IDENTIDADES 1 ENGLISH IDENTIDADES 6 ENGLISH | Page 36

the conversation on race to the
confrontation with the United States.
Guanche argued his rejection of the
conversation on “Afro-Cuban” identity
in the journal Espacio Laical,10 because
he considers it harmful, from a cultural
and ideological point of view. He
believes the use of the terms “Afrodescendant” or “Afro-Cuban” as a
strategy for cultural and ideological
subversion against the cultural identity
of the Cuban nation by Afro-descendant
organizations in the U.S. deployed
through scholarships and events to
which Cuban Afro-descendants are
invited. García Ronda argued in Espacio
Laical 10 that a key problem for all
Cubans is that we’re poor, which is an
accurate view of the socio-economic
development of Cuban families. Thus,
he believes, that the demands made by
Afro-descendants do not make any
particular sense,11 a focus makes
invisible the inequalities, difference and
diversity that, when seen in terms of
race, become class and income
inequalities, and reinforce them. De la
Hoz, who is a member of the UNEAC
Executive Board, rejects any plurality in
the discussion inside and outside Cuba,
and considers it ideologically ‘spurious’:
‘Those both outside and inside Cuba try
to find fissures that will lead to the
nation’s disintegration; the subject of
raciality has become popular lately, for
those with malicious interests.12 With
regard to the State, he also rejects any
discursive
or
organizational
independence on the part of Afrodescendant activists or organizations. He

sees them as an assault on “national
unity” and intentional, perverse attempts
to break this “unity” from an ideological
point of view. Morales agrees with De la
Hoz, and also suspects anti-racist
activists who are against the regime as
part of a “U.S. conspiracy”: “Another
important issue is that the subject [of
raciality] became part of the “internal
subversion” platform promoted and
financed by the U.S. government a long
time ago. Recently, some representatives
of this movement have softened their
rhetoric, which brings it closer to our
positions. So, the criticism these
individuals offer regarding the race issue
in Cuba are not very different from ours:
the idea that the race issue in Cuba
would be resolved by a regime change,
according to them, is no longer present
in their political rhetoric. This may be
because of the potential changes that
may come about in the U.S.’s policy
towards Cuba, or because they have
realized that the solution they propose is
too
unpopular.”13
The
Aponte
Commission has the following to say
about this: “We do not agree with some
Cubans who seek a supposed solution to
this delicate topic through political play,
especially because history has shown us
for quite some time now that the
country’s problems must be solved by
Cubans, themselves, and not by serving
the island up to international capital,
particularly to U.S. capital.”14 Thus,
proposals for organizational autonomy
and
specific
demands
regarding
representation and affirmative action are
understood as “a political game” against

36