Trotsky As Taught in Cuba

[fa2991]

How the country that gave Ramon Mercader asylum treats Trotsky's role in the history of the Russian Revolution.

http://www.havanatimes.org/?p=27884&preview=true

Trotsky, as Taught in Cuba

August 17, 2010 | Daisy Valera


Lev Davidovich Bronstein —better known to the world as Leon Trotsky— died on August 21, 1940, in Coyoacan, Mexico. One could think that the name of this Russian revolutionary would have come to my ears in my contemporary history classes in my first year of high school here in Cuba.

Nevertheless, the name Trotsky was not written in the history book that I carried around when I was 14 and 15. From the classes of that period I can only remember the figure of Lenin, who was glorified by my teacher.

Like the more than 30 other students in my class, I knew of Vladimir Ilyich Lenin as the primary and practically sole leader of the Great October Socialist Revolution. The only other memory that I retained of those classes was the day we learned about the causes for the collapse of the USSR; for some reason, many of the students in the room looked at each other as if we had been double-crossed.


The history lessons concluded, as did my high school studies, without me ever learning that there had been a Leon Trotsky. Only a few days before I began my program at the university —and by pure chance— I heard a song by a Cuban folk singer about how Trotsky had been one of the main figures in the Russian Revolution of 1917.


The name of that revolutionary stuck in my mind, but any information about him was scarce in every place one could go to look him up. It wasn’t until my third year at the university that the fact that I found myself among a very particular group of people allowed me to discover the full story of a part of history that no one had thought it necessary to reveal to me.
Finally the name of Trotsky stopped being just a name and for me turned into a person who had carried out actions of critical importance for the Russian Revolution. He had been the principle representative of the St. Petersburg’s soviets (workers’ councils) as well as in the organization of the Red Army.


Perhaps the fact that I had never before known about Trotsky made me become an assiduous reader of most of his works, among which I have to highlight Permanent Revolution (1930) and The Revolution Betrayed (1936).

August 20th will mark 70 years since the fateful attack carried out by a Stalinist clique against a man who exhibited in his deeds and writings a love for the world proletariat. He was confident that a social structure different from capitalism could free life of all wrongs.


Yet despite everything, this Trotsky still doesn’t appear in Cuban history books. There’s no mention of the founder of the Fourth International, an organization committed to the struggle against bureaucracy, against those who sought to enrich themselves at the expense of other people’s labor, against those lacking scruples in accentuating the differences between classes in a society that aimed to construct socialism, and against those who did not allow the workers to either participate or decide.


So isn’t it important to reclaim him in the history taught on the island, a person truly committed until the final few days of their life to the non-degeneration of societies that are called socialist.

[Saorsa]

There’s no mention of the founder of the Fourth International,

There's not a whole lot to mention.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Why was Lev Davidovich Bronstein known as Leon Trotsky? And come to think of it, why was Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov known as Lenin?

[Raúl Duke]

There's not a whole lot to mention.

Well history books should at least mention that he was involved in leading/running the red army which fought in the russian civil war for the bolshevik's side and/or had a "power struggle" of sorts with Stalin during a small time period in Soviet history and the aftermath of this (i.e. Trotskyism was created, etc). Although all that would be needed are a few paragraphs at least really.

[fa2991]

Why was Lev Davidovich Bronstein known as Leon Trotsky? And come to think of it, why was Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov known as Lenin?

They were revolutionary nicknames, weren't they? I know "Stalin" means "Steel," but I'm not sure about the origins of "Lenin" or "Trotsky."


There's not a whole lot to mention.

Seems to me that it's sort of equivalent to leaving Engels out of a Marx biography or Art Garfunkel out of a Paul Simon biography, etc.

[Crux]

Lev Davidovitch Bronstein took the name of Trotsky to avoid being captured after fleeing Tsarist prisons in Siberia. It was taken from one of the prison guards.
Lenin refers to the river Lena, although I do not know under what circumstances he got the name.

