Cuba opening up 'economic zones' to increase foreign investment

[L.A.P.]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/23/us-cuba-investment-idUSBRE98M12H20130923


Reuters) - Cuba published rules and regulations on Monday governing its first special development zone, touting new port facilities in Mariel Bay in a bid to attract investors and take advantage of a renovated Panama Canal.
The decree establishing the zone and related rules takes effect on November 1 and includes significant tax and customs breaks for foreign and Cuban companies while maintaining restrictive policies, including for labor.
Cuba hopes the zone, and others it plans for the future, will "increase exports, the effective substitution of imports, (spur) high-technology and local development projects, as well as contribute to the creation of new jobs," according to reform plans issued by the ruling Communist Party in 2011.

The plan spoke positively of foreign investment, promised a review of the cumbersome approval process and said special economic zones, joint venture golf courses, marinas and new manufacturing projects were planned.
Most experts believe large flows of direct investment will be needed for development and to create jobs if the government follows through with plans to lay off up to a million workers in an attempt to lift the country out of its economic malaise.
The Mariel special development zone covers 180 square miles (466 square km) west of Havana and is centered around a new container terminal under construction in Mariel Bay, 28 miles from the Cuban capital.
The zone will be administered by a new state entity under the Council of Ministers, and investors will be given up to 50-year contracts, compared with the current 25 years, with the possibility of renewal.
They can have up to 100 percent ownership during the contract, according to Cuba's foreign investment law.
Investors will be charged virtually no labor or local taxes and will be granted a 10-year reprieve from paying a 12 percent tax on profits. They will, however, pay a 14 percent social security tax, a 1 percent sales or service tax for local transactions, and 0.5 percent of income to a zone maintenance and development fund.
Foreign managers and technicians will be subject to local income taxes.
All equipment and materials brought in to set up shop will be duty free, with low import and export rates for material brought in to produce for export.

However, one of the main complaints of foreign investors in Cuba has not changed: that they must hire and fire through a state-run labor company which pays employees in near worthless pesos while investors pay the company in hard currency.
Investors complain they have little control over their labor force and must find ways to stimulate their workers, who often receive the equivalent of around $20 a month for services that the labor company charges up to twenty times more for.
And investors will still face a complicated approval policy, tough supervision, and conflict resolution through Cuban entities unless stipulated otherwise in their contracts. And they must be insured through Cuban state companies.

MARIEL PORT
The Mariel container terminal and logistical rail and highway support, a $900 million project, is largely being financed by Brazil and built in conjunction with Brazil's Grupo Odebrecht SA. The container facility will be operated by Singaporean port operator PSA International Pte Ltd.
The terminal is scheduled to open in January.
Future plans call for increasing the terminal's capacity, developing light manufacturing, storage and other facilities near the port, and building hotels, golf courses and condominiums in the broader area that runs along the northern coast and 30 miles inland.
Mariel Bay is one of Cuba's finest along the northern coast, and the port is destined to replace Havana, the country's main port, over the coming years.

The Mariel terminal, which will have an initial 765 yards of berth, is ideally situated to handle U.S. cargo if the American trade embargo is eventually lifted, and will receive U.S. food exports already flowing into the country under a 2000 amendment to sanctions.
Plans through 2022 call for Mariel to house logistics facilities for offshore oil exploration and development, the container terminal, general cargo and bulk foods facilities.
Mariel Port will handle vessels with up drafts up to 49 feet compared with 36 feet at Havana Bay due to a tunnel under the channel leading into the Cuban capital's port.
The terminal will have an initial capacity of 850,000 to 1 million containers, compared with Havana's 350,000.
(Editing by Tom Brown and Jim Marshall)

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Capitalism in action!

[Conscript]

Capitalism in action!

Well if it preserves cuban sovereignty...

[Brutus]

Looks like he's following the lead of Deng and Maduro.

[RedSonRising]

:crying:

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Well if it preserves cuban sovereignty...

Not sure if serious....?

[mykittyhasaboner]

Capitalism in action!

Can you please explain your viewpoint rather than making an obvious one liner? i'm not trying to add hostility to the discussion, rather i just want you to add a bit of substance to your argument.

im sorry, i honestly dont understand your message here. Cuba has participated on the world market ever since the revolution, not to mention before that. Now that there is no socialist bloc, the only difference is the trade partners; as well as the terms of trade between Cuba and other states.


Well if it preserves cuban sovereignty...

What exactly is this Cuban sovereignty? i'm with The Boss asking you if your serious?

Sure Cuban society was to some degree (and still is to some degree) socialist, and the state is nobody's pawn; neither the US nor Spain controls Cuba. However, this doesn't mean that they are "sovereign". That they have the independence they once had. More and more the Cuban state is aiming to increase the share of private/foreign capital within the economy because its becoming a necessity. Cuba is no more "sovereign" than China, Vietnam, Brazil, or Belarus. The only difference is the form of government and that a Cuban capitalist class does not dominate. Nor do foreign capitalists dominate. However more and more influence is being exerted by world trade, and Cuba is forced to conform.


Looks like he's following the lead of Deng and Maduro.

i grow really tired of these comparisons. Deng split the world communist movement in half for good, following in the footsteps of Mao. Chavez, Maduro, the PSUV, and all their supporters are something totally different. In an economic sense the Cuban state has historically been well to the left of these two examples, and currently are much closer to socialism than either China or Venezuela.

However that's beside the point. Why must these comparisons be made? The Cuban state is going to do whats best for them, not follow examples of anyone else. Sure, they trade with China and Venezuela extensively; but had they merely followed their examples, the Cuban economy would be heavily privatized (which basically means corrupt as fuck). Not only that but it would have happened much earlier.

One could argue that Cuba's economy is already privatized and corrupt to a significant degree. There's truth to that; but nothing close to the outrageous path taken by the CPC even before Deng. Venezuela is still ruled by private capitalists and all the great/progressive reforms and committees wont change that.


:crying:

This is to be expected! Don't fret over the Cuban state doing shit like this. They are surviving. They haven't been overthrown by mercenaries and murdering psychopaths. So long as this hasn't happened...the Cuban people are free to develop their own consciousness and can change their own society for the better.

i must admit i am very biased in favor of the Cuban revolution as it was probably the most progressive event in the history of the "Western Hemisphere" so far. My close proximity to Cuba and daily experience with Cuban emigres is re-affirming.

[RedSonRising]

This is to be expected! Don't fret over the Cuban state doing shit like this. They are surviving. They haven't been overthrown by mercenaries and murdering psychopaths. So long as this hasn't happened...the Cuban people are free to develop their own consciousness and can change their own society for the better.

i must admit i am very biased in favor of the Cuban revolution as it was probably the most progressive event in the history of the "Western Hemisphere" so far. My close proximity to Cuba and daily experience with Cuban emigres is re-affirming.

I suppose you're right. Honestly the fact the Cuban economy has been sustained to this point is in itself an anomaly. They can only be self-sustaining to a point, and with the global economy the way it is today, it should be no surprise the state has to take such measures. And you are right in noting that a majority of the gains made through the Revolution and the subsequent political structure.

I visited the island several years ago myself and talked to as many people as I could, what are your recent experiences?

[Lokomotive293]

This is to be expected! Don't fret over the Cuban state doing shit like this. They are surviving. They haven't been overthrown by mercenaries and murdering psychopaths. So long as this hasn't happened...the Cuban people are free to develop their own consciousness and can change their own society for the better. .

This. I think, here, we just have to trust the Cubans that they know what they are doing, and that they are able to make the right decisions.
Cuba is far from perfect, and how could it be, given the incredibly hard circumstances they find themselves in.
Socialism itself is full of contradictions, even more so on a small island surrounded by capitalist states, and as long as capitalism is dominant in the world, no small island can opt out of its laws completely (they have to trade with someone...), even if very important steps have been made through ALBA.
Cuba doesn't need people to make smart-sounding comments about how they are abandoning socialism, Cuba needs our solidarity. They need us to put pressure on the US government to end the blockade, and, most of all, they need us to continue the fight for socialism in our own countries.

[ANTIFA GATE-9]

Not the ideal circumstances for socialism but considering you can nearly see the world's top capitalist nation from the Cuban coast they are doing well enough to stay communists(although not perfect communists) for over 40 years now.
If the us embargo was lifted then that would be another story. They are taking crucial and correct measures according to the circumstances they have today.

[Comrade Jacob]

I'm going to continue convincing myself that these are just small reform so they can survive...

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

This. I think, here, we just have to trust the Cubans that they know what they are doing, and that they are able to make the right decisions.


Why should we trust the Cuban state? The Cuban people is not the Cuban state. The Cuban state is a treacherous machine like any other capitalist state.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

This. I think, here, we just have to trust the Cubans that they know what they are doing, and that they are able to make the right decisions.
Cuba is far from perfect, and how could it be, given the incredibly hard circumstances they find themselves in.
Socialism itself is full of contradictions, even more so on a small island surrounded by capitalist states, and as long as capitalism is dominant in the world, no small island can opt out of its laws completely (they have to trade with someone...), even if very important steps have been made through ALBA.
Cuba doesn't need people to make smart-sounding comments about how they are abandoning socialism, Cuba needs our solidarity. They need us to put pressure on the US government to end the blockade, and, most of all, they need us to continue the fight for socialism in our own countries.

What do you mean 'smart-sounding comments about how they are abandoning socialism'? I mean, do you understand what Socialism is? And do you understand what capitalism is?

Read the OP article. The situation in Cuba is that foreign investors will be producing goods in Cuba, using Cuban labour. The Cuban workers will be paid around $20 per month in the equivalent CUP, or non-convertible peso. The products will then be sold for multiple times the wage paid to the workers. That IS capitalism. It is nothing other than capitalism. It's what Marx identified and codified as the capitalist social relationship - that of the employing capitalist and the waged labourer. it's what we've fought against for 100, 200 years. Why should we abandon that fight just because one country waves a red flag and once (over 20 years ago!!) had a state-controlled economy?

What you're seeing in Cuba is exactly what happened in China in the 1980s, and which of you will stand up and defend China today? If you defend Cuba and don't defend China as is today, that makes you wholly hypocritical, and makes me question your actual understanding of Marxism, and of what a Marxian understanding of socialism and capitalism actually is.

[Lokomotive293]

Why should we trust the Cuban state? The Cuban people is not the Cuban state. The Cuban state is a treacherous machine like any other capitalist state.

The actualisations of the Cuban economy (which is what you call "opening") have been discussed in all of Cuban society, multiple times.
Cuba is a democratic state (in the real sense, not in the bourgeois sense), it is still defined by the Poder Popular, the power of the people. The decisions made by the Cuban state are the decisions made by the Cuban people.


What do you mean 'smart-sounding comments about how they are abandoning socialism'? I mean, do you understand what Socialism is? And do you understand what capitalism is?

Read the OP article. The situation in Cuba is that foreign investors will be producing goods in Cuba, using Cuban labour. The Cuban workers will be paid around $20 per month in the equivalent CUP, or non-convertible peso. The products will then be sold for multiple times the wage paid to the workers. That IS capitalism. It is nothing other than capitalism. It's what Marx identified and codified as the capitalist social relationship - that of the employing capitalist and the waged labourer. it's what we've fought against for 100, 200 years. Why should we abandon that fight just because one country waves a red flag and once (over 20 years ago!!) had a state-controlled economy?

I've been to Cuba just recently, and I've had the chance to talk to (very informed and politically active) Cubans about this exact project. The deal is this: Cuba needs foreign currency, they need foreign technology, and they need to find a way around the US blockade.

So, what they are doing, is, they are building this huge harbour, which will 1) save them a ton of money, because they won't need this expensive process of reloading goods onto smaller ships just to get them into the harbour (which they do now in Havana), 2) become an import point in the region and thus put pressure on the US to lift the blockade (Keep in mind: Currently, every ships that lands in Cuba cannot land in the US for the next two years. The more Cuba has to offer, the more companies will pressure the US to change this law.) and 3) attract foreign investors, who will bring foreign currency and technology into the country.

The idea is, then, that those foreign companies, who will be allowed to produce in Mariel, have to follow very tight regulations. They have to follow all Cuban laws regarding working conditions, and they have to pay the normal amount of what they pay their workers in their original countries to the Cuban state, who then pays the Cuban workers what they would earn working for a state company. Please keep in mind, that, in Cuba, $20, or 500 CUP, is still a lot of money. Cubans still get a lot of their food from their librettas (coupons they can exchange for food, or that they can get food for at very low prices), most people get free meals at work or school, healthcare and education are free, rent is 20 CUP a month, the bus is 1/2 CUP per ride, a cup of coffee is 1 CUP, and so on.

I think you don't understand what socialism is. Socialism is intensified class struggle under the dictatorship of the proletariat. Nothing more, and nothing less. And if the Cubans have to make such deals with foreign companies (they've been doing that for a long time, btw, joint ventures are pretty common in Cuba), it means that they are making difficult and, yes, risky decisions in difficult times, and in some way they are making a deal with the devil, but it doesn't mean they are abandoning socialism.

Also, with all due respect, what I wanted to say is this: Cuba doesn't need armchair Marxists to tell them that everything they're doing is wrong, it needs people who show their solidarity, and who also know that the best way to help Cuba is to fight for socialism right where they live.

[mykittyhasaboner]

I suppose you're right. Honestly the fact the Cuban economy has been sustained to this point is in itself an anomaly. They can only be self-sustaining to a point, and with the global economy the way it is today, it should be no surprise the state has to take such measures. And you are right in noting that a majority of the gains made through the Revolution and the subsequent political structure.

I visited the island several years ago myself and talked to as many people as I could, what are your recent experiences?

Everyday i work with Cubans in south florida. Many of them left Cuba simply to find better work. Others left for work but because they are also against the Cuban state. Many found better work and are content enough to stay. Many have found better work and think their lives were still better in Cuba. i've met communists or former party members who left Cuba.

