"Cuba goes capitalist"

[khad]

How much you wanna bet Raul is a Dengist? Another sexpat-infested shithole in the works.


http://www.newstatesman.com/print/200906040028
Cuba goes capitalist
Graham Norwood

Published 04 June 2009

Observations on private property


?I can talk about cigars but I can?t talk about change,? Christina said
sharply, as she showed me the Havana cigar factory where she worked. I had
asked how Cuba was evolving under the leadership of Raúl Castro.

Just outside the factory gates, however, the signs of change are everywhere.
The Cuban capital now boasts branches of clothing chains such as Benetton,
Mango and Zara. Electrical shops sell plasma TVs, hotels advertise wifi and
Cuban youths pore over mobile telephones. On every street there are scenes
that would have been unimaginable two years ago.

Come July, there will be another sign of Cuba?s New Labour-style
accommodation of the capitalist 21st century: wealthy foreigners will be
able to buy luxury holiday homes on the island.

Two hours from Havana, the neatly manicured Varadero tourist resort welcomes
a million visitors a year. The complex hosts five-star hotels, shopping
malls and even a golf course (and yes, golf is reconcilable with the
revolution ? a photo of a club-wielding Che is on display at the course
shop). On the edge of Varadero, a 170-hectare plot will soon become the site
of the Carbonera Club, a joint venture between the Cuban authorities and a
British developer, Esencia. The scheme will consist of some 800 apartments
and villas, priced at up to £1.15m, and marketed exclusively to foreigners.
There will be a yacht marina, facilities for scuba diving and tennis, a spa
and a gym.

That?s all lovely, of course, but it hardly distinguishes the place from
playgrounds of the rich around the world. The Carbonera Club?s unique appeal
lies elsewhere.

In 1959 Fidel Castro nationalised Cuban land and property. Since then no
private homes have been built, sold or bought. But that will change, at
least for foreigners, when Carbonera goes on sale in July. Esencia expects
most buyers this year to be from Canada, Spain and the UK ? the nations that
supply the majority of tourists to Cuba. But the company?s long-term goal is
to attract US buyers.

That will be possible only when the trade embargo between Cuba and the US is
finally scrapped. But it looks as if this will be sooner rather than later.
Barack Obama has admitted that the embargo has not brought democracy to
Cuba. The US Senate recently relaxed travel and financial repatriation
controls, and senior Washington politicians visited Havana in April. Raúl
Castro?s embrace of 3G mobiles and foreigners who want holiday homes will no
doubt be seen as a reciprocal move in the necessary diplomatic pas de deux.

Should Americans start to arrive in volume, post-embargo, you can expect to
see more private homes popping up across the island. There is already talk
of a dozen resorts.

In the meantime, the Carbonera Club has had a few hiccups. Cuba?s government
would prefer to sell the properties with a 75-year lease, but the west
prefers freehold. And there is uncertainty over Havana?s capacity to handle
inquiries from western mortgage companies if a buyer borrows to fund a
purchase. But these are small fry compared to the scheme?s political
significance.

Whether it marks the beginning of the end of Cuba?s revolutionary programme,
or the end of the beginning, as some islanders believe, one thing is
certain: if you want to see Cuba before it becomes too much like the rest of
the world, go there now. Say hello to Christina at the cigar factory. Some
day soon she may feel comfortable talking about the changes happening around
her.

[LeninBalls]

I'll believe it when I see it.

[mykittyhasaboner]

People have been saying "Cuba has gone capitalist" ever since Raul got elected, but despite all this, the best these people can come up with are luxury homes for tourists and mobile phones. When the Cuban government launches a "perestroika" (so to speak) and dissolves the democratic institutions of the current worker's state, or succumbs to any imperialist demands, then I'll believe they have "gone capitalist". Until then, all this talk about capitalism is nonsense.

[Kwisatz Haderach]

The luxury homes don't worry me nearly as much as this:


The Cuban capital now boasts branches of clothing chains such as Benetton, Mango and Zara.
Huh? How does that work? Does anyone know anything about it?

[khad]

I called it long ago. Raul is a Dengist. We will all see who is right.

[mykittyhasaboner]

I called it long ago. Raul is a Dengist. We will all see who is right.

Yet you continue to base this on thin air.

[SocialismOrBarbarism]

Expanding one of the most promising sectors of the economy in order to bring in more income and increase the living standards of workers makes Cuba a capitalist state?

wat

[khad]

Expanding one of the most promising sectors of the economy in order to bring in more income and increase the living standards of workers makes Cuba a capitalist state?

wat
Many people here have no idea how things work in a third world country. Tourism is a parasitic industry that opens up avenues for all sorts of criminality, corruption, and degeneracy.

[Radical]

LOL. You've got no physical evidence of this at all. Just rumours off the internet. Come back when you've got something worth dicussing.


GUESS WHAT EVERYBODY, AMERICA IS NOW A COMMUNIST COUNTRY!!!1111
Sorry, I have just as much evidence here as you have to suggest Cuba is a Capitalist country.

[punisa]

I wouldn't join the speculation train, but I just hope Cuban working class and Cuban people are smarter then other socialist examples.
But history showed us some bitter images for us socialists.
Scenes of massive euphoria and people chanting for capitalism and "open" market on the streets:
- Yugoslavia
- Russia and whole ex USSR
- East Germany

I *want* to believe that Cubans are smarter then that, but...

As for harvesting money from rich tourists, I say go Cuba ! :thumbup1:

[SocialismOrBarbarism]

What does that have to do with Cuba being a capitalist state? Sounds more like moralist crap I'd expect to hear from a conservative than from someone claiming to be a leftist.