Thanks for the original article by the way, it was an interesting read.
Also, in it's hey-day the original 4th international was hardly irrelevant, it had militants in most corners of the world and in several countries played a significant role. Sure the forces were small, but would you disparrage, say the Communist League, for which that famous manifesto was written, on those grounds, an organization that never numbered more than a couple of hundreds? Or that early little split from the Socialist revolutionary party that went on to become the RDSLP?

[Charles Xavier]

Lev Davidovitch Bronstein took the name of Trotsky to avoid being captured after fleeing Tsarist prisons in Siberia. It was taken from one of the prison guards.
Lenin refers to the river Lena, although I do not know under what circumstances he got the name.

Thanks for the original article by the way, it was an interesting read.
Also, in it's hey-day the original 4th international was hardly irrelevant, it had militants in most corners of the world and in several countries played a significant role. Sure the forces were small, but would you disparrage, say the Communist League, for which that famous manifesto was written, on those grounds, an organization that never numbered more than a couple of hundreds? Or that early little split from the Socialist revolutionary party that went on to become the RDSLP?

The difference is that The Communist League has political works and ideas that lead to the foundation of modern scientific socialism and political struggle of the working class and the so called "forth international" has nothing to claim to its name. I can't think of a single important theoretical contribution or political campaign from the organization.

Size isn't the issue, its relevancy matters.

[S.Artesian]

They were revolutionary nicknames, weren't they? I know "Stalin" means "Steel," but I'm not sure about the origins of "Lenin" or "Trotsky."



Seems to me that it's sort of equivalent to leaving Engels out of a Marx biography or Art Garfunkel out of a Paul Simon biography, etc.


According to Deutscher, Bronstein took the name Trotsky from one of the guards when he escaped from exile in Siberia [if I'm remembering this correctly].

These weren't nicknames, but names designed to provide a bit of cover from the Tsar's secret police.

[S.Artesian]

The difference is that The Communist League has political works and ideas that lead to the foundation of modern scientific socialism and political struggle of the working class and the so called "forth international" has nothing to claim to its name. I can't think of a single important theoretical contribution or political campaign from the organization.

Size isn't the issue, its relevancy matters.


I think the 4th International's opposition to class-collaboration in the form of the "popular front" was and is a very relevant contribution, if we're looking at the actual historical record, the actual results of "popular fronts."

As for "political" campaigns-- you might want to check out the history of relations between Trotskyists and the miners of Bolivia, particularly during the "national revolutionary government" of the MNR, 1952-1964.

[DaringMehring]

Editing history is nothing new -- they're just following the precedent of the Stalin school of falsification. The history presented by the bureaucratic socialist states is about as good as their track record of achieving socialism. I read an official Soviet history published in 1980/81... it was a joke. Even if you had no knowledge of history at all (so you couldn't see the numerous "re-interpretations" and omissions), you could tell that it had absolutely no sociological insight or even Marxist science, not to mention revolutionary spirit.

[Catillina]

Lenin refers to the river Lena, although I do not know under what circumstances he got the name.



My History teacher told us, because the river Lena was a straight line where Lenin was hold. Therefore, the ideas of Lenin are straight.

Or another theory is, if you are banished to the river Lena(in pre-soviet russia), you were "approved" by the Tzarist Regime, as strong opponent of the regime

[Devrim]

There's not a whole lot to mention.

No, not really apart from Trotsky being the military organiser of the revolution and civil war. This is an absolutely absurd comment.

Devrim

[Devrim]

Why was Lev Davidovich Bronstein known as Leon Trotsky? And come to think of it, why was Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov known as Lenin?

Do you sign articles that you write in communist publications with your real name? I certainly don't.

Devrim

[Saorsa]

No, not really apart from Trotsky being the military organiser of the revolution and civil war. This is an absolutely absurd comment.

I meant there's not much worth mentioning about the 'Fourth International'. Trotsky the man and Trotsky the revolutionary leader, I have a fair bit of respect for. His writings are very worthwhile on a number of questions and he had some valid criticisms.

Trotskyism as a political movement is worse than useless.

[Chambered Word]

There's not a whole lot to mention.

It's good to see some interesting discussion and debate happening as usual.