The point is that Cuban society is not Miami, and this place will always be dominated by the right. However, i've been introduced to many different debates going in Cuba because of our close proximity. For example, recently the Cuban state made it much easier for Cubans to travel. In my experience, everybody thought it was a good thing. However the same people will disagree vehemently about how agriculture is being re-organized (private vs coop etc etc) or how the Cuban peso is losing importance to the convertible peso.

Most Cubans love to talk and debate; and they do so openly. That is the one unifying cultural trait that i've noticed. That and great rhythm.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

I've been to Cuba just recently, and I've had the chance to talk to (very informed and politically active) Cubans about this exact project. The deal is this: Cuba needs foreign currency, they need foreign technology, and they need to find a way around the US blockade.

Indeed, the people are tired of a state-controlled economy that limits what they can earn in terms of currency, which in turn limits what they can access in terms of consumer goods. There is a dual economy in Cuba which has, over at least the past 20 years since tourism became a boom sector for the country, created distinct classes of haves and have-nots.


So, what they are doing, is, they are building this huge harbour, which will 1) save them a ton of money, because they won't need this expensive process of reloading goods onto smaller ships just to get them into the harbour (which they do now in Havana),

It will save the Cuban state a ton of money, for sure. It will save the Cuban workers nothing, because the labour market will still be regulated by the Cuban state employment company, meaning workers will still be paid less than the fruits of their labour. This is exploitation, profit-seeking behaviour, which Marx identified 150 years ago.


2) become an import point in the region and thus put pressure on the US to lift the blockade (Keep in mind: Currently, every ships that lands in Cuba cannot land in the US for the next two years. The more Cuba has to offer, the more companies will pressure the US to change this law.)

Cuba is becoming a more competitive capitalist economy so that capitalist companies will want to trade there. Exactly. Nothing to do with socialism. After all, why would large foreign multinationals want to trade in a genuinely socialist country - a country that wasn't for-profit.

The only reason any sort of company would want to trade in Cuba is to make a profit. Profit-making, last time I checked with ANY communist, is mutually exclusive to socialism.


and 3) attract foreign investors, who will bring foreign currency and technology into the country.

Yes, capitalism, in a more global context.


Please keep in mind, that, in Cuba, $20, or 500 CUP, is still a lot of money.

No it's not. You can buy jack shit with 500 CUP. The access of ordinary Cubans to consumer goods and services is severely restricted by their wages.


Cubans still get a lot of their food from their librettas (coupons they can exchange for food, or that they can get food for at very low prices), most people get free meals at work or school, healthcare and education are free, rent is 20 CUP a month, the bus is 1/2 CUP per ride, a cup of coffee is 1 CUP, and so on.

Yeah, for a shit apartment, a crowded bus on shit roads, a TERRIBLE cup of coffee (Cuba is known for its bad coffee amongst the latin countries). For nice stuff, you need a hell of a lot more. I'm not saying it's a bad system, the rationing and welfare system, but let's not make out like Cubans have access to goods that are anything other than low quality, low efficiency.


I think you don't understand what socialism is.

I'm looking forward to this.



Socialism is intensified class struggle under the dictatorship of the proletariat.

There's nothing 'class strugglist' about allowing multinational companies into your country to make huge profits.

There's also nothing socialist about letting them employ your workers - subjugating your own proletariat to exploitative capitalist relations with huge multinational companies is nothing but capitalism.


Nothing more, and nothing less. And if the Cubans have to make such deals with foreign companies (they've been doing that for a long time, btw, joint ventures are pretty common in Cuba),

Yes, Cuba has been an openly capitalist, mixed welfare economy for a long time now.


it means that they are making difficult and, yes, risky decisions in difficult times, and in some way they are making a deal with the devil, but it doesn't mean they are abandoning socialism.

The decisions aren't difficult. The Cuban political caste recognises that they can't survive politically, and Cuba can't survive economically, unless it becomes more competitive in the capitalist world. By having such low wages, and offering its low wage, educated workforce to foreign companies, it is doing just that. It is capitalism and nothing else.

I hate to play this line, but seriously: have you actually read any Marx? Or any overviews of Marxian economics? Because it seems to me as though you don't understand what socialism is, what capitalism is, and why profit-seeking is not compatible with socialism. I am not trying to be a dick, but it's difficult to really take what you're saying seriously when you seem to have little understanding of what Marxists actually mean when they use terms like socialism, or capitalism.


Also, with all due respect, what I wanted to say is this: Cuba doesn't need armchair Marxists to tell them that everything they're doing is wrong, it needs people who show their solidarity, and who also know that the best way to help Cuba is to fight for socialism right where they live.

I presume you're referring to me as the armchair Marxist? Besides the irony of you typing that from behind your keyboard, all i'll say is: i've been active IRL, i've been to Cuba, and i'll show solidarity with the workers of Cuba, and indeed the workers of the world. I won't show any solidarity to those who capitulate to capitalist economic pressures. Why should I? All they're doing is putting the Cuban workers back into their chains, and i'll be damned if i'm gonna let that shit fly.

[mykittyhasaboner]

Why should we abandon that fight just because one country waves a red flag and once (over 20 years ago!!) had a state-controlled economy?

Nobody is abandoning any fight against capitalism. At least i'm not. Certainly Cuba isn't either. Had they abandoned all hope for socialism, they would probably be a mirror image of Jamaica, Puerto Rico or even Haiti. The better living standard in Cuba is a direct result of that fight against capitalism. Whether it was completed or fits your or anybody's definition of socialism is irrelevant. The people there are better off than they might be had it not been for the revolution. This is objective.


What you're seeing in Cuba is exactly what happened in China in the 1980s, and which of you will stand up and defend China today?Not so. How many commodities that people use hundreds of times on a daily basis were made in Cuba? Can you pick up an iPhone made in the Pinar Del Rio branch of Foxconn? Are we hearing about suicidal cigar rollers? Are people being forced to live in tiny shacks and horrible excuses for shelter in the middle of Habana?

i'm sure the United States and Israel are pretty similar when it comes to political economy, but how many people (right wingers) support both states? Not many i would assume.


If you defend Cuba and don't defend China as is today, that makes you wholly hypocritical, and makes me question your actual understanding of Marxism, and of what a Marxian understanding of socialism and capitalism actually is.Take it easy.

My understanding of Marxism and the differences between capitalism and communism are quite clear. Things doesn't always fit ones theoretical understanding of this or that mode of production.

[L.A.P.]

All I can say is that Cuba is going to make some big profits from charging those Brazilian and Singaporean corporations such a high labor cost while paying the labor itself so little. It's funny that investors complain about it as if they care about how much the Cuban state pays their workers instead of the high-price on their source of surplus-value.

Cuba will allow more foreign capital as the United States loses its dominance over the global market. The big enemy of the Cuban state was always the "American capitalist-imperialists", but the BRIC capitalists don't seem as bad. The Cuban Revolution was a popularly-supported nationalist revolt that reorganized the production of capital to circulate in Cuba (rather than it all being extracted by US corporations), not a social revolution that broke existing economic relations.

Defenders of Cuba have valid arguments if you're some sort of left-wing nationalist/social democrat type.

[Crabbensmasher]

I don't really find it odd that the workers are paid $20 a month. Of course it's bad that the state is taking most of the profit, but wouldn't it be a bit odd it they paid them like $220 a month? That could be like 6 times the average salary in Cuba. Perhaps the profit is being diverted to social programs, education or healthcare.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

Nobody is abandoning any fight against capitalism. At least i'm not. Certainly Cuba isn't either. Had they abandoned all hope for socialism, they would probably be a mirror image of Jamaica, Puerto Rico or even Haiti. The better living standard in Cuba is a direct result of that fight against capitalism. Whether it was completed or fits your or anybody's definition of socialism is irrelevant. The people there are better off than they might be had it not been for the revolution. This is objective.


It is not. It is a result of a coup that installed a social-democratic government, which, bound to some labour interest, was bound to do some social reform. Like any welfare state, Cuba offers things some other impoverished less socially-minded states does not, but it does not make it socialist. If there was a time when socialism was attempted in Cuba, it was long ago, and the current order of things is endlessly spiralling out of control towards an inevitable China syndrome (if you know what I mean).

It was to some extent the relative prosperity of pre-Revolution Cuba that allowed some gains to be made. Bear in mind that today most things are stagnant. The railways can hardly operate, most roads are broken, houses are falling apart, infrastructure is declining, electricity unreliable. Water-born illnesses are increasing due to poor water treatment, following improvements in the 50's and 60's, the situation is now getting critical once more.

Objective improvements are no sign of socialism, either. Sweden isn't socialist just because the population might enjoy more generous welfare than some other nation...


Not so. How many commodities that people use hundreds of times on a daily basis were made in Cuba? Can you pick up an iPhone made in the Pinar Del Rio branch of Foxconn? Are we hearing about suicidal cigar rollers? Are people being forced to live in tiny shacks and horrible excuses for shelter in the middle of Habana?

Well, the last thing definitely does exist. Houses with roofs collapsing. Improvised fixing and fitting. And yes, some shacks as well. Not on a Haitian scale, but they definitely do exist.


i'm sure the United States and Israel are pretty similar when it comes to political economy, but how many people (right wingers) support both states? Not many i would assume.

What? Plenty right-wing nuts love both the USA and Israel. What is your point? Now Nazis might not, but the modern racist Islam-obsessed right-wing movement is quite passionate about the Israeli state.


My understanding of Marxism and the differences between capitalism and communism are quite clear. Things doesn't always fit ones theoretical understanding of this or that mode of production.

You just don't want to call it what it is when you see it. Capitalism.

[Lokomotive293]

There is a dual economy in Cuba which has, over at least the past 20 years since tourism became a boom sector for the country, created distinct classes of haves and have-nots.

Which is a direct result of the Perioda Especial, the special period that followed the fall of the Soviet Union, when from one day to the next, most foreign trade just stopped, and many Cubans had no food and no water.
Of course Cuba has many problems, also grave problems, it would be a miracle if it didn't, given the material conditions. You don't seem to understand that there is a huge difference between socialism and paradise.

The problem you mentioned is one of the main reasons for the current actualisations of the Cuban economic system, btw.


It will save the Cuban state a ton of money, for sure. It will save the Cuban workers nothing, because the labour market will still be regulated by the Cuban state employment company, meaning workers will still be paid less than the fruits of their labour. This is exploitation, profit-seeking behaviour, which Marx identified 150 years ago.

Please show me where Marx said that socialism means workers are paid the exact fruits of their labor (in fact, he said it doesn't). That would not even be possible, how would education, healthcare, public transport, defense etc. be paid for?


Cuba is becoming a more competitive capitalist economy so that capitalist companies will want to trade there. Exactly. Nothing to do with socialism. After all, why would large foreign multinationals want to trade in a genuinely socialist country - a country that wasn't for-profit.

So what is a "genuinely socialist country"? North Korea? Albania under Hoxha? Isolationism as a state philosophy? Don't you understand that there are certain material conditions, that make it neccessary for Cuba to trade with capitalist countries (e.g. that Cuba is a small island, and that there are no other socialist countries around, at least the last time I checked)?


The only reason any sort of company would want to trade in Cuba is to make a profit. Profit-making, last time I checked with ANY communist, is mutually exclusive to socialism.

Ever heard of a thing called "transitional period"? Capitalist relations will not disappear immediately, automatically and everywhere at once, just because the working class has taken political power, and even less so will the world stop being capitalist, just because the working class has taken political power on one small island. What is important about Cuba is that the working class has political power, and that they are making what seems to be a step back (and probably is...) in order to save the achievements of the revolution (free healthcare, education etc.) and to raise living standards for all of them.


No it's not. You can buy jack shit with 500 CUP. The access of ordinary Cubans to consumer goods and services is severely restricted by their wages.

Cuba is fricking third-world-country, and additionally, it has to deal with the effects of an economic blockade. Of course, access to certain goods that are standard in the Imperialist centers (like shampoo, toilet paper or the Internet) is limited, which sucks and which Cubans have every right to complain about, but which is not the fault of the Cuban system but of outside circumstances.
However, what is great about Cuba is that the most important neccessities of life (roof over your head, food, water, healthcare, education, transport) are guaranteed to everyone. Unlike in Haiti, or the United States, or even Western Europe.


Yeah, for a shit apartment, a crowded bus on shit roads, a TERRIBLE cup of coffee (Cuba is known for its bad coffee amongst the latin countries). For nice stuff, you need a hell of a lot more. I'm not saying it's a bad system, the rationing and welfare system, but let's not make out like Cubans have access to goods that are anything other than low quality, low efficiency.

I have to live with my parents because I can't afford an apartment of my own, I have to take the bike because I can't afford the bus, I can't go out at night because I have no money, I can hardly even afford to buy lunch at university.

The busses in Havana are as crowded as in any other big city at rush hour, and the roads are fine, that much I have to say.

However, I will repeat what I said before: Cuba is a third-world country without slums, but it is still a third-world country.


There's nothing 'class strugglist' about allowing multinational companies into your country to make huge profits.

Ever heard of something called "the greater picture"?


The decisions aren't difficult. The Cuban political caste recognises that they can't survive politically, and Cuba can't survive economically, unless it becomes more competitive in the capitalist world. By having such low wages, and offering its low wage, educated workforce to foreign companies, it is doing just that. It is capitalism and nothing else.

There is no "political caste" in Cuba. And stop acting like Cuba is now letting foreign companies run wild on the island. I've explained what things will look like in Mariel in my other post.


I hate to play this line, but seriously: have you actually read any Marx? Or any overviews of Marxian economics? Because it seems to me as though you don't understand what socialism is, what capitalism is, and why profit-seeking is not compatible with socialism. I am not trying to be a dick, but it's difficult to really take what you're saying seriously when you seem to have little understanding of what Marxists actually mean when they use terms like socialism, or capitalism.

