What does “We the People” mean?

the AZEL

PERSPECTIVE

Commentary on Cuba's Future, U.S. Foreign Policy & Individual Freedoms - Issue 362 B
 
José Azel's latest books "On Freedom" and "Sobre La Libertad" are now available on Amazon. 

What does “We the People” mean?  (Previously published)

ShareShare
TweetTweet
ForwardForward

Our political troubles begin with the first three words of the U.S. Constitution: “We the People.” According to Randy Barnett, Professor of Constitutional Law at Georgetown University, those who favor a Democratic approach to the Constitution read “We the People” as a group or collective entity. And those who favor a Republican interpretation view “We the People” as individual persons. 

It is clear from the founding documents, and the Founder’s affinity to the philosophy of John Locke, that individual liberty was the main guiding principle in the creation of the United States. The Constitution was designed to implement the principles of the Declaration of Independence, and functions as the institutional device to secure our natural rights of life, liberty, and property. For the Founders, “We the People” meant, not a collective entity, but each one of us as an individual citizen. Yet, as George Will points out in The Conservative Sensibility, our choice of one or the other of these different understanding of “We the People” has enormous political consequences. 

Under the collective interpretation, “We the People” expresses the desires of a majority of the people, where the will of the majority prevails. Thus, the Constitution becomes a mechanism for the will of the collective, where the only legal individual rights are those granted by the will of the majority. In contrast, the “We the People” as individuals interpretation sees the Constitution as a tool for restraining government and limiting laws discordant with our natural rights as individuals. 

The American ideal is more than majorities having their way. Our fundamental rights are not subject to democratic vote or to the outcomes of elections. 

As Professor Barnett formulates it, “The great divide in America today is between those who believe, as the Founders did, that first come rights and then comes government and those who believe...that first comes government and then come rights.” Government is not the creator of our natural rights, and majorities have no right to violate our natural rights. Our rights supersede democratic majority. 

At the core of these beliefs is the doctrine of natural rights. Natural rights are those that are not dependent on laws or government. Natural rights pre-exist government and can be discovered by reason. We construct governments to secure our natural rights. We are rights-bearing individuals, and the United States is a rights-based government. And thus, the legitimate function of our government, as affirmed in the Declaration of Independence, is to secure our natural rights. Government’s function is to protect our life and liberty so that we may pursue individual happiness. The goal of a democratic government is freedom, not the other way around. 

The Founding Fathers believed that majority governments were inherently dangerous to our individual rights. As noted by George Will, “Of the major institutions created by the Constitution – Congress, the presidency, the Supreme Court -- only one half of one of them, the House of Representatives, was, in the Framer’s original design, directly elected by the people.” 

Consequently, for about 150 years following the founding, political discussions often began with a debate concerning whether the federal government was entitled to take some action under its constitutionally enumerated powers. Today, as George Will notes, “almost nobody in either the legislative or executive branch believes that there is any subject, any sphere, from which the federal government is constitutionally excluded.” This is unfortunate, because our natural rights must take precedence over the power of the majority to govern. 

History has been defined as the record of the struggle between freedom and authority, and James Madison identified tyranny of the majority as a political evil that democracy could produce. “We the People” does not mean our ethnic, racial, political, or sexual groups. We are not, as “identity politics” requires, defined by accidents of birth or socialization. We are not whatever our group is. We are not a society of politically sedated collectives. Individual opinions are necessary for a healthy democracy. We must reclaim our Founder’s “We the People” as individual persons to define ourselves as independent participants in a free society. 

Please let us know if you Like Issue 362 B - What does “We the People” mean? on Facebook this article.
We welcome your feedback.
Abrazos,

Lily & José

(click on the name to email Lily or Jose)
José Azel, Ph.D.

José Azel left Cuba in 1961 as a 13 year-old political exile in what has been dubbed Operation Pedro Pan - the largest unaccompanied child refugee movement in the history of the Western Hemisphere.  

