Details

Published: 10 January 2026

Cubans Would Welcome U.S. Military Action

Leer en Español

For more than six decades, U.S. policy toward Cuba has generally oscillated between containment, engagement, sanctions, and rhetorical support for democratic aspirations. What has remained largely unchanged is the assumption—shared by many well-intentioned observers—that peaceful civic resistance, international pressure, and gradual liberalization could ultimately bring about regime change. History has shown otherwise. In totalitarian systems, particularly Marxist–Leninist regimes modeled on Cuban state doctrine, non-violent strategies alone do not dismantle power. They merely coexist with it.

The Trump administration’s renewed emphasis on reversing communist gains in Latin America reflects a strategic recalibration long overdue. The naval presence in the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean, combined with decisive action against socialist strongholds in Venezuela and potentially elsewhere in the hemisphere, signals a recognition of a fundamental reality. Force, when legitimate and intelligently applied, remains the only proven mechanism for overthrowing entrenched totalitarian regimes.

Pacifist regime-change strategies have succeeded primarily in democratic or semi-democratic systems. These are states where power holders are constrained by law, public opinion, or institutional accountability. Non-violent movements can compel concessions in such environments because governments fear electoral loss, reputational damage, or judicial consequences. Totalitarian regimes fear none of these. They are afraid only of the loss of coercive control. 

Read more: Cubans Would Welcome U.S. Military Action

Details

Published: 04 January 2026

The Capture of Nicolás Maduro: A Turning Point in Confronting Continental Socialism

Leer en Español

In the early hours of January 3, 2026, the world awoke to stunning news: Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, had been captured in a daring U.S.-led operation. While the specifics of the raid—rumored to involve elite special forces, cyber disruptions, and local intelligence assets—remain shrouded in secrecy, the implications are profound. This bold action signals a seismic shift in U.S. foreign policy: a new paradigm aimed at directly confronting the scourge of continental socialism across Latin America. For too long, this ideological cancer has been financially underwritten by the illicit drug trade, allowing it to fester and spread. The Maduro regime's downfall, should it play out, would not merely be the ousting of a tyrant. It would be a deliberate strike against a network that has poisoned the hemisphere, subsidized by narcotics profits and bolstered by foreign adversaries.

The roots of this crisis trace back to decades of U.S. disengagement from Latin America. Following the Cold War's end, American attention pivoted to the Middle East, Europe, and Asia, leaving a vacuum in its own backyard. Into this void poured opportunistic powers: China, with its Belt and Road investments and resource grabs; Russia, arming regimes and meddling in elections; Iran, exporting its revolutionary zeal through proxy militias; and North Korea, acting as a Chinese surrogate in arms deals and nuclear technology transfers. These nations exploited the region's instability, propping up leftist governments that promised equality but delivered poverty and repression. Venezuela, under Maduro, became a prime example—a failed state where hyperinflation, food shortages, and human rights abuses were normalized under the guise of "Bolivarian socialism." 

Read more: The Capture of Nicolás Maduro: A Turning Point in Confronting Continental Socialism

Details

Published: 20 May 2025

The Myth of Progress: Notes on Cuba Before and After Communism

Leer en Español

A comparative analysis of Cuba in healthcare, education, and labor conditions before and after 66 years of socialist regime, dismantling the myths about revolutionary achievements.

123 Years of Independence: Two Contrasting Realities

May 20, 2025 marks the 123rd anniversary of Cuba's independence. Of this total, only 27 years corresponded to a republic that, although imperfect, built a prosperous and modern nation. This period, despite including two authoritarian episodes, contrasts dramatically with the subsequent 66 years under a communist totalitarian regime that has plunged the island into a profound material, spiritual, and moral crisis.

For more than six decades, Castroism has transformed Cuba into a scenario of repression, pain, and widespread misery, where the most basic liberties have disappeared. The regime has survived, transitioning from being an instrument of international communism to becoming, after the fall of the Soviet bloc, a promoter of these ideas through initiatives such as the São Paulo Forum.