Yes, I have, but I seem to have missed the part where Marx said that socialism means that, immediately after the revolution, we will find ourselves in utopia.


I presume you're referring to me as the armchair Marxist? Besides the irony of you typing that from behind your keyboard, all i'll say is: i've been active IRL, i've been to Cuba, and i'll show solidarity with the workers of Cuba, and indeed the workers of the world. I won't show any solidarity to those who capitulate to capitalist economic pressures. Why should I? All they're doing is putting the Cuban workers back into their chains, and i'll be damned if i'm gonna let that shit fly.

The workers of Cuba and the Cuban state are one and the same thing. Socialist states have, at all times, traded with capitalist states and were forced to submit to the rules of the world market while doing that. Capitalism is a global system, and if you don't understand the real problems a socialist nation surrounded by capitalist states has to face, you are preaching revolution, but you are not willing to face the hardships that are connected to it. What should Cubans do? Overthrow their government for some utopia of "real socialism"? That will lead right back into Imperialist oppression. Thankfully, Cubans know that.

[cliffhanger]

Which is a direct result of the Perioda Especial, the special period that followed the fall of the Soviet Union, when from one day to the next, most foreign trade just stopped, and many Cubans had no food and no water. This is because Cuba willingly integrated into the orbit of Soviet social-imperialism as a neocolony based on sugar monoculture. During the Special Period it has tried to survive through a combination of foreign aid, foreign beach tourism, and oil and gas speculation. Now it is transitioning to mass unemployment and petty trading on one hand and increasing foreign corporate control on the other. There are positive welfare features about Cuba's model but I don't know why we can't just call it a capitalist economy. There are nice things about many capitalist economies, it's just that socialism is something worth fighting for.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Which is a direct result of the Perioda Especial, the special period that followed the fall of the Soviet Union, when from one day to the next, most foreign trade just stopped, and many Cubans had no food and no water.

What does it tell you about the strength of any economy that it can almost collapse overnight at the loss of a sole trading partner? Tells me that the economy was being propped up by that one trading partner, hiding genuine faults within the economy's underlying organisation.


Of course Cuba has many problems, also grave problems, it would be a miracle if it didn't, given the material conditions. You don't seem to understand that there is a huge difference between socialism and paradise.

I understand perfectly well the difference between socialism and paradise. One can exist, the other probably never will.

You don't seem to understand the difference between socialism and capitalism, which is why you are presenting the Cuban economic model as socialist, which is false.



Please show me where Marx said that socialism means workers are paid the exact fruits of their labor (in fact, he said it doesn't).

That's the whole point of capitalist exploitation - workers are paid less than the fruits of their labour. Ergo, if that particular exploitative relationship continues, the result cannot be framed as a socialist social system.

Read this chapter in Wage Labour and Capital for an understanding of wages and profit:

http://marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/wage-labour/ch07.htm


That would not even be possible, how would education, healthcare, public transport, defense etc. be paid for?

So you want to steal from one section of the working class to pay the other? How else can this end other than as a 'race to the bottom'?

But you're right, which is why a socialist economy cannot co-exist with a monetary economy and, by extension, a capitalist economy cannot co-exist without money in some form, ergo, a single country cannot maintain a socialist model in a capitalist world.


So what is a "genuinely socialist country"? North Korea? Albania under Hoxha? Isolationism as a state philosophy? Don't you understand that there are certain material conditions, that make it neccessary for Cuba to trade with capitalist countries (e.g. that Cuba is a small island, and that there are no other socialist countries around, at least the last time I checked)?

That there is not a single socialist country (no 'country' can be socialist, in the truest sense of the term) is not an argument for somehow elevating the 'friendliest' capitalist nations to the role of socialist nation. That's an incredibly weak argument.


Ever heard of a thing called "transitional period"? Capitalist relations will not disappear immediately, automatically and everywhere at once, just because the working class has taken political power, and even less so will the world stop being capitalist, just because the working class has taken political power on one small island.

So make your mind up. Does Cuba have socialist or capitalist social relations?


What is important about Cuba is that the working class has political power, and that they are making what seems to be a step back (and probably is...) in order to save the achievements of the revolution (free healthcare, education etc.) and to raise living standards for all of them.

A nominally communist party holds power in Cuba. It's impossible to say the working class holds power. There was never even a popular revolution - Castro et al. came to power via a guerilla coup (not that it was a bad thing), not a revolution stemming from the working class.

Raising living standards isn't something to be smirked at, but you can't just pick anything you like and say 'look, free healthcare and education - it's Socialism'. Socialism, at least as defined in revolutionary circles, is actually a pretty well-defined concept and, on any level, Cuba does not pass the test. It is a state, it has profit and private employment, it has money, it has wage labour. The list goes on.


Cuba is fricking third-world-country, and additionally, it has to deal with the effects of an economic blockade. Of course, access to certain goods that are standard in the Imperialist centers (like shampoo, toilet paper or the Internet) is limited, which sucks and which Cubans have every right to complain about, but which is not the fault of the Cuban system but of outside circumstances.
However, what is great about Cuba is that the most important neccessities of life (roof over your head, food, water, healthcare, education, transport) are guaranteed to everyone. Unlike in Haiti, or the United States, or even Western Europe.

I wouldn't disagree - Cuba has a pretty solid welfare system. Again though, doesn't really equate to Socialism, otherwise we could hold up some Scandanavian countries as 'Socialist', because they have welfare systems far more equitable and efficient than Cuba does.


The busses in Havana are as crowded as in any other big city at rush hour, and the roads are fine, that much I have to say.

The roads are fine? Seriously? The roads are fucking shit there, I genuinely thought I was going to die every time I was in a car there.


However, I will repeat what I said before: Cuba is a third-world country without slums, but it is still a third-world country.

That doesn't change the definitions we use for socialism.


Ever heard of something called "the greater picture"?

What is the greater picture? A capitalist world, the rise of the market in the past 30 years? None of this really does Cuba's potential for socialism much good...


Yes, I have, but I seem to have missed the part where Marx said that socialism means that, immediately after the revolution, we will find ourselves in utopia.

Just because Cuba doesn't really match any of the definitions revolutionaries use for socialism, doesn't mean you have to immediately cast such definitions as 'utopia'. That's what liberals or social democrats say - y'know, that communism is a nice idea but un-workable. If that's what you believe, then perhaps you need to re-consider whether you support revolutionary socialism, or its watered down, social democratic form.



The workers of Cuba and the Cuban state are one and the same thing.

Unless you can back this up with some sort of evidence, this is really just a meaningless statement.


Socialist states have, at all times, traded with capitalist states and were forced to submit to the rules of the world market while doing that.

Yes, nominally 'socialist' countries betrayed the capitalist social relations that really guided their economies and production processes.


Thankfully, Cubans know that.

Ah yes, sitting behind your computer somewhere in the western world, you are entitled to be the mouth organ of the Cuban working class. Again, unless you actually have evidence that Cubans don't want social and economic change (which is not my experience - pretty much every Cuban I spoke to said their economic system sucks), then your posturing on behalf of the Cuban people is meaningless.

[Lokomotive293]

What does it tell you about the strength of any economy that it can almost collapse overnight at the loss of a sole trading partner? Tells me that the economy was being propped up by that one trading partner, hiding genuine faults within the economy's underlying organisation.

Genuine faults like that Cuba is a small island that has been robbed by different Imperialists for centuries and that the Western world cut off all trade relations with after the revolution? I think so. Btw, at that time 1/6th of the world was socialist, and those were countries that had built up a completely new system of trade between each other. Anybody would have been f*****, had they been the only country that survived the collapse of that entire system.


You don't seem to understand the difference between socialism and capitalism, which is why you are presenting the Cuban economic model as socialist, which is false.

That's the whole point of capitalist exploitation - workers are paid less than the fruits of their labour. Ergo, if that particular exploitative relationship continues, the result cannot be framed as a socialist social system.

Read this chapter in Wage Labour and Capital for an understanding of wages and profit:

http://marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/wage-labour/ch07.htm

You seem to think I'm stupid, but maybe you should read what Marx wrote about the "undiminshed proceeds of labor", and about socialism being "stamped with the birthmarks of the old society from whose womb it emerges" in the Critique of the Gotha Programme (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/ch01.htm)



So you want to steal from one section of the working class to pay the other? How else can this end other than as a 'race to the bottom'?

How else are you going to support the old, the sick, the orphans, etc.? Please just read what Marx wrote about this.


ergo, a single country cannot maintain a socialist model in a capitalist world.

Not forever, which is why it is your job to fight for socialism in your country, not to spend your time arguing how Cuba can't be socialist because it's not possible.


So make your mind up. Does Cuba have socialist or capitalist social relations?

Socialism is intensified class struggle under the dictatorship of the proletariat.


A nominally communist party holds power in Cuba. It's impossible to say the working class holds power. There was never even a popular revolution - Castro et al. came to power via a guerilla coup (not that it was a bad thing), not a revolution stemming from the working class.

Except that the PCC does not "hold power". The Cuban working class exercises power through their representative bodies, the organs of the Poder Popular. Maybe you should read up on the Cuban political system a little, as well as on the history of the revolution (because then you would know how much active popular support those guerrillas had. Gee, people were tearing down walls of their houses in order to support the guerrillas.)


I wouldn't disagree - Cuba has a pretty solid welfare system. Again though, doesn't really equate to Socialism, otherwise we could hold up some Scandanavian countries as 'Socialist', because they have welfare systems far more equitable and efficient than Cuba does.

Last time I checked, Scandinavian countries don't have their key industries owned by the state, or a working class dictatorship.


The roads are fine? Seriously? The roads are fucking shit there, I genuinely thought I was going to die every time I was in a car there.

I don't know where you were, but I didn't notice anything like that. To be fair, though, I've never been in a car in Cuba, I always took the (famous party-) busses of Havana City :cool:


What is the greater picture? A capitalist world, the rise of the market in the past 30 years? None of this really does Cuba's potential for socialism much good...

Which means Cuba should just give up? Great plan.


Just because Cuba doesn't really match any of the definitions revolutionaries use for socialism, doesn't mean you have to immediately cast such definitions as 'utopia'. That's what liberals or social democrats say - y'know, that communism is a nice idea but un-workable. If that's what you believe, then perhaps you need to re-consider whether you support revolutionary socialism, or its watered down, social democratic form.

Except that I am not saying communism is un-workable, I am saying that you cannot expect that you will have a revolution, and everything will be fine. The real struggle only begins after the revolution.


Unless you can back this up with some sort of evidence, this is really just a meaningless statement.

As I said, read up on the political system of Cuba.


Ah yes, sitting behind your computer somewhere in the western world, you are entitled to be the mouth organ of the Cuban working class. Again, unless you actually have evidence that Cubans don't want social and economic change (which is not my experience - pretty much every Cuban I spoke to said their economic system sucks), then your posturing on behalf of the Cuban people is meaningless.

Pretty much every Cuban I spoke to said that many things about their economic system suck right now, but that they will defend their revolution. I think what you are doing here is arrogant, and self-righteous: You are telling a whole people that has been fighting for their independence and for socialism for decades that everything they are doing is meaningless. I am sure that, should there be a revolution over where you live, you will sit in your armchair screaming "Oh, but you are not socialists!", rather than be on the streets.
That's just the difference between meaningless posturing, and real, active international solidarity.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Genuine faults like that Cuba is a small island that has been robbed by different Imperialists for centuries and that the Western world cut off all trade relations with after the revolution? I think so. Btw, at that time 1/6th of the world was socialist, and those were countries that had built up a completely new system of trade between each other. Anybody would have been f*****, had they been the only country that survived the collapse of that entire system.

1/6 of the world was Socialist? Only if you include North Korea, Albania, (the former) Yugoslavia, and the USSR of Brezhnev, Andropov, and Gorbachev. Hardly 'Socialism'.

But yes, you are just proving my point that one country - let alone a tiny island nation with a tropical climate - cannot implement socialism.


You seem to think I'm stupid, but maybe you should read what Marx wrote about the "undiminshed proceeds of labor", and about socialism being "stamped with the birthmarks of the old society from whose womb it emerges" in the Critique of the Gotha Programme (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/ch01.htm)

I don't think you're stupid, I think you're ignorant of Marxian theory, which is fine, but don't try and speak for Marxism if you don't know what you're talking about, which is why I directed you to the link I did, to enable you to learn.

I should clarify - socialism is not merely about a worker receiving the exact monetary compensation in exchange for the equivalent amount of labour performed. Rather, the idea is that, whereas under capitalism, workers exchange their labour power (rather than specific instances of their labour) for a wage, socialism will not entail such an exchange; workers will input their labour into the system, and consume 'for need' or 'for want'.

However, the point I was trying to make was that there is a very specific social relationship that characterises capitalism - that between the exploiting capitalist, and the exploited worker. This is largely borne out by the capitalist employing the waged worker - the worker gives up their labour power to the capitalist in exchange for a wage -, and extracting a surplus from the worker, by paying the worker a lower wage than the actual value of the work the labourer does. In other words, capitalism is a system of low(er) wages and (steadily) increasing prices, creating an ever increasing rate of surplus. This is the social relationship that characterises the Cuban economy; it is capitalistic in nature and hugely un-desirable. It leaves very little possibility of a move towards socialist relations without a further revolution.

And as it happens, in the Gotha critique, Marx is actually criticising the notion of dividing proceeds of wealth among the workers precisely because once you make deductions for depreciation, insurance, paying for healthcare and education etc. His whole point was that such a system was un-workable and utopian in itself. A social democratic dream.


How else are you going to support the old, the sick, the orphans, etc.? Please just read what Marx wrote about this.

