[R-G] Cuba and the liberal propaganda media

[Anthony Fenton]

Cuba and the liberal propaganda media
March 01, 2008 By Toni Solo
http://www.zcommunications.org/znet/viewArticle/16707

Cuba was ranked at 51 in the 2007 UN Human Development Index. One  
place above Mexico. You will never read that fact in corporate  
mainstream reporting on Cuba. Nor will you read that around 90% of  
those eligible voted in Cuba's recent elections. Nor will you read a  
thorough comparison between Cuba and similar countries like, say,  
Jamaica or the Dominican Republic.



The Human Development Index is a comparative measure of standard of  
living among UN member countries. In last year's Human Development  
Index, Jamaica sits at 101 and Dominican Republic at 79. Among  
Caribbean countries only the Bahamas, at 49, and Barbados, at 31, do  
better than Cuba. Among Central American countries only Costa Rica,  
at 48, does better.



Reporting on Cuba in the corporate liberal press goes to incredible  
lengths to avoid any realistic account of Cuba. Writing of the calm  
around the vote ratifying Raul Castro as President, Rory Carroll of  
the Guardian wrote on February 25th, "The dearth of suspense  
underscored the authorities' tight control over the island and its 11  
million people, many of whom hanker for relief from poverty harsher  
than that experienced in eastern Europe before the fall of the Berlin  
wall."



The comparison is hopelessly irrelevant. Living standards for the  
majority of people in all Caribbean countries except the Bahamas and  
Barbados are much worse than in Cuba and the same is true of other  
countries in the region like Honduras, Nicaragua, El Salvador or  
Guatemala. Among South American countries only Uruguay, Argentina and  
Chile rank above Cuba in the UN index. That means that Cuban society,  
despite 45 years of vicious terrorist attacks and genocidal economic  
blockade by the United States, is more successful in terms of human  
development than almost all its Caribbean neighbours and the great  
majority of Latin American countries, including economic giants like  
Mexico and Brazil or "free trade" beacons like Panama.



That very clearly means Cuba's socialist system has proven better at  
meeting people's needs than the corporate consumer capitalist system  
applied in most other countries in the Americas. The Guardian and the  
Independent are supposed to be the flagship newspapers of liberal  
opinion in British society. In fact most of their journalism on a  
range of issues, from Palestine to Haiti to Iran andAfghanistan to  
Venezuela and Cuba parrots standard NATO government propaganda. Their  
editors might splutter in response and point to trend-bucking  
journalists like Robert Fisk or Patrick Cockburn. But those  
exceptions serve as journalistic loss leaders pulling in the punters  
while routine editorial policy differs little from the downmarket  
tabloids.



If one compares the treatment of recent events in Cuba with political  
coverage of the US or Europe, the double standards are blatant. David  
Usborne wrote in the Independent, also on February 25th, "...there  
was little suspense in Havana yesterday anyway, as most people  
doubted the newly elected body would dare do anything but salute the  
legacy of Fidel by selecting his 76-year-old brother to take over.  
The only real alternative for the 614-member Assembly was to embrace  
a generational shift, choosing one of two younger loyal lieutenants  
of the regime, either the Foreign Minister, Felipe Perez Roque, who  
is 42, or the 56-year-old Vice-President, Carlos Lage."



So Usborne acknowledges that there was a real alternative but still  
manages to make it sound as though there was hardly any choice. Why  
does one never hear that logic applied to votes in the US Congress on  
Iraq or on support for Israel. For example "...there was hardly any  
tension in Congress around last night 's vote on the Middle East as  
most people knew the elected Senators would hardly dare challenge the  
pro-Israel lobby" or "almost no one expected any problems for the  
vote on military spending because few politicians would dare  
challenge the defence industry".



Usborne quotes a US State Department statement from Condoleezza Rice.  
""We urge the Cuban government to begin a process of peaceful,  
democratic change by releasing all political prisoners, respecting  
human rights, and creating a clear pathway towards free and fair  
elections,"she said." But Usbourne might equally well have checked  
out the internet to find quotes from important regional politicians.  
Lula de Silva, President of Brazil, quoted in an Agence France Press  
wire of February 19th "The leader insisted that he was "happy that  
everything has been going on quite calmly....what we feared was that,  
in an adverse situation, a turbulent process might have ocurred and  
that the Cubans in Miami might have considered it the moment to  
return to Cuba and turn the island into a zone of conflict.""



The Mexican government stated its intention "to continue progress in  
a process of bilateral rapprochement begun some months ago" following  
a diplomatic row between Cuba and Mexico's former President, Vicente  
Fox. The Organization of American States Secretary General José  
Miguel Insulza remarked "whatever change may come about should come  
about from peaceful and democratic dialogue by Cubans and in no case  
be moved by external efforts." The Jamaican government information  
service wrote that the country's right-wing President Bruce Golding  
"hailed President Castro for his steadfastness, courage, strength of  
his leadership and his unswerving commitment to the cause of the  
Cuban people."



The point of noting these responses is that by quoting the by now  
almost irrelevant Rice, Usborne prioritizes a completely skewed  
Americanist view of Cuba. Most other governments in the Americas,  
unlike the United States government , tend to be more ready to  
recognize the vulnerability of their own contradictions. If one looks  
at the United States one can quickly note the grotesque litany of  
human rights abuses prevalent there, from its racist criminal justice  
system, to the Guantanamo base torture cells, to "war on terror"  
denial of due process, to mass violation of privacy, the no-fly  
lists,  CIA rendition-to-torture flights, denial of basic rights to  
tens of thousands of people from New Orleans, political prisoners  
like Leonard Peltier and Mumia Abu Jamal...the list goes on and on.