[Nolan]

I admit they should mention him. Maybe a paragraph of shame like my history books gave Benedict Arnold.

Problem is though, if they admit that figures important to the initial revolution can betray us and capitalist revisionism doesn't always come from someone later on, they can pretend that state capitalism doesn't exist in Cuba and the Castro bros are some saints for the proletariat.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Do you sign articles that you write in communist publications with your real name? I certainly don't.

Devrim

I've never written in a communist publication. Although I probably wouldn't use any name whatsoever if I did.

My question didn't have as much to do with why they didn't use their real names, it had more to do with the origins of their nicknames, a question that has now been sufficiently answered.

[graymouser]

The Fourth International did have significant accomplishments in its early years. The radical traditions in both Bolivia and Sri Lanka were basically created by Trotskyists, and particularly Bolivian radicalism is firmly rooted in the program of the Partido Obrero Revolucionario back before the 1953 revolution. Unfortunately the POR made some terrible mistakes and the Bolivian Trotskyists are no longer unified in any serious party.

Also, the Trotskyists were a significant force in Vietnam before they were murdered by Ho Chi Minh's forces.

[Barry Lyndon]

I admit they should mention him. Maybe a paragraph of shame like my history books gave Benedict Arnold.

Yeah, because leading the Red Army and saving the revolution from the White pogromists makes you a traitor.:rolleyes:

Fuck you and your Stalinist wankery.

In reply to the OP, I agree that Trotsky should be included in Cuban textbooks. I am a strong supporter of the Cuban Revolution but I think that their long-standing dependence on the USSR for support had some debilitating effects, particularly when it comes to uncritically swallowing the 'official' Soviet history(which airbrushed Trotsky out).

To be honest, though, I find Cuba's achievements in socialist construction, as well as their medical and military(ie Angola) internationalism to be far more important then whether they honor my favorite historical figures or not.

[Zeus the Moose]

Yeah, because leading the Red Army and saving the revolution from the White pogromists makes you a traitor.:rolleyes:

Fuck you and your Stalinist wankery.

I can actually see where Red America is coming from in trying to make a Leon Trotsky/Benedict Arnold link, and if you're looking at it from the "Stalin-descendant" side of history, then the comparison may seem apt.

Benedict Arnold was originally a hero of the American War of Independence. In the early years of the war, he probably had better renown than George Washington, and was at least a better commander. Arnold (along with Ethan Allen) led the forces that captured Fort Ticonderoga in 1775, and played a major role in the battle of Saratoga, which is widely seen as one of the main turning points in the War of Independence. It was after that point that the American ambassadors to France had a good victory to show to the French, helping convince them to come into the war against the British. Only later, after Arnold had been jerked around by the Continental Congress and others had falsely claimed Arnold's accomplishments as their own, did he switch sides.

[RedSonRising]

http://www.marxist.com/templates/imt/images/logo.png (http://www.marxist.com/)
http://www.marxist.com/templates/imt/images/imt_flag.png
International Marxist Tendency[/URL]





[URL="http://www.marxist.com/launch-revolution-betrayed.htm"] More than one hundred attend launch of 'Revolution Betrayed' in Cuba (http://www.marxist.com/id/)