We will support those groups by abolishing money, classes and states - essentially, capitalism - and instituting a free access economy where there is no issue over paying for, funding, or access to welfare mechanisms such as education, healthcare, social care etc.


Not forever, which is why it is your job to fight for socialism in your country, not to spend your time arguing how Cuba can't be socialist because it's not possible.

Oh save me the moralisms, you're doing the exact same thing. Besides, spending a little time on here in no way impinges on my ability to fight for what is right in my country, thanks.


Socialism is intensified class struggle under the dictatorship of the proletariat.

Class struggle implies that there is more than one class. So who is this capitalist class in Cuba? I fail to see how if the working class was as politically strong as you say it supposedly is, that after 50+ years there would still be a capitalist class in Cuba.


Except that the PCC does not "hold power". The Cuban working class exercises power through their representative bodies, the organs of the Poder Popular. Maybe you should read up on the Cuban political system a little, as well as on the history of the revolution (because then you would know how much active popular support those guerrillas had. Gee, people were tearing down walls of their houses in order to support the guerrillas.)

Yeah i'm a History teacher, I don't really need to be told to 'do my homework'. The extent to which democracy operates in Cuba is quite limited. I'm not saying there aren't reasons for this (US imperialism and intrigue, the blockade etc.), but there is a democratic deficit which makes it difficult for the working class to effectively wield power in Cuba, especially at the national level.

And, though the revolution may have been popular, that doesn't mean it was instigated by the working class. There are plenty of bourgeois revolutions in history that have been popular with workers.


Last time I checked, Scandinavian countries don't have their key industries owned by the state, or a working class dictatorship.

And as we are seeing, Cuba is privatising left, right, and centre. And you've yet to prove that there is a working class dictatorship in Cuba.


I don't know where you were, but I didn't notice anything like that. To be fair, though, I've never been in a car in Cuba, I always took the (famous party-) busses of Havana City :cool:

Buses and cars go on the same roads, though? I covered most of Havana province, including the whole city where the roads weren't great, and the Playas del este, where the roads were appalling.


Which means Cuba should just give up? Great plan.

No, i'm not talking about what they should do. I'm telling you to stop calling Cuba socialist, because it isn't. It has no bearing on what Cuba does, really.


As I said, read up on the political system of Cuba.

As I said, I pretty much study History full-time. Stop being such a sanctimonious prick.


Pretty much every Cuban I spoke to said that many things about their economic system suck right now, but that they will defend their revolution. I think what you are doing here is arrogant, and self-righteous: You are telling a whole people that has been fighting for their independence and for socialism for decades that everything they are doing is meaningless.

I'm not telling them anything. The fact that the original revolutionaries were heroic, and continue to be remembered popularly and as heroes is not something I dispute at all. I'm taking issue with you calling the Cuba of 2013, the Cuba that whores itself out to tourists, to golf course constructors, to foreign multinational companies and to small businesses, calling this country Socialist. It's not, unless you are the sort of Socialist that isn't really interested in Marxism or communism.


I am sure that, should there be a revolution over where you live, you will sit in your armchair screaming "Oh, but you are not socialists!", rather than be on the streets.

I'm glad you feel so qualified to make such sure-footed comments about my potential future reaction to a hypothetical future event based on an exchange of 2 or 3 messages on an anonymous internet message board. Presumably it's the same sort of headstrong, ignorant thinking that led you to label Cuba as socialist.


That's just the difference between meaningless posturing, and real, active international solidarity.

Well, whatever makes you sleep better at night. Sorry to say but you're still just posturing over the internet too, bud. Nothing active in your ignorance.

[RedSonRising]

Oh for fuck's sake, we're calling the Cuban Revolution a coup now? No. Just no.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

If a group of 200-300 people taking over a whole country through military force isn't a coup, then I don't know what is.

[Comrade Jacob]

If a group of 200-300 people taking over a whole country through military force isn't a coup, then I don't know what is.

How many of them wear in the military? They were guerillas.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

How many of them wear in the military? They were guerillas.

Fair enough. My point was more that it wasn't a working class revolution, and certainly not one with a 'red' character.

[Lensky]

If a group of 200-300 people taking over a whole country through military force isn't a coup, then I don't know what is.

This has to be a joke, how could 300 people take over an entire country? So to achieve communism in America we just need to get together a couple of dedicated volunteers?

[TruProl]

This has to be a joke, how could 300 people take over an entire country? So to achieve communism in America we just need to get together a couple of dedicated volunteers?

"I began the revolution with 82 men. If I had to do it again, I would do it with 10 or 15 and absolute faith. It does not matter how small you are if you have faith and plan of action."

—Fidel Castro

[cliffhanger]

how could 300 people take over an entire country?218 for a majority in the House of Representatives, 60 for a cloture-proof majority in the Senate, and 1 Kenyan President, mayhaps?

[Lokomotive293]

1/6 of the world was Socialist? Only if you include North Korea, Albania, (the former) Yugoslavia, and the USSR of Brezhnev, Andropov, and Gorbachev. Hardly 'Socialism'.

But yes, you are just proving my point that one country - let alone a tiny island nation with a tropical climate - cannot implement socialism.

Why can't you build socialism in a tropical climate?

Anyway, you don't seem to understand the difference between socialism and communism. Socialism is the revolutionary society, the society that first has to build up new social relations, the society that is, in every way, imperfect and stamped with the birthmarks of the society from whose womb it emerges. Maybe you should really read what Marx wrote in the Critique of the Gotha Programme, specifically about how exchange of labor-equivalents (values!) will still exist under socialism, though of course in a different form.


This is the social relationship that characterises the Cuban economy; it is capitalistic in nature and hugely un-desirable. It leaves very little possibility of a move towards socialist relations without a further revolution.

No, it is not. The Cuban economy is dominated by production according to a social plan, the key industries are state-owned, the working class has political power.


We will support those groups by abolishing money, classes and states - essentially, capitalism - and instituting a free access economy where there is no issue over paying for, funding, or access to welfare mechanisms such as education, healthcare, social care etc.

Yes, of course, but that will just not happen the night after the revolution. (Remember the old Marx, as well as all experiences of real life)


Class struggle implies that there is more than one class. So who is this capitalist class in Cuba? I fail to see how if the working class was as politically strong as you say it supposedly is, that after 50+ years there would still be a capitalist class in Cuba.

It takes a long time to fully establish a new social system (50 years is no time at all). And, Miami is not all that far from Havana, if I remember correctly.


Yeah i'm a History teacher, I don't really need to be told to 'do my homework'. The extent to which democracy operates in Cuba is quite limited. I'm not saying there aren't reasons for this (US imperialism and intrigue, the blockade etc.), but there is a democratic deficit which makes it difficult for the working class to effectively wield power in Cuba, especially at the national level.

I'm lazy, so I won't explain Cuban democracy to you myself (It took some Cuban two hours to explain it to me...), but this is pretty good for a start.

http://www.cuba-solidarity.org.uk/faqdocs/Cuban-political-system-facts.pdf



Buses and cars go on the same roads, though? I covered most of Havana province, including the whole city where the roads weren't great, and the Playas del este, where the roads were appalling.

Maybe you were trying to go through those really small cobblestone streets in the inner city of Havana by car? The busses don't go there, of course. They stay on the main roads, and everything else, I walked.


Well, whatever makes you sleep better at night. Sorry to say but you're still just posturing over the internet too, bud. Nothing active in your ignorance.

Well, I didn't go to Cuba to have a nice vacation (which I did, anyway, but yeah...), I went there to talk about my life in capitalist society, to learn about Cuban socialism, and to paint walls, carry chairs, etc.

[Delenda Carthago]

What does it tell you about the strength of any economy that it can almost collapse overnight at the loss of a sole trading partner? Tells me that the economy was being propped up by that one trading partner, hiding genuine faults within the economy's underlying organisation.

