🔹 NBC: Are you afraid for yourself or your family?
🇨🇺 Cuban President Díaz-Canel: I have no fear. I am willing to give my life for the Revolution.
I believe the American people would not support an invasion of a small island that poses no threat. There would be no justification. It would bring unnecessary loss of life, would be costly, and would destabilize the region.
American people would not support it. They can see that Cuba seeks dialogue, not war.
🔹NBC: We saw people living in severe poverty in Havana. Is it time to take responsibility and change the Cuban system? Why not follow China or Vietnam which have embraced one-party rule while also embracing market economies?
🇨🇺 President Díaz-Canel: We study their models closely. But they were under sanctions for about a decade. Cuba has faced more than 60 years of blockade.
That is the difference. They were able to develop once restrictions eased. Cuba has not had that opportunity. We are an island 90 miles from the United States, under constant pressure.
When China and Vietnam began their development, they started from less favorable conditions than Cuba has today. So the real question is: lift the blockade and see what Cuba can do. If we have achieved this much under pressure, what could we achieve without it?
If Cuba is truly weak, as some claim, then why has the United States spent decades trying to isolate and undermine it? Why not let it fail on its own? The answer is clear.
Let’s not be misled here.
The problem is not “foreign workers” - it is a system that pits worker against worker so wages stay low and profits stay high.
Farmers will always hire the cheapest labour available. That is how the system works. Blaming migrants only protects those who benefit from this arrangement.
Yes, waste of food is unacceptable and must be dealt with. But turning this into a nationality issue is dangerous. It divides workers instead of addressing the real problem.
Local and migrant workers are not enemies. They face the same exploitation.If we are serious, the focus should be fair wages for all; proper working conditions;accountability from those who own and manage production.
Anything else is just playing into a divide-and-rule game.
Workers must stand together - or they will continue to be played against each other.
Para Marx el capitalismo representa engañosamente "la ciencia como propiedad del capital". La maquinaria -comprada con el trabajo no remunerado d los obreros- es "presentada como ciencia ajena externa al trabajador". Con la tecnología "el trabajador se presenta como superfluo".
"Por tanto, es una afirmación burguesa muy absurda q el trabajador tenga intereses comunes con el capitalista porque este último haga su trabajo más corto y fácil". Marx explicó: "el capital reduce involuntariamente el trabajo humano al mínimo" sólo para aumentar su beneficio.
En los "Grundrisse" (1857-58), Marx escribió que el trabajo "se transfiere del trabajador al capital en forma de máquina" y, en consecuencia, el trabajo se devalúa: "lo que era la actividad del trabajador vivo se convierte en la actividad de la máquina".
En cambio en el socialismo "la reducción general del trabajo necesario de la sociedad al mínimo" -gracias a los recursos creados por las máquinas- permite "el libre desarrollo de las individualidades, el aumento de sus cualidades artísticas, científicas, etc". Hay alternativa.
The ANC in exile ran schools, clinics, diplomatic missions, intelligence networks and a non-racial army - under bombardment, danger, assassinations , surveillance. You don’t integrate armies of liberation and those of apartheid, draft one of the most progressive constitution in the world and negotiate one of the most complex transitions in modern history by “yawning under a tree”; criticise failures if you want, but don’t rewrite history.
They don’t hate Trump because he uses military violence against the Untermenschen — something German and other Europea elites fully support (see Gaza). They hate him because he’s demolishing the myth or fiction of the “rules-based order”, where you’re expected to cloak imperialist and neocolonial violence in liberal niceties.
If at least 26 billionaires can waste at least $27 million trying to defeat Zohran Mamdani, then those same billionaires can afford to pay an extra 2% on their income over $1 million to make New York a better, thriving city for everyone — including themselves.
Early voting in the NYC mayoral election begins TODAY.
If you're a New Yorker, I urge you to vote for Zohran Mamdani — the only candidate who will stand up to the oligarchy and fight for working people.
Listen to his inspiring words from primary night.
Mamdani: Yesterday, Andrew Cuomo laughed and agreed when a radio host said that I would cheer another 9/11.
Yesterday, Eric Adams said that we “can’t let our city become Europe.” He compared me to violent extremists, and he lied when he said that our movement seeks to burn churches and destroy communities.
The day before that, Curtis Sliwa slandered me from a debate stage when he claimed that I support global jihad.
And every day, Super PAC ads imply that I am a terrorist or mock the way I eat, push polls that ask New Yorkers questions like whether they support invented proposals to make halal mandatory, or political cartoons that represent my candidacy as an airplane hurtling towards the World Trade Center.
But I do not want to use this moment to speak to them any further. I want to use this moment to speak to the Muslims of this city.
I want to speak to the memory of my aunt, who stopped taking the subway after September 11th because she did not feel safe in her hijab.
I want to speak to the Muslim who works for our city—whether they teach in our schools or walk the beat for the NYPD, New Yorkers who all make daily sacrifices on behalf of this city, only to see their leaders spit in their face.
I want to speak to every child who grows up in New York marked as the Other, who is randomly selected in a way that rarely feels random, who feels that they carry a stain that can never be cleaned.
Growing up in the shadow of 9/11, I have known what it means to live with an undercurrent of suspicion. I will always remember the disdain I faced, the way my name could immediately become “Mohammad,” and how I could return to my city only to be asked in a double mirrored room at the airport if I had any plan of attacking it.
And since I was very young, I have known that I was spared the worst of it. I was never pressured to be an informant like classmates of mine. I have never had the word ‘terrorist’ spray-painted on my garage, as one of my aides has. My mosque has never been set on fire.
To be Muslim in New York is to expect indignity. But indignity does not make us distinct—there are many who face it. It is the tolerance of that indignity that does.