The Meeting with Fidel: a Gift from God, Says D’Escoto

[roody]

This is from Granma. I don't see any copyright information, so here it is in its entirety.

http://www.granma.co.cu/english/news/art0020.html

September 5th, 2009

Father D’Escoto, President of the UN General Assembly, affirmed on Friday that his meeting with Fidel Castro was a gift from God and assessed the physical and spiritual condition of the Cuban Revolution leader as excellent.

It’s a book of combat, written through the eyes of a man of faith. On these pages we find his concern for poverty, for those who cry and Suffer, for those who have nothng to eat, for those who thirst for love And justice, pointed out Eusebio Leal, director of the havana city historian office, while presenting the book by Miguel d’ Escoto.

During a special round table aired on Cuban radio and television, the Nicaraguan diplomat considered that "God listened to the prayers of all revolutionaries in the world", while making reference to the recovery of the leader of the island’s revolutionary process, with whom he met for almost three hours on Wednesday.

We’ll have Fidel for a while, said D’Escoto, who expressed his gratitude for the Order of Solidarity received from the Cuban State in recognition of his struggle in the Sandinista Revolution and his international activity, particularly the work carried out this year while heading the UN National Assembly.

A priest, an intellectual, a journalist, a diplomat and an ideologist of the fairest causes, D’Escoto carried out a five-day working visit to Cuba, one month before the end of his work as the head of the UN General Assembly (October 3), a task, he said, "he assumed in defense of the poor".

So, far, I’ve been the oldest person to take on that post, in spite of my delicate health condition, but I did it on behalf of the poor of the world, for which Fidel is an example to us all, he stressed.

He ratified his commitment to his faith, and expressed that the capitalist ideology is the most serious adversary in history against the message of Jesus Christ.

The capitalist ideology tells you "the greater you are the more you can have", while Jesus said that the greater you are the bigger your heart in order to be able to give more, he said, and called for a move from the logic of ‘I and Mine’ to that of ‘We and Ours’, which he said is the one used in Cuba and of which Fidel is the driving force.

The former Nicaraguan Foreign Minister participated in a panel, in which his fellow countryman, political analyst and writer Roberto Regalado, and Argentinean journalist Stella Calloni also spoke. Likewise, Regalado and Calloni were present in the launching in Havana of Miguel D’Escoto’s book Antiimperialismo y no violencia (Anti-imperialism and Non-violence). (AIN)

[Judi Lynn]

1. So glad he met with him! Wonderful comments by UN President D’Escoto.

Fidel Castro must be getting his health back if he is capable of visiting 3 hours with people again!

Thanks, roody.

[Peace Patriot]

2. Words to live by...

"He ratified his commitment to his faith, and expressed that the capitalist ideology is the most serious adversary in history against the message of Jesus Christ.

"'The capitalist ideology tells you 'the greater you are the more you can have', while Jesus said that the greater you are the bigger your heart in order to be able to give more, he said, and called for a move from the logic of ‘I and Mine’ to that of ‘We and Ours’, which he said is the one used in Cuba and of which Fidel is the driving force."

-----------------------

What a strange "Alice in Wonderland" world our corpo/fascist media creates, in which Christianity ("love thy neighbor") has somehow become equated with killing Arabs and Persians and Afghanis, and hating them, and hating gays and liberals and "illegal immigrants" and brown people and black people, and re-shackling women, and being the world's biggest consumer pigs and polluters, and not wanting the poor to have health care, and taking no responsibility for your "brother," and always, always favoring the filthy rich and the war profiteers, and on and on. It's almost as if the corpo/fascist media set out to slime Christianity.

I mean, there have always been some people who called themselves 'Christians' who are warped--greedy, vicious, stupid, sadistic--but that is true of any category of people. It is not particularly characteristic of Christians. It was certainly exacerbated when the Roman Catholic Church ruled the western world, and became such a corrupt powermonger. The upper clergy of the Catholic Church have never quite gotten over that thirst for power. And some truly evil things have been done in the name of "Christianity"--by Protestants as well as Catholics. But, a) that is true of every major religion (except maybe Buddhaism) and every major political ideology as well (democracy, capitalism, communism, monarchism), and b) the great majority of religious people just want to be good, ethical, responsible people, and don't commit atrocities, and are not intolerant, and have common desires for peace and social justice.

For instance, there were numerous religious groups and individual clergy in the U.S. who vocally, publicly condemned the war on Iraq. In fact, it was overwhelming. But they were ignored! They by far represented the majority. They were given no air time. Their views were blackholed by the warmongering media, while the slimebags of the "Christian right" were given a Big Trumpet, to promulgate their insane views way out of proportion to their numbers. And that is still happening--while the much more prevalent views--like those of Father D’Escoto--get no press.

