Dialogue, Debate, Confrontation. Toward a Delimitation of Boundaries – Español
By Enrique Ubieta Gómez for La Isla Deconocida
I believe in ideas, in revolutionary reason. I support the Cuban Revolution from a reasoned perspective, from an argumentative perspective. I am convinced that it is possible to discuss and analyze every success and every failure of these 50 years, and that on balance, the revolutionary process will always come out favorably. I don’t shirk from debate.
But I’ve also understood that the war against socialism, against the Revolution, is not a “scientific” or “academic” crusade for truth; that its adversaries are not theoreticians obsessed with proving that they are right (although some of them teach or are academic professionals), rather, they are individuals who for a variety of motives – personal history, ideological, or simply economic – desire its destruction. I’ve proven that there is a network of transnational interests that play hard: they lie or mislead and they are betting that their (verisimilitude) version will come out the winner in the media “show;” that which takes over the mind of the spectators. A network that chooses the exact words that should be used and repeats them in order to describe every subject and object, every event (regime rather than government, embargo rather than blockade, Castro rather than Fidel or Raúl, as the people refer to them). That people manufacture them, plant them, and that the media can close the doors and windows on any argument that reveals the trap. That dialogue is for the deaf, because the objective is not who’s right, but who will maintain or take power. Continue reading