======================================================================
Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
======================================================================



From the Dissident Voice via the Minnesota Cuba Committee (Minnesota Cuba 
Committee [mnc...@minnesotacubacommittee.org]) The Elected Delegate and the 
Dissident in Cuba’s Municipal Elections

http://dissidentvoice.org/2010/05/the-elected-delegate-and-the-dissident-in-cuba%E2%80%99s-municipal-elections/

by Arnold August / May 22nd, 2010

The municipal elections have come to a close on May 19 with the constitution
of the Municipal Assemblies and the election by the delegates of the presidents
and vice-presidents from amongst the newly elected delegates. 


Prior to this last step, thousands of neighbourhood nomination meetings took
place between February 24 and March 24 in all 169 Municipalities across the
island. From among those nominated by the citizens, a secret universal suffrage
ballot election took place on April 25 to elect the 15,093 delegates for all
municipalities from among the more than 45,000 nominated directly by the
citizens. On that Sunday a candidate, from a minimum of two to a maximum of
eight nominees in each constituency (riding or ward), would have to garner at
least 50% of the valid votes in order to be elected. 


A second round took place on May 2 in those constituencies which none of the
candidates garnered at least 50% of the valid votes. In these cases, the two
candidates getting the most votes advanced in a run-off second round. In cases
where there was a tie vote between two candidates, these two candidates also
advanced to the second round. This is a normal situation and takes place in all
of the fourteen municipal elections which have been organized since 1976.
(There occurred one unusual instance this year in which a candidate passed away
just prior to the April 25 elections and so a new nomination meeting had to
took place after April 25; the electors in this constituency thus went to the
polls for the first time on May 2.) For all these reasons, a total of 14% of
the constituencies (2,107) had to go into a second round on May 2. 


In these elections on May 2, three constituencies ended up in a tie among
the two candidates who went into the second round, and so a third round took
place on May 5 in which a winner finally emerged in all three, completing this
phase of the municipal partial elections; this set the stage for the
constitution of the municipal assemblies on May 19. 


Elected were 15,093 delegates 16 years and older (minimum age requirement to
vote and to be elected at the municipal level.) Aside from a very small portion
(for example the president and vice-president of the Municipal Assemblies, and
some presidents and vice presidents of the People’s Councils), all delegates do
their work as an elected citizen on a voluntary basis, with no pay or
remuneration of any kind while maintaining their regular job. In the
exceptional cases in which some delegates become full time as indicated above,
they will receive the same wage as they had been receiving in their work place,
not a cent more. For the overwhelming proportion that is non-professional,
their work as a delegate takes place in the main after work hours and on the
weekend. 


One of the most intriguing aspects of investigating the Cuban electoral
process and Cuba’s type of democracy is finding out in detail the history of
the elected and what they do in their political, professional and personal
life. This captivating feature of research applies not only to the municipal
delegates but also for example to the elected deputies in the National Assembly
of People’s Power (parliament). While several deputies are well known
throughout Cuba and internationally, the vast majority are not as is the case
of virtually all the municipal delegates (who according to the Cuban
Constitution constitute up to 50% of the national legislature). Even the most
well know national legislative deputies (such as Fidel Castro, Raúl Castro,
Ricardo Alarcón and others) who are known nationally and internationally,
outside of Cuba their real main characteristics, features and historical
evolution are in the main kept from the international public eye or completely
distorted to the point of these political leaders being victims of defamation
of character. 


Cubans in the main know their elected local municipal delegates because they
are neighbours and are used to seeing each other almost every day or at least
quite often. However, as a result of the media disinformation and black-out,
for people outside of Cuba in general the local elected delegate remains a
mystery: A blank page. Instead of foreign journalists providing non-Cubans with
some portraits of who are the 15,093 elected citizens with several examples,
neither exaggerating the positive points nor highlighting only negative
experience, there seems to be an effort by the international mass media to hide
this feature of the Cuban political system from international public opinion.
As a result of the failure to carry out this serious journalistic work, these
elected delegates, human beings like you and I, are eliminated from
international public knowledge. This is more often than not carried out by
using catch phrases such as “branding” them as being members of the Partido
Comunista de Cuba (PCC) or the Communist youth wing of the party. The intention
is clear: to present their nomination and election as being conditioned by
their party affiliation which is far from being the reality. 


