A huge number of mainstream liberals and far too many progressives still do not see the underhanded way in which this leading newspaper, in effect the voice of the bourgeoisie, sells the plutocracy’s agenda.  The confusion normally stems from the professional manner the By Kate Randall, WSWS.ORG | 7 June 2011

The New York Times is continuing its campaign against “wasteful” Medicare spending and “unnecessary” tests and procedures. The latest volley comes in the form of an opinion piece titled “Squandering Medicare’s Money” by Rita F. Redberg, the director of Women’s Cardiovascular Services at the University of California San Francisco Medical Center (UCSF).

In the column published May 25, Ms. Redberg states, “Medicare spends a fortune each year on procedures that have no proven benefit and should not be covered.” She claims that her conclusions are not based on political considerations or any hidden agenda. We beg to differ.

The Times has a long record of promoting deep cuts to health care spending. They pushed for passage of President Obama’s health care overhaul as an initial salvo in the campaign to reduce spending on treatments and procedures, particularly for the elderly, while funneling billions to the health insurance industry.

The latest Times column is full of deception, beginning with the description of the author. Rita Redberg’s professional resume makes her suitably qualified to promote an agenda of cost cutting. The newspaper makes no mention of the fact that Redberg worked in the office of right-wing Republican Senator Orrin Hatch from 2003 to 2006. Hatch has been a vocal supporter of cuts to health care programs, criticizing Obama’s proposals from the right.

Redberg is currently the chief editor of the Archives of Internal Medicine, a bi-monthly professional medical journal published by the American Medical Association. In that position, according to her UCSF bio, “she has spearheaded the journal’s new focus on health care reform and ‘less is more,’ which highlights areas of health care with no known benefit and definite risks.”

In her column, Redberg identifies a number of screenings and procedures that she claims are in overuse in the Medicare system and should be cut back. She writes that, “the chief actuary for Medicare estimates 15 percent to 30 percent of health care expenditures are wasteful,” and that, “$75 billion to $150 billion could be cut without reducing needed services.”

The wasteful spending cited by Redberg is related to screenings and treatments that have been documented to save millions of lives. For many of the treatments Redberg cites, the problem is not that too many people are receiving them, but that many people are going without.

An approach concerned with the well-being of the population would focus on expanding care and saving lives. But as we have seen throughout the entire health care “reform” debate, the concern of the political establishment is not with improving health care for the majority of people, but in protecting and boosting the bottom line of the health-care industry—the private insurers, the giant hospital chains and drug companies.

There is also an disturbing subtext to Redberg’s argument consistent with the Times’ approach to this issue: People are living too long and health care dollars should not be spent on treatments for the elderly when it may only extend their lives for a short time, or make them more comfortable.

Redberg’s piece targets a range of tests and procedures for cuts in Medicare spending. She relies heavily on the recommendations of the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), a government body that is supposedly “independent,” but which in recent years has increasingly recommended cuts in health care services. In 2009 the panel recommended that women under the age of 50 not undergo annual mammogram screenings, which provoked widespread opposition nationally.

The procedures cited by Redberg include:

Screening colonoscopies: The USPSTF advises against routine screening colonoscopies in patients over 75 because it takes at least eight years to realize any benefits. Redberg bemoans the fact that, despite the USPSTF’s recommendation, Medicare spent more than $100 million for nearly 550,000 colonoscopy screenings, and that around 40 percent were for patients over the age of 75.

The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) notes that when colorectal cancer is discovered early and treated, the five-year survival rate is 90 percent. But less than 40 percent of colorectal cancers are found early because screening rates are low.

Redberg’s argument essentially amounts to the assertion that once anyone reaches the age of 75, there is no longer any reason to protect them from cancer, despite the fact that more and more Americans are living fulfilling lives through their 80s and even 90s. Or rather, it is precisely because of this fact that Redberg and the Times are concerned.