The Regime's Survival Mechanisms

How has it managed to stay in power for so long? The answer lies in two main areas:

Internally, through a sophisticated apparatus of state terrorism and an impressive espionage network that has infiltrated all opposition groups.

Externally, obtaining the support of the international community through extensive disinformation campaigns that have projected a distorted image of Cuban reality.

To achieve this manipulation, the Castro regime has needed to deconstruct history, systematically falsifying the achievements of the republican stage prior to 1959.

Three Great Myths of Castroism

 

Direct link: http://cubanamericanvoice.com/pwa.html

 

Read more: The Myth of Progress: Notes on Cuba Before and After Communism

Details

Published: 26 April 2025

The Church’s Moment for Reparation

Leer en Español

The death of Pope Francis concludes a controversial twelve-year reign as Bishop of Rome. As the Catholic Church prepares to name the 267^th pope within the next few weeks, it is paramount to understand all that is at stake. Francis’ stewardship of the Church has presented man-made monumental challenges to the institution. The threat of schism has been real, because of the policies that he put in place or advocated for.

The Catholic Church is the largest Christian denomination in the world. Christianity is the biggest religion on the planet. Western civilization and its institutions, customs, and ethics were built upon Christianity as a religion and the Judeo-Christian values it subscribes to. This is why the person who is elected the next successor of St. Peter impacts everyone, not just Catholics. An understanding of the enormous shortcomings of the first Jesuit pope’s tenure is critical to appreciating this situation.

Pope Francis personified Vatican II (1962–1965). The Second Vatican Council (or Vatican II) was a consequential moment for the Catholic Church. It sought to “update” its teachings and practices for the modern era. It promoted ecumenism, introduced liturgical changes like using vernacular languages for Mass, and fostered dialogue with other religions. Likewise, it was also infiltrated and greatly influenced by communists and Soviet spies and sympathizers.

Vatican II was very political. It produced sixteen documents, including four constitutions, nine decrees, and three declarations. Not a single condemnation was made of communism, even though this was the heyday of the Cold War and communists were committing atrocities on every continent. Before Vatican II, there were at least ten papal encyclicals explicitly condemning, by name, both communism and socialism. None of this seemed to matter to promoters of the Second Vatican Council.  

The 1968 Latin American Episcopal Conference (CELAM) in Medellín, Colombia, weaponized communists. The CELAM summit was attended by nearly 250 bishops from across Latin America, along with theologians, priests, and religious and lay experts. The attending bishops called for a “preferential option for the poor” and emphasized that the Church must stand with the oppressed. However, this was not to be achieved by Catholicism’s traditional and historic venues for helping the poor and downtrodden. This was a call for revolution by way of championing systemic structural changes.

Liberation theology played a central role in Medellín. It sought to shape how the Church in Latin America would interpret and enforce Vatican II reforms. Influenced by Marxist analysis and misrepresenting the Gospel, it emphasized that salvation isn’t just spiritual but also involves “liberation” from perceived economic, political, and social “oppression.” Many bishops at Medellín, inspired by this theology, argued that the Church must be actively involved in transforming the existing structures of power. Among the attendees was Archbishop Hélder Câmara of Brazil, a key figure in liberation theology. Additionally, Câmara influenced Klaus Schwab in the early 1970s and helped shape the World Economic Forum’s model for “stakeholder capitalism.” From this realm of revolutionary-minded men, Jorge Mario Bergoglio entered the Church.

The Catholic Church of Vatican II became more immanent and less transcendentalist. The battle for the Church’s soul was launched. Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI, both having lived under totalitarian regimes, condemned communism and socialism for their atheistic and collectivist foundations. They saw these political religions as being incompatible with Catholic teachings on human dignity, freedom, and private property. Building on earlier papal critiques of materialist models, they also expressed concerns about excessive consumerism and secularism. John Paul II and Benedict XVI neutralized radical interpretations of Vatican II. The arrival of Jorge Mario Bergoglio at the Vatican changed that. The former Archbishop of Buenos Aires launched a war to reverse the course of his predecessors.

