Don’t talk about politics because they’ll hang you, but I hung myself first and talked about politics afterwards.
In front of me there are four panelists, I imagine that they’re people who are knowledgeable about the matter, prominent scholars on the subject of Cuba and its miseries, but full of demagoguery and revolutionary utopias, they were born, grew up, and came of age within the political fanaticism of socialism, submissive and obedient to the directives of the Party and the whims and the ego of the Maximum Leader, so they substituted their needs and looked for sustenance, listening to and making what was bad, and they didn’t deal with looking for what was good. I’m not judging, I am trying to be just and find reason.
The debate presented today is: Bread winning: incomes and standards of living.
Maria del Carmen psychologist and scholar on the subject, presents the moderator. Jose Luis Rodriguez prestigious professor. Betty Anaya Cruz also an expert on the subject and the pompous reporter Yasley Carrero Chavez.
Between them they make a detailed presentation of income, salaries and standards of living. At no time do they explain how to obtain a salary that covers the necessities, incomes that raise us to a dignified standard of living and earn us our bread in an honest, honored form. Of course, the means don’t exist in a socialist system and even less in this mutation implanted in Cuba. They concur that salaries only cover 50% of the necessities and the other 50% comes from other sources of income. They don’t dare say that it comes from corruption or from selling or exchanging dignity and decorum for leftovers from the State. If they make direct political critiques they’ll hang.
A leading official representing the State in matters of commerce states that: “Not even if they raise the salary several times will it cover basic necessities and resolve the problem.” Fuck, I say to myself, why is this mediocre person here if he already committed suicide, he is more dead than socialism, I hope he goes home and runs his errands to the corner store, and to think that he represents society and has a prominent post.
The panelist Jose Luis Rodriguez uses data to show that people’s savings in banks have grown. Wow! Damn! Now I believe that shame has a price in the stock market.
So I wrote my first question on a scrap of paper that was on the seats.
If the system implanted in Cuba is socialist, based in Marxism and Leninism, and I read in one of Lenin’s books that the salary earned by the worker in a socialist system serves to satisfy his basic material and spiritual needs within the society and still have a little left over for other enjoyment: What has happened that this hasn’t come true, does the system work? Could we reverse the situation without political changes?
I didn’t believe they would give me the floor for my question but they gave me three minutes in front of the microphone and so I repeated what I had written and I added these words about the increase in savings: Was it the honest and honored worked who had saved his salary? The worker can’t save anything. Therefore it’s not saving but robbing, embezzlement, corruption and other undignified forms of raising income.
I understood that all this problem of salary and everything else has been engendered by a socialist system and we are going to solve it with more socialism; that’s like a doctor faced with a bacterial infection wanting to heal it with more bacteria. Thank you I’m done.
They finished by giving a social and economic tint to the debate, supporting the new reformist model, as always avoiding the subject of necessary political change. Terror and demagoguery. If they directly confront politics they hang.
TOPIC: What is the income? What is the standard of living? What is the relationship between them?
19 July 2013