only if there is physical genocide... or maybethe conscience will grow if the genocide hasan ecological root. The physical bloodymutilations mobilize the people; the culturalamputations are not even dealt with asgenocide. Both manifestations areabominable because they make an attempton the human person and his integrity. But itlooks as thogh materialism based on biology,outdated but in force, gives more importanceto the truncated parts of the body than tothe amputations and lynching of the soul,the spirit of nations. It might seem that it isconsidered more terrible to use a prosthesisto substitute the mutilation of one memberof our body than being without freedom andoxygen needed for the subjetivity of theperson and the community.What reductionist concept of cultureunderlies in this overcome dichotomy aboutthe inseparable unity of all the dimensions ofthe human person? Why is the physicalagression denounced more frequently andwith more belligerency in the internationalarena? Invasions, assaults and violenceinflicted on the spirit of each human beingand on the plural and multicolored souls ofentire nations are avoided. Why?Today’s world walks hemiplegic, limping onits right or left foot. A qualifying disease asfalse and hypocrit as the pseudo-culturesimposed by politicians according to which, ifwe are going to criticize, standing on oneside, we have to get vaccinated on the otherside.Ready then, to state our opinion about therelationship between culture, politics andsociety in Cuba, we first submit ourselves tothis mania for inmunization against theextremes. Thus, we can condemn thecultural genocides against the indigenouscommunities of yesterday and today. We cancriticize consumer banalities which overflowthe West and the East. We can even defendnations with entire histories and souls which,in the middle of the 21 st century still don’thave access to political sovereignty or togeographic settlements. We should regretthe inter-ethnic genocides, or the violentmanipulation of religions and genocidesagainst them or sectarianisms.About these topics and about the topics on aglobalization with double strabismus, andabout the world capitalist crisis, the globalwarming, the nuclear proliferation and theimpossibility of some vulnerable sectors ofsociety to express themselves the way theywish, in the United States, in France or in GreatBritain, we can criticize and express ourselvesfreely in Cuba.But beware, when the same thing is intended tobe done about Cuba, by persons or foreigngroups, friends of Cuba, which even considerthemselves to have a left-wing ideologicalinpiration or political bias, then they are said tobe promoting “anti-culture”, they are said to becapitalized; there is a politization and thesepersons are considered mercenaries ormanipulated, or naive, but they are neverconsidered as legitimate expresions of ourunquestionable cultural diversity.The honesty of the ones who come to Cuba toexpress what bothers them and is dangerous intheir countries, is not enough to put themselvesin the place of Cubans, women and men, whohave chosen to live and stay in their countryand don’t agree with something, even when it isa light disagreement, with the official totum.This is what makes us think that hypocrisy hasglobalized itself and has landed in Cuba. Webelieve that the double standards haveglobalized themselves and make LatinAmericans and Europeans to consider normal inCuba what they would consider anunacceptable tragedy in their own countries. Weare not speaking only about artists, NobelPrizes, writers of worldwide stature, but alsopoliticians, religious persons and academicians.These “cultural expressions” are not the oneswe are referring to when we say that the mostauthentic way of promoting culture is to openthe door of the structures, the windows of thesoul and the spaces of the human spirit so thatit can express itself the way it is, with freedom,responsability and inclusive respect.The diplomacy of mercantile interests above theuniversally recognized human rights leads to aclear lack of ethics.On the other hand it is regrettable to asurethat: “We have our final objectives clear”although “in order to achieve them Europe hasto fall within the Cuban strategy...” We believeEdiciones <strong>Convivencia</strong>Pinar del Río. 201239
that bearing in mind the strategies of Cubadoes not necessarily mean to “fall withingthem”. Is it ethical to fall within strategiesthat systematically and totally exlude everyperson who thinks different? It’s not these“policies” we are referring to when we saythat to promote the culture and thedevelopment of one nation is the mostauthentic way of promoting Politics, like that,with capital letter and with ethics.Bearing in mind the historical and culturaldifferencies and the differences in theprocesses, how would this same thing soundif it is said in the negotiations with The SouthAfrica of the apartheid, or in the Chile ofPinochet, or in the Argentina of the militaryjunta, with the left or right wingdictatorships or the Sudan of Darfur, theunbelievable Zimbabwe, the Germanxenophobics, the kidnappers of the FARC,the Talibans who prepare schools for womenthat will turn into bombs, or the usualmembers of ETA? We absolutely agree withthe dialogue, but according to this Europeanlogic, in order to achieve a dialogue “would itbe necessary to fall within the samestrategies”? According to this logic, is itnecessary to give in exchange for nothing, ina dialogue with a wall because already inother occasions they pretended they wereholding talks with other Chinese or Africanwalls? This logic demonstrates the doublestandard used to evaluate the violations tothe physical integrity and another one toevaluate the violations to the cultural andspiritual integrity of nations.It is not isolation which strengthens anddevelops the culture of peoples; that’s whywe see with hope the lifting of all therestrictions ethically unacceptable, imposedfrom abroad. But it would be morallyunacceptable not to