[Communist Theory]

I can say America is Socialist and hope it is true too.

[Madvillainy]

Cuba goes capitalist? When has it ever stopped being capitalist?

[h9socialist]

Raul was a Marxist before Fidel, and about the same time as Che. I think it's getting a little overboard to accuse him of driving Cuba to capitalism. Any opening of relations with the US is liable to cause an exchange of ideas and culture. But I seriously doubt that it will kill the revolution. See if Cuba would democratically select the US healthcare system over its own (I sincerely doubt it).

[TrueLeninist]

Cuba, Korea, Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador are welfare, state-capitalist systems or (Market socialism) if you wanna label it that way. Because for socialism to fully work most countries have to be socialists. Socialism in one country or two isolated countries doesn't work

TrueLeninist

[Prairie Fire]

It is extremely arguable wether Cuba ever had a truly socialized economy and political system to begin with.

[SecondLife]

Socialism in one country or two isolated countries doesn't work

Then you never can't get socialism. You can end your life only in prison.
But, about Cuba. Cubans are smart people, but not enough smart without our political-propaganda help.
We must go to Cuba and demonstrate with our live example - banana, Ariel or Chappi isn't paradise.
We must demonstrate that we aren't monkeys.
I hope Raul isn't so Dengist to prohibit communist propaganda. But seems that Cuba itself can't make enough good propaganda to prevent people becoming monkeys.

[BIG BROTHER]

Well as we have seen from the examples of the former Soviet Countries, the bureaucratic caste that rules Cuba will betray socialism, in the name of Socialism in order to keep its power as an elite. If this means selling out the planned economy of Cuba it will be done.

Nevertheless I think is a little bit to soon to know if a capitalist restoration is imminent. I mean Capitalism is were Cuba can find support, regarding the first post I don't think having cellphones makes a difference, and Cuba ever since the fall of the USSR has had some section of its economy mostly tourism as a Capitalist economy.

[Yehuda Stern]

Or - maybe Cuba and China were always capitalist, and that's why they can turn to a market economy without any change in the ruling class, let alone a civil war.

[RedSonRising]

Cuban Unions still have a relatively high amount of control of production and industry, and the bureaucracy is far from that of former Soviet-bloc countries. Decisions regarding foreign capital is still in the hands of the party, as well as other policies of possible reform, but the input the producers of the country have won't allow a return to market capitalism.

[h9socialist]

This discussion is getting way past cynical! I can't decide whether it's comical or tragic that some 21st Century Cyber-Leftists think themselves good enough revolutionaries to want to go to Cuba and pass out literature telling the people there what it means to be revolutionary -- or lecture Raul Castro on what it means to be a Marxist. Cuba is not "going capitalist," especially with capitalism in chaos, and most Latin American countries going to the Left. It's one thing to talk about revolution, and another to actually implement it!

[PRC-UTE]

Cuba goes capitalist? When has it ever stopped being capitalist?

Around the time when the workers took over their workplaces, the revolutionary stated followed up by nationalising most of the country's lands and firms, and the capitalists themselves took off.

[TrueLeninist]

But just because Cuba is not 100% socialist, doesn't mean that its leaders are evil. If you weigh 500 lbs. and you try to lose weigh and all you can lose is 200, instead of 350 lbs. to reach to your ideal weight, doesn't mean that you are not trying to lose weight. Cuba's leaders are trying as hard as they can to turn Cuba into a socialist workers state and to spread socialism knwoledge around the world. Just because Cuba has to have capitalist trade businesses with other countries doesn't mean that Cuba's leaders are not trying to turn Cuba into a dictatorship of the proletariat.


TrueLeninist



It is extremely arguable wether Cuba ever had a truly socialized economy and political system to begin with.

[Madvillainy]

Around the time when the workers took over their workplaces, the revolutionary stated followed up by nationalising most of the country's lands and firms, and the capitalists themselves took off.

Prove it! A small guerilla movement detached from the working class seized control and nationalized everything and then decided to (conveniently) join the Imperialist russian block. Wowzers! That isn't socialism, the working class in cuba is still fuckin exploited while castro and his fellow capitalist partners live a life of luxury.

[khad]

Besides, I never said Cuba was capitalist, only that Raul is a Dengist-type engineering a restoration of capitalism. It's a process.

"Cuba goes capitalist" is merely the title of the article. Note the quotation marks.

[mykittyhasaboner]

Prove it! A small guerilla movement detached from the working class seized control and nationalized everything and then decided to (conveniently) join the Imperialist russian block. Wowzers! That isn't socialism, the working class in cuba is still fuckin exploited while castro and his fellow capitalist partners live a life of luxury.


Well for starters, why not try proving what you are saying, instead of declaring things arrogantly like its truth.

As for proving that Cuba is a democratic, socialist worker's state established in the 1959 revolution (which was not an isolated group of guerrillas seizing power in some coup):

http://www.themilitant.com/2007/7113/711359.html
http://www.queensu.ca/philosophy/cuba/philosophical_issues.html
http://www.marxists.de/statecap/cuba/robinb.htm
http://www.greenleft.org.au/2001/445/26240
http://www.idrc.ca/en/ev-54437-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html

I think these sources will suffice for someone demanding evidence without using any themselves. On Castro and his "ruling elite" living a life of luxury, that's simply a load of crap, even bourgeois outlets disprove this:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/05/16/world/main1622957.shtml

The working class in Cuba isn't exploited by anyone, worker's in Cuba own and control the means of production. In Cuba the bourgeoisie have been long abolished as the owners and controllers of society, accept it.

