Related videos:
The controversy over the support of the national president of the University Student Federation (FEU), Ricardo Rodríguez González, for the pricing policy of ETECSA continues to grow and has sparked a massive wave of public indignation on social media.
Since the publication of his post in which he defended the appearance of Miguel Díaz-Canel, thousands of Cubans have reacted with anger, mockery, and disbelief, accusing him of being a “traitor,” “submissive,” and a “puppet of power.”
The servile interpretation used by Rodríguez to praise the presidential speech - “it was clear, it was explained” - was the trigger.
While the leader justified the price increase in telecommunications services on his podcast From the Presidency, Rodríguez supported him on his social media as if he were speaking on behalf of the students. But the response was swift: the students contradicted him with actions and words.
An overwhelming and spontaneous rejection
On the Facebook page of CiberCuba, where the note about his statements was shared, the comments reached record numbers. Over 4,000 reactions and more than 1,500 messages in less than 24 hours harshly expressed the widespread sentiment: Rodríguez González no longer represents young Cubans.
“They should remove him; his role is to defend the interests of the students, and if he doesn't fulfill that, then he should be taken out of there.”, wrote a user. Another was more direct: “Bootlickers like many, but the youth are waking up.”
The qualifiers are often repeated: "traitor," "stooge," " informer," "lackey," "sheep," "bootlicker."
The outrage becomes even more symbolic when referring to the sweater worn by the young leader, featuring the face of Lenin, and the visible tattoo on his arm depicting the hammer and sickle of the communists. "That says it all" was the most quoted phrase to express that, visually, Rodríguez González embodies the apparatus of totalitarian power more than a critical and weary youth.
The wound of representation
The most repeated criticism is that Rodríguez González has betrayed the role he was supposed to fulfill as a student leader.
“Your duty is to support the students who are protesting, not to support the indefensible”, shouted an internet user. “Mella and José Antonio would be turning in their graves”, many said, recalling the combative and defiant origins of the FEU in Cuba's history.
Others were even more sarcastic: "We'll see him in a couple of years crossing the border, like so many other regime spokespersons who end up in exile".
Comparisons with disgraced political figures, such as Roberto Robaina, Carlos Lage, or Felipe Pérez Roque, were abundant. The pattern is well-known among the public: those who today receive applause from the top are tomorrow discarded when they no longer serve the interests of power.
"A president we did not choose"
Dozens of comments questioned the legitimacy of the process that brought Rodríguez González to his position. "Who elected him?", asked many internet users. For many, his appointment is another proof of the lack of autonomy of Cuban organizations. "He does not represent the FEU, he represents the PCC", they stated.
There was also a renewed insistence on his immediate removal by the federations of various universities. “The students themselves must call for his resignation. If he does not represent, he cannot stay there”, wrote an architect in one of the most read comments.
A critique that goes beyond the fare
While the trigger was ETECSA's price hike —deemed a "theft" by many—, the real underlying issue of this digital storm is the lack of representation and the disconnection between official leaders and the citizenry.
“This young man does not suffer like we do”, wrote an internet user from Camagüey, revealing that Rodríguez González is reportedly from a sugar town abandoned by the so-called “revolution,” that is, the dictatorship he now defends.
The references to the privileges enjoyed by Rodríguez González —possible free recharges, unrestricted connections, travel, and benefits from his position— were also frequent. “It's easy to talk from the top”, they pointed out.
From mockery to moral rejection
Beyond the insults, many users raised reflections of high moral caliber. "Dignity cannot be bought. The president of the FEU should be the first to defend the student body, not to repeat the discourse of those in power," said a user.
In reference to the pullover featuring the face of Vladimir Ilich Lenin, others wondered: “Does that young man know how many deaths the person printed on his chest has caused?”
Some questioned his conscience directly: “If you're not with your peers, who are you with?”, was a recurring theme. The accusation of “submission” evolved from being merely political to becoming an ethical and generational judgment.
A wasted opportunity
Far from calming the spirits, Rodríguez González's defense of Díaz-Canel's words has deepened a significant rift between the official institutions and the younger segments of the population.
Instead of representing, it has made visible its disconnection from the real problems of the country: the economic crisis, repression, and forced emigration.
What began as an institutional comment ended in a national scandal. The FEU, instead of strengthening as a space for dialogue and action among university students, has once again fallen into disrepute. And its president, rather than being the voice of the students, has become a symbol of everything they reject.
“It does not represent us”, was the most shared cry. And in that phrase lies the core of a much deeper crisis: that of the Cuban political system, which is unable to generate legitimate and respected leadership, even among its own base.
Filed under: