Cuba plans massive shift to "non-state" sector

[RedZero]

full article: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/23/us-cuba-economy-idUSBRE83M19Y20120423


(Reuters) - Cuba will move nearly 50 percent of the state's economic activity to the "non-state" sector, a senior Communist party official said at the weekend, the latest signal the island is headed toward a mixed economy.

Cuban President Raul Castro has hammered away at the need for the state to become more efficient and get out of secondary economic activity such as farming and retail services since taking over for his ailing older brother, Fidel, in 2008.

China and Vietnam adopted similar measures in the last few decades of the 20th century as they began to shift to what is known as market socialism.

"Today, almost 95 percent of gross domestic product is produced by the state. Within four or five years between 40 percent and 45 percent will result from different forms of non-state production," a long-time Communist party political bureau member, Esteban Lazo Hernandez, said in a speech to the Havana city government.

Lazo, who is considered by many to be the Communist party's top ideologue, said the increased private business and the tax revenue the move would generate meant local government needed to improve its efficiency in order to cope with the shift, according to clips of his speech broadcast by state-run television on Sunday.

The Cuban Communist party approved a...

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

And somehow I don't think even this will convince the typical Cuba-huggers, they'll cling to the excuses of necessity. :laugh:

[Deicide]

They are still good communists!!! This is imperialist propaganda :sneaky:

[Mass Grave Aesthetics]

I think by now it should be impossible to deny that Cuba is moving towards private- enterprise- capitalism.
Judging from what I´ve read they seem to be planning to implement those kind of "reforms" faster than was done in China and Vietnam.
Also, what kind of a socialist considers mass- scale privatisations a necessity?

[Prometeo liberado]

The last time I was in Cuba, 6 years ago I believe, the street committee's had already begun to take up the discussion as to what form/direction the economy would take. The problem I saw was that these committees could not imagine any other options relations other than the so called public/private option. Rather than push forward with for greater worker control and ownership. The allure of consumerism being dangled in front of them by their counter-revolutionary cousins in Miami seems to have trumped the need to defend the gains of the revolution. Though I am a huge supporter of and believer in the Cuban Revolution it is imperative that as communists we recognize the immense forces of counter-revolution and imperialist aggression as the two great forces that have retarded revolutionary cultural outlook and practice in Cuba. This movement toward Social Democracy signifies a dangerous move in the revolutionary Cuban synthesis.

[KurtFF8]

And somehow I don't think even this will convince the typical Cuba-huggers, they'll cling to the excuses of necessity. :laugh:

"Cuba-huggers"? Really?

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

"Cuba-huggers"? Really?

Those that defend Cuba as socialist/communist, yes, that cling to Cuba like two desperate lovers last farewell before a misty pacific sunset-- that insist that all sorts of degeneration and total capitulation is actually a good thing.

[Delenda Carthago]

http://www.greenleft.org.au/node/50319

http://www.granma.cu/ingles/cuba-i/2feb-cuba.html

[KurtFF8]

that insist that all sorts of degeneration and total capitulation is actually a good thing.

I would love to see a convincing argument that the recent developments are equal to "degeneration" and "total capitulation."

It's amazing for people who criticize pro-Cuba folks turn around and make such outlandish claims themselves.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

I would love to see a convincing argument that the recent developments are equal to "degeneration" and "total capitulation."

It's amazing for people who criticize pro-Cuba folks turn around and make such outlandish claims themselves.

The state is the landlord. "leases" enterprises/locales.

Encourages a reversion to more private farming, letting farmers lease land from the state to use it (rent free for a while, but nevertheless), seeks to increase "incentives" and other general liberal farces.

Then again, Cuba has been capitalist for this whole time. It's just shedding its cocoon of fake-socialism it donned to get the Soviet Union on their side after the fall out with the United States. As there, the state is the capitalist and nothing else is really different.

[RedSonRising]

And somehow I don't think even this will convince the typical Cuba-huggers, they'll cling to the excuses of necessity. :laugh:

It's a bourgeois media source comparing the Cuban economy to Vietnam and China because they have no ideological reference point in their shallow minds to any shift in a State economy besides what they've been conditioned to know. "Non-state" shifts have been happening for a while to services and small-time cooperatives, and while their intentions are unclear, they have in no way indicated a return to capitalism.

