Sandro Castro Faces Internal Criticism: Gerardo Hernández's Implied Endorsement

In a powerful critique against the behavior of Sandro Castro, Fidel Castro's controversial grandson, former spy Gerardo Hernández Nordelo has shown his support through a succinct yet impactful Facebook post: “AMEN.” Unlike the average citizen, Gerardo is regarded by the regime as a hero of the Republic, a former member of the “Cuban Five,” and currently serves as the National Coordinator of the Committees for the Defense of the Revolution (CDR). His Facebook page is not merely personal; it acts as an informal political forum for those aligned with the government and its ideologies.

When Hernández shares a harsh critique like that of Ernesto Limia, sealing it with “AMEN,” it conveys more than mere agreement. It signals legitimacy and authorization, a nod of approval from the ideological apparatus. In a religious context, “amen” translates to “so be it.” In today’s Cuban climate, coming from Gerardo, it serves as a revolutionary blessing, integrating the criticism into the authorized discourse. Limia's text, once shared by Gerardo, transitions from intellectual rumination to doctrinal directive, allowing it to be perceived as a sanctioned attack.

This action can also be seen as a preventive warning. If the criticism comes from within the regime, backed by figures like Gerardo and Limia, it cannot be dismissed as enemy propaganda. It's friendly fire, yet still a direct hit.

Criticism from Within

Ernesto Limia Díaz, the historian and intellectual behind the original piece titled “Te lo prometió Martí…”, delivers a pointed reflection on Sandro Castro’s public behavior. Limia doesn't mince words, labeling Castro an “imbecile” and accusing him of tarnishing his grandfather’s legacy. Limia criticizes Sandro for posing with the American flag, interpreting it as disrespectful and ego-driven, noting that Cuba's adversaries exploit such behavior.

The critique draws on historical figures like José de la Luz y Caballero and José Martí to underscore the moral judgment against the revolutionary’s descendant.

The Downfall of Sandro Castro

Over recent years, Sandro Castro has gained notoriety for his ostentatious lifestyle, starting with a viral video of him driving a Mercedes amid a pandemic-stricken Cuba in 2021. This was followed by lavish parties and extravagant displays, making him a trending topic, often seen with his signature beer, Cristal, and involved in increasingly bizarre antics.

His subtle jabs at state entities like UNE and ETECSA have been polarizing, with some even humorously nominating him for president. However, his real misstep in the eyes of the regime seems to have been aligning himself with the American flag, and indirectly criticizing Díaz-Canel.

Not a Political Enemy, But Still a Problem

Limia clarifies that Sandro Castro hasn’t committed any crimes nor is he a political adversary. However, his lack of ethics and exploitation of his surname damage the regime’s image, suggesting that his unchecked conduct has become intolerable.

Limia draws historical comparisons, noting that even the founding fathers of Cuba had descendants who strayed from their legacy. This analogy underscores that familial lineage does not guarantee loyalty or integrity. He warns against imprisoning Sandro without due process, as it would play into the hands of historical foes, portraying the revolution as one that devours its own.

Gerardo Hernández’s simple yet powerful “AMEN” gives the critique institutional weight. By endorsing Limia’s text with one word, Hernández elevates it from personal opinion to a moral guideline, a significant move in Cuba’s increasingly polarized social media landscape.

His endorsement is neither innocent nor rhetorical. It distinctly draws a line between the revered symbols of the Revolution and those who tarnish them. Gerardo’s single word resonates louder than lengthy speeches, marking a turning point.

In this charged context, Gerardo’s “AMEN” is more than approval; it’s a declaration that patience has run out. In a nation where the speaker’s identity often outweighs the words themselves, Gerardo’s brief yet potent endorsement of the critique against Sandro Castro is significant.

With this tacit yet clear institutional blessing, it’s evident that the grace period for Sandro Castro is over. The call to criticize him is no longer from independent media or frustrated exiles—it’s an internal directive.