It would be dishonest of me to remain silent after hearing Barack Obama's speech delivered at the Cuban American National Foundation last Friday. I feel no resentment towards him, for he is not responsible for the crimes perpetrated against Cuba and humanity. Were I to defend him, I would do his adversaries a favour. I have therefore no reservations about criticising him and expressing myself frankly.
What were Obama's statements? "Throughout my entire life, there has been injustice and repression in Cuba. Never, in my lifetime, have the people of Cuba known freedom. Never, in the lives of two generations of Cubans, have the people of Cuba known democracy ... I won't stand for this injustice ... I will maintain the embargo."
This man who is doubtless, from the social and human points of view, the most progressive candidate for the US presidency, portrays the Cuban revolution as anti-democratic and lacking in respect for freedom and human rights. It is the same argument US administrations have used again and again to justify crimes against our country. The blockade is an act of genocide. I don't want to see US children inculcated with those shameful values.
No small and blockaded country like ours would have been able to hold its ground for so long on the basis of ambition, vanity, deceit or the abuse of power, the kind of power its neighbour has. To state otherwise is an insult to the intelligence of our heroic people.
I am not questioning Obama's great intelligence, his debating skills or his work ethic. He is a talented orator and is ahead of his rivals in the electoral race. Nevertheless, I am obliged to raise a number of delicate questions. I do not expect answers; I wish only to raise them for the record.
Is it right for the president of the US to order the assassination of any one person in the world, whatever the pretext? Is it ethical for the president of the US to order the torture of other human beings? Should state terrorism be used by a country as powerful as the US as an instrument to bring peace to the planet?
Is an Adjustment Act, applied as punishment to only one country, Cuba, in order to destabilise it, good and honourable when it costs innocent children and mothers their lives? Are the brain drain and the continuous theft of the best scientific and intellectual minds in poor countries moral and justifiable?
Is it fair to stage pre-emptive attacks? Is it honourable and sane to invest millions and millions of dollars in the military-industrial complex, to produce weapons that can destroy life on earth several times over? Is that the way in which the US expresses its respect for freedom, democracy and human rights?
Before judging our country, Obama should know that Cuba - with its education, health, sports, culture and science programmes, implemented not only in its own territory but also in other poor countries around the world, and in spite of the economic and financial blockade and the aggression of his powerful country - is proof that much can be done with very little. Cuba has never subordinated cooperation with other countries to ideological requirements. We offered the US our help when hurricane Katrina lashed the city of New Orleans. Our revolution can mobilise tens of thousands of doctors and health technicians. It can mobilise an equally vast number of teachers and citizens who are willing to travel to any corner of the world to fulfil any noble purpose, not to usurp rights or take possession of raw materials.
The goodwill and determination of people constitute limitless resources that would not fit in the vault of a bank. They cannot spring from the hypocritical politics of an empire.
5 comments:
The irony is that not many in the US are aware of what cuba is trying to do and what sort of a man Castro is? All they are worried about is about their oil prices, luxuries, the red carpet at Hollywood. I mean the Americans have freedom in every sense of the word, but that is unfathomable because they are completely oblivious about the lives of millions around the world who are struggling. Is that what absolute freedom means?
We can presume that this age has been the harbinger of 'absolute freedom' and the fact is that nobody takes responsibilities for their actions. They need a false pretext of freedom to keep people doped with sex, religion and TV (Lennon's working class hero). That precisely is the age we are in which everything has just been made commodity ( and I m sure freedom is one because it sells here).
P.S.
I m confused with everything these days. My perspective of life, the purpose of it et al. It is pulling me down into unprecedented levels of psychological chaos.
Thanks for the reply Gautam . At one point of time it appeared as though i was posting with immutable desolateness.
As for your comment it is absolutely true.
Out of all the atrocities that is committed in their name and in the name of freedom , people of an imperialistic country will be the last to about them .
Freedom of opinion can only exist when the government thinks itself secure
All of us are pulled into an era of neo-liberalism and unhealthy rate of consumerism under the pretext that more one consumes more happy one can become oblivious to the fact that this mode of capitalism is not sustainable.
This is precisely what is happening to the middle class in India .
I personally believe doing away with the things one can do without is a healthy way forward
Democracy and freedom are the most abused terms in the annals of history .Democracy keeps people happy they claim, at least those who matter to the governments like the big corporations.
In states like orissa , chatisgarh , there is a huge problem with forcible eviction of tribal people taking the land away from them for huge mining projests worth billions of dollars(POSCO DEAL-58,000 crores) the people have not been compensated .Binayak Sen , a doctor who worked for them and sympathized with the tribals has been arrested under terrorist law.
If true development is just material development of man
lets reject it.
I remember the passionate debate that we had about how life of the mind is the most important.That makes a lot of sense to me in world of pizzas , burgers , glittering malls , Ipods .
Freedom of opinion can only exist when the government thinks itself secure
American security threat is all invented to make people believe that their interests are genuinely under threat when the country is wrecking havoc in Iraq.
These are the terms that should be banned.
1.globalization
2.Free market democracy
3.Neo-liberalism
4.Liberation
5.Democracy .
6Freedom.
7.Security
No persident of america will never ever win an election without these words .
an open question...
what have u guys decided to do about the place we live in.....
does anybody want to do something....organise...plans...ideas that might change things for good or at least move in a forward direction.
- a desperate youth like yourselves
"If true development is just material development of man lets reject it."
Nicely said, don't know whether this can happen.
One of the main problems of this world is money. Money which was created to replace barter system has become the thing on which every damn thing revolves. I can see that the concept of money is flawed, but don't know what to do :(
I came across the blog of another ashwin from your set, which best summarizes what is happening in this world,
http://thegreatthree.blogspot.com/2008/05/i-go-on.html
This blog is so refreshing! Right now the middle class is in love with liberalisation and consumerism. They are getting things that their parents could only dream of. Do you guys think capitalism is a zero sum game?
Post a Comment