In 2005, only 50 percent of US adults age 50 or older had undergone a sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy within the previous 10 years. Surely some of the Medicare patients Redberg says should not receive the screening could be treated and possibly cured of cancer if they received the test.

Screening for cervical cancer in women and prostate cancer in men: The USPSTF recommends against screening for prostate cancer in men 75 and older, and against screening for cervical cancer in women 65 and older who have had a previous normal Pap smear. According to Redberg, Medicare spent more than $50 million in 2008 on such screenings.

In 2007, according to the CDC, 12,280 women in the United States were diagnosed with cervical cancer and 4,021 women died from the disease. Since the introduction of the Pap smear 50 years ago, the screening has been credited with reducing deaths from cervical cancer by 70 percent.

However, about 11 percent of women in the US report that they do not regularly obtain a Pap smear. A 1996 report from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) of the US Department of Health and Human Services shows that half of women newly diagnosed with invasive cervical cancer had never had a Pap smear.

The NIH report notes: “The unscreened populations include older women, the uninsured, ethnic minorities, especially Hispanics and elderly blacks, and poor women, particularly those in rural areas.” An aggressive government campaign to promote and fund cervical cancer screenings would save lives. Redberg maintains that over-testing of older women is the problem.

According to the CDC, in 2007 in the US, 223,307 new cases of prostate cancer were diagnosed and 29,093 men died of the disease. The risk of getting prostate cancer increases with age. Among every 100 men who are 60 years old today, six or seven will get prostate cancer by age 70.

While there are differences in the medical community over the risks and benefits of prostate screening in the older male population, the CDC recommends that the decision to test or not be arrived at through an informed discussion between the patient and his health care professional. Redberg recommends that Medicare cut off screenings for men 75 and older.

Cardiac stents and defibrillators: Redberg’s proposal to reduce Medicare spending on heart stents and defibrillators is the latest installment in a long campaign by the Times to reduce “overtreatment” for cardiovascular disease. The paper has argued in the past for reduction in the use of stents to open up blocked arteries, against overuse of artificial pacemakers and over-prescribing of cholesterol-lowering statin drugs.

Redberg writes that, “Multiple clinical trials have shown that cardiac stents are no more effective than drugs or lifestyle change in preventing heart attacks or death.” She does not link to these clinical trials, and also fails to mention the most common usages of stents—in combination with angioplasty to treat a sudden blockage of the heart or in the aftermath of a heart attack.

Medical professionals disagree how often stents should be used, and in particular on the use of drug-coated versus bare stents. There are also conflicting opinions and studies on whether patients receiving stents have a better quality of life or live longer than those on alternative therapies. But Redberg is most interested in the $1.6 billion Medicare could save annually if it stopped paying for drug-coated stents altogether.

And although she writes that, “some studies have shown that stents provide short-term relief of chest pain,” she goes on to state that “up to 30 percent of patients receiving stents have no chest pain to begin with.” What about the pain of the remaining 70 percent?

Regarding implantable cardiac defibrillators, Redberg cites a recent study that found “one-fifth of all implantable cardiac defibrillators were placed in patients who, according to clinical guidelines, will not benefit from them. But Medicare pays for them anyway, at a cost of $50,000 to $100,000 per device implantation.”

The referenced study, published earlier this year in the Journal of the American Medical Association, claimed that 22.5 percent of the patients who received the devices did not meet the evidence-based guidelines. Redberg does not inform her readers that this study has generated considerable controversy.

As the WSWS has noted previously, one can always find cases in medicine where a treatment or screening can cause harm or injury. Physicians must constantly weigh the pros and cons of any particularly screening or procedure, with the best possible outcome for their patients in mind.

Rita Redberg’s column on the “Squandering Medicare’s Money” has nothing in common with such an approach. She ends her column with the cynical comment, “Of course, doctors, with the consent of their patients, should be free to provide whatever care they agree is appropriate. But when the procedure arising from that judgment, however well intentioned, is not supported by evidence, the nation’s taxpayers should have no obligation to pay for it.”

