Politics in Miami and its influence on Cuba
In his book, Miami, City of the future, journalist and historian T.D. Allman states: “Only thanks to an accident of history, the Cuban Revolution, did Miami acquire the human skills and hemispheric conditions necessary to exploit its natural advantages as the capital of the Western hemisphere south of Rio Grande and the Gulf of Mexico.”
For a city that was no more than a summer tourist enclave, or a refuge for northern retirees, with a population that barely reached one million inhabitants in 1959, becoming the epicenter of the U.S. war against Cuba had extraordinary repercussions. It transformed the city’s economic and social base, as well as the way local politics was exercised.
From that moment on the Cuba issue became the center of the city’s political campaigns, even when the majority of Cuban immigrants were not yet able to vote in elections. The reason was not only ideological, but also the relationship between this issue and the economic and political benefits associated with these positions. In the exotic Miami setting, it became a ritual for politicians from all over the country to approach the city and take vows of anti-communism, promising the overthrow of the Fidel Castro regime.
It was a framework for the war against Cuba, mostly created by the CIA, ultimately put in place to influence domestic politics. It also created a political force which allowed Cuban Americans control of important local spaces, as well as catapulting the extreme right at the national level, forming part of the most conservative sectors of the country. Thus was born what Progreso Weekly founder Francisco Aruca called the “Industry for evil.”
When we now see old counterrevolutionary organizations, local media, or even figures recently emigrated from the island who scream in support of the Republican presidential candidate, we are not in the presence of something new, but rather of a norm of what has been happening in Miami’s Cuban-American enclave for many years.
It is also not new that those who do not adhere to their views experience a bad time. Media lynching has been a common practice by the Cuban American media in that city. And let us not forget the deaths and injuries as a result of the history of this ‘democratic’ crusade.
What has evolved is a more sophisticated form of these actions. In tune with what has been happening in the United States, although in Miami there are still radio or television programs that continue to graze in Jurassic territory, political campaigns are governed by highly advanced technological and mathematical mechanisms which allow establishing the psychological profile, the interests and the tastes of those to whom the message is directed.
Both Democrats and Republicans take advantage of these mechanisms. It is said that Barack Obama was the first cyber-president in history, but the Republican right perfected it, often perversely, in helping to guarantee Donald Trump’s victory in 2016. And to a large extent, this year’s presidential election will depend greatly on these same influences.
Florida is one of the key stages of this battle, and Cuban-American voters one of the “clusters” into which American [political] society is divided. They are especially a target of the Republicans, who hope to increase the level of support in this segment of the population by again exploiting the issue of hostility towards Cuba.
Based on the design and activism of the Cuban-American extreme right, Donald Trump’s policy towards Cuba has been brutal, especially since it has been carried out in the midst of a pandemic that plagues the entire world. Although it is still an aberration, the viciousness against the rest of their own is not so strange in Cuba’s history. There’s the case of the volunteers and Creole guerrillas at the service of Spain, who were feared, even more than the Spanish soldiers, for their cruelty.
In order to carry out a policy of this nature some rationalization is needed to sustain it. An opinion matrix must be enthroned that justifies doing anything to end a regime labeled among the worst in the history of humanity. Even the wildest forms of terrorism have found an excuse in this logic, and generations of Cuban émigrés have been educated under these premises, giving rise to a culture of hatred that has permeated the attitude of many people, even new immigrants, particularly vulnerable to the conditioning of the ghetto. What is extraordinary is not that many Cuban-Americans support Donald Trump, but that many others vote against him, reflecting the social and political transformations that have taken place in this community.
Any vestige of normality as far as relations with Cuba is not admitted in this climate. Until a few months ago, as a consequence of the expansion of contacts during the Obama administration, the presentation of Cuban artists in Miami, as well as Cuban-Americans in Cuba, had become normal. The barriers that for decades had prevented these types of exchanges seemed to be breaking down, but a new offensive of intolerance has fallen on Cuban artists forcing them to define themselves against the Cuban system if they want access to the Miami market. Some have given-in to the pressure and we are witnessing these unusual and embarrassing ‘conversions.’
It is worth insisting that this is not new in the actions of the Cuban-American right; what is new is the impact that these activities now have in Cuba. Whereas before its repercussion was basically restricted to the population of Cuban origin in the locality, even with limitations towards segments of that population that prefer to deal in English and show more liberal political leanings. The increasing contact with Cuba and, above all, the influence of social networks, has expanded the scope within Cuban society itself, which creates a new dimension to the problem, not alien to the formulators of U.S. policy against Cuba.
While Radio and TV Martí have wasted millions of dollars trying unsuccessfully to access the Cuban public, as well as many other millions destined for subversion were lost in Miami on their way to the Island, it is no longer necessary to pretend that they have a counterpart in Cuba to access those funds. It is enough to get ‘friends and followers’ in these aforementioned networks. That is what the new campaigns are all about, which also depend on designed scientific mechanisms or algorithms.
The targets of the message are diverse and encompass the entire Cuban population, but are directed more to areas of society particularly affected by the economic situation, and with a low average cultural level where a certain deterioration in civic behavior can be found. That explains the selection of marginal types as political ‘influencers’ and that the preferred sector has been the universe of popular culture.
The campaigns have a morbid hook that accompanies supposed personal secrets, especially dealing with politicians or artists, false or legitimate accusations of corruptions, or any news that reflects social discontent. No matter if it is true or false, there are no limits to the infamy. The point is not respectability, but quite the opposite, because you seem to become more popular.
Faced with such an avalanche of indiscriminate information, even opponents of another profile see their visibility diminished. The logic of these campaigns is not to create political alternatives, even those sponsored by the U.S., but to encourage social chaos in Cuba.
The problem is that it intoxicates the national debate on the real problems the country faces, and whose occasional bad decisions give credibility to the worst interpretations. Sometimes the official response is as bad as what is being presented as true, and when those positions are mixed, what results are prejudices against legitimate criticism and personal delegitimization prevails as a source of criteria.
Cuba has had to face all kinds of aggressions, but the current situation is new in many ways, including the conditions in which the ideological confrontation take place. It is no longer enough to invent antennas to block unwanted signals, on the contrary, to provide the population as much true information as possible is what is needed, as well as to stimulate intelligent discussions from different positions with a view to building the new consensus imposed by the current situation.
Faced with this pandemic of rudeness that comes to us from Miami, the only antidote is transparency and culture.
