Helms-Burton does not believe in new entrepreneurs
- Details
- Published: Thursday, 13 June 2019 08:34
- Hits: 90
Photo: GranmaHavana, June 13.- The so-called entrepreneurs were presented by the official policy of the previous administration of President Barack Obama as actors of the gradual changes towards the restitution of capitalism on the island, although in the Helms-Burton Act, fundamental housing of the blocking and designing a post-socialist regime, that sector would not have a place under the sun.
That doctrine ended with the arrival of the current tenant of the White House, Donald Trump, who took the anti-Cuban policy to the other extreme and, more than 20 years after the enactment of the Helms-Burton Act, decided not to postpone Title III any further.
The Law, in addition to injuring the interests of third countries, by applying extraterritorial measures of blockade, poses a brutal regression of the possession of the national wealth, to the successors of its former owners, by ignoring almost 60 years of profound changes in the revolutionary process.
THE HOUR OF THE BODEGUEROS
In the context of the Law, taking into account the disproportion of the probable claims of the Cubans, along with great fortunes at the tip of the pyramid, they will demand their rights according to the Helms-Burton owners of wineries, chinchales, small cafeterias, apartments, etc.
The term of property traffic is applied according to the legislative initiative, even in favor of the former owners of land, who regardless of where they are located in agricultural or urban areas, will have the right to be delivered or be paid with high interest all manufacturing facilities, construction of any kind that in the years of the Revolution has been built on these properties, with which there is no free space left of the great tsunami of capitalist reconstruction.
Supposedly on the island would be the object of this scramble not only all state industrial property, services or real estate, on which the anti-communist government that seeks to exercise power after the alleged defeat of the Revolution, would have no authority to sell and privatize those goods to the highest bidder, as happened in the USSR and in the socialist camp, since those properties would already have owners in the descendants of their old patrons: American companies or the old native oligarchy, as established by Helms-Burton.
This is a message that defeats the dreams of the possible corrupt white-collar bureaucrats, who long to play a leading role in a supposedly post-socialist stage, in which they would emerge as masters of the companies and facilities they administer, in a kind of Creole version of the collapse of real socialism.
The chaos caused by this climate of revenge and scramble for violence is evident, although perhaps the true objective of the Law is to act as a premeditated coartada of the "humanitarian" American intervention.
A MAFIOUS GRANDMAN
Among the claims that must be prepared today to be presented to the courts are picturesque cases like that of a grandson of the mobster Meyer Lansky, who endorsed by yellow title deeds signed by high officials of the Batista dictatorship, involved with the gangster, dreams of recovering the hotel Habana Riviera and the surrounding land, to incidentally have right over the hotel Cohiba, built on the properties that one day dreamed his mafioso grandfather raise an empire of casinos, lupanares and high standard accommodations.
The real application of the Law would affect the town, owner of their houses in more than 95%, whose immense majority acquired the titles after 1959; all the dreams of the around 84,000 entrepreneurs who used their private homes as initial capital for rent or the business of gastronomy and other initiatives, which in those conditions could hardly survive, would be destroyed.
The other major settling of accounts would be in agriculture, where according to the official website of the United Nations Organization for Food and Agriculture (FAO), in Cuba, approximately 30% of the arable land is managed by state companies and the UBPCs, and the rest are in the hands of individual peasants, owners of the land, benefited by the Agrarian Reform Law of 1960, or belong to cooperatives or to usufructuaries of the land Imposing the reconstitution of the agricultural farm and exploitation would only be possible with a brutal repression that would end the desires of emancipation and personal development of those who one day, thanks to the Revolution, became masters of their destinies.
In this way the dreams of the small businessmen and others not so small would end, with successes and also probable misunderstandings, have space within the Cuban socialist project. (Granma)
