United States Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, SLAMS Cuban Regime On Cuban independence Day Leaving Trump Open To Cuban Intervention

United States Secretary of State Marco Rubio earlier this morning, May 20, 2026, delivered a scathing rebuke of the Cuban regime and its lack of progress for the Cuban people. Rubio highlighted the island’s economic failures under the Castro-era system and argued that corruption within the regime has continued to expand while ordinary Cubans suffer through worsening economic limitations. He stated that Cubans deserve the same opportunities enjoyed by Cuban Americans living in Florida and throughout the United States, placing President Donald Trump at the center of growing discussions surrounding possible U.S. involvement and policy expansion toward Cuba and the Caribbean.

In Rubio’s video message, he specifically referenced how, in 1902, the Cuban flag flew for the first time over an independent Cuba in resistance to Castilian rule and foreign domination. He contrasted that historic moment with modern-day Cuba, where many citizens continue to suffer under the current regime. Rubio publicly expressed support for the Cuban people not only in spirit, but through potential direct U.S. assistance aimed at helping secure a better future for the island. He described the ongoing blackouts as unacceptable for a nation in the Americas while, according to his remarks, wealthy Cuban elites control approximately $18 billion in assets tied to nearly 70% of the Cuban economy through the military-linked conglomerate GAESA.

Prior to Rubio’s remarks, Cuban leadership had engaged in increasingly confrontational rhetoric, arguing that the country has the right to defend itself against foreign pressure. While that argument is valid from a sovereignty standpoint, critics contend that the government has focused more on preserving its political pride against the United States than addressing the worsening conditions faced by ordinary Cubans. The island’s blackouts continue to damage the economy and deepen the country’s recessionary conditions. At the same time, broader geopolitical tensions, including complications surrounding the U.S.–Iran conflict and disruptions in global energy markets, are contributing to unstable fuel supplies throughout Cuba and parts of the Caribbean.

In 2023 and 2024, Cuba’s economy contracted by 1.9% and 1.1%, respectively. Energy shortages and weak tourism performance were among the primary causes of the decline. Chronic shortages of medical supplies and humanitarian aid have further strained hospitals and recovery efforts across the country, while limited access to international financing has constrained Cuba’s economic potential under its state-dominated system. Although the United States embargo remains in place, the Cuban leadership has continued to mismanage the economy and plunge much of the population into worsening poverty and instability.

Cuba’s dependence on oil cannot be overstated. The Communist Party has struggled to successfully modernize the island’s energy infrastructure or significantly expand solar and wind alternatives, leaving the country heavily reliant on oil-based energy production. Domestic oil production has remained relatively stagnant despite rising global oil prices. Estimates suggest Cuba produces between 24,000 and 40,000 barrels of oil per day while importing more than 110,000 barrels daily, a dependency made even more difficult by sanctions and trade restrictions connected to the embargo. Renewable energy sources account for only approximately 3.6% of the country’s total energy production.

Meanwhile, reports indicate increasing U.S. military activity throughout the Caribbean and near the Florida Straits. According to recent reporting, an MQ-4C Triton surveillance drone has been operating off the coast of Cuba since at least February 2026. Additional reports have also confirmed the presence of U.S. destroyers and active Coast Guard units throughout the northern Caribbean. U.S. Southern Command has maintained a heightened regional presence following the reported extraction of Nicolás Maduro from Venezuela.

Cuba remains central to broader U.S. strategic concerns regarding security and stability throughout the Caribbean region. However, the question now facing Havana is whether the Cuban government will allow its current system to collapse under mounting economic pressure, political unrest, and growing international scrutiny. Marco Rubio is correct in exposing Cuba's issues, and it may be time for the Cuban people to call for a change.

Floridanismo: The Rise of Latino Catholic Conservatism and Florida First Politics Under Trump

After expanding my research into Católicophobia and Floridanophobia, I’ve observed an emerging trend among pro-Catholic Hispanic communities under Trump: a growing call for a “Florida First” political approach grounded in a distinct regional identity. It intent is to support a central Floridano identity.

The Latino conservative movement is rising rapidly in Florida. While it was once dominated largely by Cuban voices, the expanding presence of Puerto Rican, Peruvian, Colombian, and Dominican communities has added new layers of complexity to the political landscape. Within this diversity, however, a shared sense of purpose is beginning to take shape. Floridanismo is an effort to formalize and strengthen that unity.

Floridanismo advocates for a more unified Latino community as a means of achieving political change that expands Latino businesses and their economic opportunities throughout the state of Florida. This vision of unity also includes linguistic cohesion, with support for English, Latin, and Spanish as official languages of the state, reflecting practical communication needs as well as cultural continuity, including the development of a more Latin- and Spanish- influenced form of English. For example, changing Floridian to Floridano/Floridana.

