Cuban broadcaster Laritza Camacho has indirectly but unmistakably responded to a controversial statement made by pro-government journalist Arleen Rodríguez Derivet. Rodríguez attempted to justify power outages in Cuba by stating that José Martí "never experienced electric light and was still a genius."
"Keep playing games, but don't mess with Martí, where his people reside," Camacho declared in a brief post on her Facebook profile recently.
"Martí is perhaps the only light we have left. Show some respect," she added, accompanying her words with a photo of Martí's statue in Central Park.
While Camacho's post did not explicitly mention Rodríguez Derivet, it clearly addressed the issue that has flooded social media in recent days.
A Comment That Missed the Mark
The controversy began when a segment of an interview recorded months earlier between Arleen Rodríguez and former Ecuadorian president Rafael Correa circulated online. During their conversation, broadcasted by RT en Español, Rodríguez attempted to downplay the impact of power cuts with a comment that sparked widespread outrage:
"José Martí never experienced electric light and was a genius; he wrote like the gods. I wish I could write one line like Martí with the lights on," the officialist journalist remarked.
Correa, visibly uncomfortable, interrupted with a sharp retort: "But Arleen, we're in the 21st century."
Although the incident occurred in November, the interview has resurfaced amidst ongoing power outages lasting over 40 hours in several Cuban provinces. Comparing the lack of electricity to Martí's time not only demonstrates poor judgment but also mocks the daily struggles of millions of Cubans.
Through her succinct post, Laritza Camacho has drawn a moral boundary against those who exploit Martí's legacy for political ends. Her message, widely shared and applauded, has ignited a wave of reactions rooted in dignity, memory, and historical clarity.
Public Outrage: "Not with Martí"
Arleen Rodríguez's comment unleashed a torrent of criticism, sarcasm, indignation, and pain. Laritza Camacho's post, in turn, has channeled this collective sentiment with profound simplicity. The responses emphasize the need to establish a red line:
"Martí is not an excuse to justify darkness." "If we're going to talk about sacrifice, it should be with respect and knowledge." "Do not touch Martí, even in darkness." "The dignity of the people dims when their history is manipulated."
Many recalled that using Martí to legitimize hardship has been a recurring theme in official discourse, but this time a dangerous threshold was crossed: denying history in the name of propaganda. Others pointed out the contrast between the comfort of those speaking from well-lit studios and the reality faced by those living by candlelight, with mosquitoes and spoiling food.
Rodríguez's comment seemed to encapsulate the complete disconnect between the regime's spokespeople and everyday life.
"You can't speak of Martí while living in privilege and leaving the people in darkness." "Don't place me in the dark, as he himself said. But you insist."
Some, with biting humor, summed up the general sentiment: "First, it was that rice was Asian. Now that electricity doesn't matter. What's next, wearing loincloths?"
Martí's Awareness of Electricity
Beyond the controversy, there is an incontrovertible fact: José Martí not only knew about electricity, but he also wrote about it with admiration and depth. During his time in the United States—primarily in New York—Martí witnessed the emergence of electric lighting and the advancement of science in this field.
Between 1882 and 1884, he published numerous articles in magazines such as La América, La Opinión Nacional, and La Nación, where he enthusiastically discussed the technological innovations of his era. In La Edad de Oro, aimed at Latin American children, Martí explicitly mentioned "electric light" among the great achievements of civilization.
In a chronicle from New York, he wrote: "Beautiful electric light! ... the soft air illuminated, as if by the reflections of angel wings..."
He also left reflections that remain relevant today:
"Among man's dreams, there is one beautiful: to banish the night." "One must know the world's forces to put them to work and make the electricity that kills in a lightning bolt illuminate in the light."
Among the titles of his articles are: Progresos de la ciencia eléctrica, La luz Edison, Últimas maravillas de la electricidad, Carros eléctricos, and La exposición de Boston, among others. In them, he described inventions, technological fairs, and new uses of electricity in banks, theaters, factories, and streets.
A Line Not to Be Crossed
Arleen Rodríguez's error was not just a historical oversight, but an ethical affront. In a country where darkness has become routine, comparing the current precariousness with the context of the 19th century equates to normalizing regression and erasing aspirations for progress.
Martí's legacy cannot continue to be manipulated at the convenience of those seeking to justify collapse. As one commentator bitterly noted:
"Now it seems Martí is also the intellectual author of the power outages."
Key Questions About the Controversy Involving Martí and Electricity
Why did Laritza Camacho speak out against Arleen Rodríguez?
Laritza Camacho spoke out in response to Arleen Rodríguez's attempt to justify Cuba's power outages by referencing Martí's lack of experience with electric light, a statement that many found disrespectful and historically inaccurate.
What was the public's reaction to Rodríguez's comments?
The public reacted with widespread criticism, sarcasm, and indignation, viewing Rodríguez's comments as a misuse of Martí's legacy to downplay the hardships faced by Cubans due to ongoing power outages.