Prominent Cubans defend Zurbano's right to talk about racism, 4/21/13

Everyone now accepts that the New York Times changed the title on Roberto Zurbano's article from "The Coming Country: And My Black Cuba?"  to "For Blacks in Cuba, the Revolution Hasn’t Begun," without his knowledge or consent. Alan West-Durán's piece, Zurbano and “The New York Times”: Lost and Found in Translation, describes the ugly process the New York Times imposed on the creation of this article, a process he helped Zurbano deal with. Yet Casa de las Americas has yet to reverse its demotion of Zurbano from executive to analyst and none of the old guard has judged it wise to retract any of the things they wrote in Jiribilla when they were clearly reacting to the title. However, the array of Cubans defending Zurbano inside the island and out is growing and includes some prominent people.

ARAC, the Articulación Regional Afrodescendiente de América Latina y el Caribe Regional (Regional Network of People of African Descent in Latin America and the Caribbean), has a chapter in Cuba, to which belong Gisela Arandia, Esteban Morales, and other long time activists on issues of race and identity. They are not a dissident group, some of their members have had long careers in the government.

ARAC issued a statement, dated April 5th, that includes:

Relative to the recent polemics in national and international media concerning the racial problems in today’s Cuba, we wish to express the following...

3. ARAC strongly supports and will continue supporting the free expression of ideas for all of its activists, as part of the fundamental liberty of expression in our society as a whole.

4. ARAC thus opposes any institutional or individual process or method, of an obstructive or repressive character, against any participant involved in such controversies that has personally elected to express his or her opinion or reasoning.

This statement was not issued casually and refers clearly to the Zurbano article and the firestorm of comments it generated as well as to his demotion by the Casa de las Americas.

Perhaps the first to write positively about Zurbano was Alberto Jones, AfroCubaWeb columnist, who is the former director of a large veterinary lab in Oriente and now director of the Caribbean American Children's Foundation in Florida. In Speculations surrounding Roberto Zurbano’s OP-ED in the New York Times, written on March 28th and first circulated on Walter Lippmann's Cuba News, he stated:

The fact that tens of thousands of Afrocubans have achieved the intellectual capacity to read, analyze, compare and extract their own conclusions thanks to the knowledge obtained through the existence of the Cuban Revolution should not deprive them of their right to question, denounce or silence mistakes nor forbid them from proposing ideas or solutions for the nation’s failures and unfulfilled dreams.

Rather than weakening the government and its institutions with his actions, such a courageous, frontal approach fortifies and creates a positive environment of concern, interest and a social commitment to create a better nation which is, in essence, what the Cuban Revolution is all about in the first place.

On April 6th. Zuleica Romay Guerra, president of the top level Instituto Cubano del Libro, published her own article in Jiribilla, Cuba tiene la obligación moral de librar esta batalla. She refers directly to the above ARAC statement and to the Zurbano controversy through the use of links to the statement

"The documents containing ARAC's position with respect to the polemics of the day is a result of an exercise inherent in the desire to create the Revolution. Our discussions do not require pejudiced moderators, yellow journalists, or skeptical prophets. ARAC is a revolutionary project, defended by people conscious that capitalism has nothing to offer blacks an people of color in this country. Very near us, in the richest country of the world, a great many poeple like me are irreversibly poor, they do not have a press or a government that defends their interests, though they have elected a black man to occupies the throne." [The links are as in the original.]

"El documento contentivo de la posición de ARAC ante las polémicas del momento es resultado de un ejercicio inherente a la voluntad de hacer Revolución. Nuestras discusiones no necesitan moderadores prejuiciados, relatores amarillistas ni escépticos profetas.ARAC es un proyecto revolucionario, defendido por personas conscientes de que el capitalismo no tiene nada que ofrecer a los negros y mestizos de este país. Muy cerca de nosotros, en la nación más rica del mundo, muchísima gente como yo son irremediablemente pobres; no tienen periódicos ni gobierno que defiendan sus intereses, aunque hayan elegido a un hombre negro para ocupar un trono." [The links are as in the original.]

