetic” touchups.

Though defined as the revolutionary vanguard of Cuban society, the Cuban Communist Party (PCC) has never played such a role. For decades, Fidel Castro was the main obstacle to the normal functioning of the PCC. When he had no choice but to hand power over to his brother, there was the possibility that Raul Castro would choose to change this situation, albeit gradually and without endangering the country’s power structure through such changes.