What one needs to understand about Cuban prisons before commenting on a political prisoner

The Cuban penitentiary system is a closed, arbitrary, and deeply corrupt structure, where prisons operate as fiefdoms managed by chiefs with extensive power over the lives of inmates. Extreme hunger, malnutrition, unsanitary conditions, tuberculosis, scabies, parasitism, bed bugs and other insects and rodents, gastrointestinal diseases, a lack of medications, and almost always insufficient medical care prevail.

Beatings, physical and psychological torture, prolonged isolation, sexual abuse, theft, drug trafficking, violence among inmates tolerated or promoted by officials, and deaths that go unpunished are also very common.

In Cuban prisons, if a prisoner is skilled, brave, bold, and has economic resources, they can buy and possess many things. Common prisoners smuggle in marijuana, alcohol, food, and even obtain or buy sex from women affiliated with the Minint and some female medical staff. In the regime's prisons, you can find a few individuals who are very overweight and even muscular, reminiscent of Arnold Schwarzenegger, alongside thousands more who are malnourished, resembling prisoners from Auschwitz-Birkenau.

Within that hell, not all political prisoners receive the same treatment. The situation of each individual depends on a complex combination of factors: their identity and public standing, their level of defiance, their ability to organize and speak out, the support of their family, the opposition, the exile community, and the democratic world, their personal skills, and the current national and international political climate.

The first factor is who the political prisoner is. A person who is internationally recognized receives different treatment compared to someone whose detention barely registers outside their municipality. Public visibility can partially protect the prisoner because it raises the political cost of assassination or irreparable harm.

But that protection is never absolute. A prisoner can enjoy significant international solidarity while simultaneously maintaining a high level of defiance within the prison. They can refuse to wear the uniform of a common criminal, not stand up during roll call, reject formations, not stand at attention for the guards, report on beatings, and use every phone call not only to talk with their family but also to inform about the hunger, corruption, torture, diseases, and crimes that occur within the prison.

You can also protest when authorities organize political rallies, shout slogans against the dictatorship, refuse to participate in events for May Day or July 26, and organize political prisoners and common prisoners to demand better conditions.

In that case, neither his fame nor international solidarity will prevent him from being beaten, isolated, threatened, or deprived of his rights. They will suspend his visits, correspondence, and phone calls. They will send him to punishment cells, take away the food brought by his family, and use violent guards and/or common inmates against him.

The regime will wage a war to force him to reduce his level of defiance. External solidarity may prevent them from killing him, but not necessarily from torturing him.

When that rebellious prisoner has a brave family, an active opposition, a mobilized exile, and wide international support, the oppressors know that their death would have repercussions. That's why they may avoid resorting to murder, even as they continue to punish him severely.

If there is a high level of rebellion but lacking broad support, the danger increases extraordinarily. They can destroy him both physically and psychologically, let him die of hunger or disease, induce him to commit suicide, drive him to madness through isolation, or kill him outright.

Family support is crucial. A prisoner may be known internationally, but if they don’t have brave family members to denounce every abuse, the political police can gradually isolate them until they are silenced. A family that stands up to the prison, protests in the streets, in front of the Communist Party headquarters, speaks with journalists, and mobilizes human rights organizations becomes the prisoner’s first line of defense.

It doesn't save him from all the blows, but it makes it difficult for him to disappear within the system.

There are also political prisoners who choose to maintain a less confrontational stance. This does not make them bad activists or betray their cause. Some opt to keep their political convictions intact, but they avoid protesting against every abuse, constantly confronting the military, or publicly denouncing everything that happens. They do this to survive in a hellish and cruel world. They want to avoid beatings, torture, isolation, suspension of visits, loss of family-provided food, and physical or mental destruction.

When a prisoner is well-known and receives international support but does not declare open war inside the prison, the political police may grant certain conditions. They may allow them to receive more food, books, writing or painting materials, phone calls, and visits. They may be more willing to address some complaints. The prison will still be terrible, but the regime will try to make their hell a bit less unbearable in exchange for not organizing protests or turning the prison into another front of struggle. This does not prove collaboration.
It may simply be a survival strategy.

Now, if the inmate is not known, does not have an active family, and does not receive external solidarity, the regime may show no consideration for him, even if he is not confrontational. He may go hungry, be robbed by common prisoners, and suffer abuses without the political police being concerned. He does not represent a significant political cost and, therefore, is much more vulnerable.

Intelligence and the skills of the inmate also play a role. A person who can earn the respect of common prisoners, build alliances, and approach certain officials who do not act out of political fanaticism but rather for economic necessity, can have collaborators and smuggle in or out food, medicine, information, and complaints even while being very isolated and monitored. They can assist other inmates and receive help when needed. However, even those skills have limits. An inmate subjected to constant surveillance, cameras, microphones, and total isolation has far fewer possibilities than someone living in a collective barrack.

The political moment also changes the treatment. When the regime anticipates the visit of a Pope, a head of state, or an important delegation, or when it seeks to negotiate benefits with foreign governments, it can temporarily reduce certain abuses. It might slightly improve food quality, allow visits, or avoid actions that are overly visible and scandalous.

When one believes that they will not gain concessions and has nothing to lose, sadism, violence, and torture can escalate.
That’s why there is no fixed formula. The treatment depends on the prisoner, the prison, their jailers, their behavior, their family, their national and international support, and the political interests of the regime at any given moment.

For example, two very brave and rebellious political prisoners who are well-known internationally may receive completely different treatment; if one accepts exile while the other refuses it. The first will see an end to the aggression and punishment, while the latter will face an increase.

If both decide to accept forced exile, but one chooses to follow most of the rules imposed by the political police and the other does not, the former will leave sooner and will not be beaten or tortured during the process, while the latter will see his departure delayed and the pressures against him increase.

Anyone who is not familiar with this reality should proceed with caution before passing judgment. If a person is not a specialist in urology, they should not attempt to diagnose the condition of a patient’s kidneys and urinary system. They should listen to the urologist, who has studied this specialty and understands how the body functions.

In the same way, those who do not know the Cuban penitentiary system from the inside should not speculate, defame, or lightly accuse a political prisoner for the decisions they made in a hellish place. Criticizing without knowledge or evidence does not aid the cause of freedom.
Before judging the prisoner, one must understand what a Nazi-style concentration camp is like in the 21st century.