FSL
9th January 2010, 00:10
Today I would like to introduce as a guest blogger Laritza Diversent, a young woman who has been blogging for some time but only recently has had her blog, Laritza's Laws (http://leyesdelaritzaen.wordpress.com/), translated into English. Laritza graduated from Law School at the University of Havana in 2007, and works as a lawyer and independent journalist. With other attorneys she has formed the Cuban Legal Association to educate Cubans about their legal rights under the country's Constitution and body of laws.
These are words of the famous cuban blogger, Yoanni Sanchez, who has been honoured with awards for her brave work reporting on the realities of the cuban prison.
This other blogger, Laritza Diversent, is also a part of the vibrant segment of cuban opposition, people who are young, educated, socially active and know little fear! Some of her work is given below because it just seemed too good not to share.
Part of the exile community demonstrated that it is not the same as it was 50 years ago. These exiles are renovated and are ready to struggle for their country in an intelligent way, without playing the game of the Cuban government.
The Cubans in Miami have grown smart. Information on whether they stopped being scum is not given. Supporting the embargo and voting republicans is their very original way of struggling for their country.
Isolated Cuba realized that her exiled sister feels for her. A message of love which brought goose bumps or tears to many. It also showed us that we can and must talk. But afterwards, hug each other.
Hugs are always nice. No complains here.
It is true, actual Cuban youth do not have the drive of Venezuelan youth who combat Hugo Chávez
Don't rush into judgements, she's not talking about the anarchist youth that might oppose Chavez. She's talking about those that support the neoliberal opposition. Her concept of driven youth.
The baby was laid out in the city mortuary. At the nearest florist he wanted to order a wreath to say goodbye to the little angel, from himself and his cousins. The employee, without any sensitivity, asked him who had died. He didn’t understand, thinking she wanted to know more about who she had been and described the little girl. He imagined, that for a baby of one, they would make a beautiful floral arrangement.
How wrong he was! The insensitive woman looked at a list of the dead to see which families had ordered wreaths. Because two wreaths and no more are authorized for every death, and the baby had already received the two to which she was entitled.
Caught between astonishment and indignation, I asked if this had really happened. He told me yes. But the story did not end there.
He protested and the assistant just replied, “This is what is directed.” After much pleading, the woman told him that if no one else died before four in the morning, he could order a wreath. In gratitude, he gave her some money which she happily accepted.
I thought that was the end of the sad story. Almost at his stop me, already at the door, the stranger told me, “But that’s not the only thing that happened.” They placed the baby in a coffin half a meter longer than her size.The indignation of the mother was such that she loudly called for an independent journalist to report the lack of respect...
...But I also wondered: How far does the rationing system go in this country?
This is a sad story indeed, if only because it's about a little girl that died. But it is used in such a shameless way it's offensive. The real tragedy here isn't that the kid died, but that the state gives a certain amount of free flowers for each funeral and that there wasn't a baby-sized coffin readily available.
According to Article 68 of the Constitution, “the organs of the state are integrated and develop their activity on the basis of a socialist democracy…” The precept establishes rules that introduce elements of the republican system: “All representative organs of state power are elected and may be replaced;… those elected must be held accountable for their actions and can be removed from office at any time;…”
However, the same article contains clauses that nullify the possibility of limits on power, or checks and balances, typical of the tripartite principle. This reinforces the basis for a system of subordination, that leads to the centralization of power: “…the decisions of the highest state organs are binding for the lower organs of power; …the lower state organs answer to the superior, and are accountable to them;…”
Which is the superior organ of representation that is at the top of this pyramidal organization? The National Assembly, which is the supreme organ of State power and which establishes that the State Council is the representative of the National Assembly between sessions.
What’s more, the Council of State is the supreme representative of the Cuban State, by national and international law. But the Constitution, in regulating its powers, doesn’t distinguish between those who act for the State and those who act in the name of the National Assembly (parliament). In practice, it gives the Council of State legal power to act with great freedom.