The second link in the above extract from Zuleica Romay's article is to La Revolución contra el racismo, by Y. P. Fernández in Jiribilla, part of a series of Jiribilla articles against Zurbano's Times piece that include those by old guard AfroCuban intellectuals such as Silvio Castro, Heriberto Feraudy, and the same Esteban Morales who is also in ARAC. Various analysts have noted that these articles are reacting more to the title than to its contents - Zurbano has been known in Cuba for some time in many venues to be expounding the same ideas as in the Times article. It is hard to overstate the importance of what Zuleica Romay has to say on this, she has an extemely good reputation in all circles.

The famous Nueva Trova singer, Silvio Rodriguez, who regularly fills stadiums across the world with audiences in the hundreds of thousands, is quoted by AP:

Noted singer-songwriter Silvio Rodriguez for one, called for "an airing of ideas" without "ganging up" on the author.

This is taken from a post on his blog, Segunda Cita -- scroll down to the entry for April 3rd, at 08:45:

... puede estar percibiendo que aquí y en otros sitios “le estamos cayendo en pandilla”. Al menos respecto a nosotros, esa sería una idea muy equivocada, porque para nada es la intención que nos anima al comentar sus declaraciones.

Quiero dejar bien claro que el propósito de Segunda cita, en este y en otros debates, es que circule el pensamiento, que se aireen las ideas. Las que nos gustan, las que no nos gustan y las que más o menos.

Al menos yo no me creo profesor de nada y mucho menos cátedra. Incluso creo ser uno de los que más aprende de estos intercambios. Así que me encuentro muy lejos de cualquier intención punitiva o inquisitoria. Ese tipo de lastre primitivo no me acompaña, entre otras cosas porque he sido víctima del mismo.

Debatir las ideas es tomarlas en cuenta, es una forma de respetarlas

Rogelio M. Díaz Moreno, a specialist in nuclear physics and radiology at the Institute of Neurology y Neurosurgery in Havana, spoke out on 4/4/13 on the Red Observatorio Crítico in El derecho a equivocarse ¿también es racista?

 What are we seeing here? Is this the way to resolve issues or carry out historical-philosophical discussions? I feel very good that those who disagree with Zurbano publish their reviews, in a tone and volume as high as they see fit, but it is another thing altogether to take administrative and professional retaliation against a person who employs his thinking skills. Even before his dismissal, we had an academic and ideological debate, pending some clarifications. From that point, what you hear is a loud message, clear and very, very racist: what do we do with this 'black man who is wrong'?, Out!

¿Qué es esto que estamos contemplando? ¿Acaso esta es la manera de resolver polémicas o discusiones histórico-filosóficas? Yo encuentro muy bien que, quienes no estén de acuerdo con Zurbano, publiquen sus críticas, en tono y volumen tan alto como estimen conveniente, pero otra cosa muy distinta es que se tome una represalia administrativa y profesional contra una persona que da empleo a sus capacidades de pensamiento. Hasta antes del despido, teníamos un debate académico e ideológico, pendiente de algunas aclaraciones. A partir de ese punto, lo que se escucha es un mensaje alto, claro y muy, pero muy racista: ¿qué le pasa al ´negro equivocao´ este?, ¡fuera!.

The story teller, essayist, curator, and cultural critic Alberto Abreu Arcia, who is close to Zurbano, wrote a most interesting piece for his Afromodernidades blog from his home in Cardenas, a port city in Matanzas province with a very strong set of African cultures. He is sensitive to how the Havana intellectuals view the provinces where in fact the African presence is so very strong. He makes a trenchant observation of the new media aspects of this affair, something that eludes many of Zur's critics:

The author places himself in a virtual, transnational space, in one of the enclaves or power circuits not only for the flow of information, but also for the production and reproduction of meaning. And he therefore assumes all the mediations, negotiations and risks that this entails. The same Zurbano does not hide his fascination with this when, in the e-mail that he sent out to his colleagues and that I published in this blog, he notes, "they have to report to me the quantity, quality and classification of the audience reception, which I am very interested in. By Wednesday there were 12 640 comments (which it is not possible to read), but the system of classifying the reception is very interesting.

