The Untouchable Yoani
What I find most interesting about conversations regarding Yoani (see the comment thread on Humberto's latest post) is that there are some people that believe she is untouchable and no one is allowed to criticize her or any of her positions. It appears that they believe Yoani's acts of dissidence, which are undoubtedly admirable and inspiring, somehow preclude her from any criticism and no one is allowed to question her premise. This really is quite ironic since free expression and questioning the status quo is the core value of her struggle. Nevertheless, since Yoani is perceived as a David slinging rocks at a Goliath, she has been seemingly draped in a cloak of infallibility and we are all obligated to accept every word she says and writes as the gospel.
History is filled with figures that have struggled against tyranny, but the mere fact that they stood up against oppression does not afford them infallibility. Nelson Mandela led a noble cause to end apartheid in South Africa, but accepting his important role in ending racist rule in his country does not mean we are forbidden from questioning his admiration of Fidel Castro. Certainly there are many who believe that figures like Mandela and Yoani have somehow earned sainthood and only other "saints" have the authority to question their motives. But fortunately, freedom of expression is a right all humans are born with, and just like Yoani has a right to express her views and criticize those she disagrees with, so do others have the same right to express their views and criticize her.
No one is untouchable, not even Yoani. And even though I tend to agree with her most of the time, I would be doing an injustice to her cause, the cause of freedom for Cuba, and the cause of freedom for all mankind if I were to impart upon her infallibility.
For more than half a century the Cuban dictatorship has forced everyone on the island to accept their words, deeds, and decisions as infallible, perfect, and unquestionable. To allow Yoani the same tyrannical luxury would be an insult to her courage and the courage of the tens of thousands of Cubans that never had the internet and celebrity status, but nonetheless struggled, suffered, and gave their lives in the fight to give every Cuban the ability to speak their mind--even if they did not agree with them.
I agree.
Alberto,
Bravo! Thanks for a much needed post!
As Einstein said: "Let every man be respected as an individual and no man idolized."
I wish you well
Melek
"If passion drives you, let reason hold the reins." ~ B. Franklin
Outstanding message, Alberto. Unfortunately, for many, it's much easier to profess tolerance than to practice it.
"Los santos estan en el Cielo"
That said I DO NOT question Yoani's dissiedence because of her stand on the embargo, I do look wearily upon her socialist mindset (and that of other dissidents) and worry about what will become of Cuba after el viejo cagalitroso farts for the last time.
It's not that she's untouchable. The problem is this perception (and rightfully earned in many cases) that we Cubans tend to attack each other rather than the common enemy. It's not reasonable for me to expect Yoani to have the same opinions as me. Because of the nature of the regime and my knowledge of history I have to cast a wary eye to opposition leaders in Cuba who are known outside of Cuba. But when I balance my disagreements with Yoani with what I perceive as good she has done in removing the blinders from some people who have a romantic view of the island, I have to say I support her. That means I'm not going to attack her for our differences but rather echo our shared opinions.
Disagreeing with certain positions Yoani advocates, Henry, is not what I would consider to be attacking her. We can disagree amongst ourselves and even call each other out on what we honestly believe to be errors in judgment, and still remain true to our core goal of freedom for all Cubans. No family, no matter how much they love each other and stick together, agrees on every single issue.
I support Yoani 100%. I support her right to say the things I agree with and the things I disagree with. What I don't support is that my right and the rights of others to disagree with her, or anyone else for that matter, be curtailed so we can look like one big happy family. We're not. No family is.
[...] 2010 Febrero 20 etiquetas: Alberto de la Cruz, Castrismo, Cuba, Yoani Sánchez by Zoé Valdés Babalublog dedica un post a Yoani Sánchez, firmado por Alberto de la [...]
There are many areas where I disagree with Yoani, but these are minor in comparison those I am in agreement with. The problem lies when we focus solely on the disagreements and fail to to once in a while say, "you know she is right."
I think that Yoani would be the first to welcome this "plural" debate. She is "only a blogger," not a saint.
Alberto at 1:21 P.M.
Exactly.
Well, as one of the people who took exception to the comments on Humberto's post, let me reiterate that it was the name calling of "Castro plant" or "closet-socialist" that seems rather ridiculous.