When Cuba transfers large amounts of productive property over to private hands, then we can call it a restoration of capitalism. Until then, the restaurants and cooperatives and individual farms pose little threat to the flawed but substantially progressive system of integrated workers' democracy in place. Municipal food planning, teacher and worker unions in government, and local committee organization goes on.



Then again, Cuba has been capitalist for this whole time. It's just shedding its cocoon of fake-socialism it donned to get the Soviet Union on their side after the fall out with the United States. As there, the state is the capitalist and nothing else is really different.

You need to read up on the history of the Cuban Revolution if you believe socialism was a name-only category adopted for the sake of Soviet support. The industrial workers and rural peasants of the country were politicized through class analysis, not simply anti-Batista ideas, and the leaders of the July-16th movement were largely anti-capitalist. Do you remember why they fell out of the United States in the first place? Nationalization of exploitative foreign enterprise.

[Workers-Control-Over-Prod]

The problem I saw was that these committees could not imagine any other options relations other than the so called public/private option. Rather than push forward with for greater worker control and ownership.

Yes, it is a problem. People seem to believe that what they have is real socialism and don't see the alternative to either state or private capitalist relations. This is what has to be fought.

[OnlyCommunistYouKnow]

Damnit Castro! Why must you age and let this happen?

[Tim Cornelis]

It's a bourgeois media source comparing the Cuban economy to Vietnam and China because they have no ideological reference point in their shallow minds to any shift in a State economy besides what they've been conditioned to know. "Non-state" shifts have been happening for a while to services and small-time cooperatives, and while their intentions are unclear, they have in no way indicated a return to capitalism.

In the year 2000, public sector employment was 76% and private sector employment was 23% compared to the 1981 ratio of 91% to 8%. (Economy of Cuba, wikipedia).


When Cuba transfers large amounts of productive property over to private hands, then we can call it a restoration of capitalism.

They are already doing this. They are privatizing state-capitalism.


Until then, the restaurants and cooperatives and individual farms pose little threat to the flawed but substantially progressive system of integrated workers' democracy in place. Municipal food planning, teacher and worker unions in government, and local committee organization goes on.

Workers' democracy in Cuba, another one of these.... :rolleyes:

But I won't bother, I've already noticed that these theories are unfalsifiable, every source and fact I will use are just "bourgeois lies" and "propaganda."

[Revolution starts with U]

If state capitalism is a bourgiousie ideology, by calling its shift to private capitalism a "betrayal," does that not imply a support for bourgiousie ideologies?

Or is state capitalism a proletarian ideology, and therefore socialism... and therefore socialists are capitalists?

[Zealot]

Someone needs to put down this traitor, he's just another lame ass Gorbachev reactionary. However, I can't say I'm surprised since he's been on a capitalist crusade for a while now. It's actually quite ironic because I recently finished writing my school essay on the neo-liberalisation of Cuba.

[Raúl Duke]

It's not like it was all very socialist in the beginning...

I feel that if Cuba goes the way of China, etc than basically it seems like nearly all state-'socialist' nations seem to eventually, perhaps in a pre-determined fashion, slide back to the usual form of private capitalism to some degree/manner or another.

I know someone will say "hey, no!" about this idea and claim that US imperialism is somewhat involved, which it is but not as much as they're thinking. Even if the CCP start privatizing I doubt the US will open up much to them, they (particularly the Cuban American voting bloc in Miami) want to see the end of CCP/Castro rule.

What boggles my mind is, if they're really socialists, why don't they think of other forms of economic management or ideas besides just "privatizing?" Why such a lack of imagination from officials/etc in so-called "socialist" states?

[REDSOX]

My understanding of what the Cubans are doing is that they are transferring small businesses leaseholds to the workers while keeping the businesses Freehold state owned and letting them run them as a form of self managed businesses. I suspect that this will be extended to include medium sized enterprises which will be run as self managed co-ops similar to the agriculture holdings where the land is state owned but is run by the workers. The commanding heights will stay state owned and state managed. Sounds like the Cubans are experimenting with self managed enterprises at the small and medium sized enterprise level similar to what Tito did in Yugoslavia though it is not clear whether these will operate in a market framed environment or a planned basis. One thing i am certain of though this is not Privatisation in the neo liberal sense. All workers laid off will be directed into new small businesses, tourism and co-ops and possibly in the future oil based industry if they find oil and gas which they may thus transforming Cuba. I dont think they are following China and Vietnam exactly possibly something in between what they have now and what china and nam have and possibly where Venezuela is heading. Cant see what the fuss is about really and the trots shouldnt get worked up about it since they opposed small and medium business nationlisation in Cuba's 1968 nationalisation offensive so logically they should welcome self management of small and medium enterprises

[Art Vandelay]

It's not like it was all very socialist in the beginning...