El hablante en el texto de Zurbano se sitúa en un espacio transnacional, virtual, en uno de los enclaves o circuitos centrales no sólo para la circulación de la información, sino para la producción y reproducción de sentidos. Y en consecuencia asume todas las mediaciones, negociaciones y riesgos que este hecho supone. El mismo Zurbano no esconde su fascinación por este hecho cuando en el e-mail que hizo circular entre sus colegas, y que publiqué en este blog apunta: “ellos deben reportarme la cantidad, calidad y clasificación de la recepción del texto, cosa que me interesa mucho. Hasta hoy miércoles tiene 12 640 comentarios (que no es posible leer), pero el sistema de clasificar la recepción es bien interesante.

This is taken from “For Blacks in Cuba, the Revolution Hasn’t Begun”, una lectura a partir del rumor on Alberto Abreu's Afromodernidades blog, 4/5/13. This is the blog Jiribilla had the poor taste to refer to as "un blog de muy poca visibilidad" - a blog with low visibility. Why aren't they monitoring and promoting AfroCuban new media? Cuba has no way to track the increasingly abundant and high quality production of its black scholars, writers, and cultural figures. The model of the Republic Cuba took from France simply does not allow for attention to ethnic identity and urgently needs to be tweaked.

Victor Fowler Calzada is a well known poet, writer, and researcher who has won numerous prizes including the prestigious Nicolás Guillén Poetry Prize. On 4/6/13, he wrote a piece that was published in Jiribilla, as Dolor, alegría y resistencia, which is a change in title from the original Derivas con (por, y desde) Zurbano: Dolor, alegría y resistencia. Was Jiribilla seeking to blunt its impact? In another title change? (They have since restored the correct title.) Fowler's frank and direct criticism of the way in which the AfroCuban old guard turned on their colleague Zurbano is a game changer:

From this point of view it hurts and horrifies me to think that (since this is something that could happen to anyone) one phone call  to Roberto Zurbano, author of the text and - to top it off -contributor to the same Jiribilla, would have sufficed to refine the answers. Not only did the publication not consult Zurbano to see if what appeared in the New York newspaper (in particular, the aggressive title) was true or not, but neither did those who wrote against him, some of them his colleagues in the fight against racism in Cuba today.

Since, as mentioned, this story begins with the falsification of the news (the title) and ends with the concealment of another (the note), things happen so that opposites complement each other to damage the profession of journalism with particularly destructive results: two press bodies act as cheap pamphleteers who implicitely propse that lying in pursuit of an ideological goal is the right attitude. Furthermore, to make the shame even greater, they  passed - in a matter of hours - from being Zurbano's comrades to acerbic (and even offensive) critics, without having the slightest communication between them (I think again how easy it would have been to lower the level of belligerence just by asking Zurbano if the title was really his). The intellectuals who criticized him so quickly (in a fast, nasty pack) have reduced to virtually zero the credibility of this same anti-racist struggle which they swore, with hands to the fire, to uphold, because you cannot be an ethical and unethical leader at the same time.

Desde este punto de vista duele tanto como horroriza pensar que (puesto que es algo que pudiera suceder a cualquiera) que hubiese bastado un telefonazo a Roberto Zurbano, autor del texto y –para colmo– colaborador de La Jiribilla misma, para matizar las respuestas. No sólo la publicación no consultó a Zurbano si era cierto o no lo aparecido en el periódico neoyorkino (en particular, el agresivo título), sino que tampoco lo hicieron los que escribieron en su contra, varios de ellos sus compañeros en la lucha contra el racismo en la Cuba de hoy.

Puesto que, según lo anterior, esta historia comienza con la falsificación de una noticia (la del título) y termina con la ocultación de otra (la de la nota), las cosas suceden de modo que los contrarios se complementan para dañar la profesión del periodismo con resultados particularmente destructivos: ambos órganos de prensa actúan como libelos baratos que implícitamente propone que mentir, en pos de un objetivo ideológico, es una actitud correcta. Además de ello, para que la vergüenza sea todavía mayor, al pasar –en el plazo de horas- de compañeros de lucha de Zurbano a críticos acerbos (e incluso ofensivos) sin que haya mediado la más pequeña comunicación entre ellos (vuelvo a pensar en lo sencillo que hubiese sido rebajar la beligerancia con sólo preguntar a Zurbano si el título era realmente de él), los intelectuales que con tanta presteza le criticaron (en un desagradable bloque rápido) prácticamente han reducido a cero la credibilidad de esa misma lucha antirracista que, con manos en el fuego, juran defender porque no se puede ser un líder ético y no ético a la misma vez.