Written by In Defence of Marxism Thursday, 21 February 2008


This year, for the first time one of Trotsky's key works, the Revolution Betrayed (http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1936/revbet/index.htm), was presented by the Frederick Engels Foundation at the Havana Book Fair, stimulating big interest. A special edition of a theoretical magazine on China, including the analysis of the International Marxist Tendency (http://www.marxist.com/china-long-march-capitalism021006-5.htm) on this subject was also being sold. It is clear that a layer of the most conscious workers and youth in Cuba are looking far a Marxist alternative to the prospect of "market economics" being reintroduced to the island. http://www.marxist.com/images/stories/cuba/bookfair/dsc_0021.jpg On Monday, February 18, more than one hundred people filled the Fernando Ortiz meeting room at the Havana Book Fair, to attend the launch of Leon Trotsky's Revolution Betrayed (http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1936/revbet/index.htm), the first time that a book by the Russian revolutionary has officially been presented in Cuba. The people were so keen that 15 minutes before the advertised time, all 60 seats in the room had already been taken. Those attending were revolutionary militants spanning three generations and from many Latin American countries and beyond. Among those present were veteran Cuban Trotskyist Idalberto Ferrera, and his son and also a revolutionary militant Juan Leon Ferrera, who participated in the revolutionary war and later worked with Che Guevara.
This is the fourth year that the Spanish Frederick Engels Foundation (FFE) is taking part in this impressive Book Fair which takes place in the Cabaña complex, the old Spanish colonial fortress where Che Guevara established his Comandancia (Command Post) after the victory of the revolution, nearly 50 years ago. This time we decided to present two works which in our opinion are crucial for the debates about socialism that are taking place throughout Latin America, and of course in Cuba itself. One is the already mentioned work by Leon Trotsky, and the other a special issue of the Marxismo Hoy theoretical magazine devoted to China, which includes a work on the revolutionary history of the country, Trotsky's introduction to Harold Isaacs book on China and a document by the International Marxist Tendency analysing the process of capitalist restoration in China.
http://www.marxist.com/images/stories/cuba/bookfair/dsc_0033.jpg The meeting began with a speech by Jordi Martorell, spokesperson for the international Hands Off Venezuela campaign and a member of the Frederick Engels Foundation. He stressed how the presence of the FFE at the Book Fair was part of our internationalist and militant commitment to defend the Cuban Revolution.
Jordi explained the historical significance of the event. This was the first time a book by Trotsky was being launched at the Book Fair. Written in 1936, the book predicted and explained the process by which the Stalinist bureaucracy restored capitalism in the Soviet Union at the end of the 1980s. Jordi pointed out that the importance of the book lies in the scientific analysis of the collapse of the bureaucratic system, which was not at all the "failure of socialism", as bourgeois propagandists argued. In this book Trotsky describes the process of bureaucratic degeneration of the Russian Revolution, but also explains its material causes: the isolation of the revolution in a backward country.
One of the aspects that Trotsky deals with is the foreign policy adopted by the Stalinist bureaucracy, which abandoned proletarian internationalism for the conservative idea of "socialism in one country" and peaceful coexistence, which reflected the interests of the bureaucratic caste. Jordi pointed out how the Cuban revolution itself, many years later, clashed with this conception, and quoted from Che's speech in Algiers when he made a call to "create two, three, many Vietnams", and how he attempted by all means to spread the revolution to other countries, finally paying with his life.
In the Revolution Betrayed, Trotsky outlines three possible perspectives for the USSR. One is the victory of the workers and the return to Lenin's regime of workers' democracy. The other is the victory of a bourgeois party, which would start the return to capitalism by de-nationalising the land and light industry. Finally, Trotsky warned that the continuation of the rule of the bureaucracy would lead to this bureaucracy attempting to transform itself from parasitical administrators of the means of production to owners of the same, which is precisely what happened in Russia after 1989/91.