demand, not to express,in any space of public debate the wish toalso stop the blockade, the isolation and thediscredit of the Cubans who don’t coincidewith the culture promoted by the centers ofpower.A blockade to the culture from abroad is notaccepted but the blockade to the differenceculture from inside is accepted. This is sucha visible incongruity that it would benecessary, at least, the unprejudicedconsideration by friends and adversaries. Onthe contrary, it is admitted; it is disguised. It isnot elegant, it is not “culturally or politicallyappropriate”, to mention this internal culturalblockade due to the fact that the Cubangovernment has entrenched itself in theexternal confrontation against the United Statesand the States have responded with the samelogic.Very often, in order to fight Goliath, the stonesthrowed by David at his own brothers aredisguised. Or the powerful of this worldmanipulate the sling of the small David todemonstrate that he is different from Goliath,but at the expense of the rest of David’s people.But we should not continue with this logic ofconfrontation: Don’t we see all the time David’sfriends amicably visiting, negotiating withGoliath whereas they come to Cuba and forgetthe part of himself that David hides, ignores,imprisons and discredits?To open up to diversity, to use the grammar ofan “us” which does not exclude or rate “them”anti-cultural because they are different, is theway to the true Culture and the authenticPolitics. Like that, with capital letters, so thatthere is space for the widest concepts and themost diverse and plural realities.If Culture means the cultivation of the spirit ofpersons and peoples there should’t be policiesthat don’t cultivate the spirit of some personsand some peoples; policies that put out theirlight; close their windows; cut off their oxygen.How is it possible that we accept and expressthe concept that there might be “persons aliento culture”?That concept is incongruent in itsef. Does the“culture” indentify itself with the officialinstitutions, the payrolls that certify who isgoing to work in the “culture sector” or with aprivate culture to which some “belong” andothers don’t? Exclusive culture is not realculture because something of the human spirit,which is its universal character is being, at least,unknown, and at most, mutilated.If Culture is the search for the highest degreeof human cohabitation there can’t be culturalinitiatives that exclude persons or groups fromthis human cohabitation because they don’tthink identical from the centers of power suchEdiciones <strong>Convivencia</strong>Pinar del Río. 201240
- Page 2 and 3: Consejo de Redacción de Convivenci
- Page 4 and 5: Cuba does have thought, projects an
- Page 6 and 7: with their changes and hesitations,
- Page 8 and 9: well, eveyone knows that they are n
- Page 10 and 11: There has to be a differentiation b
- Page 12: lind. Infiltrations of bureaucracy
- Page 15 and 16: We are, and we should be “the pro
- Page 17 and 18: have been introduced during decades
- Page 19 and 20: sacrifice his life, his prestige, h
- Page 21 and 22: have different political options, i
- Page 23 and 24: there is political will and changes
- Page 25 and 26: Conclusions from its Council. We th
- Page 27 and 28: TO FREE THE PRODUCTIVE FORCESAND TH
- Page 29 and 30: tentative behaviors by the governme
- Page 31 and 32: the three powers of the State: the
- Page 33 and 34: what in our opinion is better for C
- Page 35 and 36: THERE IS NO FATHERLAND WITHOUTTHE S
- Page 37 and 38: Fatherland going to belong to every
- Page 39: CULTURE AND POLITICS IN CUBAEditori
- Page 43 and 44: POWER IS FOR SERVINGEditorial 10. J
- Page 45 and 46: An authentic exercise of power as a
- Page 47 and 48: “mosquitoes” which are the smal
- Page 49 and 50: “For I will take you from among t
- Page 51 and 52: forward by seizing the institutions
- Page 53 and 54: democratic participation where they
- Page 55 and 56: north and south of the human person
- Page 57 and 58: wins with the complementation and t
- Page 59 and 60: has reached a citizenship category
- Page 61 and 62: THE ABSOLUTE RESPECTFOR ALL OF THE
- Page 63 and 64: It is clear that it is about the in
- Page 65 and 66: negotiation techniques because it c
- Page 67 and 68: who are firmly coherent, which does
- Page 69 and 70: The government faced one first dile
- Page 71 and 72: credibility, the service and thesov
- Page 73 and 74: make them coherent with those inter
- Page 75 and 76: democracy even when all of thesecon
- Page 77 and 78: ECONOMY WITH FREEDOM AND RESPONSIBI
- Page 79 and 80: ethical dimension of the debate abo
- Page 81 and 82: expecting from us Cubans, men andwo
- Page 83 and 84: fraternal, humanitarian institution
- Page 85 and 86: or social institution should keep i
- Page 87 and 88: State and the worst way to violate
- Page 89 and 90: diversity would not be considered a
- Page 91 and 92:
democratic government whose capacit
- Page 93 and 94:
is no possible development. Back in
- Page 95 and 96:
dimension in order to safeguard the
- Page 97 and 98:
.Requirements to publish announceme
- Page 99 and 100:
That is why it is logical and good
- Page 101 and 102:
or repressed for his faith and for
- Page 103 and 104:
CIVIC FRIENDSHIP AND PACIFIC COEXIS
- Page 105 and 106:
we have arrived to the conclusion t
- Page 107 and 108:
Assembly in 1940:“! Parties, stay
- Page 109 and 110:
WHAT COMES AFTER THE POPE’S VISIT
- Page 111 and 112:
the search for it always implies an
- Page 113 and 114:
In number 6 of our cited Editorial
- Page 115 and 116:
CUBA DOES HAVE THOUGHT, PROJECTSAND
- Page 117 and 118:
everlasting projects shall be never
- Page 119 and 120:
prisoners of conscience. This group
- Page 121 and 122:
After 110 years of the birth of tha
- Page 123 and 124:
one ideology. To use persons to see
- Page 125 and 126:
perspective given by any statesman
- Page 127 and 128:
we respect everybody, we live weavi
- Page 129 and 130:
Relación de artistas cubanos y las