Ley Mordaza – Gag Law
We run various sites in defense of human rights and need support to pay for more powerful servers. Thank you.
Comentarios

    The New Gospel, According to the General

    The New Gospel, According to the General / Cubanet, Miriam Celaya

    Cubanet, Miriam Celaya, Havana, 26 May 2016 — The Cuban
    Party-State-Government has just published a tabloid containing two of
    the root documents analyzed and approved during the VII Congress of the
    Cuban Communist Party (PCC) last April, 2016. These are the Project for
    the Conceptualization for the Economic and Social Model of Socialist
    Development Project and for the National Project Plan for Economic and
    Social Development Until 2030: Proposal Of Country’s Vision, Core And
    Strategic Sectors.

    No doubt this is a case of “partial declassification”, considering that
    the four documents adopted in April’s occult ritual were of a strictly
    secret character. The discussion and approval, produced in covert
    conditions, involved about a thousand of the anointed (so-called
    “delegates”) and, according to official figures 3,500 “guests.”

    The two remaining mysterious scrolls have yet to be declassified,
    namely, the Report on the Results of the Implementation of the
    Guidelines for Economic and Social Policy of the Party and the
    Revolution, with the Update of the Guidelines for the period 2016-2021,
    which contains the Working Party In Compliance With Those Approved At
    The First National Conference Objectives And Guidelines Of The First
    Secretary Of The Central Committee, i.e., the sacred commandments of the
    General-President himself.

    The first thing that draws attention to this tabloid’s disclosure is the
    indifference of the Cuban population, which has not given any importance
    to a document where, presumably, the destiny of the nation was plotted
    and established. In contrast, some foreign news agencies have unleashed
    a wave of comments that tend to magnify those documents as if they were
    the creation of a miracle, focusing the spotlight on what they consider
    the big news: the alleged acknowledgement of “private property” by the
    PCC, including medium size and small businesses in that category. At the
    same time, the media’s most audacious analysts suggest the Cuban
    government has employed certain political will to enhance or enable the
    development of this type of economic management.

    Such a mirage, agitated by the “co-responsible” of Havana’s accredited
    press–so diligent in legitimizing the official discourse of the ruling
    elite as refractory to delve into a serious and thorough investigation
    of the Cuban reality–part of a misinterpretation of point 91 of the
    “Conceptualization…”, which textually exposes “another transformation
    that will contribute to the economy, employment and well-being of the
    population is the recognition of the complementary role of private
    ownership over certain means of production …”.

    However, it is known that true private property is only possible in
    societies where individuals, groups or business entities are able to
    exercise the right to own, control, inherit, manage and produce their
    goods and capital in order to achieve wealth. Those rights include the
    possibility of developing their properties according to their abilities,
    or acquiring (including importing) raw materials, machinery, equipment
    and all documents necessary for the development of their commercial or
    productive activity, which implies the existence of a lawful framework
    providing legal guarantees to the “owners.” That is not the case in
    Cuba, as should be known in the circles of the accredited press.

    In fact, the newly published document endorses the opposite of what can
    be expected where real private property exists, as described in point
    #104: “the concentration of property and wealth in natural or legal
    non-State persons or entities is not allowed, in accordance with what
    has been legislated, in a manner consistent with the principles of our
    socialism,” and, if this were not enough, they hammer another nail on
    the coffin of the illusory “private property” in section 201, when it
    dictates: “the state regulates the constitution, dissolution,
    liquidation and restructuring of legal entities of all forms of
    property. It defines their areas of policies and principal activities.”

    But the most relevant value of “The Project of Conceptualization …” is
    the huge number of conflicting and mutually exclusive elements, which
    clearly reflects not only the extent and depth of the Cuban
    socio-economic crisis, but the impossibility of getting it resolved from
    the political and legal framework established in the last 57 years.

    This is evident throughout the entire document, but a few key issues
    that contradict the ideological assumptions on which it is intended to
    build the “Model” are more than sufficient. Suppose we look at the case
    of foreign investments, a kind of property that is currently being
    officially acknowledged by the government as “a source of development
    and means of accessing capital, technology, markets and managerial
    experience, which contributes production clusters and in the resolution
    of major structural imbalances…” (Item #90).

    On the other hand, the principle that the economic system is planned,
    regulated and controlled by the State is sustained. The State also
    controls relations with international economies (point 203).

    So the solution to the structural crisis of Cuba’s socialism is found in
    the forms of capitalist production, but the distribution of wealth
    stemming from market relations through foreign trade and foreign
    (capitalist) investment will be exerted by the socialist state. Then the
    wealth from capitalist production capacity would be state-socialist
    property, since, as stated by paragraph 124, “the State acts as a
    representative of the owner, which is the people.”

    The colossal nationalization of the economy continues to be maintained,
    since, in its capacity as representative of the owners, the State
    decides and controls the destinies of the corporate profits of socialist
    property of all the people, after [the owners’] fulfillment of tax
    obligations and other commitments, (point 148).

    This “representation” includes the regulation and control of
    institutions, companies and communications media as a strategic resource
    of the State–which is to say, the state monopoly of the media–“according
    to the policy designed” by the CCP, “preserving technology sovereignty,
    in compliance with the legislation established on matters of defense and
    national security” (points 110 and 111), in which it presupposes
    ratification of Law 88 (Gag Law).

    Of course, the role of the State (government and one-party at the same
    time) as “patriarch” manager of wealth and properties under
    “representative of the people” is more than questionable, in a nation
    where presidential elections have not been held in over 60 years, and
    where more than 70% of the population was born after 1959 and has never
    had the opportunity to legitimize such paternity.

    This is precisely what determines that the “new” proposal–absurdly
    futuristic, but almost identical to all the discursive rhetoric of the
    preceding decades–from the same octogenarian and retrograde ruling
    elite, does not arouse the interest of ordinary Cubans in the least. Why
    “debate” about the same old fait accompli? they ask themselves with the
    same apathy that dominates Cuban society.

    Few have stopped to think that, with the popular “debate” which, it’s
    rumored, will take place around these documents, the ruling caste aims
    to “legitimize” the consecration of state capitalism for their own
    benefit, and will continue to cling to power beyond the biological
    possibilities of the olive-green banditos. This seems to be expressed in
    the presentation of the behemoth in question: we are facing the
    strategic legacy of the “historic generation” to new generations.

    It is not possible to exhaust in a single article all the ambiguous
    rabbit trails that slither along the 330 points of the Conceptualization
    Project. For now, let’s summarize that they are the “good news” that
    Saint Raúl, of the olive-green, bearer of a truth that has certainly
    been revealed to him by his predecessor, the Great Orate: if we stick to
    the concept of “Revolution” of that wise old man, if the “Guidelines”
    are met and if the results of the implementation of these are effective,
    in the year 2030 Cubans will be in a position to “build a sovereign,
    independent, socialist, democratic, prosperous and sustainable nation.”

    Let no one be surprised if, in the coming weeks, the number of emigrants
    from this impossible island increases exponentially.

    Translated by Norma Whiting

    Source: The New Gospel, According to the General / Cubanet, Miriam
    Celaya – Translating Cuba –
    translatingcuba.com/the-new-gospel-according-to-the-general-cubanet-miriam-celaya/

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *