Humberto Fontova: Cuban Stalinism at 50--and the Media Lies Continue
"Cuban mothers let me assure you that I will solve all Cuba's problems without spilling a drop of blood." Upon entering Havana on January 7, 1959, Cuba's new leader Fidel Castro broadcast that promise into a phalanx of microphones. As the jubilant crowd erupted with joy, Castro continued. “Cuban mothers let me assure you that because of me you will never have to cry."
The following day, just below San Juan Hill in eastern Cuba, a bulldozer rumbled to a start, clanked into position, and started pushing dirt into a huge pit with blood pooling at the bottom from the still-twitching bodies of more than a hundred men and boys who'd been machine-gunned without trial on the Castro brothers' orders. Their wives and mothers wept hysterically from a nearby road.
On that very day, the U.K. Observer ran the following headline: "Mr Castro's bearded, youthful figure has become a symbol of Latin America's rejection of brutality and lying. Every sign is that he will reject personal rule and violence."
These two events perfectly symbolize the Castro/Cuba phenomenon, even half a century later. The Castro regime oppresses and kills while issuing a smokescreen of lies not merely devious but downright psychopathic. The worldwide media abandons all pretense as "investigators" or "watchdogs" and adopts a role, not merely as sycophants, but as advertising agency. As Cuba's Stalinist nomenklatura celebrates fifty years of repression and high living this week --from Time magazine to USA Today, and from the BBC to Der Spiegel to the very U.K. Observer (now the Guardian) -- the usual idiocies on Cuba are spouting forth their usual sources, but in much greater profusion.
If what we constantly heard and read about Fidel Castro and the Cuban Revolution in the mainstream media and college textbooks was merely in error it might be less obnoxious. Instead the media/academia clichés usually upend the truth. We get the precise opposite of the truth. Ignorance (usually willful) of conditions in pre-Castro Cuba, of Fidel Castro's background, of U.S.-Cuba relations pre-1960 all contribute to the cliché-ridden Castro legend. With the media wallowing in a Castro-cliché orgy on this hideous anniversary let's examine them one at a time, in no particular order of importance.
Cliché no. 1: A plucky Castro succeeded in defying a relentlessly hostile U.S. that worked ceaselessly to topple him.
The Facts: “We ended up getting exactly what we'd wanted all along," wrote Nikita Khrushchev about the Missile Crisis Resolution.
"Security for Fidel Castro's regime and American missiles removed from Turkey. Until today the U.S. has complied with her promise not to interfere with Castro and not to allow anyone else to interfere with Castro. After Kennedy's death, his successor Lyndon Johnson assured us that he would keep the promise not to invade Cuba."
Henry Kissinger, as Gerald Ford's secretary of state, renewed the pledge. After the Missile Crisis "resolution," Castro's "defiance" of the U.S. took the form of the U.S. Coast Guard and even the British Navy (when some intrepid exile freedom fighters moved their operation to the Bahamas) shielding him from exile attacks. Far from "defying" a superpower, Castro hid behind the skirts of two superpowers, plus the British Empire....
comments powered by Disqus
Lorraine Paul - 1/15/2009
I loved that phrase "...intrepid exile freedom fighters...".
More likely disgruntled gangsters trying drug running! LOL
Lorraine Paul - 1/15/2009
Over the years there have been so many assassination attempts on Castro that the 'agreement' made by Washington to leave Castro alone has been treated with less than lip-service.
On the bright side, during this time Cubans have gone about their business, and the Cuban revolution continues to be a shining beacon for those in South America who live under the yoke of a Washington-endorsed government!!
Arnold Shcherban - 1/10/2009
Although very brief and partial (certainly not "eye for an eye") I would recommend you to read the response of Mr. Cosmos below.
Javier Ramirez - 1/9/2009
I am very wary when someone dismisses something by with a casual remark. It tells me that you really have nothing substantive to offer. Why don't you humor us and give us an "analytic objection".
Tiger Cosmos - 1/9/2009
Any talk of Castro must be said in the light of what Cuba was under Batista as well as the U.S. foreign policy created by the Batista loyalists dictating U.S. policy.
Miami's Batista diplomacy has failed. It has only cornered Castro and forced him into a position that has made it difficult for the Cuban people. Castro originally sought assistance from the U.S. Russia was who he turned to after the U.S. sided with Batista and the mafia - thanks to Batista, his wife, and all the Batista loyalists in Florida.
Now with Obama as our new president these Batista loyalists are going to be creating a lot of false outrage. Concerned that after 50 years of diplomatic failure their policy will be changed. U.S. citizens will be able to visit Cuba and soon the blockade will be removed.
Castro did a lot of good for the poor and farming class of Cuba. He provided education for the first time to their children, hospitals, and opportunity.
The above massacre has not been documented. I am sure that during the war their was a lot of rebel versus loyalist massacres on both sides. It was Batista after all who ruled with mafia hits. However, the Batista Cuban's have blood on their hands for their 50 years of anti-Cuban policy. The policy they wish to return to Cuba is one that excludes 98% of the population.
Arnold Shcherban - 1/3/2009
which don't even deserve analytic objection.
- Thomas Slaughter interviewed about his new book on the American Revolution
- Historian Michael Ignatieff writes a memoir explaining why he failed in politics
- Olivia Remie Constable, director of the Medieval Institute at Notre Dame since 2009, passes away
- Arizona Historical Society soon could be history
- Yale's Donald Kagan says students need to study Western civilization