In addition, there are many people nominated and eventually elected to the
municipal assemblies who are not members of the party or of its youth wing.
Just to take one example: I know personally of one who is not a member of the
party but in all the elections for which he was nominated and later elected
during 25 years, all the other candidates were indeed members of party. This
person, who lives in Plaza de la Revolución Municipality of the Province of
Ciudad de la Habana, has been nominated and then elected as a Municipal
delegate for almost 25 years; he was also a provincial delegate for 8 years and
served as a president of a people’s council for 5 years. In fact, after the
April 25 municipal elections, the total results for the 15 municipal assemblies
in the province of Ciudad de La Habana, indicate that only 56 % of the elected
delegates are party members, in itself showing that it is not obligatory to be
a party member in order to be nominated and eventually win the approval in
secret ballot elections.1 


In this context it was quite disappointing to read an article by Fernando
Ravsberg, BBC Mundo journalist stationed in Havana for many years. The
article is entitled “Cuban
dissidents in an electoral campaign.” The main focus of the March 13
article, as the title suggests, is the role of a dissident who decided to
participate in the local nomination procedure in constituency number 47 of the
Punta Brava Consejo Popular located in the Municipality of La Lisa, one of the
15 municipalities to be found in the Province of Ciudad de La Habana. 


The article seems to be written in such a way as to provide a false
atmosphere of repression and fear exercised against those who do not agree with
the revolution but who participate in elections in one way or another. For
example, Mr. Ravsberg writes that the local nomination meeting was calmly
taking place with no signs of “repression”. The journalist opens the door for a
qualification when he refers to this single policeman present as a sign of
“repressive” forces, even though he writes that the policeman was diverting
traffic so as to avoid interference in the nomination meeting; these meetings
very often take place outdoors and normally spill into parts of the street.
(Would the Bobbies in London directing traffic be tagged as being part of the
“repressive forces” by BBC Mundo?) 


However, even this “moderate” indication of the absence of signs of
“repression” is negated in the very same article when the journalist quotes the
dissident. The word of the dissident is once again taken as a truth when the 
journalist
allows the dissident to contradict the writer’s own observation, namely that
there was only one policeman in the area. The article in question then
indicates that the dissident claimed that there are in fact “more policemen in
the area,” but “they are not in view,” once again taking the dissident’s word
as a fact. In the same manner, while the article admits that the situation at
the nomination area meeting was calm with no apparent pressures, the same
dispatch records, according to the claims of the dissident, that in other
nomination assemblies there were indeed pressures exercised against dissidents,
but with no facts to back it up. And once again this unsubstantiated allegation
comes from the mouth of the dissident and is presented as a truth in the
article. 


I have attended dozens of nomination meetings and secret ballot voting at
the local level and the national general elections level in 1997-98, 2000 and
2007-08. All these steps in the political process are carried out in the utmost
calm; there are no signs of police or anything else of this nature.
Investigation has also shown that those who call themselves dissidents can
participate in elections in any way they see fit within the context of the laws
as all other Cuban citizens who have their rights. There are probably very few
countries in the world where voting nomination days and voting days are so
calm. Of course we cannot compare nomination meetings because in no other
county in the world aside from Cuba do citizens have the legal right to propose
directly from among their own neighbours who they believe should be candidates
for elections and to propose themselves. The false accusations of “repression,”
“forcing people to vote,” etc are often simply used as a pretext to avoid
exposing the very poor showing of the dissidents in the nomination procedure
when they choose to participate. 


