Miguel Díaz-Canel, President of Cuba (a vibrant Caribbean nation surrounded on all sides by water but not democracy), has put it bluntly: “Freedom of expression in the revolution will continue to exist restricted by the revolution’s right to exist . Everything within the revolution; nothing outside of the revolution.”
Given the precarious situation of freedom of expression, media and journalism in Cuba, the message is self-explanatory and reflects the uneasiness of the revolutions by accepting critical voices. On the left, when power is elusive, one of its basic pillars is characterized by the right to protest and question, but once in power it favors choirs and the habit of openly dismissing anyone who steps outside the score.
The concerns of the dissatisfied citizen, the warnings of the trade unions, the concerns of the business world, the academy’s calls for attention, the yellow lights of all kinds of non-governmental organizations and the information or opinions recorded by the media, all is nothing. Because “The Change” has the skin of a newborn baby, irritated by any word or concept that doesn’t fit its vision.
There’s no cream worth it. The bubbles are dramatic and only subside when the voices are silenced or self-censorship comes into play. It seems that dialogue, discussion and debate only work well when the left is in opposition. A cascade of episodes confirms that those in power on the left are tending to practice a new model of opposition: to oppose harshly and with veiled threats to those troubled by their actions.
It’s worth noting that the same thing happens with the right, for the extremes are beautiful mirrors, but it’s repulsive that those who wave the banners of the value of protest end up trampling on them. There is no need to look into distant history to confirm that the pattern repeats itself.
There is the example of former Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa, with his cunning organic communications law, his legal and economic aggression, and his intimidating reactions to journalists who dedicated an open letter to him at the time: “For nine years, Rafael Correa’s government has had freedom of the press in Ecuador badly damaged. It has prosecuted dissenters, it has prosecuted media and journalists, it has insulted and stigmatized those who practice journalism or simply express critical thoughts, it has enforced a system of pre-censorship by imposing content, it has installed publicity officials as instrument of reward and punishment cancels access to information”.
Newsletter
Current affairs analysis and the best stories from Colombia, delivered to your inbox every week
GET THE
There are the nefarious maneuvers of Daniel Ortega and his wife, the official fortune teller, to dismiss any dissonant note from the opposition or public opinion. Ortega, firmly entrenched in power to uphold his “democratic” proposal, has no problem imprisoning those who dare remind him that he has evolved from revolutionary to tyrant. A tyrant who runs over his former comrades.
There is, to name just one of many cases, Nicolás Maduro’s anger at the persecuted, run over, censored and dispossessed newspaper El Nacional. Because Maduro can only be praised. Nor should we talk about that sinister, rabid dog that Diosdado Cabello has become, unable to move a hair and ignoring the “God” given by his name by his parents in the baptismal font.
All are predestined to bring the truth into their words and to punish those who, in their opinion, are only lying and expressing disagreements. Because the truth is one, and it is that of change. The rest is ñola, boñiga, cagajón.
The message is clear: reinforce the offensive narrative that journalism works to defend corporations. You have to put aside direct contact with people; the people deserve to approach the truth, and the truth is only in the ruler’s language. For no other reason, the analyst León Valencia, who has always been able to express his opinion in the media, calls for the rapid introduction of “a government communication strategy for democratic balance”.
The generous examples we have suffered in the region compel us to deal fully with the proposed media laws related to “democratization”. These and many other issues related to the freedom of expression that every Colombian has and the minimum conditions that must be guaranteed for the journalistic profession must be discussed openly. Or we will reach the stage where reporting and commenting is on the agenda of the Department of Agriculture with a weed eradication plan.
Subscribe here to the EL PAÍS newsletter on Colombia and receive all the important information about current events in the country.