Democratic Socialists of America Co-Chair Ashik Siddique defended his organization’s praise of Fidel Castro during a contentious CNN interview, arguing that younger Americans are reassessing pre-revolutionary Cuba while acknowledging repression under Castro and crediting the revolution with expanding universal healthcare.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom.
Democratic Socialists of America Co-Chair Ashik Siddique defended his organization’s favorable commemoration of Fidel Castro during a contentious CNN interview Wednesday, arguing that younger Americans are examining Cuba’s history before the communist revolution and saying the Castro era brought an expansion of universal healthcare despite political repression on the island.
The exchange unfolded on “CNN News Central,” where co-host Boris Sanchez repeatedly pressed Siddique over a recent DSA statement celebrating the 100th anniversary of Castro’s birth and questioned how such rhetoric would be received by Cuban Americans, particularly those whose families suffered under Castro’s government.
The interview can be viewed here.
Sanchez began by pointing to a DSA statement commemorating Castro that described the longtime Cuban leader as “an organizer” and “a fighter.”
“Last week, the DSA commemorated 100 years of Fidel Castro with a statement describing him as ‘an organizer’ and ‘a fighter’. How do you think that plays with Florida voters?” Sanchez asked.
Rather than directly addressing Castro’s record, Siddique initially shifted the discussion toward domestic economic issues and DSA-supported policies.
“I think you’re seeing the results, you’re seeing that play out in these elections, where our candidates are campaigning on addressing the cost of living crises that so many people are struggling with in the U.S., and especially in Florida. More and more people are not happy with a government that spends, now, over $1 trillion on a military budget, on expanding the ICE budget to tear communities apart, kidnapping our neighbors. People want our taxpayer dollars to be used on things like Medicare for All, raising a living wage, providing childcare for everybody. So, if we want to expand democracy across the world, and especially in the United States, the policies we’re talking about are the way to do it.”
Sanchez then returned to the DSA’s decision to praise Castro, emphasizing that the issue was distinct from the organization’s economic agenda.
“I hear your message discipline on affordability. I do wonder whether you understand why a statement like that, lauding Fidel Castro, may not just turn people off from your platform, but offends people who suffered for decades under his dictatorship.”
Siddique responded by criticizing decades of U.S. foreign policy toward Cuba and other countries, arguing that military interventions and economic pressure have failed to produce democracy.
“Many decades of U.S. policy at this point have shown that, if we want to expand democracy across the world, military regime change and economic blockades are not the way to do it. I came of age after Iraq was invaded by the United States, after Afghanistan was, and democracy did not expand there. If we want to expand free and fair elections anywhere in the world, it’s about expanding a more open policy toward the whole world. If we were serious about expanding democracy in Cuba, for example, we could start by going back to the opening up, the economic reform that happened under the Obama administration.”
Sanchez interrupted to clarify that he was asking specifically about praising Castro rather than debating U.S. foreign policy.
“I understand your critique of U.S. policy. It’s not an uncommon one. What I’m trying to get at is how you think that lauding Fidel Castro is a good idea and is going to win you votes in Florida.”
Siddique then argued that younger Americans are increasingly examining economic and social conditions in Cuba before Castro’s revolution.
“Many people, especially younger Americans, now, are looking at the history of what happened in Cuba and what it was like before the Cuban Revolution, where it was one of the most unequal societies in the Western Hemisphere, people lived under very brutal conditions under a power structure where U.S. corporations were profiting off the labor of the Cuban people. So, if we’re serious about expanding democracy, going back to the system that existed in Cuba before then is not the way to do it. It’s about opening up political and economic reform that starts with free trade, ending the brutal embargo that, for over 60 years, under economic sanctions from the United States, that have limited trade into Cuba, that has been starving the Cuban people, it’s been really brutal conditions. If we look at what’s happening now, electricity is being shut down, food is being shut down.”
Sanchez then asked Siddique whether he had spent significant time speaking with Cubans who fled the country because of political persecution.
“I know plenty of people who are — especially second and third-generation Cubans — who are finding things out for themselves and wanting to open up, more open communication, open exchange with Cubans,” Siddique responded.
He added: “I have, and there are people who, whatever critiques they might have of the Cuban government, they don’t think that an economic blockade and military intervention is the way to do it.”