He is currently dedicated to the in-depth analyses of Cuba's economic, social and political state, with a keen interest in post-Castro-Cuba strategies. Dr. Azel was a Senior Scholar at the Institute for Cuban and Cuban-American Studies (ICCAS) at the University of Miami, Jose Azel has published extensively on Cuba related topics.

In 2012 and 2015, Dr. Azel testified in the U.S. Congress on U.S.-Cuba Policy, and U.S. National Security.  He is a frequent speaker and commentator on these and related topics on local, national and international media.  He holds undergraduate and masters degrees in business administration and a Ph.D. in International Affairs from the University of Miami.

José along with his wife Lily are avid skiers and adventure travelers.  In recent years they have climbed Grand Teton in Wyoming, trekked Mt. Kilimanjaro in Tanzania and Machu Pichu in Peru.  They have also hiked in Tibet and in the Himalayas to Mt. Everest Base Camp.

They cycled St. James Way (
El Camino de Santiago de Compostela) and cycled alongside the Danube from Germany to Hungary and throughout southern France.  They have scuba dived in the Bay Islands off the Honduran coast and in the Galapagos Islands. Most recently, they rafted for 17 days 220 miles in the Grand Canyon. 

Their adventurers are normally dedicated to raise funds for causes that are dear to them. 

Watch Joe & Lily summit Kilimanjaro.

Books by Dr. José Azel
José Azel’s writings are touched with the wisdom of a master, and the charm of an excellent communicator. Anyone who wishes to understand why countries do, or do not, progress will find in this book the best explanations. And, from these readings emerge numerous inferences: How and why do the good intentions of leftist collectivism lead countries to hell? Why is liberty not a sub product of prosperity, but rather one of its causes?

If it was in my power, this work would be required reading for all college and university students, and I would also recommend its reading to all politicians, journalists, and policymakers. With his writings Azel accomplishes what was achieved in France by Frédéric Bastiat, and in the United States by Henry Hazlitt: Azel brings together common sense with intelligent observation, and academic substance. Stupendous,

Carlos Alberto Montaner

                                                                   BUY NOW
Los escritos de José Azel están tocados por la sabiduría de un maestro y la amenidad de un excelente comunicador. Cualquiera que desee entender por qué los países progresan, o no, encontrará en este libro las mejores explicaciones. De estas lecturas surgen numerosas inferencias: ¿Cómo y por qué las buenas intenciones del colectivismo de izquierda llevan a los países al infierno? ¿Por qué la libertad no es un subproducto de la prosperidad, sino una de sus causas?

Si estuviera en mis manos, esta obra sería de obligada lectura de todos los estudiantes universitarios, pero además, le recomendaría su lectura a todos los políticos, periodistas y policy makers. Con sus escritos Azel logra lo que Frédéric Bastiat consiguiera en Francia y Henry Hazlitt en Estados Unidos: aunar el sentido común, la observación inteligente y la enjundia académica. Estupendo.

Carlos Alberto Montaner
                                                           
Compre Aqui
"Liberty for beginners is much more than what the title promises. It is eighty themes touched with the wisdom of a master, and the charm of an excellent communicator. Anyone that wishes to understand why countries do, or do not progress, will find in this book the best explanations. Stupendous"

Carlos Alberto Montaner

"Libertad para novatos es mucho más de lo que promete el título. Son ochenta temas tocados con la sabiduría de un maestro y la amenidad de un excelente comunicador. Cualquier adulto que desee saber por qué progresan o se estancan los pueblos aquí encontrará las mejores explicaciones. Estupendo."