Mr. Ravsberg, pays utmost attention to the dissident, Silvio Benítez, and
his electoral campaign, as if he was the center of Cuban politics on that day
(and perhaps with this goal in mind, presents him as the most newsworthy
element in the municipal elections). What did he write about the citizen who
eventually was nominated and then voted by her neighbours to be a candidate for
the April 25 municipal elections? All he had to say is that she is a member of
the PCC, a doctor, and on the staff of a regional public health enterprise. In
fact, the whole article is written as if the nomination by a show of hands vote
was between the “PCC candidate” versus the “dissident.” 


In the Cuban electoral system, the PCC and its youth wing cannot propose nor
nominate people for elections; only individual citizens have this right. In
order to add to the fabricated image of the PCC controlling everything to the
detriment of the citizen’s rights, contrary to what is stipulated in the Cuban
Constitution and Electoral law, Mr. Ravsberg’s comments objectively serves to
denigrate the following important notion: sovereignty resides in the hands of
the people even though the Cubans at all levels always strive to improve this
aspect which is not perfect. 


By so doing, the journalist misinforms the readers on this issue, whether
this is his intention or not. 


In the same vein, the article claims that one elderly person (therefore,
according to the preconceived notion, a veteran die-hard revolutionary) spoke
against the dissident with the goal of barring him from being nominated. 


On April 30, 2010, I interviewed the “other nominee” who had been elected as
a delegate on April 25.2 The interview with Dr. Daysi Victores took
place in Havana on a pleasant Friday afternoon, in the very modest office of
the Consejo Popular Punta Brava, in the presence of the equally modest
president of the Consejo Popular of Punta Brava Armando Nelson Padrón Alfaro
and Juanita Mejías Carbonnell, Secretary of this consejo popular. This
grass-roots consejo is one of the seven consejos populares
within the Municipality of La Lisa; like all other municipalities in Cuba they
are decentralized in this way in order to, among other reasons, more
efficiently strive to solve local problems and provide more power to the
elected delegate. This goal is still on the agenda to be improved, as the
Cubans themselves assert. 





Dr. Daysi Victores, now 66 years old and retired, was born in Camagüey into
a very poor family. Her father was a worker and her mother a housewife. The
couple had four children. In 1961 Daysi went to eastern Cuba as part of the
literacy campaign carried out by the new revolutionary government. Upon her
return to her native Camagüey, she then went to school in Havana with a
scholarship, eventually taking up medicine in the capital. Her three brothers 
and
sisters were also able to study and take up various professions as have done
Daysi’s own children. She declared that “becoming a doctor would not have been
possible for a daughter of a very humble family if it was not for the
revolution.” She eventually stayed in Havana. During her career as a doctor,
aside from practicing at the local level as a family doctor, given her talents
and devotion, she also took up various responsibilities over the years. In 1974
for example she was the director of the polyclinic in Punta Brava and later in
other health centers such as in Arroyo Arenas. In fact, she was sent as a
trouble-shooter to several polyclinics in order to help solve problems in these
places. She was later Vice Directress of Medications in the La Lisa Municipality
from which she retired. Amongst her other accomplishment: she was in Ethiopia
as part of an internationalist mission in 1981 as a health professional. 


Daysi was elected as a delegate on April 25, 2010 for her fourth mandate.
Given that each municipal mandate is for two and half years, this means that
she has already served over seven and a half years as a delegate before this
year’s elections. All municipal assemblies are divided into a series of
permanent working commissions in which each delegate participates on an ongoing
basis. In the last mandate she was President of the Permanent Working
Commission responsible for Health and Hygiene in her municipality. (All these
commissions and their participants have to be renewed once the municipal 
assemblies
had been established on May 19.) Daysi is a member of the PCC since 1980,
nominated and elected that way by her fellow workers at her place of work, that
is, the Medication enterprise where she worked. PCC membership in Cuba is based
on selection in the places of work or study, and not on the neighbourhood where
people live. 