On 4/10/13, London based writer, poet, and journalist Pedro Perez Sarduy wrote a piece with the catchy title, ¡Edita tú, que yo titulo! (You edit, I put in the title!) based on a song by Beny Moré "Elije tú, que canto yo".  He decries the piling on by the AfroCuban old guard, while pointing out the emergence of other voices:

In another aspect of what already transcends the purely academic debate, what caught my attention was that from the start, without having any scruples to verifying anything, some national cultural figures and other types came down on Zurbano, incriminating him in a way lacking all manners that reminds me of former times. At least there arose in time some wise and authoritative voices. And I say all this from personal reminiscences that began when I was still a boy.

En otro aspecto de lo que ya ha trascendido el debate puramente académico, lo que me llamó la atención fue que de entrada y sin ningún tipo de escrúpulo de verificación, algunos culturosos nacionales y otras especies le cayeron encima a Zurbano incriminándolo de una forma carente de modales y que me recuerdan otros tiempos. Por lo menos se levantaron a tiempo voces sensatas y con autoridad. Y esto lo digo por reminiscencias personales que comenzaron cuando todavía yo era un jovencito."

In a 4/11/13 note to Rogelio M. Díaz Moreno's post on Red Observatorio Crítico, Sandra Alvarez, a Havana Journalist well known for her wonderful blog, Negra Cubana Tiene Que Ser, pointed out that absolutely nothing happened in a more egregious case involving Rolando Rodriguez' racist book accusing the Independents of Color of being pro-Yanqui annexationists and defending the Miguel Gomez republic for executing the 1912 Massacre:

Roge, there is still Rolando Rodriguez' book on the PIC, everyone knows that it is very, very questionable (only Esteban Morales, who wrote the prologue, supports it) and nothing happened to him, it is still being sold -- why, because he is white? By a historian of the State Council. The possibility of disagreeing can not have a color. Besides it hurts people that Zurbano is precisely a black man, what would have happened if a white person had written that article? ...

Roge, por ahi anda aun el libro de Rolando Rodriguez sobre el PIC, que todo el mundo sabe que es muy muy cuestionable (solo Esteban Morales, quien hizo el prologo lo apoyo) y no pasa nada, de sigue vendiendo, por que, por blanco? por historiador del Consejo de Estado. La posibilidad de disentir no puede tener color. Ademas a la gente le duele que Zurbano sea precisamente un hombre negro, que hubiera pasado si es una persona blanca quien escribe ese articulo?…

On 4/12/13, Sandra Alvarez put out a very nice summary of articles on this topic on her blog, Negra Cubana Tiene que Ser: El “escándalo Zurbano”. Página en construcción. She added a comment we agree with wholeheartedly:

After the NYT article came out, a torrent of refutacions, some way too pedestrian and racist to be published on a Cuban cultural site, flooded the web, especially in that national publication, La Jiribilla.

Luego de la salida del mismo (el articulo del NYT), una corriente de refutaciones, algunas sumamente pedestres y racistas para ser publicadas en un sitio cultural cubano, inundó la red de redes, en especial a la publicación nacional La Jiribilla.

Also on 4/12/13, Sandra del Valle Casals, a researcher and journalist with a masters in African Studies from El Colegio de México, pointed out on an article published in Negra Cubana Tiene que Ser, Hasta que “el pueblo” siga ajeno a estos debates y pugnas entre intelectuales, el cambio seguirá lejano…

The answer to the question Zurbano poses (the future of the disenfranchised, mostly black, in the context of the economic liberalization in Cuba and the shrinking of the welfare state) has not been given. Obviously, this response belongs not only to Cuban intellectuals (who are the protagonists of this dispute), nor only to our representatives at different levels of decision-making, but it is a response that has to come from the people, and much more to that part of the population whose social mobility is impaired and worsened if there no policies are implemented to counteract the "collateral damage" of economic liberalization.