Henry makes an extremely profound and valid observation, and he is 100% correct that many extranjeros do perceive that the Cubans tend to attack each other rather than the common enemy.
It is confounding.
Henry, I agree with you when you say: The problem is this perception (and rightfully earned in many cases) that we Cubans tend to attack each other rather than the common enemy. If you want an example of that attitude read Jorge Pomar's comment of Cesar Cozar's "nudist protest" at http://abiculiberal.blogspot.com or get it at baracuteycubano.blogspot.com
We don't have to agree, but do we need to denigrate and question motives?
I've carefully analized Yoani's posts since the end of 2007.
She provides accurate and first hand chronicles of the actual Cuban surreal situation. I've not seen ever any phrase in her writings trying to perform as a political leader of the Cuban dissident movement or any sign of arrogance.
The problem is that in Cuba anyone who tells the truth is in fact against the totalitarian regime and a dissident per se.
I've also commented certain opinions lacking coincidence with some of her statements. But most of her texts are simply irrefutable and we have to understand the lack of leadership in the Cuban exile community were she is really known. People obviously tend to idolize her because of all the above elements.
Alberto, with all due respect to our fellow Babalusian, Humberto who I respect very much, I think his post was an attack. He did not expound upon his differences with Yoani but compared her to well known apologists for the regime. That makes me uncomfortable. As editor of this blog, though I haven't done much editing lately, it makes me uncomfortable. In fact I see Yoani as very similar to Humberto in one respect. Humberto's audience is conservative Americans that need to hear about the reality of Castro's Cuba. Yoani's audience is liberal Americans and left leaning people around the world that need to hear about the reality of Castro's Cuba. By necessity the arguments that both would make would have to be different but the goal is bringing awareness to those who don't contemplate the situation on that island very often. I just don't see the usefulness of something like Humberto's post. I know plenty of people who are against the embargo who have no love for the regime. I just think their arguments are flawed. And of course there are plenty of people who are against the embargo who are Fidelistas. But Yoani is not an anti-embargo crusader, or at least to date she hasn't been. So I don't think it's fair to brand her as useful to the regime because of that one issue.
Henry:
The embargo is about as contentious an issue as you can find on the topic of Cuba. While I would agree that our good friend Humberto, whom I also respect, did not pull any punches in his post, neither has Yoani exhibited much restraint the few times she has broached the subject.
Yoani's latest statement basically implies that much of the suffering being experienced by the Cuban people is caused by the "blockade." (I'm not even going to get into her use of the word "blockade")And all of her statements regarding the embargo have fallen along the same lines. In her opinion, which she has a right to, the embargo is a major source of suffering in Cuba.
Even though I vehemently disagree with her assertion, I don't have an issue with Yoani expressing this opinion. What I do find offensive is that she has never qualified this statement. I am for the embargo, but I am not in favor of inflicting more pain and suffering on the Cuban people. I believe the suffering and pain inflicted on the Cuban people comes from one source and one source only: the Castro regime. By not qualifying her statement, however, she is implying that I--an embargo supporter--am also supporting the suffering of the Cuban people. My heart tells me this is not her intention, but it is very easy for those outside to see it as such. She could have easily started her statement with "I know Cuban exiles mean well, but..." Instead, she gives a blanket statement that implies to those who disagree with her, and the rest of the world that if you are for the embargo, you are for the continued suffering of the Cuban people.
Based on this, I can see how Humberto can take offense at her statements.
Then he should attack the statement.
Talk about broad strokes, Humberto's followers are conservative, and Yoani's are liberal. Funny, I like them both, I read them both, and I have a problem with both, but the classification based on who I like in unnerving.
Truth be told, Henry, Yoani's statement could have been attributed to any of the individuals Humberto mentioned in his post and no one would have questioned it. She used the same buzzwords and talking points that defenders of the regime have been using for years. In a way he did attack the statement.
Nevertheless, I respect your point and I understand how these types of discussions can do more harm than good. Like you, I am in the middle here: I do not agree with some of the things Yoani says but I think she is doing an important job and reaching people we would have trouble reaching. As I mentioned before, no group can agree on everything, but we should make a concerted effort to move forward on the things we do agree on.
With that said, just like I would never advocate silencing Yoani's critique of certain positions I hold, neither do I believe anyone has the right to expect me to hold back my opinion because she is "Yoani."
