As the possibility grows of Bernie Sanders winning the Democratic nomination for President, his opponents are looking for vulnerabilities that can be exploited. This shouldn\u2019t be difficult, as Sanders has been politically active for some six decades. Surely he has written or said something embarrassing during that period.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
But\nafter trawling through the various archives, they have found very\nlittle to work with. Until now.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Last\nweek, the attention of the mainstream media focussed on things that\nSanders had said about Cuba in the past.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It\nseems that many years ago, Sanders made reference to two achievements\nof the Castro regime: raising literacy levels in the country and\ncreating one of the best health care systems in Latin America. When\npressed on these comments by CNN\u2019s Anderson Cooper, Sanders doubled\ndown and said, \u201cWe’re very opposed to the authoritarian nature of\nCuba but you know, it’s unfair to simply say everything is bad …\nWhen Fidel Castro came into office, you know what he did? He had a\nmassive literacy program. Is that a bad thing? Even though Fidel\nCastro did it?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
When\nasked about the dissidents Cuba\u2019s Communist government has sent to\njail, Sanders replied that \u201cwe condemn that.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Later,\nhe said that his view differed little from that expressed by former\nPresident Barack Obama, whose efforts to end the blockade and engage\nwith Cuba have been reversed by Donald Trump. In March 2016, Obama\nsaid that \u201cThe United States recognizes progress that Cuba has made\nas a nation, its enormous achievements in education and in health\ncare.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
But\nthis did not stop Sanders\u2019 critics, and not only Republicans, from\nattacking him for being an apologist for Castro. One British writer\nblasted him in a Facebook post, saying that Sanders \u201chas a record\nof being a bit soft (and a bit daft) on anti-western dictators\u201d,\ncomparing him to Jeremy Corbyn.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This\nview is, I think, unfair to Sanders.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The\nfirst thing to say in Sanders\u2019 defence is that what he says is not\nwrong. Or as he put it, \u201cfacts are facts\u201d. Literacy rates in\nCuba did rise dramatically following the 1959 revolution. And Cuba\ndoes have the best health care system in the region.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
But\nit\u2019s not that simple. While people in Cuba can now read, they have\nbeen very limited in what they can read. The regime has never\ntolerated dissent, and strictly limited what kinds of books can be\npublished or sold in the country, as well as print and online media. \nIt is true that there are some exceptions, such as Leonardo Padura\u2019s\n2009 book, The Man Who Loved Dogs, which is sympathetic to Trotsky. \nBut for many years, such dissident writing was banned.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The problem with what Sanders says about Cuba is that it\u2019s complicated. Yes, the regime has done a few good things. But overall, it is a repressive society, noted for a lack of human rights and ugly forms of prejudice, including state-supported homophobia. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n This means that when discussing Cuba, one is required to display an awareness of the complexities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Sanders\nhas shown that he can do this, as his views on Israel and Palestine\nhave shown. He does not see the world in black and white. In fact,\nhis understanding of the tragic nature of the conflict in that\nregion, his empathy for the people on both sides, has helped turn him\ninto the most popular politician among both American Muslims and\nJews.<\/p>\n\n\n\n He\nhas also shown that he knows to speak clearly about dictators in a\nway that the current American President has been unable to do. For\nexample, he says of Russian President Vladimir Putin, \u201cHe is an\nautocratic thug who is attempting to destroy democracy and crush\ndissent in Russia.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n He needs to show the same clarity when talking about Castro and Cuba as well.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n