Images of President Miguel Díaz-Canel engaging in a voluntary work session in the Artemisa province on Sunday, in tribute to Commander Ernesto Che Guevara, sparked immediate ridicule and outrage among Cuban citizens. Many questioned the genuineness of the scene and the purpose of the official propaganda.
The Presidency of Cuba shared photos on X of Díaz-Canel participating in the National Voluntary Work Day, marking the 66th anniversary of Che's first productive work initiative.
According to official reports, the president participated in planting activities at the Agroindustrial Los Tamarindos company in Artemisa, accompanied by members of the Communist Party’s Central Committee.
The images also featured Lis Cuesta, who is not officially recognized as the first lady.
Following the activities, Osnay Miguel Colina Rodríguez, head of the Organizing Committee for the 22nd Congress of the Central de Trabajadores (CTC), stated that Che envisioned productive work as a source of wealth and the foundation of the Cuban people's "solidarity spirit."
He recalled that for decades, these sessions reportedly helped build hospitals and schools and mobilized workforces to needed areas.
He emphasized the need for "a lot of work," referencing efforts to rebuild the eastern part of the country and improve neighborhood sanitation amid an epidemiological crisis.
However, the official message was quickly overshadowed by public reaction. The comments on the post and across social media platforms were flooded with unending criticism, mockery, and outright rejection.
Many users mocked the setting, highlighting the use of Adidas sportswear, high-end sneakers, and staged camera poses.
Others questioned the practical value of the gesture, pointing out that it seemed like empty propaganda in a nation suffering from hunger, scarcity, and a failing agricultural system.
Several people insisted that the president lacks any real agricultural experience, noting that even basic details, such as how he held the hoe, seemed unconvincing.
Comments also criticized the contrast between traditional Guevarist rhetoric and the use of imported consumer symbols, something previously seen as "ideological diversion."
Others highlighted the political fatigue with such propaganda: forced poses, inappropriate clothing for real work, and a repetitive script that fails to change the dire conditions in the countryside or the crisis affecting millions of Cubans.
The result was a flood of reactions exposing, once again, the gap between the official narrative and the corrosive humor, fatigue, and disbelief of a citizenry that no longer buys into these staged performances.
Cuban Public Reaction to Propaganda Stunts
Why did Díaz-Canel's voluntary work session spark ridicule?
The session drew mockery due to its perceived inauthenticity, with many questioning the sincerity of the gesture and criticizing the use of luxury sportswear and staged photo opportunities.
What were some of the criticisms about Díaz-Canel's participation?
Critics highlighted the lack of real agricultural experience, the disconnect between the official narrative and the reality of Cuba's crises, and the use of foreign consumer brands in a Guevarist context.