However, for those too poor to afford it, there is no way for patients to get and doctors to give “whatever care they agree is appropriate” if it is not covered by insurance. In other words, those who are too poor to afford screenings that the ruling class declares to be “unnecessary” or “excessive” should be denied access. The wealthy, of course, will continue to have access to the best health care money can buy.

Redberg is advancing the long-running New York Times campaign to gut health care services, particularly for the elderly, poor and disabled. Her opinion piece came the day after a special election in Buffalo, New York ended in a surprise defeat for the Republican candidate in a vote that was universally acknowledged to be a referendum on Medicare cuts. The Democratic Party establishment responded by insisting that the result should not dissuade anyone from going forward with cuts to the popular health care program.

Redberg’s column was accompanied by an New York Times editorial declaring that, “Sooner or later, Democrats will have to admit that Medicare cannot keep running as it is,” calling for further cuts in the health care program. It was followed by a column by David Brooks calling for a bipartisan agreement to slash Medicare that would insulate both the Democrats and Republicans from voter retaliation.

Columnist Joe Nocera declared the same week, “The debate we need is not about whether Medicare should be reformed, but how.” Business columnist Gretchen Morgenson summed up the editorial campaign with a column May 29 on the broader issue of the $14.3 trillion federal deficit, citing a new report on the long-term implications for the US and world financial system of the continued growth in debt. This opinion piece bore the remarkable headline, “U.S. Has Binged. Soon It’ll Be Time to Pay the Tab.”

Readers are expected to accept the following line of argument as given: Medicare is going broke, billions are being wasted on care, and the slashing of services must go forward. Taxpayers, they argue, must not be held hostage to this wasteful spending. Of course, there is no mention of the billions of dollars in taxpayers’ money that has been squandered on bailing out the banks, or spent to prosecute a growing list of imperialist wars.

The Socialist Equality Party rejects the entire framework of this debate. A solution to the health crisis lies not in slashing spending and eliminating medical tests and procedures for working people, but in putting an end to the privately owned health care corporations and establishing socialized medicine. Only in this way can health care—a basic social right—be defended.

 

_______________________________________________________________

If you liked this article, why not support The Greanville Post by buying our T-shirt, a mug, a mousepad, or any other item now in our store? That way you donate a few dollars and also get a nice gift. It’s a win-win formula!

Created By CrankyBeagle for The Greanville Post

Be sure to visit our Zazzle store and get one today!

 

 

Written by Stamatis Karagiannopoulos
Monday, 06 June 2011

YESTERDAY A MILESTONE WAS PASSED in the social and political situation in Greece and throughout Europe. Impressive mobilizations rolled across the country: half a million in Athens and rallies  of thousands of people gathered in Thessaloniki, Patras, Larissa, Volos, Heraklion, etc. This places Greece on the threshold of a revolutionary situation. It means that, for the first time in decades the developed capitalist countries of Europe are faced with the prospect of a revolution with continental dimensions.

Half a million protesters in Athens – Uprising across the country

Yesterday’s gathering in Athens, apart from its impressive size, had many new elements. The awkwardness and blind rage that characterized the first days of the movement have given way to enthusiasm. The masses have acquired a sense of confidence through the collective show of strength. While the early days were focused on the idea of a silent angry people, yesterday the mood had changed. The people shouted ingenious slogans against the government and the “Troika”, and everywhere groups of people were spontaneously formed in which everyone wanted to express an opinion on the movement and on the next steps to be taken.

At the same time, in the most advanced part of the protesters, especially in the youth, an interest to seek a political solution for the “next day” was evident. This explains the enormous interest in participating in the People’s Assembly of Syntagma Square, which was attended by 10,000 people, patiently waiting to participate, although very few were able to speak.