Carlos Alberto Montaner

Compre Aqui

In Reflections on FreedomJosé Azel brings together a collection of his columns published in prestigious newspapers.  Each article reveals his heartfelt and personal awareness of the importance of freedom in our lives.  They are his reflections after nearly sixty years of living and learning as a Cuban outside Cuba. In what has become his stylistic trademark, Professor Azel brilliantly introduces complex topics in brief journalistic articles.
En Reflexiones sobre la libertad José Azel reúne una colección de sus columnas publicadas en prestigiosos periódicos. Cada artículo revela su percepción sincera y personal de la importancia de la libertad en nuestras vidas. Son sus reflexiones después de casi sesenta años viviendo y aprendiendo como cubano fuera de Cuba.  En lo que ha resultado ser característica distintiva de sus artículos, el Profesor Azel introduce con brillantez complejos temas en  breves artículos de carácter periodístico.
Mañana in Cuba is a comprehensive analysis of contemporary Cuba with an incisive perspective of the Cuban frame of mind and its relevancy for Cuba's future.
Pedazos y Vacíos is a collection of poems written in by Dr. Azel in his youth. Poems are in Spanish.

Free Cuba Now!

To promote a nonviolent transition to a Cuba that respects human rights, political and economic freedoms, and the rule of law.

 
The main reason behind Cuba’s economic debacle

Hundreds of boxes of mangoes rotted in the fields of Camagüey in the current harvest of 2021. (14ymedio)

Former University of Pittsburgh professor Carmelo Mesa Lago, dubbed “the dean of Cuban economists,” in two interviews over the past week has succinctly explained the cause for Cuba’s economic disaster.

In this paragraph, interviewed by Andres Oppenheimer for his June 17, 2024 Miami Herald column “Russia’s warships in Cuba are more than a tit-for-tat for Biden’s support for Ukraine” Professor Mesa Lago said that Havana has maintained its communist economic model.

The main reason behind Cuba’s economic debacle is that, unlike other communist-ruled countries like China and Vietnam that follow the “socialist market” model, a code work for a hybrid economy, the Cuban regime has not allowed a sizable private sector.

Cuba has to import sugar, poultry and several other foodstuffs because private farmers have no incentive to produce, Mesa Lago said.  “In Cuba, farmers have to sell up to 70% of their crops to the state, and their products’ prices are set by the state below the market price.”

Consequently, the Cuban dictatorship seeks to place the blame for its failures elsewhere, but the official argument collapses when scrutinized.

Collectivization of agriculture and the end of self-sufficiency

Firstly, according to the Cuban Studies Institute between 1952-1958 there was “a successful nationalistic trend aimed to reach agricultural self-sufficiency to supply the people’s market demand for food.” Despite the efforts to violently overthrow the Batista regime in the 1950s, “the Cuban food supply grew steadily to provide a highly productive system that, in daily calories consumption, ranked Cuba third in Latin America.”

Secondly, this ended when the Castro regime seized and collectivized properties, and prohibited farmers selling their crops to non-state entities, in the early years of the revolution. Farmers no longer decided how much to produce, or what price to sell. The Cuban government established production quotas and farmers were (and are) obligated to sell to the state collection agency, called Acopio. Most recent law on agriculture in Cuba ( Decreto Ley 358 de 2018) continues to prohibit private sales of agricultural products to non-state entities. The dictatorship began rationing food in 1962 as a method of control and continued the practice over the next six decades. Rationed food is not free, but sold at subsidized prices. Rationed items are not enough to feed a person.

After that, Marc Frank of Reuters reported on August 10, 2010 that “in Cuba’s long-centralized agriculture system, farmers must produce certain crops or livestock to sell back to the state at fixed prices in exchange for state-assigned supplies.” In the same article he divulged how “farmers and consumers complain the cumbersome system sometimes results in rotting crops and farmers going without timely supplies of animal feed, pesticides and fertilizer.”

Let the food rot, or get into trouble if you try to sell it

Rotting crops cannot be blamed on economic sanctions, but inefficient centralized communist agricultural practices that prohibit market mechanisms to increase efficiency and deliver more food to Cubans. Diario de Cuba (DDC) ( March 18, 2021) and 14ymedio (June 15, 2021) have reported on rotting food crops due to the failures of the state enterprise, Acopio in picking them up on time.

Worse yet, farmers have no other option but to allow them to rot or risk fines and prison.