[mykittyhasaboner]

Besides, I never said Cuba was capitalist, only that Raul is a Dengist-type engineering a restoration of capitalism. It's a process.You still, (still despite all your rambling on the subject) have yet to prove this. Tourist industry =/= revisionist "Denigist" market socialism, nor any intention of restoring capitalism. Mind you the overwhelming majority is still employed in the public sector, and a good portion of the 'private' sector are municipal farms; this small section of tourism is one of Cuba's best ways of generating some kind of revenue, what with the island losing around 4 billion last year due to the embargo.


"Cuba goes capitalist" is merely the title of the article. Note the quotation marks.Except you obviously endorse the title, and analysis of the article, which is why you posted it.

[SecondLife]

Prove it! A small guerilla movement detached from the working class seized control and nationalized everything and then decided to (conveniently) join the Imperialist russian block. Wowzers! That isn't socialism, the working class in cuba is still fuckin exploited while castro and his fellow capitalist partners live a life of luxury.

Who is this fucking and so mutch talked mysterious 'working class'?
Any bastard can make some work and name itself 'working class' and wants to power. I was seen that the more someone name itself 'working class', the more fascist it actually is. Seems that working itself infringes human. I am example unemployed and never name itself 'working class', even if I do some work.

[turquino]

"Cuba's bold shift to a postsocialist era" CS Monitor. Aug 12, 2008.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0812/p09s02-coop.html

In his speech, Mr. Castro redefined socialism and effectively declared the end of that system – as we know it – on the island. "Socialism means social justice and equality, but equality of rights, of opportunities, not of income," he said.

This remarkable declaration represents an embrace of a postmodern version of socialism. Rather than moving Cuba toward European democratic socialism – a capitalist economy with a socialist social-services system – his prescription advocates what amounts to the worst of both worlds: a state-controlled economy in which the government shirks its social responsibilities.
...
His new definition of socialism bears no resemblance to the traditional usage of the term. Not only did he state that "equality is not the same as egalitarianism," he went on to say that "egalitarianism is in itself a form of exploitation; exploitation of the good workers by those who are less productive and lazy."

This is the opposite of Karl Marx's prescription for communism: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs."

[khad]

Who is this fucking and so mutch talked mysterious 'working class'?
Any bastard can make some work and name itself 'working class' and wants to power. I was seen that the more someone name itself 'working class', the more fascist it actually is. Seems that working itself infringes human. I am example unemployed and never name itself 'working class', even if I do some work.

Huh? I think you're confused about some basic concepts. There is nothing at all mysterious about the working class.


"Cuba's bold shift to a postsocialist era" CS Monitor. Aug 12, 2008.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0812/p09s02-coop.html

More from the same article:


More recently, in 2002, the Cuban government codified the return to a radical form of socialism through a constitutional amendment that promised never to return to capitalism and declared Cuba's political and social systems "irrevocable."

Castro's indication that his government will eliminate some free services and excessive subsidies to consumer goods is further evidence that Cuba is about to enter a postsocialist era.

If these changes materialize, the Cuban state will retain control of the economy while pulling back from the historical social responsibilities of a socialist government.

[SocialismOrBarbarism]

"Cuba's bold shift to a postsocialist era" CS Monitor. Aug 12, 2008.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0812/p09s02-coop.html


In his speech, Mr. Castro redefined socialism and effectively declared the end of that system – as we know it – on the island. "Socialism means social justice and equality, but equality of rights, of opportunities, not of income," he said. That isn't a bold shift at all. Cuban society was never based on equality of income. His view is the same as Marx's view of socialism except for that idiotic comment about egalitarianism, and not having income equality in no way indicates that the state will "shirk it's social responsibilities." It's just another article trying to show socialism as something it isn't.


The new path goes well beyond revolutionary Cuba's historically alternating socialist formulas. Che Guevara's preferred model of socialism is based on the application of radical egalitarian measures and the principle of "moral incentives." In that model, individual workers are motivated by spiritual rewards derived from individual sacrifice for the common good.

Following several years of applying the Guevarist model, Fidel Castro reintroduced material incentives in 1970, with the hope of improving the economy by increasing worker productivity. People didn't receive pay in pre-1970s revolutionary Cuba?


Raúl Castro's recent pronouncements, however, signal a dramatic ideological shift that actually heralds the end of socialism.
His new definition of socialism bears no resemblance to the traditional usage of the term.

Coming from people who define it as a state system...


Castro's indication that his government will eliminate some free services and excessive subsidies to consumer goods is further evidence that Cuba is about to enter a postsocialist era.
If these changes materialize, the Cuban state will retain control of the economy while pulling back from the historical social responsibilities of a socialist government.


Speculation based on a quote that in no way indicates that...

[PRC-UTE]

Prove it! A small guerilla movement detached from the working class seized control and nationalized everything and then decided to (conveniently) join the Imperialist russian block. Wowzers!


Of course the July 26 movement was far from small, and did indeed have strong connections to the working class, and it was this support that they cultivated that allowed the guerrillas to win, but leaving that aside, what I actually said was that the Cuban state followed up on on workplace takeovers led by the working class.