Daysi, and the two officers of the consejo popular present in the
interview were proud to point out the achievements of the local people’s power,
at the same time mentioning the limitations in what they would like to
accomplish. In order to solve problems, or at least attempt to do so, each
local delegates works collectively with other delegates and the consejo
popular and its president. They also collaborate with the corresponding
governmental administrative entity, a process which in turn strengthens the
work of the municipal assemblies, the most important state and government
organs in the municipalities. Among the improvements brought about: improving
availability of drinking water in collaboration with the governmental
enterprise Aguas Habana responsible for this necessity, the complete renovation
of the sewer system and water supply for the population, lighting system for
the public, renovations of the funeral parlour, bank and post office, complete
renewal of the children’s park, improvements in polyclinic services as well as
recreation and sport activities for the youth. 


The interview turned out to be a balanced account as they also pointed out
shortcomings. For example, “it is true that there is much to be accomplished,
we have important problems in restaurant services, even though these services
have improved.” In another instance they point out that while they are striving
to construct a small shopping center with a butcher shop and other convenience
stores, “however the economic situation imposes limits.” 


Hopefully readers are beginning to see through the anonymous presentation by
the mass international media regarding elected people in Cuba; these media
simplify the whole issue by branding them as communists as if this was the kiss
of death. 


Given this situation, on the basis of an impartial look, it should be
evident to appreciate something very important. While there are many
accomplishments, Cuba is passing through the current situation when there
exists a somewhat fertile ground for opportunists to play on, given the fact
that as mentioned above, there are still shortcomings and goals to accomplish
in order to satisfy the demands of the population. This was something that was
not ignored by the dissident in his electoral campaign. 


What happened on March 11, 2010, at the nomination meeting which Mr.
Ravsberg describes in his article, and the two previous assemblies held on
March 4 and March 8 in which the dissident was not involved and which was not a
subject of an article? 


The BBC Mundo article admits that the dissidents were in an
electoral campaign, presenting candidates in various constituencies, even
though it is well known that campaigning is not legal in Cuba. However, the
journalist even quotes the dissident Silvio who says that his campaign work is
based on “going from house to house as do the Jehova Witnesses.” According to
the interviewees in Punta Brava, Silvio was an employee in some places of work,
but was dismissed from his jobs. After this, they say, he started to work as a
dissident. They say that while he does not work, he lives very well. Regarding
his electoral campaign for the March 11 nomination meeting; what did it consist
of? According to the interviewees, there are a certain amount of people in the
constituency who have alcoholic addiction problems and in some cases linked
with that, economic issues. Alcoholism, although not as widespread as most
other countries, definitely exists as a problem in Cuba. Silvio approaches
these people who are desperately in need of money to support their habit and
secondly and/or are in many cases quite void of political awareness. The
interviewees claim that the dissident pays them to come out and vote for him in
the nomination areas. 


This is not hard to believe seeing as that the US State Department recently
released figures of how the 20$ million of USAID is being spent in Cuba in
order to subvert the constitutional order through their paid agents. The funds
are distributed covertly so as not to expose the recipients. To provide just
two examples: of the 20$ million, 750,000$ is designated to promote “human
rights and democracy” in Cuba, and another 400,000$ to try and “identify local
leaders” who can later carry on activities at the local level.3 Almost all of 
the categories of financial
help can apply to someone like Silvio and his political party who are
presenting candidates. 


But demagogy goes along with the use of funds in Cuba. According to the Mr.
Ravsberg’s report, Silvio intends to expose the “lies and manipulation of the
government.” However, in the nomination area meeting, he apparently spoke in
the name of Raúl Castro and the necessity to bring about changes! After the
meeting and voting took place, when it had became more evident what had
happened, some citizens approached the Constituency Electoral Commission and
told them that they were sorry they voted for Silvio because they did not see
through the manipulation. As the Secretary of the Consejo Popular, Juana Mejías
said, “He proposed himself because he considered himself to have the condition
to respond to the people’s needs taking into account the words of Raúl. In this
way, he really manipulated the notion of changes to which we aspire and to
which aspires Comrade Raúl Castro. These changes are positive changes to
improve the economic life in the country, but for more socialism and more
democracy.” 


