English Version

November 16, 1999

Mr. Gustavo Machin
Cuban Interest Section
2639 16th St. NW
Washington DC 20009

Dear Gustavo:

I must confess that I was surprised by the tone of your letter — and that I am no longer on a first-name basis with you. If you're upset about losing the softball game we played last summer, perhaps I could arrange some batting instructions for you and your Cuban comrades.

I'm afraid that your memory is somewhat faulty with respect to my application for a visa to do research in Cuba. I hope you don't mind my refreshing it for you.

On May 22, 1998, I wrote a letter to the Cuban Interest Section which stated in part [in Spanish]:

"Soy presidente de una fundación en los Estados Unidos que propone ideas sobre el libre mercado y el libre comercio.... Espero la oportunidad de visitar a su paìs, estudiar el sistema económica de Cuba, y conocer a la gente Cubana."

[English translation: "I am president of a foundation in the United States that promotes ideas on the free market and free tradeÖ. I look forward to the opportunity to visit your country, study the economic system of Cuba, and get to know the Cuban people."]

Then, on June 26, 1998, I wrote a letter addressed to you, Gustavo Machin, which stated in part [in Spanish]:

"Estoy pidiendo permiso para ... viajar a Cuba para hacer un estudio informal ("fact-finding") sobre el sistema económica y la manera de vivir en Cuba.... Nuestra fundación ha criticado el embargo contra Cuba y el intervencionismo de nuestro gobierno en los asuntos de America Latina. Intento de publicar un artìculo sobre mi viaje a Cuba. Estarè muy agradecido si [me podrìa] ayudar con intrevistas con algunas personas en Cuba sobre la situación económica y polìtica en Cuba, especialmente los cambios que están occuriendo....Yo propongo la filosofìa del libre mercado en mi trabajo."

[English translation: "I am seeking permission to ... travel to Cuba to conduct an informal study ('fact-finding'') about the economic system and the manner of living in CubaÖ. Our foundation has criticized the embargo and the interventionism of our government in Latin American affairs. I intend to publish an article about my visit to Cuba. I will be very appreciative if [you could] help me with interviews with people in Cuba about the economic and political situation in Cuba, especially the changes that have taken placeÖ. I promote the free-market philosophy in my work."]

Then, on September 29, 1998, I wrote a letter addressed to Sr. Fernando Ramirez, who I understand is your boss, which stated in part [in Spanish]:

"Soy presidente de una fundación que propone la filosofìa del mercado libre. Quisiera ir a Cuba para hacer un estudio informal sobre el sistema socialista. Escribirè un artìculo sobre mi viaje despues de regresar."

[English translation: "I am president of a foundation that promotes the free-market philosophy. I would like to go to Cuba to conduct an informal study of the socialist system. I will write an article about my visit after I return."]

Please permit me also to remind you of our conversation when I came to your office to visit. I explained to you that I was a libertarian and gave you a short summary of what libertarians believe. You responded that you had heard about libertarianism as well as the Cato Institute, a libertarian foundation in Washington.

Therefore, in view of the fact that my letters and my visit clearly expressed the purpose of my visit to Cuba, the unpleasant and even sour tone of your letter is quite surprising to me and very uncalled for.

Equally important, and much to my surprise, you never once asked for a copy of the application for travel license that I submitted to the U.S. Treasury Department. If you had been doing your job and requested a copy of my application, you would have read the following:

"I hope to study informally such aspects of Cuban life as the following: 1. The extent of price controls in the society and the severity of resulting shortages; 2. The extent to which Cubans are able to begin businesses legally; 3. The nature of employments for average Cuban citizens; 4. The nature of the black market and its extent; 5. The methods of transportation both for goods and services and for people; 6. The extent to which private ownership of property is permitted; 7. The extent of regulation of open-air markets; 8. The nature of such things as health care, education, and housing for the average person; 9. The extent to which Cubans complain openly about socialist problems."

Your observation that I am prejudiced against socialism would come as no surprise to anyone who is familiar with libertarianism. I'm surprised that you're surprised! I can only assume that the reason you know so little about libertarianism is that libertarianism is not taught in Cuba's public (government) schools. (Don't feel bad — our socialist educational system does not permit libertarianism to be taught to American students either.)

But once I advised you that I was a libertarian and an ardent advocate of the free market, what prevented you from asking more questions and even doing a little research? You could have even checked the web site of The Future of Freedom Foundation to see that we have been criticizing socialism for more than ten years!

Therefore, if you came to the realization that I was prejudiced against socialism only after my trip to Cuba, you, not I, bear the responsibility for your error. It is improper for you to attempt to shift responsibility for your failures to someone else, even though I realize that socialists often attempt to do this.

Your assertion that I had no intention to delve into the effects of the U.S. embargo on Cuba is patently ludicrous and without any foundation whatsoever. If you will check with the think-tank people with whom I met at the University of Havana, they will confirm that I asked them about the effects of the embargo on Cuban life. (The problem they had was that they were unable to clearly delineate how much Cuban suffering was due to the embargo and how much to socialism.)

Moreover, you will recall that my very first article I wrote on my return, which was published in U.S. newspapers, was entitled "Support Cuban Dissidents. Lift the Embargo." And in the series I published in our journal, Freedom Daily, a copy of which I sent you in both English and in Spanish (shortened version), it states in part:

"Ultimately, two of the 20th century's most oppressive engines of economic oppression — the U.S. embargo and Cuban socialism — would grind the Cuban people, and especially the poorest among them, into economic misery and desperation."

