Whispers of change go quiet in the face of economic integration
Cuban Cigars. Ubiquitous, well-kept 1950 Chevrolets. Historic old towns,
covered in vibrant paint, on beachfront Caribbean property. Cuban Salsa recreating the
feeling of old American jazz. Descriptions like these of Cuba, flooded travel blogs and
even head-line news after the reestablishment of US-Cuban diplomatic ties this past year.
These anachronistic images generate sense of nostalgia in many Americans, most whom
ironically were not even alive during the heyday of these long-desired relics. Travel
agencies exploit off this difference, painting Cuba as an island lost in time. When in
reality, “our” historic Cuba is merely a product of fifty years of neglect during the US
embargo - Cuba is not something to romanticize nor to commercialize. Cuba’s current
state reflects an unstable society, who unfortunately might have been better off on its own
rather than reconnected to country which immidiatley colonizes its struggle as their own
within weeks of contact. The classic paradigm between core and periphery states
continues; fifty plus years and nothing has changed. As much as I believe connections
with an established democracy (US) can facilitate the growth of a new democracy(Cuba),
this blog entry, however, will explore the ways in which the sudden introduction of
foreign capital in Cuba may deepen current social problems; which in return may curb the
development of democracy and stability.
Claiming that Cuba was entirely isolated from the world during the US-Cuba
embargo is strictly an American perspective. Also, concluding that Cuba was completely
socially dormant during the time of the embargo, as if it was actually stuck in time, is
fallacy again based off American perspectives. In fact, during the end years of the
embargo, there were small but significant movements signifying a transition towards
democracy inside and outside of Cuba. For example, in Madrid July 2014, there was a
seminar at Casa de America funded by the Association of Ibero-Americans for
Freedom and the Spanish Transition Foundation, in which 9 Cuban citizen activists
attended from different sectors including, law, journalism, citizenship and human rights.
Some conservative republicans from the US, for instance former Governor of Florida Jeb
Bush, think that the embargo is the only tool the world has in guaranteeing eventual
progress in Cuba. The Obama administration thought otherwise, seeing the embargo as an
infringement to growth in Cuba, took down the barriers to spread US influence. However,
the means in which it spread, has curbed initial progress in Cuba. As noted above, the US
colonized Cuba for profit, brining in a sudden rush of foreign capital into Cuba.
Therefore, as noted in “ History of the Present: Havana”, Cuba is in paradoxical
economic state. On one side, it currently has a lack of money in the critical places –
leaving people impoverished, hungry and the oppressive system intact. On the other side,
Cuba has an inconsumable surplus of foreign capital, being centered in unsustainable and
uncontrolled development.
This uneven distribution of capital impedes the initial spread of democracy and
social development. By interrupting a previously established system, despite how
fractured it may be, US capital pushes margins even further, deepening socio-economic
disparity. The rich monopolize the new foreign market and the rest are left with merely
anything but acute government aid. Although modernization and economic development
are meant to foster democracy, the areas that received money at first (power
politics/tourism markets), perverted the model to do the exact opposite. The socio-
economic divide in Cuba maintains the oppressive system of President Raul Castro. With
conditions this harsh, Cuban citizens’ main priority is their personal and family security,
not the fight for democracy. It seems like this authoritarian regime thrives off American
neo-colonialism, rather than shrinks in its democratic presence. Yet, despite the fact the
government still controls most of the economy and wealth, I want to point out that Castro
has made efforts to modernize the Cuban society by integrating capitalism in small
occasions, for example allowing the ownerships of small businesses such as Hair salons
and restaurants.
Perhaps it is true, noted from evidence above, that US influence may eventually
promote economic freedom in the communist country, which should, by the
modernization theory, hopefully lead towards the transition to democracy. However, the
neocolonial market in Cuba, which centers wealth around power, has increased
socioeconomic inequality and curbed the chance of change in Cuba. Democracy stems
from stability and growth, not disparity. This deeper fragmentation of Cuban society,
drowns out “la lucha” for change.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/yoani-sanchez/is-cuba-already-in-
transi_b_5572558.html
https://placesjournal.org/article/history-of-the-present-
havana/?gclid=Cj0KEQiA6vS2BRDH8dq06YDHz_IBEiQAzNdBmYbB-
bG1tShzbH7w7l5X3H-9