Alberto, thank you for a rational, long overdue contribution about tolerance of differences, particularly if we have a common goal. I find it ironic that Henry is writing about respecting differences of opinion in this section while insulting me in another section for statements that I made. In this blog, it is an unfortunate fact that if one does not agree 100%, unquestionably, uncritically, with some point, either major or minor, then he/she will be subjected to a shower of insults. It's amazing that those of us who have lived for so long in this country simply cannot assimilate a simple concept like, "We can agree to disagree."
I think that most, if not all of us, have the same goal of restoring democracy in Cuba and exterminating the Communist vermin that infest the country, but we may differ as to tactics, or means to achieve that end. Unfortunately, some individuals believe that it should be verboten to critically examine past and present mistakes, much less acknowledge them. "The tactics that we've used for 50 years haven't brought down the dictatorship? Well, we simply have to continue doing the very same thing for the next 50 years! And if anyone disagrees with that, then he/she is a traitor!"
My take from the header of this excellent post by Alberto, "The Untouchable Yoani" is simply that NO ONE should be regarded as free from "criticism", or above criticism. Therefore, Yoani Sanchez is no exception!
I have also learned much about the daily struggle of Cubans in the island prison thanks to Yoani's narrative. However, just like some had commented, I believe that those who disagree with her, are entitled to express their opinions.
Regardless of Yoani's position on the "embargo" (she's entitled to it), the underlying concern for me is that the majority of her target audience in venues like The Huffington Post, is already clueless about the reality of the "embargo" ... so with statements like: "Far from suffocating the ruling class of the Island, these trade restrictions create material difficulties for the population and feed the radicalization of the ideological discourse inside Cuba."
With such statements WITHOUT explaining that the "embargo" (including why it was enacted) does not apply to food/medicine ... more importantly, that every other country in the world does business with Cuba and their people travel extensively to the island, and yet misery and oppression remain ... the distorted perception held by many that the lifting of the embargo will be the end of a morally evil act against the Cuban people and end the misery of Cubans is reinforced. You can support lifting the "embargo" for whatever reasons, but just like NO ONE is above criticism, NO ONE is above the truth. In this instance regardless of your feelings about the "embargo", the REALITY is that the misery of the Cuban people will only end when the communist regime's internal embargo is lifted and the present form of government no longer exists! So at the end of the day, we are not only held to criticism for what we say or do, but also for what we leave unsaid or don't do!
Respectfully
Melek
In December 1962, Kennedy offered a blunt summary of the Castro/Che record. “The Cuban people were promised by the revolution political liberty, social justice, intellectual freedom, land for the campesinos, and an end to economic exploitation,” he said. “They have received a police state, the elimination of the dignity of land ownership, the destruction of free speech and a free press, and the complete subjugation of individual human welfare.”
Historically speaking, Commie regimes have never needed to issue specific marching orders or send paychecks to their most useful propagandists---HENCE THE TERM: "USEFUL IDIOTS!"
No record of Walter Duranty, Herbert Matthews, Edgar Snow, etc. etc. actually getting ORDERS from their Stalinist and Maoist benefactors.
I strongly suspect Yoani reflects the views of most island Cubans and even a slight majority of exiles (including several close, close family members of mine.)
Heck, her view of the embargo was also William Buckley's and is Rush Limbaugh's!
Are all the above "agents"? Please!.. They're simply wrong--and in the view of this incurable jodedor--not above criticism on that issue.
Yoani's well-earned worldwide influence is precisely what makes her useful to the regime ON THAT ISSUE.....
BTW, Super Bowl and Mardi Gras and deer and deer season are all over--but Rabbit seasons remains open!...Talk to y'all a bit later, hopefully with pics of my Gumbo 'fixins.
I couldn't agree more with Alberto, Melek, and Ziva, on her previous post. I won't repeat myself, but the take home lesson here is that idolatry will never take to something good. Never.
That's the wonderful thing about freedom: you are free to believe and say what you want, I am free to agree with you or not. And free to express myself whatsoever.
Now, on a related-and different topic, I don't know how many of you are connected to Twitter. I've become a total nerd for its convenience and, as expected, I do follow most Cubans twittering from the island, including Yoani and other bloggers. The same way in the previous post's comments I wrote I didn't like that at the beginning she was not merging her voice with other dissidents, I also have to tell you that in Twitter she has been doing that since day one.