In August 1960 the new revolutionary government of Cuba nationalized major U.S.-owned industry in the country. Three months later, it nationalized most foreign and Cuban-owned banks, as well as large-scale Cuban-owned industry. The decrees were a response to factory "interventions" by Cuban workers taking place all across the island. Fresh from their Jan. 1, 1959, victory in toppling the U.S.-backed dictatorship of Fulgencio Batista, and spurred by acts of imperialist aggression and economic sabotage, Cuban toilers in their millions were taking over decision-making generally considered the purview of the bosses.
The political lessons of this process for working people around the world today are clearly summarized in the preface by Mary-Alice Waters to The First and Second Declarations of Havana, recently published by Pathfinder Press. The way the Cuban people carried out such "interventions" was described in some detail in a feature in last week's issue (see "How Cuban toilers established workers state" in March 26 Militant).
source: http://www.themilitant.com/2007/7113/711359.html



That isn't socialism, the working class in cuba is still fuckin exploited while castro and his fellow capitalist partners live a life of luxury.


No, Castro doesn't live in luxury, and you're really misinformed here if you think it's Cuba's top leadership who are the best off. There's a lot of stratification in Cuba's working class, but it has more to do with access to dollars from emigrant relative's remittance payments. It's an issue that's pretty significant and you should probably look it up.

Castro lives in a normal house and his sole luxury appears to be a large TV he uses to get lots of news channels on. The austerity of the leadership is well known, they just recently purged leaders who were seen as too comfortable. You can also see the fairly reliable Jon Lee Anderson bio on Che which documents how disciplined Che was that he and his family live on the same income and amount of food as other Cuban families.

[BIG BROTHER]

Just one questions to those who call cuba capitalis. If Cuba is capitalist why does Imperialism seek to overthrow the Cuban goverment and dismantle its PLANNED ECONOMY.

[Ismail]

Just one questions to those who call cuba capitalis. If Cuba is capitalist why does Imperialism seek to overthrow the Cuban goverment and dismantle its PLANNED ECONOMY.Because Cuba isn't pro-US. The US helped overthrow Mosadegh in 1950's Iran along with various other capitalist leaders simply because they wanted to be neutral instead of US puppets during the Cold War. Cuba was an obvious target considering it was a Soviet puppet and near Florida. It's like asking why World War I happened if no nation was socialist.

You might want to read this: http://www.revleft.com/vb/soviet-social-imperialism-t106563/index.html?t=106563


X. Cuba

After a popular revolution overthrew the discredited Fulgencio Batista (who was so hated that the Americans hoped to overthrow him and install Col. Ramon Barquin in his place), Fidel Castro came to power saying that "Capitalism sacrifices man, the Communist state sacrifices man. . Our revolution is not red, but olive-green, the colour of the rebel army." As Castro quickly shifted to the left however, the Americans became extremely hostile and Castro found an ally in the Soviet Union. Though relations were not extremely close, they quickly grew throughout the 1960's. The Soviets wanted sugar production to be the focus of Cuba (as per Khrushchev's specialization policy within the Warsaw Pact), and Castro agreed. In the book Castroism: Theory and Practice, it notes that "Castro announced... that his whole new economic policy was postulated on a spectacular increase in sugar production, aimed at reaching 10 million tons by 1970. Agricultural diversification went backward instead of forward. For example, rice production had advanced to a high point of 181,000 tons in 1957, two years before Castro, and plunged to 95,400 tons in 1962, after three years of Castro. Cuba had been forced to reorganise its entire economy." In other words, "Castro announced a reorientation of the Cuban economy towards agriculture, in particular the growing of sugar cane and cattle-raising."

This alienated Che Guevara, who, in Cuba - Exception or Vanguard?, stressed that "Under-development or distorted development, carries with it a dangerous specialisation in raw materials, containing a threat of hunger for all our people. We, 'the under-developed', are those of the single crop, the single product, and the single market. A single product whose uncertain sale depends upon a single market, which imposes and sets conditions. This is the great formula of imperial economic domination which is combined with the old and always useful Roman formula, 'divide and conquer.'" In the end, as Daniel Jame's Che Guevara notes of Che's comments to the Egyptian weekly Akher Saa, "Che roundly castigated the Russians as 'revisionists'" "Che's embrace of a kind of Maoism and his search for ideas that led him outside (Soviet) Marxism-Leninism could be, and were, construed in Moscow to be be anti-Soviet. Che had to go. His repeated public attacks upon the Soviet Union had finally become intolerable to the Kremlin, whose representatives had served notice of their displeasure on Premier Fidel Castro, leaving Castro with no real choice, since Moscow's economic aid kept his government and economy afloat." "Che himself was not seen anywhere in public after returning from Africa, excepting one appearance at a lecture he gave towards the end of March (1965). Che never turned up again at the Ministry of Industry following his March lecture there.. He... had suddenly and mysteriously disappeared from public view."

In the end, Che was captured in Bolivia and shot. His diaries (published in 1968 as Bolivian Diary) noted that one of the main causes of Che's defeat were "Treacherous leaders.... Their true purpose was to destroy guerilla movements in the bud, to slow down all revolutionary action, and to put in its place their own absurd and despicable political deals" Daniel James stated in his book that "The Bolivian Communists deserve all the criticism Castro gives them, for they did indeed play a 'treacherous' role which contributed mightily, perhaps decisively, to Che's failure." Could the pro-Soviet Communist Party of Bolivia have been to blame?