http://www.marxist.com/images/stories/cuba/bookfair/dsc_0026.jpg Jordi explained how the restoration of capitalism in the former USSR led an unprecedented collapse of the economy, living standards, life expectancy, art and culture, etc. He warned that the restoration of capitalism in Cuba would be even worse. He pointed to a certain naivety among layers of Cuban society about the introduction of the "market economy" and made an appeal to unconditionally defend the gains of the Cuban revolution, at which point the audience interrupted with applause.
Moving on to the presentation of the theoretical magazine on China, Jordi outlined the process of capitalist restoration which has taken place, led and controlled by the bureaucracy of the Chinese Communist Party, backing it up with many of the facts and figures which can be found in the IMT document (http://www.marxist.com/china-long-march-capitalism021006.htm). Although no one can deny that there has been significant economic growth, this has taken place at the cost of an enormous intensification of the exploitation of the Chinese working class, the emergence of enormous regional imbalances, the concentration of wealth at one end of society and of poverty at the other, with 300 million unemployed, etc. Far from being socialism of any kind (not even "market socialism with Chinese characteristics"), what we are witnessing in China is the emergence of a particularly brutal kind of capitalism.
http://www.marxist.com/images/stories/cuba/bookfair/dsc_0031.jpg The fact that China trades with Cuba and Venezuela does not determine at all the character of the mode of production in that country. These trade relations, necessary and justified as they may be, take place on market terms. Where are the Chinese doctors in the hills of Caracas or in the mountains of Kashmir?
The positive side of this process has been the development of the largest working class in the world, which is starting to acquire a consciousness of its interests and which, without doubt, will play a revolutionary role with consequences throughout the world. As the document explains, the perspectives for China, which to a large extent depends on the US market which is already in crisis, are of sustained growth, but of a crisis of overproduction and enormous social and political convulsions.
The discussion on China is also important because it has been presented by some as the model that the Venezuelan revolution should follow, arguing that if in China they are "going back to the market", then in Venezuela there is no need to expropriate the means of production..
http://www.marxist.com/images/stories/cuba/bookfair/img_1426.jpg Jordi finished by announcing the forthcoming publication of Alan Woods' "Marxism and Socialism of the 21st Century - Anti-Dieterich", which demolishes the theses of Heinz Dieterich, who by arguing that there is no need to nationalise the economy provides a "theoretical" cover for the reformists in Venezuela.
Cuban Communist journalist and writer Celia Hart, also participated in the launch of Revolution Betrayed. Celia explained the enormous impact the reading of this book had on her, when she first managed to get hold of a copy of the same edition that the Frederick Engels Foundation was now launching in Cuba. She praised both Estaban Volkov's foreword and Alan Woods' introduction to it, which she recommended to all those present.
As Jordi explained in introducing her, Celia was the person who insisted that the FFE should be present at the Havana Book Fair, in order to spread the works of Trotsky among others, and therefore the credit for such an historic event was also hers.
Celia stressed that the economic policy of Stalinism followed a series of zig-zags, and how it was the failure of the right-wing policy of concessions to the kulaks and other capitalist elements that forced it to adopt the programme of collectivisation and industrialisation that the Left Opposition had advocated, albeit in a bureaucratic and brutally distorted manner.
http://www.marxist.com/images/stories/cuba/bookfair/img_1392.jpg Regarding the NEP, she insisted that this was a policy of necessary concessions but that it had always been conceived by Lenin as something strictly limited in time and to be kept under control, not a virtue in itself. In her opinion, of all the crimes of Stalinism, the worst was the policy of "socialism in one country".
She also underlined the parallels between the ideas of Trotsky and those that Che Guevera elaborated in his recently published "Critical Notes on the USSR's Manual of Political Economy", in which Che denounced the foreign policies of both the USSR and China towards the revolutionary struggle of the Third World countries, and warned of the danger of capitalist restoration.
Finally Celia proposed that the FFE should give a copy of the Revolution Betrayed to Fidel Castro and appealed to all those present to study in depth and discuss the book.
At the end of the event both titles were sold in Cuban pesos and were taken up enthusiastically by the audience.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Different groups have been selling Trotsky's writings at book fairs in Cuba.