Floridanismo supports expanded access to free or low-cost healthcare through a combination of public and private initiatives. It also calls for stronger regional trade, military cooperation, and political alignment among the southern United States, the Caribbean, and Latin America, emphasizing Florida’s role as a regional bridge.

Many supporters of Floridanismo emphasize the defense of the Catholic faith alongside Indigenous American religious traditions. They tend to favor socially conservative policies while supporting more economically liberal approaches, though with defined limits. This includes opposition to elective abortion and advocacy for high “sin taxes” on certain goods and services.

Advocates of Floridanismo generally view race as an inherently limiting framework and treat it as a secondary or descriptive detail rather than a defining political factor. When race is discussed, it often includes considerations of ethnicity and historical concepts such as the casta system. Within the movement, some supporters view “Latino” as a race, while others see it as an ethnicity; however, there is broad respect for the term as a clear and practical way to refer to the shared community.

Overall, Floridanismo is a response to longstanding social, political, and cultural pressures faced by Latino Catholics in Florida. It is not merely a call for electoral or policy change, but a broader movement oriented toward cultural cohesion, collective identity formation, and long-term communal advancement. Central to this vision is support for bilingual and trilingual communities, which are viewed as both practical tools for integration and symbols of cultural continuity.

Floridanismo calls for cultural expansion also includes structured cultural exchange with Japanese and Korean communities, framed as a means of fostering intercultural dialogue, strengthening social cohesion, and enriching the evolving Latino-Floridano cultural identity. Within this framework, the learning of additional languages—such as Japanese, Korean, and others—is not discouraged, but rather accepted as a complementary form of cultural engagement that broadens intellectual horizons while remaining rooted in a shared regional identity.

Is Latinx a Slur? Is Latinx Offensive?

By Luis Albert Rosales

To activists, Latinx is a gender-neutral term intended to be an inclusive alternative to Latino or Latina. It is primarily used by academics and social activists. Supporters of the term argue that it helps represent individuals who feel marginalized or not fully included by the traditional term 'Latino.' However, the term has faced significant backlash from much of the Latino community as some Hispanic-focused organizations have adopted the term to refer to all Latinos. Many of those same organizations have returned to use Latino or Hispanic due to backlash. As a result, many Latinos have rejected its use. For Hispanos who have heard the term, many feel as if the word is insulting or a mockery of their Hispanic culture.

Latinx: Its Purpose and Public Perception

The term Latinx originated from progressive activists and gained popularity primarily within academic circles through its use by scholars in studies and research, rather than widespread adoption among the general Latino population. It is intended to be a gender-neutral alternative to traditional Spanish gendered terms like Latino (masculine) and Latina (feminine). In Spanish, gender markers are typically indicated by the endings -o for masculine and -a for feminine nouns. Latinx aims to include individuals who do not identify within the traditional gender binary, allegedly promoting greater inclusivity. Their position is that the term provides inclusive language for Latinos who identify as ‘non-binary’ or with similar identities. Some argue that it is a necessity to deconstruct the masculine default that, in their perspective, marginalizes women and “non-binary people”. Some proponents view language as a powerful tool for shaping social reality. By changing language, they believe they can promote more inclusive and equitable ways of thinking about gender and identity within Hispanic communities and beyond as language evolves.

This presents a complex dynamic between the scholars' intent to promote inclusivity and the term's reception within Latino and Hispanic culture. While the intention is to foster greater inclusivity, the term has also faced harsh criticism from many Hispanics who view it as an example of linguistic imposition, some have described it as “linguistic imperialism” or “linguistic colonialism”. Many Latinos have a negative view of the term. Some would highlight that, in Spanish, it makes no grammatical sense, and that it would be difficult to pronounce in Spanish. Others expand on that but also argue that if the concern is with the English language, there is no need for a new gender-neutral term since existing terms like “Latin American”, or simply ‘Latin’ or ‘Hispanic’, already serve as gender-neutral options to refer to Latino people or Hispanos. Ultimately, they affirm that Latinos who use the term may be disconnected from their Latino or Hispanics roots. Through this perspective, some view it as nothing more than an attempt at performative social justice with a strong misunderstanding of Latino culture. From a linguistic perspective, The Real Academia Española, which many view as the official arbiter on the Spanish language, has rejected Latinx and its use as a gender-neutral term for Latinos.