Throughout the 1970's and 80's the Cubans continued to move ever closer to the Soviets. They participated in pro-Soviet interventions abroad (see XI and XII) and as Sebastian Balfour's 1990 book Castro notes, in 1976 "[a] new constitution largely modelled on that of the Soviet Union was approved in a referendum in 1976." Cuban dependence on the Soviet Union was so great that in a 1992 interview with Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera Castro stated that "Our basic problems are the economic blockade and the disappearance of the socialist camp. Some 85 percent of our trade was with those countries.. The value of our sugar in fact, balanced the cost of the petroleum we got from the USSR... That trade has almost disappeared with the disappearance of the socialist countries. We had to turn to new markest. We have lost imports, credit, and technology, and sought fuel, raw materials, and drugs elsewhere." In the Guardian in the same year, he said that "I can't say that Gorbachev played a conscious part in the destruction of the Soviet Union, because I have no doubt that Gorbachev's aim was to struggle to perfect socialism." Pro-Soviet to the end, or even beyond that end.
Raul was a Marxist before Fidel,So? He was a generic pro-Soviet "Marxist-Leninist". The revisionist leader of Bulgaria, Zhivkov, led his country from the late 1950's until 1989 and later on repudiated socialism yet before that was a happily pro-Soviet "Marxist-Leninist" leader. Meanwhile, those suspected of being Maoists (and later Hoxhaists) were persecuted and sometimes even executed in these "Marxist-Leninist" states. Fidel Castro called Mao a "fascist" while praising Khrushchev, Brezhnev, and Gorbachev to the skies. In the post-Soviet world, Fidel and Raúl praise Dengism.

[SecondLife]

But so what? Where is the point? Makes this any difference for you? Depends from it something? Is USA better? Or N.Korea? Or you want to start revolution tomorrow after school or dinner?

[khad]

So? He was a generic pro-Soviet "Marxist-Leninist". The revisionist leader of Bulgaria, Zhivkov, led his country from the late 1950's until 1989 and later on repudiated socialism yet before that was a happily pro-Soviet "Marxist-Leninist" leader. Meanwhile, those suspected of being Maoists (and later Hoxhaists) were persecuted and sometimes even executed in these "Marxist-Leninist" states. Fidel Castro called Mao a "fascist" while praising Khrushchev, Brezhnev, and Gorbachev to the skies. In the post-Soviet world, Fidel and Raúl praise Dengism.
I would disagree with the accusation that Fidel is a Dengist. In fact, in the Cuban press, he has been criticizing the direction that Cuba's current government is taking.

Raul and all his supporters are just biding their time until Fidel croaks.

[Ismail]

But so what? Where is the point? Makes this any difference for you? Depends from it something? Is USA better? Or N.Korea? Or you want to start revolution tomorrow after school or dinner?The point is that Cuba is a state that, while progressive, is state capitalist, not socialist. At best, the more influential (and growing) half of their economy is state capitalist while the other, diminishing half can be called socialist. At least the DPRK, while having flaws of its own (Juche can be used to justify economic revisionism, obviously obscene personality cults) has rejected any sort of market reform and had in fact pushed back said reforms after 2002 while previously flirting with them due to Chinese pressure.

I don't see why so many Trots adore Cuba when Ramón Mercader (Trotsky's assassin) peacefully lived out his life in Cuba and the government wasn't exactly friendly towards Trotskyists. I don't see why Che-lovers adore Cuba when Fidel caved into Soviet pressure and essentially forced Che to leave Cuba since Che regarded the Soviets as revisionists. I don't see how Maoists can adore Cuba since he called Mao a "fascist" ("Castro University Speech Blasts CPR Betrayal", Havana Domestic Television and Radio Services in Spanish 0317 GMT 14 March 1966) and was a Soviet pawn who said that after he read Prestroyka he drew the conclusion that Gorbachev was "making it clear that he was not against socialism, indeed he wanted more socialism." ("Fidel Castro on Socialism, Economy, Clinton" from Corriere Della Sera, December 2 1992), etc.


I would disagree with the accusation that Fidel is a Dengist. In fact, in the Cuban press, he has been criticizing the direction that Cuba's current government is taking.He praised Chinese "socialism" (Dengism) in 1993 and awarded Jiang Zemin with a medal.

http://www.prisoncensorship.info/archive/etext/contemp/leftover/Castro1993Zemin.htm
http://www.prisoncensorship.info/archive/etext/contemp/leftover/Castro1993China.htm


Raul and all his supporters are just biding their time until Fidel croaks.I feel this is the same thing with Kim Jong Il. After he dies, the Chinese are going to want to spread Dengism across the DPRK. It was Kim who criticized the fetishization of the productive forces that Deng had used to justify his actions. As a friend of mine said:

Basically, Kim Jong Il's criticism was: The Theory of Abundance lead to an erroneous view that ALL ideology was merely a product of relations of production. Which, in a sense is true, however, it lead to the concept that the growth of the productive forces should take priority, leading to a lack of focus on Socialist ideology and the growth of a new class whose only ideology was "economy must grow", who in the main lacked Socialist ideology. This combined with obvious external pressure from the Imperialists, led to many "compromises" not only by the Revisionists, but most rank and file cadre and workers, until there was nothing left. Deng's victory in China was entirely: "Marxism says we must liberate the productive forces above all else... oh and we don't need ideology because the productive forces will take care of it."

[SecondLife]

The point is that Cuba is a state that, while progressive, is state capitalist, not socialist.

So what? USA is also capitalist. What you mean with 'socialist'? Mean you 'workers power'? I don't trust workers. Nowadays everywhere workers support rather bourgeoisie and fascists parties. Don't you see election results? I mean almost everywhere or completely everywhere. Democracy mean the same thing. I prefer better dictature than plain fascism.


I don't see how Maoists can adore Cuba since he called Mao a "fascist"

Have you better alternative? If you have, then I have very interested about it and I become your aficionado. But, why not to change situation example in Cuba if you have better idea? I hope Raul don't put you into prison if you just propagate socialism there. But if you propagate it in USA, then you surely end your life in prison or assassinated.

