« BUCL reminder | Babalu Blog - Main Page | Hotel Apartheid »

God bless them. They have my support.

But the unfortunate truth is that change in Cuba, the elimination of the Castro Mafia, and the aquisition of liberty for all, will only come at the point of a gun (pointed directly at the oppressors).

This is what I envision. Whether it be tomorrow, next week, next month, or next year. Another 'flash point' Maleconazo will develop out of nowhere - spontenously, but this time, after some panicky police shootings into the crowds, the huge mass of 'people' overtake the streets of La Habana and will head straight to the MININT offices in central Havana. Fight into and overtake the compound with the support of those 'switching sides' amoung the police and FAR units arriving into La Habana.

This is not wishful thinking, nor fantasy, nor science fiction. It has happened throughout history. And it will happen again. It is only a matter of timing. And this time it will be in front of our very eyes. Mark my words!

Is it really necessary or constructive to impugn those pushing for fundamental change, valiantly and at greater personal risk? To say that Paya and the other initiatives are simply "within the system" suggests that he or those who support him "accept the system," when they clearly do not. To say that it "legitimizes the system" is just as short-sighted when the goal is to fundamentally alter the system. They are attempting one route that they believe might bear fruit or, to mix metaphors, at least stir the pot. And God Bless them for their initiative.

Is the only answer violence or revolt? If so, I am not encouraged, because violence and revolt have really done the Cuban people and democracy a service since independence in 1902...Machado, Batista, Fidel...

Look at other cases. How did Spain's transition come about? From a King who positioned himself "within the system," was appointed the designated successor to Franco, and pushed for change once in office (not trying to suggest a parallel with Raul mind you). How about Chile? Chile's transition to democracy was gradual and was done in a way that appeased Pinochet supporters - a tragic and morally ambiguous endeavor surely, but one which perserved stability and ensured the emergence of the stable democracy praised so often in the press today. And then there's Russia itself, where changes from within the system (Perestroika and Glasnost) created space for greater change and grassroots activism across the Soviet Union.

Have successful transitions occurred using other strategies? Of course. But very often, successful transitions occur when the pressures of those working "within" AND outside of "the system" COMBINE. So in Cuba's case, why limit our options at this point? After nearly 50 years of Castro's BS, don't we need all the help we can get?

We should support and encourage ANYONE who can work and exhert effort and do their part for freedom in Cuba (including current members of the regime that are armed as well as those that are not armed). ALL SEGMENTS of Cuban society are needed to topple this regime. It cannot be done with only one segment, especially those which carry no arms.

At the same time, just as there are historical examples of non-violent overthrows, there are examples of violent overthrows.

It was by the efforts of "armed struggle" (not only once, but twice) through which the people had to win their freedom and give birth to the greatest country the history of man has ever known.

Busta I think you missed the big but :"but these working within the revolution projects do serve a purpose." I was softening the line, really. I didn't even resort to a "payaseria" retort in connection to Paya's name...but (another but)it just occured to me that by following your line of thinking, the German people should have worked with the Nazi party in hopes of gradually convincing Hitler to stop the holocoust and the destruction of Europe and that all those brave kids in Caracas should join the chavistas and try to convince Hugo not to destroy Venezuelan democracy from within his party, or that I should join the KKK and incrementally work to make them less racist or that Henry should join the Democrati.. ok forget that one. I do think the only useful thing that will come of their well intetioned and, witout a doubt, brave efforts is that they will prove that trying to work within the castro system is futile. It's the system that needs to go because it's evil.no ifs and or buts there.

Gusano,

I didn't miss that line, and I appreciate your perspective. My point was not that working within the system is always the right approach (OBVIOUSLY not the case with the Nazis or the KKK) but that in Cuba we don't necessarily know what will. Pressure needs to be brought on the regime from inside and out because quite often transitions emerge from both internal and external dynamics. And if, as you say, these movements really do serve a purpose by highlighting the justness of the cause on the outside, why bother saying they're doomed to failure? Doesn't that just create a disincentive for their activities in the first place? I guess I think our message should just be more motivational and hopeful, always. If I were a young university student who had risked my future by signing a petition that might get me kicked out of school, would i want to hear that my actions would later be deemed a failure?

I think the key here is that the petitions are doomed to failure insofar as they will not bring change directly.

I doubt that these people really believe that the petitions will be accepted and taken seriously by the regime, though. The fact is that the goal of moevments like these, given their familiarity with the system, is peripheral.

They know that the petition will fail, and that is why they submit it. It's worked. They're in the Hera;d and plenty of other places.

My guess, Gusano, is that this is what you meant... I could be wrong.

But if that is what you mean, I've got to tell you you did a pretty bad job of communicating it. This post comes off as condescending and disrespectful to those submitting the petitions. Almost as though you are suggesting they serve that "purpose" unwittingly.

That's how it comes off anyway... whether you intedned that or not. This blog gets a lot of traffic. You need to choose your words very carefully, or else what would otherwise be a very motivational post about the advantages of petition movements like this end up looking condescening and lacking in appreciation for what these students have accomplished in terms of bringing attention to the problem.

Guys, Varela collected over 11 thousand signatures back in 2003. The regime then collected its own signatures and amended the 76 constitution making the Cuban government officially socialist. They then turned around and threw a bunch of the Varela Project leaders in jail during the Black Spring.

I honestly never considered mizzoubanoz’s point of failing on purpose to draw attention to the issue-though it’s basically what happened with Paya’s project.

Trying to work within the law in a system that has no rule of law is no different than working outside the system. If you’re not going to get any advantage whatsoever by working within the system then why give the system legitimacy by trying to obey an illegitimate law? Because of that, these attempts at working within the system, leave a bad taste in more hardline exile-like me.

For people that think like me, however, there’s a silver lining to these projects that, like in the Varela project, they expose the true unlawful nature of the regime.

In my defense, as far as being condescending, I think the post might have been pessimistic , yes. Condescending? That would be true if I had copy and pasted the article and publicly critiqued the writing style of the author and reminded him of how important words are- you know, because he’s such a dummy-or is that arrogance? I always get those two confused.

Just as I was feeling positive about the respectful exchange of seemingly irreconcilable perspectives in the first few posts, something I think we need to cultivate, the discussion veered. Frankly, having fallen into the Paya minefield myself, I appreciated what I thought was a considered statement on Gusano's part. No reflection on anyone else, just my perception.

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: