On Friday, Cuban sociologist, playwright, and researcher Esther Suárez Durán released an essay on the independent platform CubaxCuba. The piece examines the rift between the Cuban populace and the regime's leadership through the lens of language: "Us" versus "Them." This is more than just a grammatical issue.
Suárez Durán explores the transformation of collective pronouns in Cuba. Initially, there was a revolutionary "Us" that united both the leaders and the people. Over time, as issues went unaddressed, the pronoun shifted to "You" as the public began to challenge their leaders, ultimately evolving into the current "Them," which signifies an irrefutable and absolute distance.
She recalls that in the early days of the revolution, the leader intentionally used plural pronouns during public addresses, fostering a genuine sense of collective identity. "The grammatical plural became flesh among the people, and those of us who embraced revolutionary ideals, regardless of age, soon felt part of the 'Us': with victories and setbacks, achievements and errors," she writes.
To explain this initial cohesion, Suárez Durán invokes the Weberian concept of "charismatic domination," as defined by Max Weber. It rests on the extraordinary devotion to the sanctity, heroism, or exemplary nature of a person and the orders created or revealed by them. However, she emphasizes that charisma was not the sole foundation; the leadership maintained a social contract with the people for decades.
This contract began to crumble when citizens demanded accountability, and the regime responded with indifference. The author notes how "the appeal to 'You,' from 'Us,' became increasingly belligerent...because 'You' responded with silence, neglect, or, alternately, denial and falsehood."
The final break came with the elite's display of privileges. "Faced with the vast, unbridgeable chasm of living standards, the flaunting of privileges—immorality as the norm rather than empathy and exemplarity—the plural subject 'You'...was replaced by another, now recognized as entirely distant, indifferent, and unassailable: 'Them,'" Suárez Durán writes.
This separation is reflected in hard data: according to the Cuban Observatory for Human Rights, 92% of Cubans disapproved of the government's performance in September 2025, and among those aged 18 to 30, only 3.39% had a favorable opinion.
Cuban jurist René Fidel González García stated in September 2026 that there is no longer just "alienation" between the rulers and the citizens but a structural and irreversible "disconnection." While vast majorities barely survive in today's Cuban society—recent figures put extreme poverty at 94%—the ruling elite, largely connected to the Castro family, live in scandalous luxury.
The most severe consequence of this fracture, the author concludes, is that "at this point, from 'Them,' there is no possibility of appealing to any meaningful unity," while from the people's perspective, the very mention of "Them" is laden with despair, frustration, and, above all, deep contempt.
In response, Suárez Durán champions the dignity of the majority: "The Most (because that is who we are: the most) show sacred respect, recognize the homeland as an altar, and we are neither willing nor able to accept any unhealthy, ridiculous, or annoying pedestal."
Understanding the Divide Between "Us" and "Them" in Cuba
What does Esther Suárez Durán's essay focus on?
The essay examines the language-driven rift between the Cuban people and the regime's leadership, highlighting the shift from "Us" to "Them."
How did the use of pronouns change in Cuba over time?
Initially, there was a collective "Us" that united leaders and citizens. As issues went unresolved, it shifted to "You," and ultimately to "Them," indicating a complete disconnection.
What is the significance of "charismatic domination" in this context?
"Charismatic domination," as defined by Max Weber, explains the initial cohesion in Cuba, where the leader's charisma and the social contract with the people created unity.