[khad]

He praised Chinese "socialism" (Dengism) in 1993 and awarded Jiang Zemin with a medal.

http://www.prisoncensorship.info/archive/etext/contemp/leftover/Castro1993Zemin.htm
http://www.prisoncensorship.info/archive/etext/contemp/leftover/Castro1993China.htm
I stand corrected, though I feel that this may be more realpolitik than actual politics. I do know that Fidel has been writing articles advising the Cuban government to stay the course--in other words he doesn't agree with some of of the policies Raul is proposing.

[Ismail]

So what? USA is also capitalist. What you mean with 'socialist'? Mean you 'workers power'? I don't trust workers. Nowadays everywhere workers support rather bourgeoisie and fascists parties. Don't you see election results? I mean almost everywhere or completely everywhere. Democracy mean the same thing. I prefer better dictature than plain fascism.There's no real Communist movement in the US, so the void is filled with populist reactionary ideologies like Fascism or, when you add xenophobia into the mix with some socialist tradition in the country (the US has almost none), Nazism.

To say that Cuban workers are suddenly going to turn to reaction if they had direct power makes no sense, and to blame them directly if any somehow become reactionary makes even less sense because a vast majority are not conscious of their surroundings, and those few who are tend to turn to reformism to 'remedy' the situation.

Furthermore, to say that you don't trust workers owning the means of production means that you are not a Communist.


Have you better alternative? If you have, then I have very interested about it and I become your aficionado. But, why not to change situation example in Cuba if you have better idea?I never claimed to have a better alternative besides a legitimately socialist movement. Once again, I support Cuba as a progressive state.

[SecondLife]

Furthermore, to say that you don't trust workers owning the means of production means that you are not a Communist.

I agree with you only if you can explain who is this mysterious worker?
Rich people talk all the time how hardly they work all the time. Sometimes I clean my living-room and feel itself also heavy worker like hero. :D

[Madvillainy]

I agree with you only if you can explain who is this mysterious worker?
Rich people talk all the time how hardly they work all the time. Sometimes I clean my living-room and feel itself also heavy worker like hero. :D

WOW! :blink: Have you read any marx or engels or um anything about communism, I'm sorry to break it to you but cleaning your room does not make you working class!! The mysterious workers you speak of are part of an exploited class that survives by selling their labour.

[SecondLife]

WOW! :blink: Have you read any marx or engels or um anything about communism, I'm sorry to break it to you but cleaning your room does not make you working class!! The mysterious workers you speak of are part of an exploited class that survives by selling their labour.

Why cleaning my room don't make me workink class? I do this also to survive and I am very exploited. Example, the fewer state gives social security to people, the more people must work and this money goes to bourgeoisie instead of social sphere. This makes the same as you sell your labour for free.
And also, why you think that also bourgeoisie can't sell their labour? Fact that bourgeoisie can get profit don't make selling their labour impossible.

[Madvillainy]

also, why you think that also bourgeoisie can't sell their labour?

Huh? I'm not sure you understand what the term bourgeois refers to. I'll try and explain it for you. The bourgeoisie is the class that owns the means of social production and who are the employers of wage labour. So by definition they cannot sell their labour ( becuz they don't produce labour).

[reddevil]

it would be heartbreaking if cuba went the way of chian or vietnam. nevertheless, please hold your horses before passing judgement. all he's done is allow the sale of houses and mobile phones.

[khad]

it would be heartbreaking if cuba went the way of chian or vietnam. nevertheless, please hold your horses before passing judgement. all he's done is allow the sale of houses and mobile phones.
The sale of multi-million dollar villas created just for rich foreigners with all the service staff to match.

[SecondLife]

Huh? I'm not sure you understand what the term bourgeois refers to. I'll try and explain it for you. The bourgeoisie is the class that owns the means of social production and who are the employers of wage labour. So by definition they cannot sell their labour ( becuz they don't produce labour).

I know what bourgeois means. Why you think that if bourgeoisie owns means of production and are employers, they cannot sell their own labour and can't produce labour. Yes they can very well and many of them do this every day. This isn't restricted by law. Example I am bourgeois, get profit, am employer and employ people to work, but this money that I get isn't still enough for me to survive (maybe I have huge demands) and I go to work for other employer. Or why other, I can work also for myself and pay every month for myself wage. This is not restricted by law. After that I can go to trade union, tell them how exploited I am and my human rights are violated and become 'working class' and then want also 'proletariate dictature' - it was example how bourgeoisie makes himself martyrs and this happens every single day. They like to be one of workers, they are like spys. Because then they can always say - "fuck you, I am also worker like you, exploited and want to survive". This is reality. Thats because you can't just trust every single worker for just blue eyes.

[Madvillainy]

I know what bourgeois means. Why you think that if bourgeoisie owns means of production and are employers, they cannot sell their own labour and can't produce labour. Yes they can very well and many of them do this every day. This isn't restricted by law. Example I am bourgeois, get profit, am employer and employ people to work, but this money that I get isn't still enough for me to survive (maybe I have huge demands) and I go to work for other employer. Or why other, I can work also for myself and pay every month for myself wage. This is not restricted by law. After that I can go to trade union, tell them how exploited I am and my human rights are violated and become 'working class' and then want also 'proletariate dictature' - it was example how bourgeoisie makes himself martyrs and this happens every single day. They like to be one of workers, they are like spys. Because then they can always say - "fuck you, I am also worker like you, exploited and want to survive". This is reality. Thats because you can't just trust every single worker for just blue eyes.

lol.