Furthermore, it is not true to say, as the reporter claims, that an elderly
person spoke in favour of the “communist” candidate. The interviewees said that
in fact three people spoke in her favour: one was a representative of the
association veteran fighters, to which Mr. Ravsberg disparagingly referred to
as an elderly person. The two others who spoke in favour of Daysi were not
elderly. In addition, it is not true that their intervention was geared to veto
Silvio’s right to nomination. Even though he nominated himself which is his
right, all the interviewees said that it is his constitutional right to present
himself. 


Furthermore, the interviewees confirmed that no one who proposed Daysi did
it on the basis that she is a member of the PCC. All the arguments in favour of
Daysi as a nominee were based on her record in the neighbourhood. 


In all the nomination meetings that I attended over the last 12 years or so,
no one was ever presented as a candidate of the party, nor was any one opposed
as a potential candidate because the person was not a member of the party. I
had witnessed several occasions in which non-party members won a nomination and
eventually the secret ballot voting for delegate. These and other examples
flesh out the statistics for the 15 municipalities in Havana as indicated
above, namely that only 56 % of the elected delegates are party members. 


Admittedly, the issue of the party’s role in the society, the political
system and within that the electoral process is very complicated; it is thus
beyond the focus of this short article and will be dealt with in another work. 


However, let us look at another important aspect. What is the dissident’s
standing in the neighbourhood? Daysi claimed in the interview that this citizen
never participates in any meeting, or political and recreation activity.
Armando Nelson Padrón, the president of the consejo popular, added that Silvio
is a person “who does not work, he has never done anything for his neighbours
or any other citizen in this town. He never moved even one grain of sand to
improve the life of this population. It is for this reason that he has no
following in the nomination assembly and this is why people did not vote for
him in as a candidate.” 


In the Ravsberg article, the whole tone of the journalism and the figures
provided give the impression that the dissidents won a victory. It says that
the dissident got 14 votes while the “Communist Party Candidate” got 50 votes
and that there were many abstentions. (Abstentions are not called for or
counted in these meetings; citizens are asked to vote in favour or against each
nominee and can vote for only one of the proposals. The show of hands votes are
counted after each proposal and the one who gets the most votes is declared to
be a nominee from that assembly.) 


In the case of constituency # 47 in Punta Brava, there were two other
nomination meetings. Upon request, figures were provided to me by the Electoral
Commission of the La Lisa Municipality.4 While it is true that many of the 
electors
present did not vote for one or the other (Daysi or Silvio), the official count
shows that Daysi got 71 votes and Silvio 13 votes. 


Before going on to the official results in the other two nomination
assemblies, let us examine these results even if it is in a summary fashion.
Silvio had all the advantages. First, he participated in a campaign which is
not only illegal in Cuba, but goes against the political culture since 1959.
Daysi did not campaign thus following the electoral procedures. This was the
case in all other elections which I have followed, showing widespread adherence
to the Cuban people’s ethics. Second, Silvio used funds to buy votes. Third,
since Daysi does not live in the area comprised in the March 11 assembly, she
did not attend, while Silvio lives there amongst his closest neighbours and did
attend. She therefore could only count on others to propose and speak for her,
while Silvio was supposedly in his element. Fourth, the general tendency in
Cuban municipal elections is not to mechanically or automatically vote for
those delegates who have completed a mandate. For example, every year since
1976, speaking in average approximate figures, less than 50% of the incumbents
are re-elected. There are several reasons for this phenomenon at the level of
nomination even before elections take place: for example, the incumbents decide
not to run again; or they have recently moved or about to move from the
constituency and therefore no longer eligible; or the citizens were not
satisfied with the delegate thus no one nominated the incumbent; finally, even
if an incumbent is proposed as a nominee by a citizen, the proposed person does
not win the majority of votes for the nomination in any of assemblies. 


