Last week’s New York Times Magazine cover story detailed the grim reality that is contemporary Cuban life and chronicled the near half century of the Cold War atavism that is the United States-Cuba relationship.
One comment seemed particularly cogent – and ironic.
Among those in officialdom that writer Roger Cohen interviewed was Elena Alvarez, a spokesperson for the Ministry of Economics. She was asked if it were still worth persevering with a two-generation revolution that has left Cuba with “dilapidated buildings, deserted highways and a need to import sugar?”
“The revolution has been a success,” responded Alvarez. “It overthrew a tyrannical regime. We got our national sovereignty. We got our pride. We survived aggression by the most powerful country in the world for 50 years. We preserved the essence of what Fidel fought for.”
Yeah, but about that crumbling infrastructure, subsistence lives and an economic model only North Korea could admire?
Upon further reflection, her spin-doctoring seemed the perfect — and ironic — complement to the perverse rationalization we hear from the usual suspects about the “success” of the Cuban embargo.