[Bandito]

What the fuck??

[Bandito]

I know what bourgeois means. Why you think that if bourgeoisie owns means of production and are employers, they cannot sell their own labour and can't produce labour. Yes they can very well and many of them do this every day. This isn't restricted by law. Example I am bourgeois, get profit, am employer and employ people to work, but this money that I get isn't still enough for me to survive (maybe I have huge demands) and I go to work for other employer. Or why other, I can work also for myself and pay every month for myself wage. This is not restricted by law. After that I can go to trade union, tell them how exploited I am and my human rights are violated and become 'working class' and then want also 'proletariate dictature' - it was example how bourgeoisie makes himself martyrs and this happens every single day. They like to be one of workers, they are like spys. Because then they can always say - "fuck you, I am also worker like you, exploited and want to survive". This is reality. Thats because you can't just trust every single worker for just blue eyes.
Oh, c'mon, use your brain on this one. Think harder and post again.

[Davie zepeda]

I am disgusted for the simple fact none of you have tooken in account the conditions and the scenario that's going on around the world. Cuba is Fighting to keep the revolution in tact. Yes it has it's imperfection but understand it will always's be more human than any other nation. The end result is Cuba has and alway's defend revolution even if it dosen't look like theirs and will contuine doing so just because fidel has a mind of his own dose not make him worng or degist. I think this is a mear smear tactic nothing more comrades nothing more than a bunch of junk let's be crictal with logic not nonsense.

[an apple]

Cuba has always been heading towards capitalism, even under the heading of Fidel.

Reform by reform it has left communism, just like 'Nam and China. It's becoming hard to survive in a capitalist world for a nation like Cuba.

It's no real news that Raul is doing this, its just a continuation of his brother's movements.

[SecondLife]

Oh, c'mon, use your brain on this one. Think harder and post again.
I don't know how old you are (I suspect that not much), but I think that you must think harder.
I can talk about myself - I don't work and probably don't want to work also anymore, in capitalist state. I can live from rent that I get from lessee. Then I am probably bourgeoisie. But I am happy that I am bourgeoisie and not like my fascist neighbour worker, who is very poor but want to kill blacks and call all unemployed people parasites. Yes, I am better bourgeoisie than bastard. But I have nothing against working, I just don't want to work in capitalist state, principle. In socialist state I am ready to work even without money, because I know then that in state have good social insurance and this is for me also money, I don't need to get it with my wage, I am satisfied to get my wage through good social insurance.

[Bandito]

Having said that, I don't think that you ever HAD to work to survive. Unlike your fascist neighbour perhaps.
If that has any relevance, I do work for a shitty wage that puts food on my table. And nothing else.

[Wakizashi the Bolshevik]

Cuba isn't turning capitalist. Not very much has changed since Raul came to power.
Sadly there have been some negative "changes", but free healthcare, free housing and free education, together with the collecive ownership of the means of production, are still there. cuba is still Socialist.

[SecondLife]

Cuba isn't turning capitalist. Not very much has changed since Raul came to power.
Sadly there have been some negative "changes", but free healthcare, free housing and free education, together with the collecive ownership of the means of production, are still there. cuba is still Socialist.

Thats right! To be more sure about it also in future, I want to be there to protect this as "red guard" (of course if they want me). Cubans are proud people and never ask help. For me only socialism is important there and not real power, altough I know that there is perfect democracy and workers power. But nobody don't know what gives tomorrow. Cuba is the most important socialist country, because revolution and Castro and Che all was like from school book, like perfect example about socialism. This is like live symbol or keykeeper of socialism. Thats because its very important. Example my child ask from me someone - "give me example of socialist country". Without Cuba I have trouble to give example (I can't give N.Korea for example).

[Madvillainy]

I don't know how old you are (I suspect that not much), but I think that you must think harder.
I can talk about myself - I don't work and probably don't want to work also anymore, in capitalist state. I can live from rent that I get from lessee. Then I am probably bourgeoisie. But I am happy that I am bourgeoisie and not like my fascist neighbour worker, who is very poor but want to kill blacks and call all unemployed people parasites. Yes, I am better bourgeoisie than bastard. But I have nothing against working, I just don't want to work in capitalist state, principle. In socialist state I am ready to work even without money, because I know then that in state have good social insurance and this is for me also money, I don't need to get it with my wage, I am satisfied to get my wage through good social insurance.

you're my hero.

[robbo203]

I know what bourgeois means. Why you think that if bourgeoisie owns means of production and are employers, they cannot sell their own labour and can't produce labour. Yes they can very well and many of them do this every day. This isn't restricted by law. Example I am bourgeois, get profit, am employer and employ people to work, but this money that I get isn't still enough for me to survive (maybe I have huge demands) and I go to work for other employer. Or why other, I can work also for myself and pay every month for myself wage. This is not restricted by law. After that I can go to trade union, tell them how exploited I am and my human rights are violated and become 'working class' and then want also 'proletariate dictature' - it was example how bourgeoisie makes himself martyrs and this happens every single day. They like to be one of workers, they are like spys. Because then they can always say - "fuck you, I am also worker like you, exploited and want to survive". This is reality. Thats because you can't just trust every single worker for just blue eyes.