Several stands succeed in attracting people with very special interests. Despite the controversial ideological diversity on the left that existed in Cuba when my parents were young, the production “explicit” of socio-political ideas was “put on the back burner” during the 1970s and most of the 80s. This was when the patrons of Soviet “Marxist-Leninist” thought imposed their varying degrees of de-Stalinization-”lite.”
Over that time -which some social scientists dub the “dark decade,” though it lasted more than 15 years- it was very “contentious” to refer to authors like Leon Trotsky, for example. Moreover, it appears to me, the background works of Lenin in the movement today known as the October Revolution have never been published in Cuba.

Therefore, one of the attractions of the book fair (although I recognize not for the “general public,” but yes for many youth between 16 and 76) has been the bookstands that offer social-political literature from the perspective of Trotskyism and the like.

Many people now know some of the exhibitors personally, and for them the fair is an opportunity to chat with their comrades and fellow socialists. A Trotskyite “underground” does not exist in Havana, because, according to my sources, there are no organized groups of such inclinations (which is “another story”), but persisting interests exists in learning of alternative ways to think about socialism and its 100-year-old history.

Just like the annual conference held in Havana on globalization and the problems of development -where Cuban economists can discuss in an atmosphere of plurality with their colleagues of other ideological tendencies- at the Book Fair it is possible to converse with representatives of different schools of thought.

Among the international entities represented, the first that should be mentioned is Pathfinder Press (US), which not only sells fine editions of Trotsky and Rosa Luxemburg, but also those of Che Guevara and Malcolm X, which assures the diversity of their public.

I myself have several books printed by its presses. Though I’m not a Trotskyite, I miss that facsimile edition that they sometimes bring of the “Bulletins of the Opposition,” a compilation of the newspaper published by Trotsky in exile, which circulated secretly in the USSR in the 1930s (and for which the penalty for possessing it was execution). I would love to read it, but on the occasions that the book was available, my finances weren’t.

It is representative that Pathfinder, in cooperation with a Cuban publisher, has published on the island a book of speeches by Malcolm X. Another publisher present is Spain’s Friedrich Engels Foundation (from another international Trotskyite tendency), which also sells the classics of that “outcast prophet” of the Russian Revolution.

[S.Artesian]

I can actually see where Red America is coming from in trying to make a Leon Trotsky/Benedict Arnold link, and if you're looking at it from the "Stalin-descendant" side of history, then the comparison may seem apt.

Benedict Arnold was originally a hero of the American War of Independence. In the early years of the war, he probably had better renown than George Washington, and was at least a better commander. Arnold (along with Ethan Allen) led the forces that captured Fort Ticonderoga in 1775, and played a major role in the battle of Saratoga, which is widely seen as one of the main turning points in the War of Independence. It was after that point that the American ambassadors to France had a good victory to show to the French, helping convince them to come into the war against the British. Only later, after Arnold had been jerked around by the Continental Congress and others had falsely claimed Arnold's accomplishments as their own, did he switch sides.

Minor point-- historical accuracy being the most minor of points for those wearing the t-shirts that say "I'm with Joe"-- Trotsky never switched sides. He maintained his allegiance to the international proletarian revolution.

[Delenda Carthago]

I've never written in a communist publication. Although I probably wouldn't use any name whatsoever if I did.

My question didn't have as much to do with why they didn't use their real names, it had more to do with the origins of their nicknames, a question that has now been sufficiently answered.

Stalin means "man of steel"(tatarara...:) )

Lenin means "man of iron"

[Chimurenga.]

Figures that a stailnist hellhole like Cuba would censor real revolutionary literature like Trotsky. If Cubans started reading Trotsky the bureaucrats would be in deep shit

:lol:

Yeah. I'm sure.

Also, why does this matter?

[Zeus the Moose]

Minor point-- historical accuracy being the most minor of points for those wearing the t-shirts that say "I'm with Joe"-- Trotsky never switched sides. He maintained his allegiance to the international proletarian revolution.

Indeed, not making it a 1:1 comparison. I was mainly trying to point out that even taking a perspective of "Trotsky as Benedict Arnold" would still have to recognise the positive roles each of them played in their respective revolutions. With Benedict Arnold, at least, it was his previous heroism which made his betrayal so horrendous in the eyes of many Americans at the time.

[Queercommie Girl]

Figures that a stailnist hellhole like Cuba would censor real revolutionary literature like Trotsky. If Cubans started reading Trotsky the bureaucrats would be in deep shit

Yes, this "Stalinist hellhole" has got more economic equality and better public welfare than probably every single capitalist state on this planet.

Not to say Cuba doesn't have a problem with the lack of democracy, but one shouldn't just focus on the political superstructure and don't even take one second to look at the economic base. Some people seem to have forgotten what socialism is supposed to be about fundamentally.

In the US, sure, you have more "freedom" on the surface, but how much of this "freedom" actually count? Does your president listen to you when you tell him to stop bombing Iraq, say?

[Devrim]

I meant there's not much worth mentioning about the 'Fourth International'. Trotsky the man and Trotsky the revolutionary leader, I have a fair bit of respect for. His writings are very worthwhile on a number of questions and he had some valid criticisms.

