3 - Order in Cuba: Good Security and Illegality

Summary

Overall, people in Cuba live simultaneously in two dimensions: a legal world with multiple restrictions and outdated rules, and an illegal world that adapts to a reality in which the rules do not make practical sense.

The legal world focuses on keeping strict and rigid control over all aspects of life in Cuba – such as jobs, salaries, businesses, sports, art, and education. The logic of Cuba's legal institutions responds to the regime's primary objective: remaining in power.

Citizens’ goals in the illegal dimension are twofold. First is the obvious goal of acquiring illicit rents. Second are actions that are driven by the need to, sometimes literally, survive. Specific illegal actions allow citizens to make Cuba a more liveable place. The Cuban government implicitly acknowledges this and tolerates many of these illicit actions. A philosophical interpretation of Cuba's rife illegality may refer to Saint Augustus’ idea of “just disobedience”: when laws are not just, citizens can justifiably break them.

Most economic and social spheres in Cuba function thanks to the co-existence of the legal and illegal worlds. Owners of paladares would not be able to properly operate or profit if they strictly followed the formal rules to buy their inputs from the state (which are scarce and of poor quality). And, given the scarce and excessive cost for accessing the Internet in Cuba, many Cubans would not be able to communicate regularly with their relatives abroad if it were not for cheaper illegal Internet access that is sold at public parks where there is a Wi-Fi signal.

The Cuban government is probably aware of the many illegal activities that take place. Most are conducted in broad daylight, and many in collusion with state employees. The state seems to be tolerant of economic activities that partially compensate for massive state inefficiencies and corruption in the production and distribution of basic goods. The Cuban state seems to have decided to tolerate those activities that are harmless to the survival of the current political system. Yet it is quite intolerant when political opponents – like human rights activists, or individuals demanding further democratization – break the regime rules.