However, I need to share something that may get me in trouble with a lot of people out there, but I'll say it nonetheless. There is one thing that strucks me really bad: the way/wording the use to request other twiteros to buy them cell phone time to twitter.
There is a website, I believed based in Europe - I think I read about it for the first time at Penultimos Dias - where you can purchase online the cell phone time for any number in Cuba. This is how they are accessing Twitter, with SMS, since they can not access the site from their cellphones nor the internet.
But I really don't like the way they request people they don'y know to buy them the time. The wording in Spanish is really... I don't know... it may me feel bad because I get the impression they are feeling they are entitled and that we, out here, have the obligation towards them. It might be wrong and it could be that I am missunderstanding them - which I don't think it is, because Spanish is my first language, so there is no lost in translation here - but again, I just don't like.
Rant over. I thought I needed to share it anyway!
I must add that I still find Babalu Blog to be mostly tolerant of divergent viewpoints...AS LONG AS IT IMPLIES THE ULTIMATE ELIMINATION OF THE CASTRO REGIME AND ANY FACSIMILE THEREOF. Many of you know that I am gay, with a strong libertarian streak, yet my cuban birth and understanding prevents me from communion with my libertarian brothers and sisters. They just have this odd devotion to non-interventionism UNDER ALL CIRCUMSTANCES that I cannot abide. I mean, how can you stand by and watch a Hitler annihilate 12 million people (yes my dear Jews - 6 million of your brethren, but just as many more gypsies, Catholics, gays, and other "social irrelevants"). I never supported the Iraq war because I never believed in the WMD and the human rights abuses there weren't that much worse than in other countries of the world.
As for this Yoani issue, I definitely come down on the side of firmly believing that Yoani is completely bonafide anti-Castro. Yes, I do think she subscribes to the idelas of democratic socialism, which would make her my nemesis in a democratic Cuba. But we are NOT in a democratic Cuba and those types of esoteric discussions of ecnomic policy must wait until WE AREN'T BEING KILLED FOR SIMPLY NOT BEING CASTROITES! So I understand Henry's sensibilities. Besides, he was one of the first to be kind to me here. Not that he agrees with me, but a simple act of kindness goes a long way
And even with some folks that I have had strong "debates" with in the past, I never felt it went over the line. So cut Henry some slack with defending Yoani's honor - you don't have to agree with someone 100% to respect them, like them, or eventually come to understand their position.
P.S. CPAC was awesome and I highly recommend it. Never hooked up with Val because he reverted to "party animal" status - LOL. Not hard to do at a convention where over half the attendees are college kids. I was expecting a borderline fascist convention and my trepidations were huge. But I found that libertarians dominated the landscape, which is how Ron Paul wins a straw poll - LOL!
My positiion is this - I will not criticize anyone who has the balls to do what she does. I don't agree with her because I am a classical liberal and it seems that she is more of the the Paya-type. That being said to napalm her and say she is wrong while blogging or commenting from the safety of your a/c or heated home is wrong. It is one thing to disagree it is another to be disrespectful. Humberto is right about many things but he doesn't need to beat the crap out of everyone to make a point. Frankly Humberto is more shocked than Yoani that anyone could possibly disagree with him. It is amazing how you guys tout "free speech" when it serves your interests.
Cardinal:
Free speech is a double-edged sword. Just like you are free to express your opinion, others are free to express their disagreement. When you start handing out "free speech" permits based on where you happen to be sitting at the moment when you express them (whether in a/c comfort or in a dungeon), then it ceases to be free speech.
Your reasons for holding back any criticism of Yoani are your own and you have the God-given right to believe in them. But to expect and/or demand that others subscribe to your reasons is quite presumptuous on your part.
If you disagree with Humberto's style, that's your prerogative. But I get very uncomfortable when people imply that some folks have more free speech rights than others based on who and where they are.
Paraphrasing Jerry Maguire´s 'you had me from hello...', well, 'she lost me from "blockade"...'. Sorry folks, maybe it's my 'intolerant right-wing nut job' DNA in action here, but, the single, 'innocent', 'harmless' use of that tale-telling word, "blockade" ('bloqueo'), at least in my mind, speaks volumes... Slip-of-the-tongue?; ordered-to?; lack-of-vocabulary?; lack-of-access-to-hard-facts?; brain-washed-Child-of-the-Revolution?; honest-to-God own beliefs? all possible...