Trotskyism as a political movement is worse than useless.

OK, you have more of a point then. The fourth international was stillborn, which is something which would obviously come from attempting to found a new international in the middle of a period of massive working class defeat.

Devrim

[Magón]

It matters because there isn't a damn thing socialist about stalinist bureaucracy, and this just proves that stalinists like Castro will do anything to keep real communist ideas from getting to the people

But Raul has done a lot to relax many things, one being censorship. Many more things such as different literature's are getting to the Cuban people nowadays, than they were before in say the 70s or 80s of Cuba.

[S.Artesian]

Figures that a stailnist hellhole like Cuba would censor real revolutionary literature like Trotsky. If Cubans started reading Trotsky the bureaucrats would be in deep shit

You ever been to Cuba? We can say a lot of things about it, but we should at least be a little bit accurate. A "Stalinist hellhole" it is not. Tremendous stresses in the economy, yes. A process of stratification, yes. But nevertheless that stratification encounters resistance in a strong egalitarianism that at the core, the core being the urban and rural workers.

I've been to Cuba. "Hellhole" was the last thing I'd call it. When I first went there in 1998, I was shocked and depressed. The decaying state of the housing stock-- unprotected concrete doesn't do well against the salt blowing in off the sea-- really bothered me... until I realized that I hadn't seen a single hungry child, seen a single child begging, been accosted by anyone seeking a handout. Not one. I saw lots of kids, in school, going to school, playing in organized sports, playing amongst themselves. Not one looked hungry, not one was out begging.

A friend, attending the same conference I was, but who had spent time there previously said something that was very, very accurate: "When you first come to Cuba, it's like a reverse neutron bomb has gone off: the buildings look terrible, but all the people look great."

I haven't been back since 2001, so I don't know how deep the changes are, although I'm sure the stratification around the tourist trade-- the hotels, the hard-currency stores has continued, but I doubt that any of the children are going hungry. That's quite an accomplishment, no matter how much I, or anyone, may disagree with the organization, the policies, the ideology, or the practice, the solid-ification of the revolution embodied in the government.

[fa2991]

I've been to Cuba. "Hellhole" was the last thing I'd call it. When I first went there in 1998, I was shocked and depressed. The decaying state of the housing stock-- unprotected concrete doesn't do well against the salt blowing in off the sea-- really bothered me... until I realized that I hadn't seen a single hungry child, seen a single child begging, been accosted by anyone seeking a handout. Not one. I saw lots of kids, in school, going to school, playing in organized sports, playing amongst themselves. Not one looked hungry, not one was out begging.

That reminds me of an article I read some time ago that said something to the effect of

"When Westerners visit Cuba, the first things they notice are the decaying buildings, ancient cars, and the apparent lack of a free press. When Latin Americans visit Cuba, the first things they notice are that there are no beggars or homeless people, that all the children go to school, and that people walk freely through the streets even at night."

[RedSonRising]

That reminds me of an article I read some time ago that said something to the effect of

"When Westerners visit Cuba, the first things they notice are the decaying buildings, ancient cars, and the apparent lack of a free press. When Latin Americans visit Cuba, the first things they notice are that there are no beggars or homeless people, that all the children go to school, and that people walk freely through the streets even at night."

This is exactly what I went through when I went there and the sequence of perspectives I held after visiting. It's interesting and encouraging to hear so many others describe their experiences in such similar way.

[graymouser]

OK, you have more of a point then. The fourth international was stillborn, which is something which would obviously come from attempting to found a new international in the middle of a period of massive working class defeat.
The Fourth International could really have had a watershed moment in Bolivia during the 1953 revolution, but the POR went along with the MNR and effectively ceded the leadership. It also completely blew opportunities in the early 1970s when the regime was unstable. The radical movement in Bolivia is still shaped by Trotskyism, but it never went where it could have.

The Fourth International was formed when it was because Trotsky foresaw a new wave of revolutions after the imperialist slaughter. Unfortunately things didn't shake out that way in the postwar world, and the Fourth International went to hell in a handbasket pretty quickly.