This double representation translates into a formal, true concession of power in favor of this branch. That is to say, the Council of State doesn’t speak just for the Parliament, but rather for the entire nation. However, it’s not accountable to the electorate, because it hasn’t been elected by the people and doesn’t depend on their decision. The National Assembly elects, among officials, the members of the Council of State.
In Cuba there is no President of the Republic, but there is a Chief of State and Government, which is the President of the Council of State and the Cabinet, a government post characteristic of republican systems. Nevertheless, popular elections are not held to elect the highest state office.
Universal suffrage is founded in the idea that the people live under an elected government, that they are guaranteed the option of choosing their leaders and that the governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed.
If citizens do not directly elect the leader who governs them, how can they hold him accountable for his actions in governing them, if they are not those who placed him in a position of power. How can they revoke a mandate that they didn’t give?
This actually if a very good article to demostrate why must we support Cuba. People go on and on about the ruthless dictatorship that is in place.
According to this dissident, the problems are found in not having a clear seperation of powers (communists are by default against that and I'd say that even anarchist councils would debate and decide simultaneously) and in not directly electing the head of the state, but instead having him elected by the parliament.
Seriously, these are the problems?
Cuban society is run by different committees: the Committee for the Defense of the Revolution, the Young Communists Union, the University Students Federation, etc. What seems to many a multi-faceted system, is for us, just pure control. All these groups create unnecessary interferences in the private life of the individual.
Just a nice touch. Participation in the workers' councils in Cuba (the Committees for the Defense of the Revolution) intereferes with the individual's life. As a matter of fact all these committees do. What a disgrace organizing in collective bodies.
She goes on to say that there are people "taking notes" on whether you unionize or participate in local meetings to "evaluate" you as a citizen. Fun stuff, if only there was a law stating that anyone who scores low (maybe for being an idiot who thinks popular councils are "unnecessary interferences in the private life"), would need to work overtime or earn less or generally be punished in some, any, form. I don't see how it's fair to have the individual leeching off of everyone else's struggle and efforts in improving life. Maybe that law would be harsh though and I'd only like it because I'm pretty pissed of at this point.
Anyway, the thing is that disiddents here are (mostly anyway) university educated, market-supporting bloggers. So the next time someone complains about being "harassed", rejoice in knowing that in some place on this earth it's not workers who are opressed but people like this.
These are words of the famous cuban blogger, Yoanni Sanchez, who has been honoured with awards for her brave work reporting on the realities of the cuban prison.
This other blogger, Laritza Diversent, is also a part of the vibrant segment of cuban opposition, people who are young, educated, socially active and know little fear! Some of her work is given below because it just seemed too good not to share.
Part of the exile community demonstrated that it is not the same as it was 50 years ago. These exiles are renovated and are ready to struggle for their country in an intelligent way, without playing the game of the Cuban government.
The Cubans in Miami have grown smart. Information on whether they stopped being scum is not given. Supporting the embargo and voting republicans is their very original way of struggling for their country.
Isolated Cuba realized that her exiled sister feels for her. A message of love which brought goose bumps or tears to many. It also showed us that we can and must talk. But afterwards, hug each other.
Hugs are always nice. No complains here.
It is true, actual Cuban youth do not have the drive of Venezuelan youth who combat Hugo Chávez
Don't rush into judgements, she's not talking about the anarchist youth that might oppose Chavez. She's talking about those that support the neoliberal opposition. Her concept of driven youth.
The baby was laid out in the city mortuary. At the nearest florist he wanted to order a wreath to say goodbye to the little angel, from himself and his cousins. The employee, without any sensitivity, asked him who had died. He didn’t understand, thinking she wanted to know more about who she had been and described the little girl. He imagined, that for a baby of one, they would make a beautiful floral arrangement.
How wrong he was! The insensitive woman looked at a list of the dead to see which families had ordered wreaths. Because two wreaths and no more are authorized for every death, and the baby had already received the two to which she was entitled.
Caught between astonishment and indignation, I asked if this had really happened. He told me yes. But the story did not end there.