My conclusion? Either she is: (a) at worst, a brilliantly conceived and implemented, Machiavellian, Manchurian, G2 mole; or (b) at best, a hopelessly (and dangerously) naive and ill-informed lady, albeit, with a pair of 'ovarios bien puestos'. Humberto, pound away! Two things might happen: either she is eventually exposed (which would be most unfortunate, but good) or, she will do her homework, get the facts right about the "blockade" and continue to be a thorn in the regime´s behind (which would be very fortunate and even better).
"Blockade" my ass... 'Ese perro ya me ha mordido varias veces...'
Alberto, I have agreed with some of Humberto's points that he has voiced in the past and have strongly disagreed with others that he has made, but I have a lot of respect for him for two reasons. One is that he has been able of navigate his way into the media and voiced the Cuban-american stand. The other reason, more relevant to here, is that NOT ONCE has he ever insulted anyone for posting on this blog something that he disagreed with. (I have a lot of respect for him on these two points)
It's a totally different matter with some others, like henry just to use one example, who will drown you with insults, or ban you altogether from this blog, simply for disagreeing on an issue. As I've said many times, we all have the common goal of seeing democracy in Cuba, but we should be able to critically examine and disagree as to tactics and strategy---especially if those tactics have not worked for over fifty years!
Spygirl,
Your constant carping about people insulting you is getting old.
I don't think anyone minds disagreement on this blog. I disagree even with the regulars on a regular basis. What becomes irritating is when someone is just being opposite and shows no logic or good sense for the opposition.
If you would simply state why you disagree, no one could possibly mind. A careful look at the hablaron on this post with all of the disagreements proves that it is possible to disagree without being disagreeable.
Sometimes you make a good point and I like it. But sometimes you become strangely irritating.
You must remember that Cubans are sensitive, like you are, and have good reason for being so. There are certain things that light a match.
Obviously one of them is the embargo. Even Yoani gets some rage on her view on that one.
Alberto,
I was about to answer Cardinal and then you took the words out of my mouth.
"You must remember that Cubans are sensitive, like you are, and have good reason for being so. There are certain things that light a match."
Honey, you hit the nail,
Thank you so much for understanding our pain.
My two cents on Joani,
She was born and raised under the Rebolution, a product of the system that indoctrinated its children since kindergarten into the communist ideas and it reflects on some of her statements and actions. She's no different than many of the Cuban late arrivals to South Florida.
I applaud some of what she does but, as Ziva said there are so many holes in her story and I perceive that deep inside she's a lefty therefore I withhold full support for her because I don't agree with her on several key issues.
A part of me tells me not to trust her for good reasons. My reasons are very much the same that all the other people that have misgivings about her stated here. Experience has tough me to be that way, like Abelardo said, that dog has bitten me way too many times to ignore it.
Only time will tell who the real Joani is. I suspect sooner or later she'll expose herself as a genuine opposition to the Castro regime or a "disguised" opposition to the regime. The more she talks and the more she acts the more she'll expose her true agenda.
Regarding my last post I must correct that what I meant when I said that I agree with the statement Ziva made is the one regarding that there are many things that don't add-up with Joani.
Spygirl, you said yourself that the embargo could be lifted tomorrow and it wouldn't change the well being of the regime one bit. You meant that it wouldn't enhance their well-being (which I disagree with, the rich can always get richer) but I used your logic against you because in one sense you are right. How can pouring millions of dollars into the coffers of Castro, Inc. possibly be detrimental Cuba's rulers? If anything has failed in fifty years it's the those arguments about how lifting the embargo will result in the death of the dictatorship.
We have seen what the Castro brothers do when they have resources. They waste them on militarization, intervention in other countries and repression in Cuba. The regime's ability to do the first two has been substantially reduced due to lack of resources. Unfortunately the third is the cheapest to do.
Henry, when all is said and done, the issue of the embargo is a minor one. And I'm not saying that lifting the embargo would automatically bring down the regime's downfall. What I AM saying is that, overall, we need to critically examine what we've been doing for the past 50 years which has yielded no results (and the embargo is just one aspect of it). We simply have to get past square one, look at the problem rationally and critically. What we are doing, instead, is to, rigidly, stubbornly, obsessively, insist that nothing should be changed, we should try nothing else, we should not think critically. No wonder we can't get past square one! My God, it's been fifty years! How can one ignore that?!
