Cuba’s new constitution, wealth and that missing word

HAVANA – Only a slip-up by our parliamentarians can explain how they’ve missed an essential word in the project of the new constitution being discussed in Cuba.  

It’s the word I was thinking about while these elected parliamentarians bitterly debated Title II and the Economic Fundamentals, that states in Article 22: “The State regulates the concentration of property in natural or legal non-state persons, in order to preserve the limits compatible with the socialist values of equity and social justice.”

Several legislators claimed that the article lacked something, it lacked a word, they said. They thought that the word ‘wealth’ should be added to ‘property’. In other words, they wanted the concentration of property to be prohibited and at the same time to ban the concentration of wealth.

Those who opposed them had an initial question: What is wealth? How do we measure it, and how does one measure too much concentration of wealth?

Then they added: “Wealth is not bad.” In fact, we aspire to wealth and to the a fair, if not equitable, redistribution of wealth. Later adding that that ill-gotten wealth is bad. But that that should not make all wealth bad…

They failed, in my opinion, when citing examples of ‘good wealth.’ They spoke of athletes who have performed like stars in competitions and have obtained a certain degree of wealth; also mentioning artists who have achieved international recognition and some wealth.

I found it remarkable that not one of the parliamentarians in the room considered the possibility that an entrepreneur, a private worker, a self-employed person, or even members of a cooperative, could accumulate ‘good wealth.’ Nope. They limited themselves to the noble and indisputable examples of athletes and artists.

I do not know if they were afraid to say it because they might attract attention, or they did not think about it… but what about the possibility that one of those ballplayers or artists who have accumulated ‘good wealth’ might some day retire and decide to set up a restaurant, for example, and by doing so generate even greater wealth. If this was the case, would that wealth then suddenly change stripes and then be considered ‘bad’?

Hey! At least they agreed that wealth was not bad. The fact is that there are enough laws to control enrichment attained illicitly. All we have to do is enforce those laws. The rest of the wealth, the good wealth, taxes should take care of redistributing it. And therefore the more wealth generated, the better for everyone. I’m paraphrasing, but somebody said something like that.

Once the debate was over, and the proposal was put to a vote, it was rejected unanimously. It’s an old and bad habit that weighs on our parliament. The accumulation of wealth was not included and our law of laws does not prohibit it.

At that point, I began to smile, suddenly remembering the joke of the congress of lazy bums who argue loudly about the number of months and weeks, the days, and even the hours that ought to be worked in a year. And then out of nowhere the only lucid one in the group interrupts the discussion to complain about so much talk of work when there was more important issues to take up… like the holidays.

Remembering the joke brought to mind the word that apparently was missing from the discussion, and it was not wealth. I searched for the text and read it from beginning to end, including the glossary. All thirty-one pages. There was a page 32, but as Guillen said, it is empty. 

Not even with four eyes, or an automatic search engine, did I find the damn word in the PDF. The word does not appear in the new Cuban Constitution. Not even once. It’s just not mentioned. The word is poverty. And it should be there. Our constitution should include, in black and white, and if possible in capital letters, the word POVERTY. Because in addition to regulating the concentration of property, the constitution should prohibit the accumulation and concentration of POVERTY. It should be an obligation of the State, one of its main functions, as per the people, to fight against poverty.

And then, in addition, we must establish laws that legalizes a minimum state of being, that when exceeded the State has the obligation to intervene and remove that person from what is legally considered living in poverty — wherever that may be, which is not difficult to find in these times. 

It would be an irrational dream, unthinkable, to make all Cubans rich, I know that. Well, at least until we’ve reached communism… But while we discuss wealth, it is not an illusion, or an impossible dream, to identify and resolve the concentration of poverty, or the pockets of poverty that emerge or may emerge.

This worries me. I do not favor the excessive accumulation of wealth by a few. But I am more afraid, it hurts even more, a luxury we can’t afford, to have an accumulation of poverty.