From 9.30 pm onwards, the density of the protest made it impossible even to approach the site of the assembly. The predominant element in the meeting was the spontaneous opinions voiced by ordinary workers, unemployed and young people expressing the need to continue the struggle.

Many proposals were made: “to besiege the parliament on the day the austerity measures are put to the vote”; “to fight to set up popular meetings in every neighborhood”; “to put into practice the decision of the People’s Assembly for an indefinite general political strike”; “to fight the media propaganda with an organized campaign in the neighborhoods and squares”. On one point all were agreed:  “next Sunday there will be a million people in the streets of Athens!”

The situation becomes revolutionary

The masses are erupting onto the scene very dramatically and are consistently to the forefront. The climate in the neighborhoods this week highlights the potential for mass assemblies. The enthusiasm from the protests is being carried into every workplace, thereby putting tremendous pressure on the leadership of the unions to take action. Already the GSEE leadership has been forced to call a 24 hour strike of all those companies that are soon to be privatized on Thursday 9th June. For the first time these workers will be engaged in coordinated action, while another 24 hour general strike was announced for 15th June.

It is certain that this general strike will be different to those we saw last year. Coming as part of the general escalation of the mass movement that has developed in the squares, it will have a much greater participation than before in the private sector. And it will be combined with the most widespread popular protests in decades. This strike will not mobilize only a part of the working class, but will tend to embrace the vast majority of the working class and trade unions. It will put the proletariat at the head of a struggle that is not a struggle for economic demands alone, but a political struggle of the masses in the streets. This strike therefore will have an inner tendency to become a lasting general strike, regardless of the intentions of the bureaucracy.

What is [a] revolutionary situation?

In the writings of Lenin and Trotsky, we can find the definition of what is a revolutionary situation. In his book “The failure of the Second International” (1916) Lenin explained:

“What, generally speaking, are the symptoms of a revolutionary situation? We shall certainly not be mistaken if we indicate the following three major symptoms: (1) when it is impossible for the ruling classes to maintain their rule without any change; when there is a crisis, in one form or another, among the “upper classes”, a crisis in the policy of the ruling class, leading to a fissure through which the discontent and indignation of the oppressed classes burst forth. For a revolution to take place, it is usually insufficient for “the lower classes not to want” to live in the old   way; it is also necessary that “the upper classes should be unable” to live in the old way; (2) when the suffering and want of the oppressed classes have grown more acute than usual; (3) when, as a consequence of the above causes, there is a considerable increase in the activity of the masses, who uncomplainingly allow themselves to be robbed in “peace time”, but, in turbulent times, are drawn both by all the circumstances of the crisis and by the “upper classes” themselves into independent historical action.

“…..The totality of all these objective changes is called a revolutionary situation. Such a situation existed in 1905 in Russia, and in all revolutionary periods in the West;…”

Trotsky in 1940, in the Emergency Manifesto explained the necessary conditions for the victory of the proletariat:

“The basic conditions for the victory of the proletarian revolution have been established by historical experience and clarified theoretically: (1) the bourgeois impasse and the resulting confusion of the ruling class; (2) the sharp dissatisfaction and the striving towards decisive changes in the ranks of the petty bourgeoisie, without whose support the big bourgeoisie cannot maintain itself; (3) the consciousness of the intolerable situation and readiness for revolutionary actions in the ranks of the proletariat; (4) a clear program and a firm leadership of the proletarian vanguard—these are the four conditions for the victory of the proletarian revolution.” (Manifesto of the Fourth International on Imperialist War and the Imperialist War).

All these elements have developed in Greece today. The ruling class begins to understand that they cannot govern as before; to lie and deceive the masses, i.e. with the old, gentle, “democratic” means. The suffering and indignation of the masses have been growing over a long period. The masses have already begun to move independently of the ruling class.