For example, DDC’s March 18, 2021 article described how tomatoes, onions, cabbage and other vegetables were rotting, and efforts by farmers and other independent actors to get the crops to sell to Cubans resulted in detentions and fines. DDC interviewed Esteban Ajete Abascal, president of the League of Independent Farmers of Cuba in the article who said that“one of the farmers, in recent days, left with a truck of onions to try to sell them, and they stopped him at the checkpoint, just outside of San Diego de los Baños, and the head of the sector seized the entire truck of onions. Every time they try to leave, they are intercepted and the merchandise is taken away.”

As a result, between 70% and 80% of Cuba’s food is imported today. This included the years when Cuba was heavily subsidized by the Soviet Union, and was part of the East Bloc. Since 2000, much of the food purchased by Havana has been imported from the United States. Despite this, rationing continued during the peak years (2011 – 2014) when the Cuban government received massive amounts of assistance from Venezuela’s Chavez regime.

Most chicken eaten in Cuba is imported from the United States, not grown in Cuba

 
 

The Blockade

Havana calls United States economic sanctions on the Cuban dictatorship a “blockade.” This is not true as the State Department (and U.S. – Cuba trade statistics over the past 25 years) demonstrate. A meme appeared on Twitter in Spanish that outlines this reality, and Cuban scholar and journalist Carlos Alberto Montaner gave a July 15, 2021 commentary on it. The first two lines of the meme translated below to English reveal the blockade imposed by Cuba’s communist regime on Cubans.

“The blockade does not prohibit fishermen in Cuba from fishing, the dictatorship does;
The blockade does not confiscate what farmers harvest, the dictatorship does;

The Cuban government’s internal blockade can be seen in action in its messaging on fishing.

Fishing

Firstly, the Vice Minister of Cuba’s Food Industry, Mydalis Naranjo Blanco, said on the radio and television Mesa Redonda   program that the seas that surround the island do not have enough fish for Cubans to consume.  “In terms of fishing, it is appropriate to say  that although we are a country that is surrounded by the sea, our  waters do not have the levels of fish that we need to cover the demand  of the population,” Naranjo Blanco responded to Randy Alonso’s question  about the fishing situation in Cuba, reported Diario de Cuba on June 22, 2023.

Secondly, Deputy Prime Minister Jorge Luis Tapia, during a speech before the National Assembly of People’s Power on July 21, 2023, assured that “family aquaculture” was successful during the Special Period, the acute economic crisis of the 1990s.

“In the years of the Special Period there was a movement at the level of the popular council that many families made the tank and that exists in the world. But here in Cuba it was made. A pond, four meters around and they raised fish there after they had it. they caught”, he emphasized hitting the podium, according to images transmitted by the official Canal Caribe.

Therefore, the message to Cubans: no fish in the surrounding ocean waters, and if you want to  get your own fish you will need to cultivate it in improvised man-made  fresh water ponds. Furthermore, Yoani Sanchezwrote a column that exposes Tapia’s  failed scheme within the existing Cuban reality.

Tapia, who has left the worst of reputations – for being inefficient, corrupt and oppressive – wherever they have placed him as leader of the PCC, has not the slightest idea of what he is ordering us to do.

An island without fish

Cubans "joke bitterly about being an island without fish" since they consume only "a quarter of the seafood they did at the end of the 1980s, according to official data," and "a fraction of the global average fish consumption per capita," according to a Reuters report published on August 27, 2019.

On the other hand, compare and contrast the fishing experience of Cubans in the video above, to foreign tourists in the video below.

Furthermore, these are not the messages sent to visiting international tourists. VisitCuba.com offers a typical message addressed to tourists that contradicts what is being told to Cubans on the island.

“Largely  unspoiled and mega-diverse, Cuba is one of the most  fascinating destinations for fishing in the Caribbean. Although located  in the heart of the Caribbean, Cuba is also right next to deep oceanic  trenches, which hide hundreds of different species. No wonder the  legendary writer Ernest Hemingway ended up staying here  for over 20 years: fishing in Cuba is something else! During this time,  not only did he write some of his masterpieces, but he also explored  the coast aboard the Pilar, his very own custom-built fishing boat.  Cuba’s waters, rivers, and lakes are full of Atlantic tarpons,  bonefish, pomfrets, Atlantic bass, and trout. However, if you want to  find the biggest banks and the rarest species, make sure you check out  the places on the list below.”