Despite this unlevel playing field in favour of Silvio, Daysi got 71 votes
against 13 for Silvio. And as mentioned above, several of these 13 regretted
their vote because at the time they did not see though the demagogy used by the
dissident (speaking in the name of Raúl and changes.) The dissident campaign
can back-fire because the Cuban people do not like petty politics and the use
of funds, a phenomenon characteristic of the neo-colonial republic under US
domination and which the Cubans left behind them with the revolution. 


It should be noted that Silvio self-proclaimed himself president of his
Liberal party of Cuba even though this is not legal, yet he has not been
arrested or tried. He seems to have complete freedom to carry out his
activities including proposing himself in a nomination meeting! 


What is even more telling, are the nomination assembly results in the other
two nomination area meetings in Constituency # 47:


March 4. The only nominee, Jorge Luis Pérez, who is not a dissident, got 60
votes. Daysi was not nominated and so Jorge Luis won as that area’s choice
after a show of hands vote in his favour.


March 8. Of the 170 participants in this area in which she lives, Daysi got
all 170 votes, 100%. 


The two nominees for elections were thus Daysi and Jorge Luis. And so why
all the fuss about the 13 votes for Silvio? 


What about the elections that took place on April 25, according to the
figures provided by the Municipal Election Commission? Mr. Ravsberg continued
with a follow-up article on the April 25 island-wide voting for candidates who
were earlier nominated.5 


In this article he once again places quite a lot of emphasis on the
dissidents in the form of a) the Damas de Blanco and b) Silvio and his
neighbourhood. He reports on polling station # 1 which was the only one
reported by Mr. Ravsberg. He writes that there were 14 spoiled ballots and 39
blank ones, and adding together the ones who do did not vote, concludes that
this represents 20% of the electorate in this neighbourhood, more than in
previous elections. According to the electoral commission figures, Daysi
received 118 votes versus 110 for Jorge Luis. In polling station # 2, a total
94.7 % of the citizens on the electoral list voted. Daysi got 145 and Jorge
Luis 144. There were 12 (3.6%) blank ballots and 21 (6.3%) spoiled ballots. 


The total for the entire constituency comprising the two polling stations:
Daysi got 273 votes and Jorge Luis got 254. There were 22 blank (3.67%) and 60
spoiled (10%) ballots, once again higher than the national average. (In another
article, I deal with the Municipal election results, especially the speculation
by the foreign press on the issue of blank and spoiled ballots.6 ) 


However, just some questions: what is the significance of Silvio’s 13 votes
in the nomination area meeting which lead to his defeat in comparison to the
nomination victories of both candidates, Daysi and Jorge Luis, and the large
number of votes for both of them in the actual elections on April 25? Daysi’s
showing is quite good taking into account that on a national level only a bit
less than 50% of those who were already delegates in the previous mandate were
voted in on April 25, a tendency which follows the voting trends over the 
years.7 


In order to get at the heart of the issue, I met with Fernando Ravsberg on
May 2 in Havana. We did not know each other. It was quite a pleasant informal
discussion even though we disagreed on the facts and analysis of the Cuban
political system and its form of democracy. It is true, as even some Cuban
journalists say that he is not as bad as many other accredited foreign
correspondents on the island. 


In the conversation, one theme repeated itself over and over again. As Mr.
Ravsberg’s articles quoted here indicate, he perceives many key political
issues on the island as a conspiracy of the PCC, using it as a euphemism for
“control” and “repression”, pitting the PCC and the historical leaders of the
revolution against the people. 


What impacted me as well is the following: when I asked Mr. Ravsberg if he
had attended the May 1 demonstration the previous day in Havana in order to
report on it, he responded “No”. When I asked why, he answered that he does not
consider this event to be a news story because there are lots of May 1
demonstrations all over the world, for example in Venezuela. At the same time,
he said that he attended the Damas de Blanco activity earlier that day (May 2)
in order to report on it.8 


What struck me most about the two interviews, the April 30 one in Punta
Brava and May 2 in Mr. Ravsberg’s home, are the following two points:


What hit me was the complete lack of respect exhibited on the part of Mr.
Ravsberg for people such as elected delegate Daysi, for the reasons indicated
above and his disdain towards the tens of thousands of Cuban women who formed
an impressive block on May 1in Havana as well as being interspersed throughout
the demonstrations in Havana and across the island comprising millions of
people. 