I don't agree with his near canonization for sainthood of Fidel Castro. I find it interesting--and I wonder if there is going to be a controversial "deathbed conversion," as, say, happened with King Charles II. Charles, too, was a most interesting man in every way (a lover of women and entertainment; re-opened the theatres in London after the long Cromwellian drought; founded the Royal Science Society; hated the vicious religious wars of his time, tried to stay out of it; a great wit, a smart man; secretly drawn to the pomp and mystery of Catholicism; converted on his death bed)--but he was a king, after all. As a democrat, I don't approve of monarchy in any form, although I can appreciate individuals in their historical context. And Fidel Castro is, in my opinion, a monarch. He is of course not called that. But that is what he is--the sacred glue that holds the Cuban Revolution together--and an increasingly benevolent monarch, as he has grown older, and a very smart man, indeed. But appreciating what he has done, and who he has become, is not the same as canonizing him, or in any way bowing to "nobility." The nobility of the few is bunk. We are all born noble. And hopefully we will die that way. "O Nobly Born," says the Tibetan Book of the Dead, "Open your eyes."

[roody]

3. Your insightful comments always shed light. Thanks.

[Billy Burnett]

4. PP, could you point out the "near canonization for sainthood of Fidel Castro" in the article?

I must be too busy genuflecting to see it. ;)

[Peace Patriot]

5. His visit with Castro was a "gift from God." Castro's policy is Jesus-like.

Maybe I'm just uncomfortable with the man's frame of reference. But it struck me as reverential toward Castro, as if he were a saint, not a pragmatic, shrewd, smart, popular, progressive machiavellian. (Note: I mean the real Machiavelli, not the myth--advocate of securalism, admired by Thomas Jefferson.) I DO see the Catholic Liberation Theology in this amazing leftist democracy movement in Latin America, and I know that Castro has been influential in this movement, but I would stress what I see as the more remarkable aspect of Castro's influence--his support for democratic change--over the religious connection. The "old Castro" supported armed revolution--not just in Cuba, but around the world. The "new Castro" tells the FARC to put down their arms, it's a new day. Very practical guy, Castro. (--cuz the FARC is being used to get up a US war against Venezuela and Ecuador).

Jesus didn't carry a gun--ever--not even when the powers-that-be came for him and killed him. Total pacifism. (And that, of course, is the weird irony of the 'Christian Right'--"kill a commie for Christ"--or an Arab or a Persian.) Castro may be religious, deep in his soul. And sharing (communism) rather than hoarding (capitalism) may well be closer to what Jesus taught--in theory, anyway--but if you have to force the rich at gunpoint, and by killing them, to share what they have, it is not Christianity.

My read on Castro is that he has mellowed with age--is not the young warrior he once was--that he has seen the strategic error of armed revolution against a vastly superior armed force, that he has recognized "bourgeois" democracy as a far superior avenue for empowerment of the poor (no blood on their hands), but that he has meanwhile assumed the role of "benevolent monarch" in Cuban society--out of necessity, not particularly out of inclination--in which he has gradually permitted Cuba to become more liberal and democratic. Our corpo/fascist 'news' monopolies "personalize" their demons, and ignore the majority of people who actually make revolutions, so I don't want to over-stress this "monarch" thing. I think the Cuban people made their revolution--as have Venezuelans, Bolivians, Ecuadorans, Argentinians and others--and that Cubans have largely consented to be governed by Castro. But he has become much more like a monarch--like Queen Elizabeth (but more powerful), the sacred representative of the land, the figure of unity, the object of ritual and mystery--than like a president, and more like a monarch, certainly, than like a saint. Saints (true saints) do not defend themselves with arms. They do not put people in jail. They do not head up governments. They are not presidents or monarchs, nor something in between. Gandhi was a saint. Castro is not--he is a pragmatic politician. He has ideals and principles, but his notion of how to implement them is like that of other politicians and public officials, through government imposition, with whatever level of consent is required by current circumstances.

I would agree that it is very difficult to judge Castro through the thick fog of propaganda that we are subjected to here. So I am reaching--trying to see around the propaganda, trying to find a model that I understand, that Castro fits. And, I guess because of this, I am sensitive to others' characterization of him. I notice their referential models (D'Escoto reaches for "Jesus"). Nothing fits Castro very well. Both he and the Cuban revolution are rather unique--they have made their own rules. "Monarch" occurred to me because our corpo/fascists are so hypocritically obsessed with judging Cuba on their own absolutely hypocritical definition of "democracy." I toyed with distinguishing between "political democracy" and "economic democracy," as a way to understand the Cuban revolution. But that doesn't exactly help in understanding Castro himself, and his function in the Cuban government and in Cuban (and Latin American) society. A revered "elder statesman"? Not exactly--more than that. A saint? A president? A citizen-an equal? A Pythagorean-Platonist (philosopher-king)? Nothing fits very well. "Benevolent monarch" resolves my struggles with the accusation that he is not "democratic." Of course he is not "democratic"! That is not what the Cuban revolution required him to be! It required him to be a monarch--by general consent of the revolutionary people!