No rational person can deny that both the embargo and socialism have terribly harmed the Cuban people. Perhaps the real reason you are upset is not that I failed to condemn my government's economic controls over the American people but because I condemned your government's economic controls over the Cuban people.

One of the striking aspects of your letter is the number of unsubstantiated assertions that you make.

For example, you fail to point to any error in my analysis of Cuba's history or Cuba's social, economic, and cultural life. I am confident that if my work contained such any such errors, you would have happily pointed them out. A piece of advice: If you are unable to substantiate assertions with facts, it is better to remain silent.

You are certainly correct to admit that your "socialist system may not be perfect and is hardly ideal," but that is a tremendous understatement.

In fact, while you are so eager to accuse others of dishonesty, the truth is that Communist Party officials in the world live the model life of the lie. The communist and socialist system that you extol so highly has brought nothing but misery and poverty and death to the people of the world, while worldwide Communist Party functionaries have lived nice lifestyles by sucking the lifeblood out of the people, much as leeches do to their victims.

Moreover, by strangulating the Cuban people with a myriad of economic controls, the Cuban government places them, and especially the poorest among them, into having to lie about the economic crimes that riddle Cuban society. As you should know, it is impossible for average people to survive in Cuba without breaking some economic law. It is difficult for me to understand how anyone in good conscience can defend such a system, even a Party functionary who benefits from it.

The truth is that Cuba's Communist Party officials should be ashamed of what they have done to the Cuban people in the name of "equality" and "social justice." What Cuban socialists have done to the Cuban people is even worse than what American socialists have done to the American people.

I believe that the real reason you are so upset with me is that you are still shocked at the willingness of average Cuban people to trust me and to talk to me and share with me their disdain for socialism. I can tell you this based on my conversations with Cubans in the street: while they still revere and respect Fidel for standing up to the U.S. government, they have absolutely no loyalty to younger Party functionaries, especially those who were born after the revolution, and who live their nice lifestyles at the expense of the Cuban people. The younger Party bureaucrats had better hope and pray that Fidel lives another 20 years, because once he dies, the Cuban people are apt to lose their fear of the government and no longer permit the younger socialist bureaucratic parasites to continue sucking the lifeblood out of them.

As you know, as a libertarian, I stand squarely against the U.S. embargo (and all other economic controls by the U.S. government). But for what it's worth, it is somewhat pathetic to see Cuban Party officials begging and pleading for the U.S. government to lift its economic controls on the American people, while, at the same time, refusing to lift the Cuban government's economic controls on the Cuban people. If you can find a better example of political hypocrisy, please let me know what it is.

During one of my visits to your office before my trip, I asked you about the parameters for talking to people in Cuba and visiting them in their homes, telling you that I had no interest in violating Cuban law in this respect. You will recall that you responded, "Talk to whomever you want and go wherever you desire except for military installations. You will discover that people are freer in Cuba than they are in the United States."

I thought to myself at the time that that wasn't saying very much. But either your superiors require you to say such things or you are truly in the grip of the indoctrination you received in your public schools. Your assertion is laughable. While I was in your country, the government that you so proudly serve was punishing people for criticizing Cuban socialism! Such punishment certainly doesn't fit any definition of freedom I know.

Moreover, as you no doubt know, your government recently sentenced a man to life in prison for helping to smuggle Cubans out of Cuba. (Admittedly, the U.S. government engages in equally immoral conduct by capturing Cuban refugees on the high seas and repatriating them into Cuban communism.) How is that reconciled with the "freedom" you extol?

The bright news I discovered during my visit, although not for Cuban Party functionaries, is that the Cuban people on the streets see through the Party lies and deceptions. Despite having been forced to attend government schools where they were taught government-approved doctrine from government-approved schoolteachers, the Cuban people know that they have been left behind in the world. And they know the real reason why — Cuban socialism. It's just a matter of time before they throw off the socialist shackles and join the rest of the world.

Finally, you make the common mistake of confusing such things as political independence and economic freedom. (Don't feel bad, because our politicians and bureaucrats make the same mistake.) As I pointed out in my article, Cuban independence and socialism are two different things. It is entirely possible for Cubans to have political independence from the U.S. while, at the same time, have a free-market economic system. While this obviously would not have been in the interests of the Party bureaucrats who live their nice parasitic lifestyles at the expense of the Cuban people, it clearly would be in the best interests of the Cuban people themselves.

If you or any other Cuban Party official would ever like to debate these issues, please let me know. We could do this via e-mail and have the debate posted on The Future of Freedom Foundation's web site. Such a debate would greatly help the American people because if they could see a real, live, Cuban socialist defending such things as public schooling, welfare, gun control, economic regulations, trade and immigration controls, drug laws, and national health care, they could perhaps realize that these things are aspects of socialism, not capitalism.

Unfortunately, however, I have discovered that people who make unsubstantiated assertions are always terribly fearful about publicly defending their assertions in the arena of debate. Moreover, with the failure of socialism all over the world, including here in the United States, socialists everywhere now tremble at the thought of entering the arena of debate to defend their failed philosophy, especially when their opponent in the arena is a libertarian.

I do hope that our ideological differences do not adversely affect our friendship. Please give my best to your family, who I enjoyed meeting at the softball game.

Sincerely,
Jacob G. Hornberger
An American with a Cuban heart and soul
President
The Future of Freedom Foundation
11350 Random Hills Road
Suite 800
Fairfax, VA 22030
Email: jhornberger@fff.org
www.fff.org

P.S. I hope you don't mind that I have posted our correspondence on The Future of Freedom Foundation's web site. If you would like to view it, go to http://www.fff.org. Click on "FFF en Español" and then scroll down until you find our letters, both in English and in Spanish.