The ruling class finds itself in a state of unprecedented confusion because of the impasse. They are absolutely unable to reach to a unified strategy. Some say:  “we must completely capitulate to the foreign lenders and see where we can go from there”. Others suggest that Greece should “renegotiate with the troika”, while still others say we must “get out of the euro now in order to strengthen the country’s competitiveness.” Some say: “let’s form a national government”, while others urge Papandreou to continue carrying out the dirty work until he gets the boot. Some, are even secretly studying the possibility of a coup, in an attempt to put the brake on the movement of the masses. This scenario was outlined in a leaked report by the CIA in the bourgeois press last week.

The desertion of 16 PASOK MPs from the government over the issue of new cuts and taxes, shows that the pressure of the movement has destabilized the government’s parliamentary group for good. New Democracy and LAOS, fearing that they will go down together with Papandreou’s sinking ship, are now keeping their distance from the government, trying to speculate on the result of a future election.

The traditional mainstay of the bourgeoisie, the middle classes have been radicalized and are now in the streets. The proletariat again and again shows its readiness to act. All the basic elements for a revolutionary situation have matured. The only thing that is lacking is a clear programme and firm leadership of the proletarian vanguard. That is all that is needed quickly to convert the revolutionary situation into a victorious revolution which will expropriate the exploiters and eliminate capitalism, setting in motion a movement that can lead to the victory of socialism in Greece, the Mediterranean and throughout Europe.

The leadership of the Left is acting criminally

Ever since the beginning of mass movement on the streets, the Left leaders have adopted an unacceptable attitude. The leadership of the Communist Party sends ultimatums to the people located in squares, urging them to “finally make the right policy proposals!” (See main article in Rizospastis on 3 / 6). The task of a Communist Party leadership is not to ask the movement to “make the right policy proposals”, but to participate actively in the movement, to try to raise the of consciousness and help the masses to formulate the correct demands.

Last Friday, the Stalinist leadership of the Communist Party made complete fools of themselves in front of the eyes of thousands gathered in the Syntagma Square. That afternoon a demonstration of PAME, the trade union faction of the Communist Party, ended up in the Square. There they delivered a 15-minute speech, during which the Communist Party called on the people assembled on the squares ex cathedra “not to trust anybody else except PAME”.

When the speech was over, in order to avoid mixing up the protesters in the square with the Communist workers, the organizers of the PAME demo immediately ordered members of the Communist Youth to form “chains” and immediately, the “Communist” left the square. In this way, the Stalinist leadership of the Communist Party has proved eloquently their organic inability to connect with the real mass movement. They have shown that they regard it simply as a means of strengthening the Party’s position in the parliamentary elections.

On the other hand, the leadership of SYRIZA refuses to enter the movement openly and boldly. It is a very serious mistake just to ask for elections, without making any proposal on how to further develop the movement, when people are on the streets, getting self-organized, ready to get rid of the government and the “troika” altogether. It is also an incorrect attitude of the CC of Synaspismos (decision 29 / 5) to ask Party members to participate in the movement, while pretending to be “non-partisan”; ” … In this movement we participate as citizens, trying to listen and learn, we take part in uniting our voice with thousands of angry in  each square of the country …. “.

The rank and file of the Left parties should respond to this damaging attitude. The position of comrade Alexis Tsipras (President of Synaspismos) and comrade Aleka Papariga (Secretary of the Communist Party) must not be confined to party offices and television panels. The place of the leaders of the Left in these moments is in Syntigma and the other squares. If the Left fails to participate openly and boldly in the movement, with appropriate ideas and suggestions that will help lead to victory and the final overthrow of the capitalist system of slavery, the core of the movement will be occupied by all sorts of petty-bourgeois and professional “patriots” who are trying to obscure the social content of the movement, replacing the class struggle with nationalist confusion.

The working class must lead the struggle!

The outbreak of this mass movement in the squares, found the labour movement in a state of fatigue and frustration, mainly because of the devastating role of the union bureaucracy, which up to now imagined they could defuse the militant mood of hundreds of thousands of workers with an occasional 24-hour general strike. So naturally, the initiative in the fight against the government and the “Troika”, passed from the unions to broader sections of people, who had not been involved in mobilizations in the last few years.