Sanchez again distinguished criticism of the U.S. embargo from DSA’s praise of Castro and then described his own family’s experience with the Cuban Revolution.
“I do wonder how they would feel about a statement lauding Fidel Castro, though, Ashik. That’s my concern. I get your criticism of foreign policy. As I said, it’s not an uncommon one. But lauding Fidel Castro is a different story. You talk about what things were like before the revolution in Cuba. I’ll give you a personal example: My grandfather was a revolutionary in Cuba during that time. He was affected by a previous dictator, Fulgencio Batista, having his friends disappeared in the street for speaking their minds. My grandfather fought in that revolution, hoping to bring democracy to Cuba. And then what happened? Fidel Castro locked my grandfather up, sentenced to 20 years for doing what you’re doing now on live TV, for speaking his mind, for expressing himself freely, for trying to organize politically. So, I wonder, again, how you think that lands with people who suffered under that dictatorship, who now you are trying to court as voters, when your organization comes out and lauds 100 years of Castro, I don’t think it would land well with them, Ashik.”
Siddique responded by turning again to economic inequality in the United States.
“We’re seeing many people in the United States who are seeing their — who are struggling under massive inequality in the United States that’s greater than it’s been in over a century. Inequality in the United States is higher than it’s been in the Gilded Age. We’re now returning to –.”
Sanchez interrupted before Siddique completed the thought.
“So, putting out a statement about Fidel Castro courts those people?” Sanchez asked.
Siddique said the broader objective should be the expansion of democracy in both Cuba and the United States without military intervention or economic isolation.
“We want to expand democracy everywhere in the United States, in Cuba, and everywhere else. And that does not come at the barrel of a gun. It doesn’t come under the threat of economic blockade. That only makes the — that limits democracy everywhere. So, if we want to improve conditions for Cubans –.”
Sanchez then put the question more directly.
“And Fidel Castro was a beacon of democracy?”
“I wouldn’t say that,” Siddique responded.
He nevertheless credited the Cuban Revolution with expanding government-provided healthcare and argued that some elements of Cuba’s system offer lessons for the United States.
“I think that the revolution in Cuba led to an expansion of things like universal healthcare. That’s actually been a model that Cuba exports medical care to countries that have very poor infrastructure themselves. There are things like that that we could have in the United States the way that it exists in Europe or in so many other countries. But we don’t have that. So, there are plenty of things that could change and improve in Cuba that Cuban people would speak for themselves. But Cubans have to be the ones deciding Cuba’s future. And we have to support, from the United States, what makes that possible, which is ending the embargo, ending sanctions. If we want freedom of expression, a free press, elections people can believe in, we have to look at the history of U.S. intervention there. So, it’s really hard for us to say where the effects of Cuba’s government end and where the effects of the blockade begin. And 65 years of strangling an economy, which the United States has done, will do that. So, that’s why lifting sanctions is what will give Cuba the breathing room it needs for political change to even be possible. And, in the United States, our concern is expanding voting rights in the U.S., expanding democracy in the United States, which is under threat from the Trump administration.”
Sanchez closed the interview by noting that economists differ over how much responsibility for Cuba’s economic conditions should be attributed to U.S. sanctions compared with the Cuban government itself. He again emphasized that his original question concerned DSA’s favorable treatment of Castro.
“I think, depending on what economists you speak to, there is some disagreement about conditions in Cuba, how much of it is the embargo, how much is the incompetence of the Cuban government. Nevertheless, my question was about Fidel Castro being a beacon of democracy. I would suggest that, perhaps, we should have more conversations with folks who have fled that regime and what they think about these statements and the position of the DSA. Nevertheless, Ashik Siddique, I appreciate you sharing your perspective, thank you so much for coming on CNN.”
“Yeah, I appreciate that. And we have to talk about how people are struggling in the United States and that’s why we’re winning elections across the country,” Siddique replied.
The interview highlighted a continuing dispute over DSA’s portrayal of Castro, with Siddique acknowledging that he would not describe the Cuban leader as a “beacon of democracy” while simultaneously defending aspects of the revolution’s legacy and attributing significant responsibility for present-day conditions in Cuba to decades of U.S. sanctions and the embargo.
Original article
Comments