He protested and the assistant just replied, “This is what is directed.” After much pleading, the woman told him that if no one else died before four in the morning, he could order a wreath. In gratitude, he gave her some money which she happily accepted.
I thought that was the end of the sad story. Almost at his stop me, already at the door, the stranger told me, “But that’s not the only thing that happened.” They placed the baby in a coffin half a meter longer than her size.The indignation of the mother was such that she loudly called for an independent journalist to report the lack of respect...
...But I also wondered: How far does the rationing system go in this country?
This is a sad story indeed, if only because it's about a little girl that died. But it is used in such a shameless way it's offensive. The real tragedy here isn't that the kid died, but that the state gives a certain amount of free flowers for each funeral and that there wasn't a baby-sized coffin readily available.
According to Article 68 of the Constitution, “the organs of the state are integrated and develop their activity on the basis of a socialist democracy…” The precept establishes rules that introduce elements of the republican system: “All representative organs of state power are elected and may be replaced;… those elected must be held accountable for their actions and can be removed from office at any time;…”
However, the same article contains clauses that nullify the possibility of limits on power, or checks and balances, typical of the tripartite principle. This reinforces the basis for a system of subordination, that leads to the centralization of power: “…the decisions of the highest state organs are binding for the lower organs of power; …the lower state organs answer to the superior, and are accountable to them;…”
Which is the superior organ of representation that is at the top of this pyramidal organization? The National Assembly, which is the supreme organ of State power and which establishes that the State Council is the representative of the National Assembly between sessions.
What’s more, the Council of State is the supreme representative of the Cuban State, by national and international law. But the Constitution, in regulating its powers, doesn’t distinguish between those who act for the State and those who act in the name of the National Assembly (parliament). In practice, it gives the Council of State legal power to act with great freedom.
This double representation translates into a formal, true concession of power in favor of this branch. That is to say, the Council of State doesn’t speak just for the Parliament, but rather for the entire nation. However, it’s not accountable to the electorate, because it hasn’t been elected by the people and doesn’t depend on their decision. The National Assembly elects, among officials, the members of the Council of State.
In Cuba there is no President of the Republic, but there is a Chief of State and Government, which is the President of the Council of State and the Cabinet, a government post characteristic of republican systems. Nevertheless, popular elections are not held to elect the highest state office.
Universal suffrage is founded in the idea that the people live under an elected government, that they are guaranteed the option of choosing their leaders and that the governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed.
If citizens do not directly elect the leader who governs them, how can they hold him accountable for his actions in governing them, if they are not those who placed him in a position of power. How can they revoke a mandate that they didn’t give?
This actually if a very good article to demostrate why must we support Cuba. People go on and on about the ruthless dictatorship that is in place.
According to this dissident, the problems are found in not having a clear seperation of powers (communists are by default against that and I'd say that even anarchist councils would debate and decide simultaneously) and in not directly electing the head of the state, but instead having him elected by the parliament.
Seriously, these are the problems?
Cuban society is run by different committees: the Committee for the Defense of the Revolution, the Young Communists Union, the University Students Federation, etc. What seems to many a multi-faceted system, is for us, just pure control. All these groups create unnecessary interferences in the private life of the individual.
Just a nice touch. Participation in the workers' councils in Cuba (the Committees for the Defense of the Revolution) intereferes with the individual's life. As a matter of fact all these committees do. What a disgrace organizing in collective bodies.
She goes on to say that there are people "taking notes" on whether you unionize or participate in local meetings to "evaluate" you as a citizen. Fun stuff, if only there was a law stating that anyone who scores low (maybe for being an idiot who thinks popular councils are "unnecessary interferences in the private life"), would need to work overtime or earn less or generally be punished in some, any, form. I don't see how it's fair to have the individual leeching off of everyone else's struggle and efforts in improving life. Maybe that law would be harsh though and I'd only like it because I'm pretty pissed of at this point.
Anyway, the thing is that disiddents here are (mostly anyway) university educated, market-supporting bloggers. So the next time someone complains about being "harassed", rejoice in knowing that in some place on this earth it's not workers who are opressed but people like this.