Saltwater Sportsman in their 2016 article  described permits and mutton snappers that were found in good numbers  in an area called Cuba’s Zapata Peninsula, and provided some  photographic evidence of their catch.

Let Cubans fish

Mary Anastasia O’Grady in her September 7, 2021 column in The Wall Street Journal titled “A Sanction Worth Lifting in Cuba” highlighted  the obstacles placed by Cuba’s military dictatorship on Cubans in the  island. In it she mentioned the Center for a Free Cuba’s July 29, 2021 CubaBrief  that made the request to “Let Cubans Fish” and outlined the existing reality.

“This is no joke. A Caribbean sea teeming with marine life contains abundant  protein. Yet it’s nearly impossible for Cubans legally to reel in dinner  to feed their families. This is more proof, as if we needed it, that  socialism is for morons.”

Nora Gámez Torres in her August 6, 2021 column,”Once again, Cuba blames the U.S. embargo for its domestic problems. It’s not that simple.” published in the Miami Herald makes the case that Cuban government policy is responsible for the lack of food.

After six decades of socialist centralization, the country still does not produce enough to feed its population. Farmers can not freely cultivate and sell their crops. Its fishing fleets – and individual fishermen, are not allowed to sell fish – as the Center for a Free Cuba recently reminded readers in its response to a paid advertisement that appeared in the New York Times with the title “Let Cuba Live!” The Center titled its retort: “Let Cubans fish!”

The mirage of the SMEs

Finally, there is a lot of buzz in foreign policy circles about new small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in Cuba, but Carmelo Mesa Lago described it in the June 16, 2024 interview Carmelo Mesa-Lago: ‘Today’s Cuba is a catastrophe’ published in El Pais English  by Carla Gloria Colomé citing an article in The New York Times that the claims made were “exaggerated.”

Firstly, “the Communist Party says that the private sector is the Trojan horse that imperialism uses to try to destroy the Revolution. The New York Times published an article in which it exaggerated, and I will give you two or three examples. They say that 10,200 new jobs in the private sector have been opened up since 2021, when SMEs began to be approved, and they say that in 2023, between the private sector and the government, imports of each totaled $1 billion.”

Value of imports to Cuba is 62% less than in 2013

“I went to the Cuban statistical yearbook, and looked at the imports of the previous year, 2022, and they were $2.17 billion. In other words, what they are quoting for 2023 is 8% less than the previous year. It is not an increase, it is a decrease in imports. Not only in terms of volume, money, amount, but these imports buy less due to the problem of rising food prices. That is a distortion of reality. That figure was given by the government, but the government does not say that they were less than the previous year.”

Moreover, “If you compare 2023 with 2013, the drop was 62%. That is, the value of imports in 2023 is 62% below that of 2013. And, if you compare it with 1989, the drop is 67%. This means that, despite SMEs,imports are reduced not only in amount, but in purchasing power. You’re giving me that as a demonstration of something successful, but, according to the numbers, it’s quite the opposite. They also say that the private sector provides half of the total employment, that is not true. Using 2023 figures, it is a third of total employment.” .

Improved relations did not translate to economic liberalization

The extension of military control over the Cuban economy accompanied President Obama's 2009 - 2017 detente with Raul Castro.

In contrast, Cuba's agricultural sector was liberalized during times of crisis.

For example, in the 1980s there were "free farmers’ markets". Afterwards, during the Special Period, in the 1990s, the "free agricultural markets." Both demonstrated the ability of Cuban farmers to produce large quantities of food, but were later overturned after the emergency that caused them to be enacted ended.

In conclusion, Cuban farmers are penalized by the Castro regime's communist agrarian policies, which place a higher priority on retaining power than on solving the island nation's low level of domestic production. If Cuban farmers are given the freedom to grow and sell their produce in markets to other Cubans, the communist dictatorship fears losing control of the island.