A capitalist is someone who has sufficient capital to live upon without the need to sell his or her labour power. There is a gradation between working class and capitalist class but class in this marxian sence has validity as a statistical generalisation

[SecondLife]

A capitalist is someone who has sufficient capital to live upon without the need to sell his or her labour power. There is a gradation between working class and capitalist class but class in this marxian sence has validity as a statistical generalisation
From this definition also all bank robbers are capitalists? And then also anybody who sell his house (in capitalist state houses/homes are privatised as you know) becomes also capitalist. And what means "sufficient capital to live up"? This dependa how much you usually eat (some people eat more than others) and how much cost food - in some country food is cheaper than in other country. Means this that if I go to other country, then I become from worker to capitalist and from capitalist to worker. But in the same country food is also cheaper in countryside.
I go to countryside and become capitalist and when I go back to city, then I'm back worker? But what if some capitalist can't survive without millions of money - they just have huge demands. Maybe he need this million for some serious operation to save his life. And who personally dictate those "sufficient needs"? And also don't forget that capitalists can very well hide their income, even better when they are conjuncted with mafia and many capitalists and private owners are conjuncted. They can present for you zero income - perfect worker, exploited, fight to survive and etc.

I see that question isn't in people or in money, but rather in economic structure of state - is there example allowed private ownership or ownership is commonage, is there capitalism or socialism. Important isn't how much you have money, but more important is what kind of social system you prefer and what kind of parties you vote.

[ZeroNowhere]

From this definition also all bank robbers are capitalists?No, I don't see how you could draw that from 'someone who has sufficient capital to live upon without the need to sell his or her labour power'.


And then also anybody who sell his house (in capitalist state houses/homes are privatised as you know) becomes also capitalist.Or that. Selling your house is not expropriating surplus labour.

While I don't exactly agree with Robin's definition, you don't seem to be getting his point.

[gorillafuck]

SecondLife, have you ever read anything by Marx, Engels, etc?

[ZeroNowhere]

SecondLife, have you ever read anything by Marx, Engels, etc?Going through his recent posts, I'm not sure why he's not in the OI, tbh.

[TC]

Your counter-revolutionary anti-socialist propaganda presented from a phoney leftist position just provides cover for your ill wishes towards the Cuban Revolution. i'm sorry whatever pathetic little political tendency you adhere to hasn't had the success of Cuban socialism but dreaming of Cuba's demise wont make it any more real then the Miami mafia's frequent pronouncements of Fidel's death.

[SecondLife]

Going through his recent posts, I'm not sure why he's not in the OI, tbh.

I don't understand why you are here? You aren't communist, you are 'De Leonist', small anarcho-primitivist movement in USA. I was born in CCCP, learned in school there, lived there. My home and nation is CCCP.
For me CCCP was real communism and I am not only communist, but also member of whole communist generation (new human generation).

[gorillafuck]

I don't understand why you are here? You aren't communist, you are 'De Leonist', small anarcho-primitivist movement in USA. I was born in CCCP, learned in school there, lived there. My home and nation is CCCP.
For me CCCP was real communism and I am not only communist, but also member of whole communist generation (new human generation).
1. A DeLeonist is a type of communist that is not even close to a primitivist
2. Someone who's probably not a communist is someone who repeatedly denies the existence of class and makes statements about how the bourgeois are also exploited
3. I don't give a flying fuck if you were born in the USSR

Edit: Though as for the thread, I think Cuba is still authentically socialist and I don't think they're going capitalist.

[SecondLife]

1. A DeLeonist is a type of communist that is not even close to a primitivist

Don't important. It's primitivism, it's revisionism.


2. Someone who's probably not a communist is someone who repeatedly denies the existence of class and makes total boneheaded statements about how the bourgeois are also exploited

I wasn't denied existence of classes and class struggle today. Also never said that bourgeois are exploited. Because some of you here are too young, naive and maybe without education, I want to point you observation that you can't classify people by employment, money or private ownership in capitalist state. In socialist state this all is guaranteed by law and not by someone eyes color.


3. I don't give a flying fuck if you were born in the USSR
Fuck you to!

[gorillafuck]

Don't important. It's primitivism.
It's absolutely nothing like primitivism


I wasn't denied existence of classes and class struggle today.
You actually denied the existence of class in this post.


you can't classify people by employment, money or private ownership in capitalist state.
This is denying the importance of class. Private Ownership of the means of production is definitely means for classifying someone.


In socialist state this all is guaranteed by law and not by someone eyes color.
Ok.....


Fuck you to!
I kind of deserved that, I'll try not to be hostile.

[SecondLife]

This is denying the importance of class. Private Ownership of the means of production is definitely means for classifying someone.

Exactly this classifies someone, but this 'someone' isn't person. Class struggle don't mean struggle with persons. You can struggle against law, against political power, against private ownership, but you can't fight with persons. Because persons political positions and capital positions just don't fit nowadays. You can fight with concrete person only if his political positions example supports private ownership and not fight if he only owns private ownership, beacus all people in capitalist state owns some private ownership (home example). Yes, most of them don't use it for profit, but they can do this (example rent his home).
Yes, you can make strike, but you fight then with private ownership and not with owner itself. If you win this owner, then becomes another.
If owner attack you, then you can fight with him. If you put bomb, then you also don't hate concrete person but again private ownership.
Also some expoited worker, who example don't own nothing, can support private ownership, capitalism, private means of production and you make a big mistake if you vote him into workers council. Instead you must fight with this worker the same way as you fight with bourgeoisie. You can't as simply classify people by profession.

[mykittyhasaboner]

Great, another thread that is going down the drain due to inane arguments and sectarian swipes. What a surprise.

SecondLife, please stop derailing the thread. Others should just ignore all this nonsensical shit.

I hope an admin or mod comes by soon and trashes all these crap.