Why do I believe this indicates denigration? For the simple reason that for
months on end including May 1 and May 2, virtually all of his focus is on the
Damas de Blanco. His refusal to cover May 1 in any way, shape or form while
covering every move and expression of the Damas de Blanca on May 2 to the
exclusion of millions of Cuban women is an indication of disdain. In a similar
manner, every word and unfounded accusation by the dissident Silvio regarding
the nomination area assembly is reported with the utmost respect while the
candidate and eventual elected delegate, Daysi, remains faceless for the
readers. 


Mr. Ravsberg could have interviewed Daysi later on or even easier yet,
conversed with at least some of the electors in the nomination area meeting in
order to get some ideas about the candidate Daysi in order to inform readers.
According to the interviewees, he did not even speak to any of them which would
have allowed international public opinion to know who these elected delegates
are in Cuba; instead he apparently concocted a smokescreen of “communist
candidate versus the dissident” coupled with all sorts of fabricated
accusations of “repression.” 


For those opposing the media war against Cuba, this is a serious problem in
journalism: the very selective choice of what is reported on and what is not.
The same applies to other countries or leaders who are demonized such as Hugo
Chávez and Venezuela. 


The current media campaign against Cuba lead by the right-wing in Europe and
the USA is to use the “dissidents,” an irrelevant factor in Cuban politics as
we have seen above. However, their presence on the island is amplified to the
extreme by much of the monopoly media, Washington and Brussels. The goal is to
discredit Cuba and its political system, to build a case against Cuba’s type of
democracy by calling it repressive or totalitarian or a dictatorship. All this
is geared to serve as a pretext for further foreign intervention in the
internal affairs of Cuba. Lines are being drawn in the international public
opinion on this issue. 


It is not a question of appointing an accusing figure against any one of the
monopoly media or a specific journalist, but rather contributing to a debate on
this issue. 



 Jose
     Hernández S., “Tomarán
     posesión de sus cargos el 19 de mayo delegados electos,” Tribuna
     de la Habana, 9 May 2010. [↩]
 Dr.
     Daysi Victores, recorded interview with the author, Havana, April 30,
     2010. [↩]
 “United
     States Department of State Congressional Notification.” [↩]
 Comisión
     Electoral del Municipio La Lisa, communicated to author on May 11, 2010. 
[↩]
 Fernando
     Ravsberg, “Cubanos
     votaron, no se esperan cambios,” BBC Mundo, 26 April 2010. [↩]
 Arnold
     August, “Cuba’s
     Municipal Elections Results: Initial Notes,” Cuba-L Analysis,
     18 May 2010. [↩]
 Susana
     Lee, “Mas de 5 000 mujeres integraran las Asambleas Municipales del Poder
     Popular,” Granma, 11 May 2010. [↩]
 Fernando
     Ravsberg, “Cuba:
     Damas de Blanco sin incidentes,” BBC Mundo, 2 May 2010. [↩]


Arnold August is a Montreal-based author/journalist/lecturer
and Cuba specialist. His first book was Democracy in Cuba and the 1997-98
Elections (English, 1999). His upcoming book is Cuba: Participatory
Democracy and Elections in the 21st Century (English, Spanish, French,
fall 2010). He can be reached at: arnoldaug...@hotmail.com.
Read other articles by
Arnold.




-- 

For more information about the Minnesota Cuba Committee and meeting times: 
www.minnesotacubacommittee.org



Join us on Facebook!

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Minnesota-Cuba-Committee/145275107760



Send us a reply email with "unsubscribe" in the subject line if you
have been added to this list in error or would like to unsubscribe. Send us a
reply email with "change" in the subject line if you would like to
switch to our lower volume list containing only items that are particularly 
newsworthy
or of local interest.
Manuel
 


                                          
________________________________________________
Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to