I would love to see someone come up with a new, original, approach instead of our usual rehashing and rearguing the same things.
Honey, in regards to your statement, "Your constant carping about people insulting you is getting old." Let me clarify. First, being insulted for simply voicing an opinion got old a long time ago. Second, I am not referring just to myself. I deeply dislike somebody's argument being swept away, not with a rational counterargument, but with a torrent of abuse. And that applies also for people who voice an opinion that I strongly disagree with. Third, I can be just as insulting as anyone here and I have a good repertoire to make use of, but I choose not to, not because i am better than anyone but because if there is one thing that we need to get in the habit of is to rationally work through our common goal and our common problems to a final resolution. Lastly, I don't know about you, but I have thoroughly enjoyed the give and take in this post because it has been done in a civil, intelligent manner, even if we have disagreed with one annother. I feel that it's much more productive. If I object to the insults it's not because I can't take it; I can give it right back; I just think that it's counterproductive.
Oh, brother...
Tell you what, Spygirl: Why don't you provide us with "a new, original, approach" to the Cuba embargo situation instead of repeating over and over again "My God, it's been fifty years!"
I am saying this not to antagonize you or to belittle your position, but in the spirit of civil discourse. If you want to have a discussion on such a emotional issue such as the embargo, you have to provide some solutions other than "it hasn't worked in 50 years"--that is not a solution.
Personally, I would love to hear a plan that makes sense.
OK, Alberto. Here's a shot: for starters, no longer admit Cubans to emigrate to the United States. I know. You're saying, WTF! But, think about it, permitting Cubans to come over has actually been counterproductive, because it has been a safety valve, for the regime. People sick of the regime have left the island, usually to the United States, instead of remianing there as a building of opposition. You may remember that in 1956, right after the Hungarian uprising, the Russians at first closed the borders, but then opened them right back and allowed the Hungarian freedom fighters to exit the country, thereby relieving the pressure for another uprising (this was related in Michener's book, The Bridge at Andau, which almost earned him a death sentence from the Communists in Venezuela in 1958, but that's another story). Then, later, it again closed up. The people in the Iron Curtain were not able to emigrate en masse, as is the case in Cuba, and I believe that that was one of the reasons why there was ultimately a samizdat movement and a Solidarity movement. I think that the United States, in helping us, may have accidentally prolongued the regime's lifespan. I don't rightly know how effective this change in policy would be, but I think it's one worth studying.
Another possibility is open season on Cuban officials anytime that they leave the country on official business, but that would necessitate a special kind of person, though it is not out of the realm of possibility.
I'm not claiming that these two suggestions will automatically result in the regime's downfall, but we should think outside the box. It's a start.
I would rather think inside the box. What 50 years? There has been no real embargo tried yet for even one month. So talking about ending it is a joke.
The suggestion about not letting people leave Cuba is not going to help stop this regime.
The only thing that would help, short of killing all the the thugs, is starving the rulers to death. The country no longer is able to produce even sugar. Tobacco is only produced with slave labor. If The free world would stop tourism and all trade with these guys, that would bring them down.
Unfortunately, this is not happening.
If my child misbehaves, I don't reward him. Why would I want to reward these goons?
Spygirl:
I give you credit for trying, but unfortunately both of your proposals are seriously flawed:
1) End the Cuban American Adjustment Act
This sounds like an easy solution, but you'd be hard pressed to find one more unjust to the Cubans on the island than taking away one of the few escapes from tyranny they have. It's like stopping a rescue operation on a sinking ship halfway through to encourage the remaining passengers to bail water faster. Not very fair, don't you think?
2)Arresting Cuban dictatorship officials
This idea I really like, but without cooperation from the rest of the world community, you will never be able to carry it out. Arresting Cuban officials here in the states would create a political outcry that the US will not be willing to deal with. And you can forget about getting the rest of the world to go along.
As you can see, the US has very little leverage against the regime. The only thing it has is the so-called embargo that is really not an embargo. Giving up the little leverage we have will not give us more power to effect change, it will only weaken our ability to deal with Cuba's dictatorship.