http://www.revleft.com/vb/ obGyYfGBwjGhgaHy8gJicqLSwsFh4xNTAqNSYrLCkBCQoKDgwO Gg8PGiskHiQsLSwxLC0sLCoyKywqKSwsLC8qMjAsLy8qNDQtKS 8sLC8pLzAsLDIsKio2LC8sLCwsLP/AABEIAI4BYwMBIgACEQEDEQH/xAAcAAABBQEBAQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAwQFBgcCAQj/xABIEAACAQIEBAMFBAYHBgYDAAABAgMAEQQSITEFBkFREyJhBz JxgZEUQqGxCCNSYnLBFSQzgpLR8FSiwtLh8RYXQ3OTshg0U//EABoBAQACAwEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADBAECBQb/xAA0EQABBAACBwcDBAIDAAAAAAABAAIDEQQhBRIxQVFhcRMiga GxwfCR0eEUMkLxFSMzYqL/2gAMAwEAAhEDEQA/ANxooooiKKKKIiiiiiIooooiKKKKIiiiiiIooooiKKKKIiiuCx zAW0sbm+x0sLdb6/T1qH5n4gsKRyOCAk8fm7BjlY+gysw/71gmhakjjMjg0bSpoML2vqK9qExPHYo8akLuFaSMZRrq2chRtu fNvUxNLlBNr+g6noPmawHAo+JzasbRYXkseZSp2IIPz0qE5Fb+ owAixQNH/gdk/wCGpOPB3YSOxZgCAAbIt97DqemY672tciqTxLATz4hsDBIY4lm M8za6I+SRUBG5MhlsP3RfbXRxogq1C0PjdHfBxPCrB9Qr/LCGtcXsQw+I2Ndda5WQEkDpv+f5UhPiRfIAxPXL90G9iT0/6fC8ipgE5KB59lVsHKrCLIdLy3K5hdja2oICmxFzmsADXz3I9y T/AK9BWq+1/mgADAxEWFmlt02Mcf8AxH+73rLHhyhSfvDMANdLka9tr27WPWu xgGarS4/Pn2SQ21rR1/v28eKTq6ezTAXklllkSHDKuSWRiFJB18FGJ0zAeYjXKLAjNVLq Y4NwebEgQxeIxZ1YIoJRb+VppNbKLaA9ddQBrflFsIulWG1fQP B+ZMNiWdMNIJPDtmKK2QX2Aa2U7bA08JMi+Usi31NrEj0/Zv337W0NRHAuARcNw5VWsuhd8vmLnKuY6n6ev1iOEc0DBznBY3 EB3uGjktv4jtZZDYWb5WAOprz5jDidTYpw6lc0RY1sAAoF/wCZJqJ4xiZWUQ4YhZ5NS5F/CjN7ysNibDKq9W9FayfM+Jkbw8Ph8plkZWbMfKkKsC7OLglTom UanMbbEiS4bw0QqRcs7HM7t7zt3bptoANAAAAAK1ADQD5ITZXH A+CphYRFHc6kszG7O5953P3mPf4U/oorQkk2URRRRWERRRRREUUUURFFFFERRRRREUUUURFFFFERRRR REUUUURFFFFERRRRREUVVebvaVg+HHLM5eW1/CjGZvTNqAnzI+dZZxb9IbFMT9ngiiXoXzSN+BVfwNEW+0V80Se 3LiZGksY+EKfzvTzhnt8x8bXlWGZexTIfkynT5g0RfRdFZ1yt7 b8FiiqTXw0h0/WEGMnsJBoP7wWtEBvtREnhcUsqK8bBkYXUjqDTfjCxGJlnsY3G QixJJY2AUDUkm1rC96XwmESJFSNQqKLADYCmvGoA0Ye1zEwmA7 lNbbbkXHzrU3qqZmr2gq6vLjyVF5b4aHkxQEviywJ4SXNyQrmS OQE9cyotulj3FX2DFiUoV93KJD/eF0B9bEm3w71CSYkRYSLGImbLH4j2sC0clncf4iH1/ZPepTljDZMLFoQzKJGuLHM3mIPwva3QADpUUYrJdDGv7UGQ8aH Ws/QHx5KRvra2lr30+neqpyo0rYrHysQULqFXrcJ5Rfp+ry/M1aJCbErqegOg6a7X0qu8ozDJiZb74qUNob2W0aKNewXTXet3f uCqw5RSGtwHnfspPGYgxoqJ5pZmIWwta9y0hudAi6/IDcimvGuMJgMM7Fi7quYlrZmc6KXsALs1gBYdbABTZSed/E8gvM4yi9iqLuWb0W4/iYgCw1GQe0XmcTSDDxE+HCTna9/Em2dyfvW90Hbe2lqmgidK+mrU6rRbv7+bvsqriMU00peZiSzZn bqbm7EdL9h8K4xmILuzGwvsBsFAAVR6BQB8qQvVj5N5RfHSsAR ljAdxcBmBJsqX6mx1Og69K9ES2IDW2KkSXWQuOTuVftspDSBI0 sX1Gc3NgsS7sx2vsOvQHYuUeVoeFYd2kkUM1jJIzWUAE5FBNhp mtfqfkAngeXsJwzDSyyAR5gGc5max1Kxxm4ZgCSBsW61Tp+Hz8 TxOHE3iR4TV1iZmLgWDMWPrcea5yKwFwSFNCSQz3nTfstRbTsV 44dxT+k2zIhGCjdSGYENNIhDDKp92NWCm+7EW0AILzj+Hgy/aWihZkUjxZVBVE1YsTuwGtlG5I1FyRUjzZExGHSTJw7DIFmnGY CQrZVgiOpKt1tdmAbW2prfMvOc3F5YsHhUMcbMBYnVjvme2gRR 5rfu37AQtgcXZZD0HPmtrU5yjxXGY6VvAYx4fxAZZmA8Ui1xGN 1vqRcDQHTKAFrUqh+G4KLAwJDEpIQdNyd2d2PlW5ubkjsOgp9h eKRSMVjlR2XcKysRrbUA6a6VXmcHm2ih82o0VtKdUVy6Agg7EW NeQwhBlUWA/71Cts7XdRXGeYIsOVDyWJN7AXOXXUgDQdP9GnHGOKLh4WkboNB 3boB8/51kOJxLSOzubsxuT610MFg+3Jc7YFx9KaS/SgMZm4+QWrYXmjDSe7OgPZjlP+9apRWBFxqKxGpngfNUuGBVbM h+617A91I2/KrU2iqFxnwKoYbT1uqZtDiPstWorMZufMUxuGVR2Cg/8A2uaQxHOWKcWMtv4QFP1AqAaLmO0j54K07T2GGwO+g+61Wis7 4V7QJYwFlXxRf3r2a30savfDsX4saOCCrKCP5/Cqk+Fkg/fs4roYXHw4r/jOfDgnNFFFVleRRRRREUUUURFFFFERRRRREUUUUReGso9qvtTa BmwmDa0o0llH3P3I/wB7uemw12nvarz2eHwKkNvtE1wp/YUaF7dTrYdL3PSx+cpZSxJJJJNzfUknck9TREniZixLMSzE3JJ uSe5J3NM2en64Nmp9BwBepJoigC1AerS/Ao7aaadaisXwgA+U0RRuarlyN7UMVw5goYy4e/mhc6AdTGfuH8O4qovhCOtJEEURfY/AOPRYyBJ4GzRuPmD1Vh0YHQikuOcwQYbJ9ofIrsQCQTqtmG2tv lvavnz2Te0M8Pn8OQ/1WZhnv9xthKPwDDqB6Ct75r5chxkKiRblSCrg2ZRcF8rWOhUba 309K1ddZKWEMLwH7OS8wmPiuMLdWSVWMViLGIrmUAdRbOLjonq LvuFFxGVds7oShbQZrbMbbEixPrf0rHeKYqfBTR4c2BwzGSFrh mCPZsjMLBlv0yjc7A2qY4h7TJCzmGPKJEAYMbkSWKlkI6Wta/b5VW7YNJDty7v+KkmY10WYdnfO/cG/DorVjOIfaMWmSVlhwimWYKffe5yxkA6kBSSNd7b1R+G8cmixOI dbkB5GWIk5TO7FYxlBsWBN/ghPS9NeF8zxxxyiSAOXkzgmxFgpARr6kZ/MTubsNL3pzJxiOGIYmaIOxB8CMgBAcxJ8gIZgSbs9gPuC421aD M4Bn7ld7MYON4lb3KobM95+pJ6Cuil+Z+aWwGDEQcNjcQt5HBu VXUFi3Vt1W1gLEjbXKMOFvd75QDoOptoPQXtf0pfiOMeWR5JGL O5uevwHoAAAANgANKbA/wCv5V6vDRCKKm/VeRmJfIS758Cl+V+AnF4qOBd3N2PRUGrN8bbDuRW6zzYfhkCpH GSScscSDNJK/p1J6ljoAPgKqvss4E2Gw32kxB2nFwc6grEPdWzWHmIzb7Ze1WO LDPGHkZmRyLviZvCJEe+VBmCxKDsLEDc5ia52IoyWTdc/TgPnNDPrDsxkOhrqcs/bYl8Dw13KYnHFBKilljB/Vwg3u1yfNJl0Mmw1AA1JpXtE5jsqJlyYUlRkBCyzxg7KAc0UHQ NbzX2tux5x9pkZ/V4MF8rXMkmqFhswQjzkHUZ9AQPKbAjO8TjGkcySs0jsblmJJJ9 TVnD4V7u+/Llw+fM81GXhpyzT7inFJMUwsoSNNEjXREFgNSd2IAu7am3wAkO VeYfsBkdEjedgERma6ou7EBQSzE2G40HW5FRvCuHPjJRGJI4wB e8jhEVdr6/yuTWjcu8Mw0LKOH4ZsbMCL4uVSIF/a8M7ZhsMo6+9VuZ8cbdUi/m8/LULRI82cunz2ULDyzjscgmxuI8LDXH9ofDU328OM5VFydyBe/Wrxy8IcFHfD4VRForYh5Y1L7nRnC5xvaxC9qcjleSR0fEyLNKo uuYLZDfeKKxRbX945228wqVxPKuHmRVxEfi5Te7Fic1rE3LXOm m/TpXJmxRcNUAV4gfnx+imEAyLnkdKJ8wlMJzNBIgfNlQ3szDyGx sbOLodQdm6VziubMKiF/HR+wRgxJ7AA/nTd+NYPBoYVZY/CUkR2Zf3rLcakn161lmK4qZpnkewLm+mg2sPwFRQNa6VrZDQK5 WkNIfpxURDjn4daO3kpjmDmF8U928qL7q329T3PrSUPAJ2i8ZY iY9dRa9huQL3I9bUxwqZ3VR95gNATubE6b2GtanPxlMPGAkMmR bKPLkUbKt2ky/XWu/NiP04ayEA+ldV57CYcYxz5cQ8j1v7BZVRUlxHAFnkkhAeMEsSl 8i6k5A7BQ5A/ZvpUVm9R9atx4iOQW0rmSQujNH+13RXgNe1OoUVpHIGOL4Ypb+ zYgHuD5vwufwrN6nuA83PhUyCNGUsW1uDcgDfbp2qljoXTRarR na6mi8SzDz67zQohajRVHw3PWImYLDhlYn1Y/U6AfOrjgncxqZVCuRqqm4HzrzkuHfF++vqF7PD4yPEX2dnnRAS 9FFFQK2iiiiiIooqkc7c5PhMTCsbDL5fEUgHRnt8QbXP0oiu9F FFERRRTPjGKMWHmkXdI3cX7qpI/KiL5j9oXMbYziE8hvlVjHGOyISo+pu3xY1D4eEWvTBWJOu9SKt 0oiWDW2pSLGG/UmkkU72NDTC+xv2FET8ztbYf4qi8ZKb9PrSpmQ6ED503kydAD8 KImrtSdOJ7AD1pteiLho7Gtm5U9p8n9HpA4KsiCJZUyswCiwzI +jaWG4+tY4+1WTlmdBCRd/EMm1hlyZRre9w2bptY+muj2uc06m0Z/RdDRph/UNbMLBy6HcfmSmsbjHlnZ5XLttmPUAWG/pauJnsNNzSQbzn6UsxAFz0rlm3OGS97EAyNzQaonPgE4wOBeVl jjUu52A/E+g9ToKZcYiyn+2jcg2IQlrWGnmtkPbysdu1N5eLSZWRXZY2Pm VTYN2z294eh01pmWr0mB0YYqkeRfDh+V5DSemO3uKMU0b95+w8 +iL1M8r8HTEYhVldI4Es8ruwUZAdQCSLltgB6npUMK7tfpXZe2 99Lz7NhA3rYONe1bDReTC2lCgKgylIlI2N7ZnAsLKAB67WzXmH mnEYxiZ5yy3uEW4jHbKu3zNz61E5O9d4bBvK6pGhZmNlUakmq0 OHZG4kE9TSkee4LAvxv1pJLHcgDUk2AAJJPQDvVp4TyBiHkytB IxUjOoKoLaGxlYkK2uq2JFaJ7OOQEwq+PMFec+6RqsY1Fkvux6 tbbQaXJnOIccxJYLhMKx18zzAou+ygkE/H8DVPFY0/tjd45fZRiWOHORmty73sbVc4P7J4kCDEzZhmZ1hGXLmI11IvIQ otcjp0q04Xgrx3SJvCjItmLvJJvoED+SMWJ6Hfao2LhnELvK8k HiZTYKhdhpcImYhUvtpvpe9VjHPxRr+IJN72tHv8AuqNfpXOdK SbNk81Wm0iWDNjgDuAG7j+VeeM8ViwysQyiZ10sud2a1kLAWuP jaqBheK46R/NijEpazM8iIF1s2hIII/ZAvTOLlbHTEt4MpJ3LnKT/AIyCakuGcBhhLDFPhxLpZZJGYL/GqWDH0LD51G869Vl1K4kk82IfZBa3dmQPHLPwpSOF5dw7+IZMR JiiwADokkljrclgGA6aXFrHWqLNCVPzrTZ+PYTDxKZJhiX2Cxk FflGDkRR8L/Gs/wATiBPiSUUKryXVWvlF22OXW3wrNs1aO3d+VX0gxndDKveBz45 n1SMGPkDDwyysfKMl8xvpYW1udtO9XnhPJGInytj5nKDURFyx/vG9l+WvqKb8N4DLGwdJYo73sYoUdrbHKZGzfSpPE4PHR+b7cyx 6X8SOLN2AABa5PQb+laukfK7WkJJU+EwgiFyNcRwFV1OeasEHL mFjAtBHpsWAYj4Frmm3MWPwqQHxRG42VNLk9AttV+PSq7jOG4e KPxcTG8jMTkE8zl39cgUZQfXbS4vpUNhcFBJIzTtFCxJRIYwgK sNjJnsoAtrm1N/kbMVj/Y7IDz5BXJsTqjsmMaCfIc8gOg3rvgvLD4hS+dY01sWNyfgL3t6/nTDEYDJmu40Nlts+/mBNvKLb666VLycgTzS5XxULWAOhJYIeoSwAGne1XDiPL6MVaR5 JACqrGxGQXIW9gt/XfpV9mlZdclw7vBcxuidePJtEbydvgNlcrVR4FykJ2b9aCigEs isRmJIKXOXUWv13FXXBcswRqF8NGsALlRcka3J63PTapHD4ZUF kFh2FdtKBuQPiarz4ySU7aC7mF0dDh25gE8f7QAANBYeldUl9p X9oH4a/lXomvsD9CPzqpa6NhKUUUUWUUUniMQsas7sFVQSSTYADck1mHM/tXLFo8J5V28UjzHuUH3R6nX4URWrnfndMFHlSz4hh5E7fvv2Hp 1rGMLjJMZxCCJiZJJZlLn0zAuSBsAoPyFNcXjCxLEkkm5Ym5J9 Sa65U5nXh87TRpG8rDLmkzHKL3ISxAF++tEX0xRWPD24S2/sYf8T00xvtwxFvIkC+uV2I+rW/CiLbKQxuFEkbxnZ1ZD8GBB/OsIw/tnxt9ZY2A7xrb8LGvMb7Z8Yw8syIOuSNb/Vs2tEWcDCGOd0bdGZD8QSD+VLyv2qUxHMSuknlBlkLF3I8zEm5 JNt6rcrnYUROZMSw+99DSD8QfuakY+T52VWyizC4OYWH8Q/yqLx/D2hcq2pHaiJMMTc3rxXIpTDRFjpSWIjKmiJRsWTXInNcQwFzYU 5bhMiqXIsB60REbXqe5eBSO9veN/law/zqsrJa1XDDxZUVd7ACoJzQpdnRDCZS8bh5lLiTW5riaY5SNyfw FFdygWA3qPDSMjkBcL/C72JZJLE5rXV+cj5daTE17kpwYx2/OvQK7j9LxgdwH0XnmaFkJ77h4WU3UWNLtJnIA+QAvrtpbc12uF