The Latinx Studies

Regarding the studies of Latinx and its use within the Latino community, Pew Research has conducted several studies on Latinx. In this section, we’re going to focus on Latinos who have heard of the term in a specific study from Pew Research titled “Latinx Awareness Has Doubled Among U.S. Hispanics Since 2019, but Only 4% Use It.” This study, with 5,078 adult Hispanics surveyed, was released in September 2024, but it was conducted in 2023.

According to the study, 53% of Latinos have not heard of the term. Of the 47% who have, only 4% use it to describe themselves. However, a supermajority of Latinos (75%) say that Latinx should not be used to describe the Hispanic or the Latino community. To add, 36% say that using the term more often is ‘bad’, while 38% are neutral in its use. Those who say that the term is good reflects only 12% of the Hispanic population while those who are unsure reflects 14%. It concludes that Latinos would more likely find the use of Latinx to be negative than positive.

When it comes to lesbian, gay or bisexual participants of this study, only 13% say they use Latinx to describe themselves. This group is the only non-racial group surveyed who uses the term more than any other.

For those who are educated, with some college, only 4% use the term to describe themselves. Those with a bachelor’s degree or greater, 7% use the term to describe themselves.

Overwhelmingly, over 70%, regardless of specific groups except for lesbian, gay or bisexual participants, say the term should not be used to describe Latinos. The total average contains the 75% referenced earlier.

Given what we know about this study, is Latinx a slur? Judging by this study alone we cannot conclude it is a slur, but we can affirm that most Latinos do not use the term while a third of Hispanics or Latinos who have heard of the term, generally view its use as a bad thing.

A Quick Informal Poll from TikTok: Is Latinx a slur?

Since there are no comprehensive studies on whether 'Latinx' is considered a slur, I’ve conducted a quick, informal poll on TikTok asking two questions that I believe are important for expanding our understanding of how Latinos or Hispanics view the term Latinx. Please note that this is not a scientific poll and should not be interpreted as representative of the broader population.

In this informal poll, there were 68 participants, and I asked two specific questions: “Is the term 'Latinx' considered offensive, insulting, or a mockery of Hispanic or Latino culture?” and “Is 'Latinx' a slur?”

According to my record, 55 participants considered the term ‘Latinx’ offensive, insulting or a mockery of Hispanic or Latino culture. This represents approximately 80.88% of participants. Respectively, 60.29% of participants consider the term a slur. Of those who consider the term offensive, insulting or mocking, 74.55% of them consider it a slur. The informal TikTok poll offers limited insight due to its small sample, but it suggests a significant portion of respondents view "Latinx" negatively, indicating a need for broader research.

During this informal poll, many commenters shared negative views about the term. They suggested that it lacked respect and was problematic in several ways. "Latinx is problematic," was a common theme among commenters. "Don't call me Latinx," was another sentiment expressed by multiple users. After the poll, some users who supported the term expressed that the results were "disappointing."

Latinx: A Failed Attempt at Inclusivity

While the intention behind "Latinx" may have been to promote inclusivity, the data indicates a significant failure in its execution and reception within the Latino community. The term is overwhelmingly rejected by Latinos, rarely used, and for many, carries negative connotations. It highlights the complexities of language evolution, cultural sensitivity, and the potential disconnect between well-intentioned initiatives and their real-world impact on the communities they aim to serve. Instead of unifying, "Latinx" appears to have become a point of contention and division within the Latino community, at least based on current data.

Trump Begins Trade War Against Mexico, Canada and China!

The trade war has begun (again)! The United States has established tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China’s goods after both countries failed to meet the demands set by Donald Trump nor alleviate his concerns regarding the trade deficit. As a response, both Canada and Mexico have imposed tariffs on American goods. However, considering that the United States imports more goods from these countries than it exports, this trade war could ultimately benefit the U.S. economy. Higher tariffs may encourage American businesses to seek alternative suppliers or boost domestic production, potentially creating jobs and reducing reliance on Mexico and Canada.

Canada was hit with 25% tariffs on most goods, except for oil, natural gas and electricity. These exceptions are facing a 10% tariff. The United States is a world leader in refining oil, this serves to alleviate the costs leaking into the common market and foreign markets. As for Mexico, the tariffs reflect the same 25%, however, all of their goods are taxed at this rate, which will have an effect on car parts and other manufactured goods. Given that the United States is heavily consumerist, other countries, such as those in CAFTA-DR and Peru with PTPA, stand to benefit significantly from this trade war.

The United States Dollar has increased in value against both of these currencies. Within 24 hours against the United States Dollar, the Mexican Peso suffered a loss of around 2.7% and the Canadian dollar suffered around 1.3%, respectively. The trade war is already impacting forex speculators and it will likely worsen for Canada and Mexico as this trade war deepens.