Unemployed university graduates, skilled and unskilled unemployed, young people without work experience, middle class people devastated by taxes and robbing banks and the collapse of the market, workers without any union or political affiliation, students who are just beginning to be politicized, pensioners and housewives: people from all layers of the working society form the main basis of this mass movement in the squares.

These layers have a fresh and combative mood. They don’t have bureaucratic leaders above them to put the brake on the mobilization and so far, they have created a movement that has proved to be persistent and long lasting. On the other hand, as is perfectly natural, these layers’ together with explosive anger and militancy, display inexperience of mass protests and are desperately seeking appropriate political slogans, appropriate fighting methods and specific political demands.

In these circumstances, therefore, the need for a distinct contribution of the working class and the labour movement in the struggle is decisive. The decisions of the People’s Assembly of Syntagma Square calling for a general strike clearly recognize this need. Without paralyzing the economic centers of the system, there cannot be any fundamental change in society. But very little has been done until now to realize the general political strike demand.

Most of the leading layer in the Popular Assembly in Syntagma Square are under the false impression that the general strike is a merely a militant auxiliary to the demonstrations in the squares. In reality, it represents a decisive escalation of struggle and reflects a new, higher stage of this struggle. We must understand that the general strike cannot be organized by shouting slogans outside the union offices and workplaces, but must flow from the demands of the workers themselves through the trade unions and workplaces.

In working-class neighborhoods and workplaces, we must create action committees and elect strike committees to prepare for the strike. That is the only way to guarantee its success. Finally, it is vital to make clear that a general political strike will lead to the downfall of the government. It must not bring to power a government of bourgeois political careerists, but rather one of elected representatives of the people coming out of the movement itself.

Therefore, the democratic organization of the movement is a crucial issue, not only for the growth but also for the solution of the question of power in order to serve the interests and aspirations of the indignant working people. The views put forward by different groups of intellectuals within the movement on “direct procedures” and “democracy through sms and e-mails”, which are portrayed as “direct democracy”, have nothing to do either with the immediate issues or democracy.

What we need now

What we need now is:

Popular Assemblies in every neighborhood, with assemblies in the workplaces to elect recallable action committees everywhere.
Popular Assemblies in the central squares of all major cities that are composed of elected and recallable representatives at neighborhood workplaces meetings and.
The creation of a Pan-Hellenic Central Committee elected by the recallable representatives of the Popular Assemblies of the different cities.
Finally, at the heart of the struggle should be the following two demands:

A complete write-off of the debt created by Greek and foreign exploiters and thieves!
To abolish forever the nightmare of debt, poverty and unemployment we need to place the  control of the financial centers and the concentrated wealth of the country (banks, insurance companies, infrastructure, transport and big firms in every industry) under social ownership, through the  democratic control of the working people, as a step forward the victory of the revolution throughout Europe and the world!
Athens, 6 June, 2011.

__________________________________________________________

If you liked this article, why not support The Greanville Post by buying our T-shirt, a mug, a mousepad, or any other item now in our store? That way you donate a few dollars and also get a nice gift. It’s a win-win formula!

Created By CrankyBeagle for The Greanville Post

Be sure to visit our Zazzle store and get one today!

 

 

By SAUL LANDAU and NELSON VALDÉS

President Obama and his advisers share with most of the mass media the same visual weakness when it comes to Cuba: they don’t see the obvious, the crucial facts and context that stare them in the face.

As Cuba begins to undergo basic changes to its economy and governmental structure, the reporting from western media follows predictably context-free and thus irrelevant standards.