JuQpsASfgNzrvU7yRxJYMSWaXwrowDZgq5tCPEuDdd9O9u1Di2 PIJaS6svdP0skTHBrhq3nt8L+UozFcuYiML4kTJm1GcFSRr0Ov SpnkTCGLGK8jZAEk1VlDXKFdCxCj3r69tqtOL4nw0ZppplxEhs TYl2Y6CwXxLAAdNLD8aueMw+Mz4N5IrnyqSysBbUKwYixPS/yqJ+IxJYTq5dP6Xnsa+WMF7a1RtA21xFn8q+4/n1jGVw0MkgjFjK92GgtmJTcne9xTPgEnEsQBJHMmTXzMYyB3uF Ba9u4quS80YplytiHsfWx06Zve+V6jvszAnysG66EGuSXkm1wf 1oc63vfQ3DL391auO81vYCPGSSv94qgjiA7BWBZj63AqEh5kxS AhcRIL/vH/QqJMK9VH0rsw2tdbX1FxuPSsaziq02J7Q62u6+mz/0U6/pWbX9dJrv521+OtNi19TvQq3NgNTsBT8cv4n/AGab/wCN/wDKsKlT37LKj66RyCCNxrUgvLmKIuMNNb/22/yqPKEbg1kNJzpaua5m0UlJ8WzkZjsLCwAFu1lAFc+O2nmOm2p0 +Hak6K1WNYnO09TjMwkWTxGLqAAzWawGgtmuNKfYA/a5P6xLJe5K5I1ZmZmuVBuLEk+o16CnnK/CsRlMkWFSUMLK7lNNSCyhuoPXuOu1WblkY5VdfAiK+IQc0lrsL K5GjXuylj6sfhW4s7V1MNh3PrXLqOdUSPn4UnwvCOColxM4dwc qsIQSq2vcKhy6nbN/kHkvB5C39sxXTdm8pDXuFW1zsNWtvpTCFpzjD+qi8kK+XxWNsz tYg+GbHyHQDtr2sKMxtdQB/Eb/AEt/OpgAV6KJrXCs/P3XIwKdRf8AiLN/9iaUXDqNlUfIUpXNzfbTvW6t0AvWvbTfpScU19D73W1yAeoval K9rKIorkr6miiysB5o52xGOaztkiB8sa3t6Zv2j6n6CoEJXINc MhP3jRESxA7/AJ1C8ShQe6dakJ8Ff/1CKr+PwxQ73oi9w2FkldY41Z3Y2VVBJJ7ADer/AMG9hfEJgDL4eHU/ttmb/Cl/xIqu8gc3nh+LSfLmWxRx1KG18vYi1x8Lda+pOFcVixMKTQuHjc XVh+R7EbEdKIsv4X+jxh1//YxUsnpGqxj6nMfyrznz2S4DDcNxMsETCWNQ6s0jtsy3Fibai/StcqK5r4acRgsTCBdpIXVf4ipy/jaiL5Kgj0/Cn8OHAF+tNigW9vxrpZ9KInA4hMosraURIW1kOa4PawA3NNh5i L7X1tSksttBp0sO3apWSFqyKT3gmCLyALYUy45BaRwehqT5fjc yjJv66C1MuYYSJmzEE91NxUSwoZUttXTOTRHrXjC1EXEsVWvAS 5o1IvtY/Eb1Vw1aDwPiKR8GkQ4dxK8+ZJ/DGXKCoK+IdR7rCw7/ABrHYOmIa3ar2CxYwzyXDIqPS3X6VzmFexY9jYBQSdNNyas6+z XHGOSeSNY8iF8hILtbWwVb2Nu5vptWpwD4w4y5ZZZjM9F3X6Ug OoIzdnOwRQ6qshDa9qX4fgTNIsakAsepG3X42GtvQ06xnCXgiS RzYmxMbaEK65onXXzKwDi9tCpB6UxVA2oPW9uo+Hz61B2DmU94 7p3hWhOyYFsJGuNx9lZV5CxYnERGVWNlkZJCh3tqqso2ta/UVJQ+yHEsbPNAuv3c7G3ewUW2qrPzDjI8oXFzgL7v617W7Wvb5 VOYT2sYoWE8cM4HVlyt8QymwPyrpxwNcA+LV9PnsuFiZ8ZGTHK T9LTLj3IMmFlyvKvhXUNNlbKmbRc4sSATpcXHz0pHC8twM6W4l ANbnyyowsdSDlIB6jX1qa4pzdhsZD4ck+MgzG7KRHPGDe4sxtL YG2xHamPLPC1SXxIpxMwDAeBJ4c6roC8UbkM75b+QqQVJ1JsKt tfJG0mQn6fjNUjqyZAUfX7LWP8AxNAwHmhmttkngc/HzMutQ3/m7hMxUl1sbHMjb3sbZM17fLapSLDYPFQs6wQ4pEUAMQryMwHmV 7pmV9t9ST0rPpuRZEleVMJMAfNEi28hOo8yTK4y/dJUHTUVTYIXAk34UsR4YyWMgeZpW7/xzwyRgzTIzggqZEyhSDcEHLf8z9TUthOZMBJGIftUEgy5SGdQS CLEWY9e1YnxDl2fCZJJY5IhmsGYKfNv3IPwpjiIlILfA7C2t+g Fh10t0rfsoCQBrZ8vxXms/wCOIDnW3L/sM+m8re+E8kYaGYTxhwRfKpa6i4INup0PUmrDbX0/nWL+y/meeOdICzPh2J8uRnyHutj5Fudb3AFzbrWo4rFs7HzERi6gK1iW G7EjXQ6ADTQ73Fubj5odH5yuyVKPDiPuxtq/BPuKY8QRPKwJCi9h11sB9TvWMS2O9aRjp54zI4xKyIwCrG8Q3Y hBqpF9Tc6a9qy+WM2vc/lV/AaQiLHCMa98Mxl9V5jTge57NbKryPrtXkkA6bnp/KtR4byjhXjAlwgjewLAsx1/dcNqPn8az3hXC5CVYws0dwSVAzFb+bKCRm+VazgOPwT+VXGbqj +Vx8Vax+lQzSQSP7lB29vDr+As6IgHeMoyNVYGe3Zai+FTLgnl gItArAo9ycuYAlXuNAGN81zYOL9TUhw7iCphvFe4Ds7qLEk55G KBRuxIIsBveqFzBzg7OYGjWONZP1yxPcyAHzLnsNCPSrly7Pgp yHw4UOuoQ3BS4sSEJsuml1+utQNOdBdPD4hrnmOMjLIXl9Bvrw UjwrBsDJLILSSkErvkRRZEv1I1JtpdjbSpAHtQFttXtSrptbqi giivDXtFsiiiiiIooooi+WAhrrI3eo1eIkV3/Snc0RKYkyD3SKgJXbN5t6k8Rxa21Miyv72/cURN/D7fStX/AEe+Jy/a54MzeCYTIV6Bw6KGHYkEj1t6VljYQj3SCPoa279HjCSLDindC I2aMIxFsxUPnseoF19L/OiLX6KKKIvnz2y8kjCT/aIiPBxDHy9UktmYeqnUjtqO1ZoJK+mfa/wT7Rwuawu0Np1/u3z/AO4Wr5koicxPXcmKCEEi9J4c60tjIw4+FESUvF7+6Mvwpq+KJ3 NcPgyNaRaEiiJ0ZQdqRZq5iFBoiVi1NfXHCuWkiwEeEAACxBb2 vZyNZB+9nJa/evmDkbgxxePw8IGjSKW/gU5n/wB0H5kV9dUBpFmkPsbSSSeTETsS8jFBGFXy5r3a62BPZbAdN7C xcG4RJgiBJNiMQhURgs6MottdSAy72HmbtpcVaaS8LSzG4N9D2 7fC2lTvne8U45IAAs5565ZGNmw0WHCI0a5fNdcketw6kA7hcgF 836zYC9QXN/syfD4d8UcSrsmUsqxCMWJVPJlNha40sKSwE8snEJPGaYYfDz52 jjWWVSwcKq5VBFjYHXQKLDoKmfanIzYWJ8I8j4aS5k8MlobAqU JOuTzdLgabXq63XY5jAcunutrzyWaRyZwVPypuYqWwj5AWINjo DbS41IvtfUaetIySZiemt60bDLHM4RimZc92dfOK7Mk8UuHY6U 6z8wRyBys/flwSdK4WQBgT8j2PQik2HepDlzhq4jFQQs2VZJApPWx3t6nYep FdZx7pJXHieYpA4C6Owj1Uvw7mrFQStNHMSz2z5gpD2FgX/aP73vetaby37TYJo/6yVgkA1vfK38J7+h+V6T4p7LoSJDhyIyYwiKblQwI8xJJNyBb0 vexqq83cgPhI1lVs6WVXsp8pygFjrqC3X1rhFsT3EtytepaNHY 0Bg7rjs68N/QX4K58ycIw82HjkljnxQJXwwM2cByBm0AYAXBN+wvtpnfEPZXi 45wiRGWMscrgr7o1812GQkd9L1oPInGWxWBKZ2E0atGWYX6HI4 NvNYW3ubjXcXsnCMyxqssoklAsXyeHm3IOXa9t7db7bVhs8kNt v5yXn3f6nkEA0d9/hHA+CxYWBYoUyoutibksdSWPUk/8ATSmeKwUaSnK0YkmNwrMFZio1ydWABva2l736VOCo7inBkmaJ 2ALQtnQ2NwbW08wH1vsK52KhZPG4SN1rB67NyrNcQdtKEx6zhl tDoCHuWGpUhgBp1IFifnXc2MicIxw0xlBDf2DZr6jV7ZCNf2rU vwrmXx5J4wjN4DmN7r1GmhGny367VM4edTounof5VwdHRx4Z5h aS0H+Lra71o3yzWJ4XPzJvwB/rxUOMNiHuww8URYfekJbTa4RCB8Mx3ppLwHEy3R5IVW//APESfMeJcfOwqxfb1zFTpbr0qsT+1bAI7oZHujFfLGzBrdUK3B BOg727WNX4MFhsTN22Gzc00a9Dl57TxUb2HV1JCSDzr0pGF9mO GW2dpJD8Qo+ii4+tWDhnL2Hw+sMSqbWzalrdsxJNMOCc2jEyFB h5oxYkGQC5sSNlJCjQ6sRc7X1tP11zHqGiFDFhoY82NC9opCHC BSW95jpmIF8t7hRYaKO3z1OtLUVheSXt5bXuN+19fwvXVFFERR RRREUUUURfL3/lXxX/AGN/8UX/AD1IYP2JcTktmjjjv+3Iv4hM1fSNFEWF4P8AR4mKEy4uNH6KiM 49LsSv4CqNxv2c4/Ck+JhJCo+/GPEX43S9vnavq2iiL5M4JyLjsUyiDDSFSbZ2Uqg9S5AGnpevqT gPDPs2FggvfwokjuNLlVAJ+ZF6f0URFFFFEXE0QZSrC6sCCO4O hFfI3NnAWwWMmw7f+m5Cnuh1RvmpHzvX15WPfpCcFh8GDE7T5/B/jjys+v8ACRof3z6URYpE1evPSYbSnGB4S81yNAO/8qyBZoLBNLxcbZbFVI9Sb0hNjM2mUAUpPwaVfuk/Ckhw2S9srfQ1KYXDasB4SGahq7nw5Q2bepPlfgf2zGQ4YyLEJW ClmNrDchb7sQLKOpIFQrZa1+j3ysVWXGuvv/qoif2QbyMPiwVf7rVshTzA3OgIt01tuO+mnxNI8N4ckEMcMS5Y 41CKOwAsKc0RFcvGDuL/AOradq6ooijeC8HTDBo4ycpOaxsTc3zNe1ySe5O1d4kxRL4YjB 8TNaNEHnvq+nu65tSbDU3p6E1J7gD6X/zNekVsTZsrKzTG8nzy4M8PCQo8b+PExLENGzMSoYC4dC2RiV1D KdL6ZlzDy/LgpvCmy58iv5TcWa+l+4II+VfQHE+OQ4Vs88gVX1VirED3VYFl U5QfLbNuT8hm3MPDZuLTy4rBRh4o1WJWc5S5W5Phg7m7dbdPUV 0cNM4HMd33UrGNee+6hx2/Qb1nBjtvp+dSPLOBWbGYeN2Kq8qi6mx30ynob2F+l6aYLAyTyr FGpaSQ5VHcn1Og7/Kt7xvKv2nhqYeSNIpUjXJY3EcqjylWAva41t0Jq5POIqB3+XNR u1Se7sVgOKOZF8NzmzXawsth9/W+vSwPypSSBWVkYAq1wwOoIO4I9b/jUVyvgsVFFkxkyTMLZWUEG1tVYn37HZrAnrUzXCcKNBYUbhMHF h3CQwFA9yfDWyDKBYtsAToBbU/LSSoorBNrLnF2Z2pNIAt8otfU270NLb3tu/T59qUrwionNNdw0Vi+KrXNXCJDhpfsOZZZGUkRMqZiWXO5NxZs o1YEE2A1pbAYTEjAASkHFJG1mYgjOL5CxA10y3PxqVwUOXN2ud D2Gl6cseneq8TnYmAGVtXtG0cvvlX1Ckca7o+qyGbnwyRNhcXH LHiCPBZ4woOY6BmBtb1sDcXtvVRwXAnDnxCpUgrfc2v939kkaX 1sCba6jUudORJMVOk6Mt4woCs5UEKxYg2TdtrgrYnr0pUs6i7g gKNb3vb59da9JonCYaIPMQouOseq83pfF4iHVDNhyus1a+UuIh I8hBy3sQoGaSw0zMxzPlUWyjpb4G4Pxhm0jikF/vlL20BtlzAkkXGl7de1Vvk2VmiF41eI6eVQddDdwPS1jb41Z8J jQxOq5gSFQOCbC4vawINtSLG1Q4oN7Q03zUuAfIYm6zznxGaS4 BxCaRLyo/mZypaLwiqhrKsimRiW3OYaEW2qQmweaRHzuMl/KrEKbi3nXZrdL7UpHJcaix6j/W9KVz3HOwuyNiL0V4RXtarKKKKKIiiiiiLwtUBxXnvB4ceecMe 0YaQ/7gIHzIrKJYMaBZcboNBeNb27XvUZO3EE1GKRh6qB/wANEV04t7foUJEOElf1kZYx9BmNQX/5ET/7DHb/ANx/+Wqbi+c8QhtKkMn900zfm+Jh58HHfoRb/KiLSW/SOAFvsBz9vGFrfHw7/hUrwX2/4WVws8EkCn79w6g/vWAa3rY1ks3BI5Vzx3QtrY2I/wClVzFYcoSpOo7bURb5xf8ASDwkbMsEMs9jYN5Y0PwJu1v7tWR/avw9cImJacAONIhYy5tiuQG9wepsPWvlVTXQaiLb+J/pGAMRh8ESOhlkyn5qqm3+Ks/5/wDaRNxRohJGkSRgkIpJ8x3YsddgBb496p4OtBNESqNUvwrinhj a9jeoMNSge1ZBrMLBFq+nmdGXNZb97a02l46ioQLXOpNtfh6VT bX1rh/U0vKkpLY/FZ3LUz8Qg3BIINwR+FqHauL0Js2sr6c9j3tE/pHD+FM39ahHn2GdL2WQDvsG9bH7wrQ6+MOA8dlwc6TwNlkQ3HY jqrDqpGhFfWPJHNQ4jgo8SEMea4ZSb2ZSVax6i40OlYRT1FFFE RXEzkKxVcxAJC3AubaC50F9r13RRFX/ALfEc4xiiIOMuWfJlKkC6ZgTG2vTNffQaVXMf7TsFhIZIcNGQ8 RaONAoCXGz5gcpQnXe57a1oTLfeo88uYUsWOGhzHdvCS5+JtUz Hs/kD9VklUP2R8nZF+2TL53H6m+4Q7v6Funp/FWitiiUdkQllzAKTa7LcWvrYEjQ+tLgU1ghCSFV0VlDAeosp+o y/Q1iWQyuLigSfBuLR4mJZYicpJuGFmVgSGRwdiDpb+VP6RhwiIX KqFLnMxAtdrAXPc2AF/SlqhHNZdV93YivDXtFZWqKKKqXNfM0qzx4HC2XEzLmEr+4i3Ny BYlm8psCLait2MLzQWCaViknjjbUqrOb2+8xAFyANW0AH0paCR iLsuUdATrb97oD6XP8qjOA8uLhxndjNiGFpJ31ZvRf2EHRRp8T c1MVqQAcs1lcTR5lI7i2wP4HQ1TuHezKCPESytaRGZjHCQBGis LNdNmsSQNgB0vrV0rl72Nt6yJHMaQ28+CwWg7VUMfgmwK+LCAA puVAORkuAQw2Vhm0I6AipXCcVgmh8VssffxLeg1vowv1+G1Svg ZspZjoNRpYnSzHS9xY26a7Gws3x3DElGWQBgRrf8CCNiOhHc1M 2Zr2N1wb4764FUnYd7HOMZFH+O6+PLwSkUFwCGI0+6bqfVQ1x/360oSUX70muu1/jbQWHYVB47iScNw4JVmgjZY7Kbut/dtmPmGovcgjXU1PYacSIri9mUML72IuL1G4HbuVtoASiteva8J r2o1uiiiiiIooooi//9k=

