False AnalogiesThere's a small section amongst those who support the most foul elements of "dissidence" in Cuba that has, for days, been promoting certain astonishing arguments on social media. It so happens that they're comparing the assault on the Moncada Barracks, Radio Reloj, and the actions of the Revolutionary Directorate during the clandestine struggle to current calls to take over radio and television stations, vandalize shops or promote street violence. I'm not sure whether comparing those two scenarios is out of an absolute ignorance of history, ruthless opportunism, or a false naiveté. I'm pretty sure it's the latter. Faced with such a scenario, one could well speak of contexts, how each event was organized, who the protagonists in each of the actions were, and about practice based on ethics and honesty. This would all provide enough arguments to counter the nonsense. However, it would also be enough to just look at the aims. What was the Generation of the Centenary after? What did it build when it came to power? What national project were they fighting against? Each answer points to it being a true struggle for freedom, for the dignity of the Homeland and for social inclusion, amongst a multitude of other achievements. In our analysis, we also look at the consequences. How many young people died at the hands of those who carried out the repression after July 26, 1953? How many more were victims of torture? Who could ever forget the look of José Luis Tassende, the death of José Antonio, the brutality against Lidia and Clodomira, the youth of Humboldt 7, Frank's life, Abel's eyes? Seriously, are we going to make a comparison with such greatness? Those who excuse their supporters and defend a notion of legitimacy that they have not earned, should also ask themselves where the tortured, the dead, the disappeared and those who have been judged outside the law are today. On what street has a corpse appeared? The other recurring argument these days is even more bankrupt: if those who receive money from the United States to carry out political actions in Cuba are mercenaries, then so is Martí, because he raised funds abroad to finance the Necessary War. Are such statements a provocation or a "show of intelligence"? It is better to go back to the questions: Is the delivery of lavish funds, through official channels and institutions linked to the United States Government -- the last one being a million dollars for projects that promote changing the system -- comparable to Martí’s work as an emigrant? Does the Apostle's perseverance, that austere life to give everything to a country, really amount to the same thing as them waiting patiently for their allowance to mount their show and respond to foreign interests? Is interference the same as solidarity? Are a people and a government the same thing? How many have forgotten the patriotic clubs, the meetings with the cigar makers in Tampa and Key West, the speeches, the poor workers giving their every penny? Is the restless and patriotic Martí the same as the "activist" who tries to sell a country? Who could forget Mariana in Jamaica, Gómez and Maceo in Central America, Flor, María Cabrales, Bernarda Toro? Are they "mercenaries" because they contributed from another country to a war that would bring freedom to their homeland? Is Máximo Gómez one -- the man who faced hardships, the death of his family, disease and hunger abroad, but who did not stop collecting every peso for the Revolution? He is the man who refused the help of a president to avoid "committing any action that does not seem to be worthy of my honest misery." It is about the hero who had to sell his glasses, his revolver and his watch -- his most precious belongings -- to support his family, while raising funds to buy weapons. And is María Cabrales also a mercenary? The woman who founded patriotic clubs in Jamaica and Costa Rica, the wife of the Titan [Antonio Maceo] who went from house to house to collect money and lay it at the Nation's feet, who suffered exile, the death of the hero and family separation, but who never slunk into a corner. The attempt to legitimize crime, double standards and servility based on comparisons such as those seen in recent days on social networks implies, above all else, the negation of a country and its people. To confront this, study and analysis, critical thinking and being alert to siren songs and false premises are necessary. The key today lies as well in sustaining that other dialogue with history and what it teaches us. Yunier Javier Sifonte Díaz graduated in Journalism from the Central University "Marta Abreu" of Las Villas in 2016. Journalist from Telecubanacán. Collaborator of Cubadebate. (Translated from original Spanish by TML Weekly.)
This article was published in Article Link:   Website: www.cpcml.ca Email: editor@cpcml.ca |