La respuesta a lo que Zurbano plantea (el futuro de los desposeídos, en su mayoría negros, en el contexto de liberalización económica en Cuba y encogimiento del estado de bienestar del país) no ha sido dada. Obviamente, esta respuesta no sólo le corresponde a los intelectuales cubanos (quienes son los grandes protagonistas de esta querella), como tampoco únicamente a nuestros representantes en los diferentes niveles de toma de decisiones; pero es una respuesta que tiene que incluir al pueblo, y mucho más a esa parte de la población cuya movilidad social quedará suspendida y empeorada si no se implementan políticas para contrarrestar los efectos “colaterales” de la liberalización económica.

 She had some further interesting remarks about passing for white in a society where that is a common occurrence, as witness the census.

On 4/13/13,  Gisela Arandia, a major figure among those in Cuba working the issues of race & identity, wrote Construcción de consensos. She ran Color Cubano for many years prior to the UNEAC decision to shut it down because dissidents were invading her regular meetings, where everyone was welcome to come in and discuss the issues. This was likely part of the long term Plantocracy plan to take over the racial issue for their own ends, a plan Alberto Jones has been reporting on in some details for years without eliciting much of a response from the Cuban government. Color Cubano was replaced by Heriberto Feraudy's Comisión de lucha Contra el Racismo y la Discriminación, which does not have any similar outreach. Gisela's voice is that of reason and a deep knowledge of the issues as she seeks to broaden the debate beyond the sensationalism that has afflicted it:

The challenge here and now should help to strengthen the consensus needed that allows racism to be be more visible in concrete objective way as the only way to find solutions within the revolutionary project. Without speculations, subterfuges and extemporaneous prescriptions - such as that hackneyed "We are all Cubans". The question is not to use as pretext the possible doubts on the progress achieved in over half a century by the project, but to transform that adverse reality which is there and demand an unprejudiced look at any person whether Cuban, foreign or from the moon.

An example of the little consensus around racial issues is that characteristic phenomenon, the denial of racism. For example, every time a black person reports an act of racial discrimination, their moral integrity is put into question, thereby trying to say that this is an approach that is outside the Revolution, even though there are clear interventions of Raul Castro on the subject, which term this a disgrace to the ideals of the project.

El desafío aquí y ahora debería contribuir a fortalecer el consenso indispensable que permita visibilizar el racismo de modo objetivo y concreto, como única alternativa para encontrarle las soluciones dentro del proyecto revolucionario. Sin especulaciones, subterfugios y recetas extemporáneas —como aquella manida de “Todos somos cubanos”—. La cuestión no es utilizar como pretexto las posibles dudas sobre los avances obtenidos en más de medio siglo por el proyecto, sino transformar esa realidad adversa que está ahí y demanda de una mirada desprejuiciada de cualquier persona cubana, extranjera o llegada de la luna.

Un ejemplo del poco consenso hacia la racialidad, es el fenómeno sintomático que se expresa en la negación del racismo. Por ejemplo, cada vez que una persona negra pretende denunciar un acto de discriminación racial, su integridad moral es puesta en tela de juicio, intentando afirmar que se trata de un enfoque que está fuera de la Revolución, incluso a pesar de las claras intervenciones de Raúl Castro con respecto al tema, quien lo calificó como una vergüenza para los ideales del proyecto.

On 4/14/13, Alberto Jones wrote another column, Ecuanimidad, cordura y visión ante el peligro de la división racial en Cuba, castigating some Cuban officials for their lack of interest in his reports on the well funded Plantocracy campaign to purchase the racial issue in Cuba:

I learned of and publicly identified some of the instigators and brokers, the resources and mechanisms that have been created in order to undermine and incite racial division in our country, with a view to re-do the slaughter of 1912 in Cuba, which is today would be multiplied a thousand times, as seen in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria ....

In repeated publications, meetings and conferences in the United States and Cuba, I have expressed my alarm at these sinister plans, where I was regularly ignored or accused of being alarmist. I bodly submitted proposals, plans and projects for the serious problems afflicting blacks, mestizos and other marginalized people in Cuba, who are the breeding ground where the siren songs of the enemy  germinate and proliferate.

Conocí e identifique públicamente a algunos de los instigadores, intermediarios, los recursos y mecanismos que se habían creado, a fin de minar e incitar la división racial en nuestro país, con miras a re-editar la masacre de 1912 en Cuba, lo que se vería multiplicado hoy miles de veces, como puede apreciarse en Afganistán, Iraq, Libia y Siria....