Stalin let this need for order in a revolutionary people go to his insane head. Castro did not. He does not suffer Stalin's psychosis. But he did, and does, assume the mantle of order (sacred authority), that is, the mantle of a monarch. Why should anyone obey Castro's orders or care what he says? Our foaming-at-the-mouth Reich replies, "Because he is a dictator." People are forced to do so. But, from everything I can see, that is not true. I don't believe that Castro has been elected (even if there have been votes). But something else has occurred, to achieve general consent to his leadership. What is it? It's more like fealty to a sacred monarch than like anything else. And Castro has achieved this without nuclear weapons (which is how our presidency became monarchical). He is the agreed upon king of Cuba.

Anyway, that's me--how I've tried to understand Cuba, and its rather amazing survival as a communist revolution, and its relationship to the democratic revolution that has occurred, recently, in other Latin American countries. These democrats-with-a-small-d (Chavez, Morales, Correa, the Kirchners, da Silva and many others, and the people who have elected them) treat Castro just in this way, as a revered "benevolent monarch." They have rejected both armed revolution and the forced imposition of economic equality, and have taken their chances as elected leaders, and have done more to further the success of democracy in this hemisphere than all of our leaders put together going back four decades and more. Yet they take pilgrimages to Cuba, to visit their....fellow president? Their equal? Their democratic ideal? Their "saint"? Their favorite "dictator"? Nope, they take pilgrimages to Cuba to visit Cuba's philosopher king!

[Billy Burnett]

6. Understood.

Thanks for the detailed post.

-

Aside: I seem to remember Mika posting, several times, an official list of all of the candidates who won nominations and ran in the last election that Fidel participated in (2003 I think) in the district os Santiago (Castro's district) opposing him.

I know Mika has been in Cuba during an entire election cycle. I have been there during the candidate nominations and campaigns.

[Peace Patriot]

7. It would not surprise me to find out that Cuba is actually democratic--so brainwashed

are we. But my general impression is that it is not--or at least not democratic in ways that I understand, nor with regard to the main leader, Castro (and now his brother). I've tried to keep up, but I really have very little information about this (elections in Cuba). It's my understanding that there ARE fairly genuine elections at levels below Castro, but anti-revolution candidacies and political speech are not allowed, and that Castro is in a special category, whether people vote for him or not. There is really no chance of anyone else winning.

And Fidel and Raul have permitted a general loosening up, or liberalisation, aimed at more democracy, but still very cautious as to counter-revolutionary sabotage or takeover (which we can be sure the US has long been plotting, along with the Batista inheritors in Miami). I understand the reasons for fear in Cuba (fear of the CIA). I'm not judging Cuba up or down on this. I'm just saying what my impression is--and my impression may be distorted by the filters through which we get information here.

[Mika]

8. Here.

PP, Cuba is democratic. I was living in Cuba during an entire election cycle. The candidate nominations are so community participatory Americans would be astounded. If you want, I could detail my experiences and observations relating to this - later.
I started this thread at the end of last year to consolidate some information on Cuba trying to dispel the myth and hysteria seen often here - including the Santiago candidate list Billy mentioned.
Some of my own experiences in Cuba too.
Didn't take long for the usual crowd (the good and the demented) to start in, so there is some sifting to do.

Cuba: Before and After the 1959 Revolution
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=4653650#4653673

[Peace Patriot]

9. Thanks so much, Mika!

I can't read it right now. I'm pressed for time, and won't get back to DU until Saturday. But I will bookmark it, and thoroughly review it then. Again, muchas gracias!

[Peace Patriot]

10. Read the whole thread, "Cuba: Before and after the 1959 Revolution." Wow!

I'm beginning to understand the intensity of the hatred for Cuba among our corpo/fascist politicians, press and global corporate predators and war profiteers, as well as their avid goal that the people of the U.S. never get to learn anything about Cuba that is real or fair--just their non-stop brainwashing and propaganda. They REALLY don't want us to know about Cuba's accomplishments--nor that these are the accomplishments of the Cuban people of their own will! A country under draconian economic sanctions by the U.S. has achieved some of the highest levels of health care and education in the world! Other accomplishments include a community and family-oriented (rehab-oriented) prison system, and--not mentioned in the thread--far better environmental and agricultural policy than most countries. And these achievements are simply not possible on a tiny island, with no "empire" to support it (like the Soviets had) by tyrannical means. It has to have occurred as the will of the people. And, given the starting points--as you point out (the pre-Revolution conditions of stark poverty and illiteracy)--that is amazing.