The US authorities are notorious for having jailed 5 Cuban anti- 
terrorists who gave the FBI information about terrorists based in the  
US. The Cuban government reckons over 3000 Cubans have been killed by  
terror attacks originating from the United States. One wonders what  
would happen to US dissidents who were found to be taking money from  
a hostile foreign power responsible for terrorist attacks on the US  
people. In Cuba such individuals are tried and jailed. Cuba's  
internal security arrangements have always resembled those employed  
by the United States and European Union governments when faced with  
terrorist threats.



Such arrangements carry similar likelihood of abuse and human rights  
violations. One has only to think of the long war in Ireland, or the  
Spanish government's security measures against ETA to find ready  
comparisons, let alone the current wholesale violation of basic  
rights experienced in the United States. In the UK, the DA notice  
self-censorship system polices media compliance with the official  
government line. Currently, the UK government is censoring ex-soldier  
Ben Griffin's attempts to denounce UK collusion in torture in  
Afghanistan.



By prioritizing US views and failing to note other perspectives on  
Cuba, Usborne and his editors deliberately imply that Rice's view is  
somehow more important than those of other government's in the  
region. In reality, US prestige in Latin America and the Caribbean  
has never been lower. Condoleezza Rice and her Bush regime colleagues  
have presided over that. Quoting Rice's remarks and no one else's is  
lazy and presumptuous - pretty much what one expects from Western  
Bloc corporate media, liberal or otherwise.



Presumption and laziness similarly characterize Phil Davison's piece  
in the Independent by-lined February 24th. Davison writes, "a  
Democrat as US president, particularly if it is Barack Obama, might  
go a long way to hauling Cuba out of its time warp and turning it  
into what some predict could be the commercial and tourism hub of the  
Carib-bean." How about, "a Democrat as US president, particularly if  
they were suddenly develop a moral conscience, might go a long way to  
hauling Colombia out of its time warp, promoting a peaceful  
settlement of its 50 year old war, funding compensation to 3.7  
million people internally displaced by conflict and encouraging the  
government to sever ties with narcotics dealing paramilitary  
terrorists who claim to control 35% of the country's legislators."



But you will never read that in the Independent or the Guardian  
because no US President is ever likely to cut off support to their  
narco-terror paramilitary proxies in Colombia. The UK liberal Press  
are little more than megaphones for smug, self-serving Western Bloc  
propaganda. Here's another one from Davison, on what Raul Castro  
might do as President, "If elected, the chances are strong that he  
will ease the stranglehold. That could sharply increase Cuba's annual  
GDP per head of $3,000 (£1,500) and average wage of $10 a month." In  
fact, an information centre like Michigan State University's  
International Business Centre reckons that in 2006 GDP per head in  
Cuba was US$4000 while in Honduras and Nicaragua it was US$3100, in  
Jamaica US$4,600, in El Salvador US$4,900.



Davison can point out that tourist-economy countries like Dominican  
Republic and Belize have far higher per capita GDPs. But how then  
does he explain their dreadful Human Development rankings compared to  
Cuba? Both Dominican Republic and Belize in 2006  had GDP per capita  
of US$8400. But in the HDI, Dominican Republic is ranked 79, 28  
places below Cuba, while Belize is ranked 80.  These contradictory  
figures point to the Latin American and Caribbean region's  
fundamental economic problem : overwhelming poverty resulting from  
gross inequality in income distribution.



The basic anti-Cuban moves in Western Bloc consumer capitalist media  
propaganda outlets like the Guardian and the Independent are these:



     * shun comparing like with like - make out it's legitimate to  
measure Cuba's economy against first world standards
     * be careful to mention the embargo but only in passing and omit  
mention of its genocidal intent and effects
     * minimize Cuba's unprecedented international humanitarian  
contributions in health and education
     *  try never to  note Cuba's world-beating scientific, sporting  
and cultural achievements
     * avoid mentioning the US government's support for terrorism  
against Cuba, keep quiet about CIA terror bomber Luis Posada Carriles
     * quote Cuba's enemies, play down its worldwide support from  
governments of all ideologies
     * discount the Non-Aligned Movement and Cuba's prestigious place  
within it
     * write out of Americanist assumptions - the only government  
whose opinions are worth anything on Cuba is the United States
     * keep human rights issues out of context and omit comparison  
with other countries in Latin America, especially Colombia
     * never mention that Cuba sits above US NAFTA partner Mexico in  
the Human Development Index
     * play down and/or disparage Cuba's participatory democratic system
     * never compare Cuba's disaster prevention systems with the  
United States' and never mention Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans or  
its sequel



One doesn't have to write a praise piece about Fidel Castro or Cuban  
socialism to recognize Cuba's unprecedented achievements against the  
most vicious aggression possible short of outright military assault.  
One may have reservations, for example, about Cuban government  
willingness to promote its citrus sector with help from retired  
Israeli government gangsters or to welcome State visits by cruel,  
greedy dictators like President Obiang of Equatorial Guinea. Or one  
might wonder why Cuba's housing shortage seems to be as intractable  
as the one in Spain. But to find out what kind of well informed  
criticism may be legitimate to make of the Cuban government or Cuban  
society, among the last places one should go looking is in Western  
Bloc liberal corporate media like the Guardian and the Independent.



toni solo ia based in Central America - articles archived at http:// 
toni.tortillaconsal.com