Claiming the figure of Martí is fundamental in the training of new generations.
HAVANA, Cuba. – Castro’s propaganda strives to adapt History to its interests, with the malicious intention that the past legitimizes the current state of affairs on the Island. And in that context the figure of José Martí takes on capital importance. The Cuban rulers and their organic intellectuality do everything possible to exalt what suits them about Martí’s ideology, and instead omit Martí’s preaching that would condemn Castro’s totalitarianism.
In addition to the official press and media, the regime has a group of specialized entities with a view to delving into Martí’s thought, among them the National Office of the Martí Program, the Center for Martí Studies, the José Cultural Society
Martí, the Martiana Forge and the Youth Circles of Martí Studies.
However, there are multiple features of Martí’s ideology that define the Apostle as a liberal and a lover of democracy, and that so much Castroist verbiage around his figure is incapable of expressing. In this article we will refer to three of these features.
Martí’s civilist conception always opposed the revolution being led by a militarist leadership that enthroned caudillismo or tyranny, to the detriment of individual freedoms. For this reason, Martí rejected the materialization of the Gómez-Maceo plan in 1884, which sought, in order to avoid civil interference in the independence struggle, the formation of a Republic in Arms with full control of the military. On that occasion, Martí’s response to the plans of Máximo Gómez and Antonio Maceo transcended: “A republic is not founded like a camp is ordered.”
Very recurrent has been the desire of the current Cuban rulers to credit the Communist Party of Cuba with the status of heir of the Cuban Revolutionary Party founded by the Apostle to lead the feat of 1895.
Castroism alleges that Martí created a party to lead the revolution, and with this they try to link him with the single party that today subjugates Cuban society. But it is overlooked that a person can only create one party, without this meaning that the existence of other parties is prevented once the Republic is founded.
And most importantly, Castroism never goes to the Bases of Martí’s Party. There, in its article 5, it is perfectly established that the party did not have the objective of enslaving Cuban society, and that once independence was achieved, the homeland would be handed over to all Cubans. Of course, there was nothing in Martí’s party group that compared it to Marxist parties.
He Montecristi Manifestothat document written by Martí shortly before entering Cuba to fight his last battle, also shows points of view that do not please the current rulers of the Island, for example, that paragraph in which it is expressed: “From its roots the homeland must be constituted with viable forms, and born of their own, so that a government without reality or sanction does not lead to partiality or tyranny.”
On the other hand, at the end of the Manifest The temporary nature of the party is emphasized, that is, not to govern a nation, but to conduct a war effort: “The Cuban Revolutionary Party, created to order and assist the current war.”
Obviously, we should not waste this opportunity that a new anniversary of the birth of our National Hero provides us to put things in their place, and highlight the democratic bias of Martí’s thought, of course contrary to the Castro regime’s way of governing.
Thus, among other things, we will avoid the hatred with which some regard Martí, arbitrarily branded as Fidel Castro of being the intellectual author of the disaster that Cuba is suffering today.