[Lokomotive293]

If a group of 200-300 people taking over a whole country through military force isn't a coup, then I don't know what is.

If a group of 200-300 people taking over a country by military force, supported by 90% of the people living in that country isn't a coup revolution, then I don't know what is.

[Lensky]

"I began the revolution with 82 men. If I had to do it again, I would do it with 10 or 15 and absolute faith. It does not matter how small you are if you have faith and plan of action."

—Fidel Castro

He is here discussing the beginning of his revolution, which lasted 5 years not counting the years prior where Castro trained and organized his revolutionaries in Mexico. They grew exponentially once the advanced nature of class struggle revealed to the cuban proletariat the repressive tactics of the Baptista regime and their class interest in supporting the 26th of July Movement. By avoiding annihilation and engaging in concrete practice of foco theory, they had the support of the majority of the cuban population by the march on Havana.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Why can't you build socialism in a tropical climate?

That wasn't really the thrust of my point, but as it is - tropical third world countries generally have been shown to have a tough time - read Jeffrey Sachs' work on the subject of development economics, it's quite interesting.


Anyway, you don't seem to understand the difference between socialism and communism. Socialism is the revolutionary society, the society that first has to build up new social relations, the society that is, in every way, imperfect and stamped with the birthmarks of the society from whose womb it emerges.

This is really just fancy words that don't contain much substance. You're essentially saying that socialism is a transition that contains much of capitalism. If that is the case, then given that Cuba has been moving back towards free market capitalism for 20 years, there's really not much hope for the supposed 'revolution'. It's not the job of socialists to manage capital, which is essentially what the PCC has been doing for decades now.


Maybe you should really read what Marx wrote in the Critique of the Gotha Programme, specifically about how exchange of labor-equivalents (values!) will still exist under socialism, though of course in a different form.

Marx wrote the following in the Gotha programme:

Accordingly, the individual producer receives back from society -- after the deductions have been made -- exactly what he gives to it. That is not what happens in Cuba, or anything close. But it shouldn't be expected, because social relations are still exploitative in nature - a hallmark of capitalism.


No, it is not. The Cuban economy is dominated by production according to a social plan, the key industries are state-owned, the working class has political power.

Say it enough times and it starts to sound true. The working class does not have political power. What is the full time job of Raul Castro? He's a full-time politician, not a full-time worker.


It takes a long time to fully establish a new social system (50 years is no time at all). And, Miami is not all that far from Havana, if I remember correctly.

You can't establish a new social system in one tiny island nation. The very notion is bizarre and antithetical to any experience of changing social systems in history.


I'm lazy, so I won't explain Cuban democracy to you myself (It took some Cuban two hours to explain it to me...), but this is pretty good for a start.

http://www.cuba-solidarity.org.uk/faqdocs/Cuban-political-system-facts.pdf

Thanks, though that's not really told me much I don't know, and hasn't really provided any 'proof' of where power lies, merely a brief overview of what the political machinations of the state supposedly are.


Well, I didn't go to Cuba to have a nice vacation (which I did, anyway, but yeah...), I went there to talk about my life in capitalist society, to learn about Cuban socialism, and to paint walls, carry chairs, etc.

Peace corps'd be proud.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

This has to be a joke, how could 300 people take over an entire country? So to achieve communism in America we just need to get together a couple of dedicated volunteers?

Context is everything. Should the situation look like it did in Cuba during the 1950's and 1960, then yes. A corrupt and wholly incompetent authoritarian government that eventually up and left for safer shores - just to march in and take over.


If a group of 200-300 people taking over a country by military force, supported by 90% of the people living in that country isn't a coup revolution, then I don't know what is.

Support does not determine whether it is a coup or a revolution. Mass-participation in the revolution does. Fidel was not even claiming to be communist during the uprising itself, and only later, when pushed into the bosom of the Soviet Union by the reaction that the U.S. had did the Castro government begin to implement changes trying to emulate the system in the SSSR.


Why can't you build socialism in a tropical climate?


That wasn't his point. It's not that it is a tropical climate. It's that it's a small country, an island. It cannot ever hope to produce all it needs within its borders, so it cannot be self-sufficient. There are other climatic challenges, too...


No, it is not. The Cuban economy is dominated by production according to a social plan, the key industries are state-owned, the working class has political power.

Does the working class have political power? You can say that all you want, but that doesn't make it so.

[RedSonRising]

Fair enough. My point was more that it wasn't a working class revolution, and certainly not one with a 'red' character.

Peasants across rural Cuba helped serve as a base for the guerrillas, and militant workers' unions coordinated with the July 26th movement to organize general strikes and other actions. Land reform and an end to urban worker exploitation, along with the reclaiming of US Business-owned Cuban land, was certainly on the agenda for most of the supporters of the movement. This was no isolated military action with no public support, this was a revolution.

[cliffhanger]

Peasants across rural Cuba helped serve as a base for the guerrillas, and militant workers' unions coordinated with the July 26th movement to organize general strikes and other actions. Land reform and an end to urban worker exploitation, along with the reclaiming of US Business-owned Cuban land, was certainly on the agenda for most of the supporters of the movement. This was no isolated military action with no public support, this was a revolution.
That it was progressive and democratic does not necessarily make it socialist. It can also be a revolution in a certain sense without necessarily being the conquest of a working class socialist vanguard. Beyond that, one can support its progressive aspects, and certainly defend it against American attacks, while accepting that it never built socialism and it became a Soviet neocolony.

[RedSonRising]

That it was progressive and democratic does not necessarily make it socialist. It can also be a revolution in a certain sense without necessarily being the conquest of a working class socialist vanguard. Beyond that, one can support its progressive aspects, and certainly defend it against American attacks, while accepting that it never built socialism and it became a Soviet neocolony.

This is true. That post alone was responding to the assertion that it was a coup, rather than a revolution.

Personally I think that the Cuban system has constantly been changing since 1959 and has elements of state capitalism as well as features of an authentic workers' democracy. The fact that teacher's unions, worker unions, farmer organizations, doctors, etc. all have some sort of real and direct say in the way the government (specifically municipal government) apportions funds and makes policy on production and other things highlights a very tangible existence of worker democracy. At the same time, the centralization of the state and the reliance on a wage system and access to the global market and the existence of a privileged political class points to the opposite. I don't think isolating and emphasizing either reality is a constructive or objective analysis. There were significant gains made in the vein of empowering the working class and overthrowing the bourgeoisie and redistributing wealth and the means of production, but it has been a largely convoluted process weighed down by internal politics as well as international aggression and isolation. I think "Soviet Neocolony" is a misnomer, for sure.

[Lokomotive293]

This is really just fancy words that don't contain much substance. You're essentially saying that socialism is a transition that contains much of capitalism. If that is the case, then given that Cuba has been moving back towards free market capitalism for 20 years, there's really not much hope for the supposed 'revolution'. It's not the job of socialists to manage capital, which is essentially what the PCC has been doing for decades now.

So, again the question: Is it better to just give up, because socialism is not possible anyway, and we are just wasting our time?


Marx wrote the following in the Gotha programme:

Accordingly, the individual producer receives back from society -- after the deductions have been made -- exactly what he gives to it. That is not what happens in Cuba, or anything close. But it shouldn't be expected, because social relations are still exploitative in nature - a hallmark of capitalism.

I don't see how that is not happening in Cuba? You just keep claiming social relations are exploitative, but you did not yet give any proof whatsoever that the dominant form of production in Cuba is based on exploitation. Who is making a profit in Cuban state-owned enterprises?


Say it enough times and it starts to sound true. The working class does not have political power. What is the full time job of Raul Castro? He's a full-time politician, not a full-time worker.

So because the President is paid for his job, the working class is suddenly not in power? Also, members of the Asamblea Nacional, the National Assembly, get no money for doing that, and all representatives can be recalled at any time by their voters.


You can't establish a new social system in one tiny island nation. The very notion is bizarre and antithetical to any experience of changing social systems in history.

Well, you have to start somewhere. And, this is sort of what I've been saying all the time, we just seem to arrive at different consequences: I say, let's help them as good as we can, and try to achieve that they are not alone anymore. You say: Cuba is not socialist because it's not possible! Let's just forget about them.


Thanks, though that's not really told me much I don't know, and hasn't really provided any 'proof' of where power lies, merely a brief overview of what the political machinations of the state supposedly are.

You say you've been to Cuba, what did you do there? Did you ever get the chance to see the political system in action, or even talk to Cubans about it? Have you gotten a hint of the work of the different mass organizations, or have you maybe seen something of the discussion about the lineamientos, that every Cuban took part in, where people wrote millions of proposals on how to change them? A friend of mine was there at that time, he said one day, all shops were closed, because people had no time to work, they were discussing the lineamientos.
I just don't know what to call that other than socialist democracy.


Peace corps'd be proud.

A US government agency that was founded for spreading the influence of US Imperialism, and originally for fighting socialism, would be proud of me for supporting Cuba? I don't think so.

[MarxSchmarx]

218 for a majority in the House of Representatives, 60 for a cloture-proof majority in the Senate, and 1 Kenyan President, mayhaps?

"1 Kenyan president"? That's just a right-wing talking point exploiting the fear of "foreigners" and black people at that. This is a verbal warning for repeating that kind of trash, even if in jest.

[cliffhanger]

"1 Kenyan president"? That's just a right-wing talking point exploiting the fear of "foreigners" and black people at that.Yes, I was making fun of that attitude. Sorry.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

So, again the question: Is it better to just give up, because socialism is not possible anyway, and we are just wasting our time?


How can you arrive at a decision of what action to take if you haven't arrived at a conclusion as to what form the Cuban social system takes? There's no point engaging in this mindless attempt to portray me as advocating 'giving up'. The point i'm making is that we have to understand what Cuba actually is, before we can think about what it should be, what it could be, and how to get there.

I think it's quite clear that Cuba is a capitalist entity, in a capitalist world. I'm not blaming the motives of individuals, groups, or parties. I have no doubt that there are many in Cuba who are well meaning, and perhaps genuinely believe in 'socialism', but that's not enough to call the system itself socialism. If that were the case, I could call my fridge socialism, or my dog a communist.

Capitalism itself is very clearly defined by Marx, and by Marxian writers hitherto. Cuba does not deviate much from that definition, if you actually analyse the organisation of the Cuban economy and production process.


I don't see how that is not happening in Cuba? You just keep claiming social relations are exploitative, but you did not yet give any proof whatsoever that the dominant form of production in Cuba is based on exploitation. Who is making a profit in Cuban state-owned enterprises?

Well, there are something like 400,000 small-business entrepreneurs in Cuba now, so i'd say they are doing OK. In addition, the foreign multi-national companies that will soon be descending on Cuba's shores will also probably make a tidy profit.

Further, from 2015 the economic reforms will allow the self-employed to hire their own labour and the purchase and sale of private property.


So because the President is paid for his job, the working class is suddenly not in power? Also, members of the Asamblea Nacional, the National Assembly, get no money for doing that, and all representatives can be recalled at any time by their voters.

Well the fact that there has never been a working class President of Cuba since the revolution isn't a great start. The National Assembly don't get paid because they only work 2 days a year, hardly a rigorous legislative body! Cuba may have some aspects of grassroots democracy (though it's hard to tell how much local CDR activity is genuine, and how much is cynical activity under coercion), but its national democracy is highly lacking, in any way.



Well, you have to start somewhere. And, this is sort of what I've been saying all the time, we just seem to arrive at different consequences: I say, let's help them as good as we can, and try to achieve that they are not alone anymore. You say: Cuba is not socialist because it's not possible! Let's just forget about them.

Please quit the whole 'helping them' charade. I'm fairly sure that an opinion on a message board neither helps nor hinders Cuba or Cuban workers, and is of no consequence to them. I'll defend Cuba against imperial intervention because it has made genuine welfare gains and there is certainly much to say about that, but i'm not going to call it 'socialist' and defend it as that.


You say you've been to Cuba, what did you do there? Did you ever get the chance to see the political system in action, or even talk to Cubans about it? Have you gotten a hint of the work of the different mass organizations, or have you maybe seen something of the discussion about the lineamientos, that every Cuban took part in, where people wrote millions of proposals on how to change them? A friend of mine was there at that time, he said one day, all shops were closed, because people had no time to work, they were discussing the lineamientos.
I just don't know what to call that other than socialist democracy.

Could you actually be any more preachy? I was in Cuba to have a good time and yes, I chose the island because I was interested to see what life was like there. DOn't give me this whole spiel about how you were some sort of political migrant there. You were on holiday like everyone else who goes to Cuba.

And as a matter of fact, EVERY Cuban I spoke to had a highly cynical attitude towards everything aside from Fidel Castro. They love him. But the economy, the government. Cynical. And, it seemed quite obvious to me that capitalism had worked its magic there, judging by the obvious existence of haves and have-nots, the crumbling economy and infrastructure, the pimps and hustlers, the prostitution.