Pope Francis did not just emblematically represent the modernist underlaying of Medellín’s 1968 CELAM conference. Latin America’s first pope crossed the threshold from the modern into the postmodern. The open support of and the friendship enjoyed by Francis with Castro-Communism was consistent with his moral and ideological alignment with Marxism. Bergoglio, in his emotional and tactical bond with Latin America’s most formidable Soviet and Neo-Communist base, made clear his ideological pedigree. The ardent defense of globalist schemes such as eco-socialist projects like climate alarmism, promoted by internationalist powers like the UN and the WEF, were among Francis’ pet projects. Attacking Catholicism’s tradition and interrupting the established norms were methodologies employed towards those ends.

The death of Pope Francis has left the Catholic Church in turmoil, with deep divisions surfacing between liberal and conservative factions. The late pope's leftist reforms, including openness to the blessing of same-sex couples, establishing a false equivalency with Islam, and a focus on cultural Marxist interpretations of social justice have alienated a large percentage of the faithful. It is in continents such as Africa and Asia, where conservative readings of Church theology dominate, that Catholicism has witnessed the greatest surge in conversions and devotional practices. By contrast, European churches, which are tended by a more liberal clergy, are empty at times. The post-Vatican II stratagem seems to have shrunken the Catholic flock, the opposite of what its proponents said would happen.

Francis’s centralized leadership style, adopting Peronist traits, unorthodox reforms, and exercising controversial appointments such as Gustavo Zanchetta and Tucho Fernández, both highly problematic figures with questionable moral aptitude, have fractured Church governance. Concerns exist over Francis’s synodality potentially undermining hierarchical authority. The post-Francis Church must establish a balance between the role of the laity while preserving the Magisterium’s authority, ensuring orthodoxy in leadership appointments, and preventing regional synods from fostering theological ambivalence.

Doctrinal clarity must be reaffirmed with the ascension of the next pope. The Church should reaffirm unambiguous Catholic teachings, particularly on sexuality, family, and moral theology, countering ambiguities in Francis’s documents like Amoris Laetitia. Many of Francis’ critics have argued that Catholicism requires adherence to scripture, tradition, and doctrine, not blind obedience to a pope. The late pope’s approaches to notions such as the “brotherhood” with Muslims and the Vatican’s deal with China on bishop appointments or his amorous relationship with communist regimes is unacceptable. Francis attempt to institutionalize the Church’s post-Vatican II shift toward secularization and relaxed teachings are issues of doctrinal lapses that must be addressed.

The militant opposition to the growing traditionalist movement in the Church run by Francis’ papacy, emulating police-state tactics at times, has no place in Catholicism. The restrictions on Traditional Latin Mass, included in his 2021 apostolic letter Traditionis Custodes, are heretical by contradicting a practice that goes back to the 2^nd century. Another major issue that questioned Francis’s tenure was his focus on secular issues like migration and the environment, both orthodox themes of the atheistic globalist left. Prioritizing earthly matters and boxing them as existential threats lends many to see paganism rather than a transcendental religion.

God will judge Pope Francis. The Lord is always right, and His will shall be done. For the next pope, an array of issues remains in need of urgent attention. Addressing secularism through robust evangelization efforts rooted in unapologetic Gospel proclamation and cultural engagement is a must. The reverence and beauty of liturgical celebrations have got to return. The affirmation of Catholic doctrine requires the absolute rejection of communism and socialism in any form. Especially its postmodern offspring like Gender Ideology, Critical Queer Theory and other transhuman doctrines. The West must once again be proud of defending its exceptionalism. The Church is God-centered. Radical secularism, communism, and materialism are diversions from the soul’s salvation.

© The CubanAmerican Voice. All rights reserved.