I feel that if Cuba goes the way of China, etc than basically it seems like nearly all state-'socialist' nations seem to eventually, perhaps in a pre-determined fashion, slide back to the usual form of private capitalism to some degree/manner or another.

I know someone will say "hey, no!" about this idea and claim that US imperialism is somewhat involved, which it is but not as much as they're thinking. Even if the CCP start privatizing I doubt the US will open up much to them, they (particularly the Cuban American voting bloc in Miami) want to see the end of CCP/Castro rule.

What boggles my mind is, if they're really socialists, why don't they think of other forms of economic management or ideas besides just "privatizing?" Why such a lack of imagination from officials/etc in so-called "socialist" states?

The decision makers in Cuba are simply acting in their class interests; unfortunately the class basis of those interests is bourgeois and political power is not held by the proletariat.

[RedSonRising]

In the year 2000, public sector employment was 76% and private sector employment was 23% compared to the 1981 ratio of 91% to 8%. (Economy of Cuba, wikipedia).



They are already doing this. They are privatizing state-capitalism.



Workers' democracy in Cuba, another one of these.... :rolleyes:

But I won't bother, I've already noticed that these theories are unfalsifiable, every source and fact I will use are just "bourgeois lies" and "propaganda."

Wikipedia uses the word "private sector", and all of a sudden the Cuban economy is being turned on its head. Brilliant. There is of course no possible way that the private sector is simply referring to non-state economic functions such as small-scale and cooperative farming, cooperative family-run restaurants, and individually provided services that require license. You got me.

If you want real on the ground analysis about what's going on in Cuba, I recommend you hear it from the people themselves and a less ideologically-bound source.

http://www.revleft.com/vb/video-al-jazeera-t167294/index.html?p=234724

While you're at it, try reading up on the organs of the state and how they interact with the numerous unions in Cuba which provide the framework through which the workers make economic and political decisions.

If that still doesn't convince you, try coming up with an explanation for the impossibility of a third world country with an economic base designed for colonial export, no valuable export-commodities, and no access to most of the world market, can afford to have both an exploitative and decadent ruling class, and the best most accessible education/healthcare/housing systems in all of Latin America. I'll wait.

[Yazman]

said the increased private business and the tax revenue the move would generate meant local government needed to improve its efficiency in order to cope with the shift

and by "improve it's efficiency" they mean "lay off countless workers in the employ of the state" as usual.


I feel that if Cuba goes the way of China, etc than basically it seems like nearly all state-'socialist' nations seem to eventually, perhaps in a pre-determined fashion, slide back to the usual form of private capitalism to some degree/manner or another.

The great redstar2000 argued this in an excellent fashion! I agree with it.

[Delenda Carthago]

Someone needs to put down this traitor, he's just another lame ass Gorbachev reactionary. However, I can't say I'm surprised since he's been on a capitalist crusade for a while now. It's actually quite ironic because I recently finished writing my school essay on the neo-liberalisation of Cuba.
If you read the article that I posted, you will see that this was not the descision of one man, but a whole peoples open democratic dialog.

[KurtFF8]

What boggles my mind is, if they're really socialists, why don't they think of other forms of economic management or ideas besides just "privatizing?" Why such a lack of imagination from officials/etc in so-called "socialist" states?

You mean like promoting worker co-ops?

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

You mean like promoting worker co-ops?

Worker coöp in capitalism is all the same as state-owned or private capitalism, just another business form. And that's assuming they would be genuine workers co-öps. Is Scandinavian or Japanese agriculture socialist because it is principially organised as coöperatives? The answer is of course, no.

[KurtFF8]

Of course not. But I would certainly much rather see the privatization of a state economy like Cuba move in the direction of co-ops over other forms of private investment.