En repetidos medios, encuentros y reuniones en los Estados Unidos y en Cuba, he expresado mi alarma ante estos planes siniestros, donde regularmente fui ignorado o acusado de alarmista. Sometí atrevidamente propuestas, planes y proyectos, para los graves problemas que afligen a negros, mestizos y otros marginados en Cuba, que constituyen el caldo de cultivo donde germinan y proliferan los canticos de sirenas de los enemigos.

On 4/16/13, Roberto Zurbano gave his own response to critics, which is now being translated into English: Mañana será tarde: Escucho, aprendo y sigo en la pelea.

Finally, on 4/18/13, a former agent of State Security now active as a journalist in Cuba, Manuel David Orrio -- who was decorated for infiltrating dissident groups -- weighed in with Cuba: apuntes “paranoides” sobre el ¿Caso Zurbano? This is a very strong statement castigating the Cuban state media for not carrying news of this debate to the people, where it belongs. They do not have access to the Internet, their only access is through print media and television, neither of which have breathed a word of this. 

How is it possible that ONCE AGAIN  those media that have a true reach to ordinary Cubans remain silent? ONCE AGAIN we will have something like the "little war of e-mails", given the rather poor  access the average suffering Cuban has to the Internet? What, no pants or skirts to address this controversy in print media, radio, TV and in particular the Mesa Redonda program? More of the same, at the doors of the Congress of the Union of Journalists of Cuba (UPEC) with Raul Castro crying out against the "excesses of secrecy"?

¿Cómo es posible que UNA VEZ MÁS los medios de difusión de verdadero alcance para el cubano de a pie permanezcan en silencio? ¿OTRA VEZ MÁS se tendrá algo parecido a la "guerrita de los e-mails", habida cuenta del bien pobre acceso del sufrido Liborio al Internet? ¿Qué pasa, no hay pantalones o faldas para abordar esta polémica en los periódicos impresos, la radio, la TV en general y en particular su programa Mesa Redonda? ¿Más de lo mismo, a las puertas del Congreso de la Unión de Periodistas de Cuba (UPEC) y con Raúl Castro “tocando a degüello” contra los “excesos de secretismo”?

The AP and the New York Times continue to misrepresent the situation with their articles on Zurbano's change of status at Casa de las Americas. This is not a first for either organization, which work in coordination with intelligence agencies and other establishment pillars such as the Council on Foreign Relations. We can quote David Rockefeller, Honorary Chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations, speaking at the at the 1991 Baden-Baden meeting of the Bilderberg Group, in The Bilderberg Group, by Daniel Estulin, pg 92:

We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time magazine and other great publications, whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years."(He went on to explain:)'It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto determination practiced in past centuries.

As I have pointed out in Comments on "For Blacks in Cuba, the Revolution Hasn't Begun", 4/4/13, the Times's history includes their publishing a COINTELPRO type article that caused the Cuban government to deny a noted African American activist beloved of Rosa Parks, Robert F. Williams, his return visit to Cuba to see old comrades. The article said he had turned against the Cuban Revolution, a classic J Edgar Hoover dirty trick. The comrades might want to retflect on how vulnerable they have been to such cheap tactics, dancing on the end of puppet strings.

The US is a very violent country, the police carry out frequent extrajudicial executions, the murder rate is very high compared to most countries, and the incarceration rate is also very high. This violence is rooted in a history of Native American land theft, massacres, and the enslavement of kidnapped Africans, so it is not surprising to see the US elites engage in patterns that continue that history. The US carried out two major interventions in Cuba, 1898 and 1912, precisely in order to prevent AfroCubans from attaining any degree of power. In 1898, their Plantocracy allies called them in to avoid handing the country over to a victorious Mambi Army that was 85%+ black. In 1912, they supported their Plantocracy allies while they carried out a massacre of over 6,000 AfroCubans, many of them veterans of this same Mambi Army who were trying to get their fair share of the country they had liberated. As is extensively discussed on this site, the US and their Miami allies are in the midst of a campaign dating back to the early 90's to prevent AfroCubans from maintaining their independence.

-- Andy Petit