For more than a half-century, most writers and radio and TV producers have had a conscious or unacknowledged stake in the failure of the Cuban revolution. To think otherwise, reporters and advisers have learned, would be a bad career move. In order to invalidate Cuba’s attempt to change the social relation of its society and spread its word to the rest of the third world the western media has consistently failed to place a context around the events that led up to the revolution. Instead, Washington and the stenographers called “the press” judge Cuba’s revolution by U.S. standards and in the U.S. context. Cuba must always perform according to what the media assume are standards of democratic perfection. This criteria for judging, beyond its vagueness, leads one to wonder about values and priorities.

For example, on May 24, typical Earthlink headlines contained the following back-to-back leads:

“NATO hits Tripoli; US says rebels can open office.”

“Alley has lost 38 inches since ‘Dancing’ debut.”

Kristie Alley – for those “outsiders” – has become featured as an actress with weight  problems. “When Kirstie Alley performs on the “Dancing With the Stars” season finale,” the AP story begins, “she’ll do it in a much smaller dress.”

That this item gets featured as a news headline – and would not appear in the Cuban media – epitomizes the U.S. free press, which argues that it must serve its readers’ interests. But the media has helped create vicarious living (“I identify with Kirstie,” say thousands of overweight women), just as the media has encouraged shopping and watching sports on TV as the essence of spiritual life (along with the rising porn industry and experiencing vicarious thrills from reading about the sinful sexuality of the rich and famous). “Our politics, religion, news, athletics, education and commerce have been transformed into congenial adjuncts of show business, largely without protest or even much popular notice. The result is that we are a people on the verge of amusing ourselves to death,” wrote Neil Postman (Amusing Ourselves To Death).

When journalists judge Cuba they inevitably apply different standards than they do to the rest of the Caribbean and Latin America where “the veneration of crap” (Postman) continues to dominate.

Cuba has threatened Washington and its servile media not by being the model for education and health (many European countries are far better), but by being disobedient and cultivating different values. The vast majority of media makers have gone to report on Cuba with a conscious or unacknowledged stake in the failure of the Cuban revolution. They place no context around the events that led up to the revolution, and barely acknowledge Uncle Sam’s large boot on Cuba’s throat for 50 years. Then, they judge it by those vague standards of democratic perfection that they don’t apply to the Dominican Republic or the other neighbors.

Cuba has begun its changes, but neither President Obama nor the mass media have acknowledged them. U.S. policy demands, of Cuba, a “civil society,” while refusing to acknowledge the wide implication of the government’s initiatives with the Catholic Church. Add up the steps taken, Cuba’s cooperation with the Church carries wide implications for religious freedom and the broadening of traditional civil society.

Few U.S. media reports listed the vast increases of religious visits to and from abroad. Havana now permits public religious processions and religious blogs. The state has made scarce resources available to refurbish churches and in the last two years permitted the building of new churches and seminaries. Cuban leaders regularly show up at religious activities and allow churches to provide services to people in prison.

The Catholic Church now has radio time and its high officials have become interlocutors on matters involving prisoners, dissidents and even in foreign policy. The number of Protestant churches opening in Cuba has dramatically increased. The State no longer promotes Atheism. But these facts remain unreported as “significant change.” Indeed, every religious institution has called for an end to the U.S. embargo and the normalization of relations. The U.S. government appears to have grown deaf to the needs of religious people of the island.

Cuba is changing. U.S. policy remains stuck in its half century obsession to remove the only government Cuba has ever had that insists on retaining independence and sovereignty.

Saul Landau’s new film WILL THE REAL TERRORIST PLEASE STAND UP is distributed by cinemalibrestudio.com. CounterPunch published his BUSH AND BOTOX WORLD

Nelson P. Valdes is Professor Emeritus, University of New Mexico

____________________________________________________________

If you liked this article, why not support The Greanville Post by buying our T-shirt, a mug, a mousepad, or any other item now in our store? That way you donate a few dollars and also get a nice gift. It’s a win-win formula!

Created By CrankyBeagle for The Greanville Post

Be sure to visit our Zazzle store and get one today!