I'm also beginning to understand why I have thought of Cuba as undemocratic. It is a quite different political system than ours or other western democracies. It is, in truth, in a hundred ways cleaner and more direct--but it still has this thing--this "force" or guiding hand--behind it, which I have compared to monarchy (Castro as the sacred glue that holds the country together). This "guiding hand" can be good or bad. In a strong monarchy, it is the monarch, whose benevolence or lack of it determines what happens. In a weak monarchy, it's the monarch and the governing elite, sometimes including democratic elements. Here, it is the richest among us, but, lately, that has come to include Saudi princes and Chinese debt-holders, and transnational corporations with loyalty to no one. The "guiding hand" is predatory capitalism. In the better capitalist democracies--France, Germany, Sweden, Norway--there is a better balance of capitalism and democracy, with strong socialist elements, and more "sovereignty of the people." The "guiding hands" have become more diffuse--no one person, or bloodline or oligarchy, and no predatory capitalist cabal, determines what happens. Labor unions, civic groups, grass roots groups and ordinary citizens have more power. Most of Latin America is following this model--the European model--with varying degrees of socialism (a lot in Venezuela, less in Brazil and Chile--although they are strongly allied as to the goal of social justice, and other goals). And Cuba?

I still say the "guiding hand" is Castro, who is more like a monarch than a president. He has been necessary to the continuity of the state--much like a king. In countries that suffered true tyrannies, like Stalinist Russia, the tyrant formed the psychotic delusion that he was necessary to the continuity of the state, and the horrors of a bad monarch followed. But no such horrors have followed in Cuba, despite Castro's special role. In other words, in Cuba, the situation itself required a monarch-like figure, and the Cuban people have been generally content with this, rather than Castro--out of egotism and insanity--crowning himself as "king."

And the members of the Communist Party might also answer, as to "guiding hand." As you pointed out, that is the description of the Communist Party in the Cuban Constitution. And it is quite interesting that no political party--including the Communist Party--can nominate or advocate for particular candidates for public office. This makes the CP, as "guiding hand," more removed from direct power than the CP was in Russia. It is more of an advocate of ideas and a persuader than other CPs have been--which, in Russia, for instance, became a tyrannical "central committee" not unlike our tyrannical corporate cabals, deciding things outside of the realm of public debate and inaccessible to ordinary citizens.

But, probably, in Cuba, both things are true: Castro has a king-like quality (the glue), and Communist Party members provide the "hands" of "guiding hands." They generate ideas and analysis of problems along communist lines, and attend to the practical aspects of governing. And I really don't know to what extent labor groups, civic groups, grass roots groups and ordinary citizens, who are not members of the CP, hold significant power over what happens (as in the European model). They can run for office; they can be elected--but I don't know if someone could run for office, say, advocating the joys of privatising the health care system. They would probably be laughed out of Cuba--but, say, they were clever liars and actually had some persuasive ability? Would they be permitted to win an election?

What I'm seeing is a system that is much more creative and adaptable than the ones that developed in Soviet Russia and in China, but not exactly a democracy, if democracy means that clever liars can get elected....

:rofl:

Well, I will end this response. Thank you for CONSIDERABLE food for thought! Really! I knew some of this about Cuba, but have never seen it all laid out, as you do in the "Before and After' thread, and I had not read any detailed description of how Cubans are organized politically and how they make decisions. Looking at our own sorry democracy, I see that we must stop using "democracy" as a generic term--as if we even remembered what it was--and start looking at facts and reality.

[Mika]

12. Castro is one smart cookie. So were/are the original revolutionaries and their students.

I've long believed that decades ago Castro chose to become the lightning rod as a distraction for the detractors of Cuba's emerging socialist system - and who better as a lightning rod and spokesperson for the Revolution than Castro. But it isn't his revolution. The real heavy lifting was done by the workers, union organizers, educators, etc etc. After the wealthy oligarchs picked up with Cuba's wealth in 59 shit needed to be built and therefore skilled workers, form laborers to Drs needed to be trained to build up a new infrastructure for the entire country, for all Cubans. While the west was busy demonizing Castro, Cubans were busy as bees. They now have the social stats, based on an equitable system, to bear this out.

How many times have I said this here.. Castro didn't do it. The Cuban people did it!


edit: Get this book..

Democracy in Cuba and the 1997-98 Elections
Arnold August
1999
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0968508405/qid=1053879619/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/102-8821757-1670550?v=glance&s=books




Viva Cuba y Venezuela!

---

[Downwinder]

11. Don't clean it up too much, where do you find the straight-men? n/t