[Lokomotive293]

I think it's quite clear that Cuba is a capitalist entity, in a capitalist world. I'm not blaming the motives of individuals, groups, or parties. I have no doubt that there are many in Cuba who are well meaning, and perhaps genuinely believe in 'socialism', but that's not enough to call the system itself socialism. If that were the case, I could call my fridge socialism, or my dog a communist.

Capitalism itself is very clearly defined by Marx, and by Marxian writers hitherto. Cuba does not deviate much from that definition, if you actually analyse the organisation of the Cuban economy and production process.

Well, there are something like 400,000 small-business entrepreneurs in Cuba now, so i'd say they are doing OK. In addition, the foreign multi-national companies that will soon be descending on Cuba's shores will also probably make a tidy profit.

Further, from 2015 the economic reforms will allow the self-employed to hire their own labour and the purchase and sale of private property.

Well, you keep saying capitalism is the dominant form of production in Cuba, and if I ask you to prove that, you say "there are 400,000 small businesses". Neither the 400,000 small businesses (most of them are like a 1 man pizza stand or something), nor the foreign companies Cuba cooperates with dominate the Cuban economy. Also, great efforts are made to integrate both of those into the plan.

Btw, a big reason for legalizing those small businesses was that they existed anyway. Now, the Cuban state can regulate and tax them.

From 2015 on, it will be possible to hire up to three laborers, and to purchase and sale a limited amount of property. Accumulation of capital will not be possible that way.

All of this are measures that you can talk about, but they don't change anything about Cuba being a socialist country.


Well the fact that there has never been a working class President of Cuba since the revolution isn't a great start. The National Assembly don't get paid because they only work 2 days a year, hardly a rigorous legislative body! Cuba may have some aspects of grassroots democracy (though it's hard to tell how much local CDR activity is genuine, and how much is cynical activity under coercion), but its national democracy is highly lacking, in any way.

Who cares where you come from, what matters is what you do? I imagine the Asamblea Nacional to be like the National Congress of a political party. They come together to decide on what steps to take next, and to elect and control the national leadership (That would be the Consejo de Estado), whose job it is to put those decisions into action.
You just keep claiming that democracy is lacking, but you give no evidence whatsoever. Just because it's different from the bourgeois "democracy" you are used to (which sort of is to be expected in a socialist state), that doesn't mean it's not democracy.

Btw, in Cuban companies, workers decide their next steps in an assembly, and the CTC (=trade union) has an important say in the administration. Just like in schools and universities, the FEEM and the FEU (=student organizations) do. Democracy in Cuba exists on so many levels.


Could you actually be any more preachy? I was in Cuba to have a good time and yes, I chose the island because I was interested to see what life was like there. DOn't give me this whole spiel about how you were some sort of political migrant there. You were on holiday like everyone else who goes to Cuba.

http://www.juventudrebelde.cu/cuba/2013-07-30/visitan-cuba-miembros-de-la-juventud-comunista-alemana/


And as a matter of fact, EVERY Cuban I spoke to had a highly cynical attitude towards everything aside from Fidel Castro. They love him. But the economy, the government. Cynical. And, it seemed quite obvious to me that capitalism had worked its magic there, judging by the obvious existence of haves and have-nots, the crumbling economy and infrastructure, the pimps and hustlers, the prostitution.

You are taking Cuba's problems that exist for objective, material reasons (the f****** US blockade, the Perioda Especial), and you're using them to defame the Cuban government, and to claim that the Cuban revolution never was a revolution at all. You think you can have the sweet sides of socialism without fighting for them. And, you are being un-dialectic and un-materialistic when you are ignoring the contradictions and real circumstances of Cuban socialism, and instead have an idea of how perfect society needs to look like, and everything that deviates from that is not worth your support.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

[QUOTE=Lokomotive293;2668441]Well, you keep saying capitalism is the dominant form of production in Cuba, and if I ask you to prove that, you say "there are 400,000 small businesses". Neither the 400,000 small businesses (most of them are like a 1 man pizza stand or something), nor the foreign companies Cuba cooperates with dominate the Cuban economy. Also, great efforts are made to integrate both of those into the plan.

I guess if the existence of hundreds of thousands of small businesses, private property, the existence of large foreign inward investment in the Cuban economy, as well as profit-making capabilities and waged labour, can't persuade you that this is a capitalist society, then nothing will.


Btw, a big reason for legalizing those small businesses was that they existed anyway. Now, the Cuban state can regulate and tax them.

Yeah, forget about being a revolutionary and revolutionising the production process, we'll just legalise entrepreneurship and hope that they pay some taxes on their profits!


From 2015 on, it will be possible to hire up to three laborers, and to purchase and sale a limited amount of property. Accumulation of capital will not be possible that way.

Are you kidding me? Of course accumulation of capital will be possible, and so will exploitation of the workforce be further entrenched. Seriously, stop defending capitalist changes! Of all the things to defend about Cuba's system (And there are many things), don't be a treacherous scab and defend the re-instatement of private property and private employment!


All of this are measures that you can talk about, but they don't change anything about Cuba being a socialist country.

Not in your closed mind, perhaps. I actually wonder what Cuba would have to do to become a capitalist nation in your eyes, because it seems it only has to self-declare as socialist for you to believe as such.


Who cares where you come from, what matters is what you do? I imagine the Asamblea Nacional to be like the National Congress of a political party. They come together to decide on what steps to take next, and to elect and control the national leadership (That would be the Consejo de Estado), whose job it is to put those decisions into action.

You mean like all those bourgeois parties? How democratic! Cuba doesn't have the worst record on democracy, in general, and like I say the grassroots democracy may or may not be a positive thing, but undoubtedly at a national level there is a huge democratic deficit which prohibits one from being able to confidently say that the working class holds power at a national level in Cuba. Of course, as this is a criticism of Cuba, you will just filter this through as noise and refuse to critically engage.


You just keep claiming that democracy is lacking, but you give no evidence whatsoever. Just because it's different from the bourgeois "democracy" you are used to (which sort of is to be expected in a socialist state), that doesn't mean it's not democracy.

See what i've said above.


Btw, in Cuban companies, workers decide their next steps in an assembly, and the CTC (=trade union) has an important say in the administration. Just like in schools and universities, the FEEM and the FEU (=student organizations) do. Democracy in Cuba exists on so many levels.

I call bullshit. When I went, there was so much cynicism towards work in Cuba. One guy I saw was an electrician, we hung out every day because he didn't have any work to do (but still got paid). He worked like 1 day in the week I was staying in his area, the rest of the time just sat outside drinking beer and hanging out with the local mayor. He said it was typical of how shit was in Cuba.

It would certainly explain why the Cuban economy is still in the doldrums 20 years after the special period.


You are taking Cuba's problems that exist for objective, material reasons (the f****** US blockade, the Perioda Especial), and you're using them to defame the Cuban government, and to claim that the Cuban revolution never was a revolution at all. You think you can have the sweet sides of socialism without fighting for them. And, you are being un-dialectic and un-materialistic when you are ignoring the contradictions and real circumstances of Cuban socialism, and instead have an idea of how perfect society needs to look like, and everything that deviates from that is not worth your support.


I don't really see how i'm 'defaming' the Cuban government. I'm merely pointing out the many flaws in Cuban society, whilst acknowledging that on the whole it has probably done a positive job for the people since 1959, that doesn't mean it is a 'socialist' society.

I'm not even sure you're really using 'un-dialectic', or 'un-materialistic', in the right contexts, but rather throwing them at me as some sort of insult. Next you'll call me a liberal imperialist or something.

You need to re-engage your capacity to think critically, because you're coming across as a non-Marxist loon right now. I understand if you want to defend what you see as the Cuban revolution, but you won't accept any criticism of Cuba, nor engage in reasoned debate. As i've said, I see some positive aspects to Cuban society, but that's not enough to label it 'socialism', for reasons i've laid out multiple times already and am not going to repeat.

[Lokomotive293]

You need to re-engage your capacity to think critically, because you're coming across as a non-Marxist loon right now. I understand if you want to defend what you see as the Cuban revolution, but you won't accept any criticism of Cuba, nor engage in reasoned debate. As i've said, I see some positive aspects to Cuban society, but that's not enough to label it 'socialism', for reasons i've laid out multiple times already and am not going to repeat.

Cuba is a small country that is not only continuously fighting for socialism, but, most of all, for its national sovereignty. I don't think I'm qualified enough to really take part in this debate, but if I was, I am sure I would have a lot of criticisms of things that are happening in Cuba. But, always under the precondition of solidarity with the Cuban revolution, and the companeros down there.
I do accept criticism, I just don't like it at all when people are criticizing something from the outside. I also want you to understand that I am not fiercely defending everything that is happening in Cuba, but rather, I have been trying to explain the material circumstances that lead to certain decisions. As I understand it, we did not have a discussion about wether or not these measures were right or wrong, and I don't feel either of us would be qualified enough to take part in such a discussion, we had a discussion about wether or not Cuba is socialist. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the reason why we did not find a common denominator here is, that we both have different analyses, and different concepts of what socialism is, and how a socialist revolution will look like. There are fundamental differences between us concerning our understanding of Marxist theory, and our idea of revolutionary strategy and tactics. E.g. looking at the discussion about economics, we have a different idea of socialism as a transitional phase, and thus the political economy of socialism. (Maybe also take a look at the thread "What is socialism?" in the learning section? It's a good start for getting a clearer understanding of the differences in analysis that can exist).
Looking at the discussion about democracy, we have a different understanding of socialist democracy (e.g. I compared the Cuban political system to that of a political party, and you asked if I was talking about bourgeois political parties. Well, I wasn't, I was talking about the democratic-centralist organization of a Leninist party. I doubt, however, that you even accept democratic centralism).
So, as long as those huge theoretical differences between us exist, we will not find a solution in this discussion about Cuba.

I can just hope that you nevertheless support the anti-imperialist struggle of Cuba and all of Latin America, and I will repeat what I said in my very first post in this thread: I trust the Cubans that they know what they are doing.

[mykittyhasaboner]

It is not.

Denial. The Cuban revolution freed Cuba from US domination. The Cuban people benefited from this. The situation now is deteriorating, but that is another topic.


It is a result of a coup that installed a social-democratic government, which, bound to some labour interest, was bound to do some social reform.This is ridiculous. If you think the Cuban revolution was a coup, then we should just stop talking now. This line of thought is very dishonest.


Like any welfare state, Cuba offers things some other impoverished less socially-minded states does not, but it does not make it socialist.When was the last welfare state installed by a coup? Do you see how ridiculous such a proposition is?


If there was a time when socialism was attempted in Cuba, it was long ago, and the current order of things is endlessly spiralling out of control towards an inevitable China syndrome (if you know what I mean). No i don't. Cuba taking steps back from socialism and allowing more and more market influence is not China syndrome. It's the reality of being isolated from easy markets in the US and around the world by a fucking embargo. The Chinese state privatized their economy because that was what they politically wanted to do. To be friendly with the US. That is a major difference.


It was to some extent the relative prosperity of pre-Revolution Cuba that allowed some gains to be made.What? If you think that was prosperity then i don't want to know your idea of poverty.



Bear in mind that today most things are stagnant. The railways can hardly operate, most roads are broken, houses are falling apart, infrastructure is declining, electricity unreliable. Water-born illnesses are increasing due to poor water treatment, following improvements in the 50's and 60's, the situation is now getting critical once more. Things are anything but stagnant. Political and economic life in Cuba is in transition. Anybody with the slightest hint of knowledge about Cuba would probably approach the situation bearing this in mind.

Poor infrastructure and decreasing standards of living are known problems. The situation was critical in the 90's, not now.


Objective improvements are no sign of socialism, either. But they can be. Cuba combined public and private property with the public sector dominating; while private activity being restricted by the state. The point of this is to improve peoples lives by lowering the cost of basic necessities and by keeping power out of private hands. How is that not to improve; objectively; everyday life in Cuba? It's not a society moving forward towards communism, but a socialist society falling back and giving concessions to the world markets.


Sweden isn't socialist just because the population might enjoy more generous welfare than some other nation...Cuba is not Sweden.


Well, the last thing definitely does exist. Houses with roofs collapsing. Improvised fixing and fitting. And yes, some shacks as well. Not on a Haitian scale, but they definitely do exist. The type of exodus towards the cities and urban poverty one can see in China is not even comparable to Cuba. If anything, the opposite is the case. Cubans are more and more employing agricultural labor in an effort to increase food production.




What? Plenty right-wing nuts love both the USA and Israel. What is your point? Now Nazis might not, but the modern racist Islam-obsessed right-wing movement is quite passionate about the Israeli state.
States which share similar political economic traits are not on the same course; and may have conflicting interests. That is my point. Perhaps the US and Israel was a bad example. Cuba and China being compared is like comparing Russia and Ecuador. Objectively, their economies will not be very similar. Mode and relations of production aside.



You just don't want to call it what it is when you see it. Capitalism.The Cuban state has traded on the world market and developed state capital since the early days of the revolution. i mentioned this in my first post. That is capitalism. You just want to see Cuba keep going backwards towards capitalism. Criticisms of Cuba from "the left" are usually tantamount to supporting their moves for more privatization.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Criticisms of Cuba from "the left" are usually tantamount to supporting their moves for more privatization.

Sorry, this is just dishonest (at best), and at worst slander. You have not a shred of evidence to back up this brazenly political bullshit.

We criticise Cuba because it bears the hallmarks, in 2013, of a capitalist nation that is, to a greater or lesser extent, embracing the world market, private property and the private sector. The defensive nature of your entire post shows that you are unwilling to engage critically with objective facts regarding the organisation of the Cuban economy.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

This is ridiculous. If you think the Cuban revolution was a coup, then we should just stop talking now. This line of thought is very dishonest.


You're fucking dishonest. A coup's a coup. Even a coup can be progressive.


When was the last welfare state installed by a coup? Do you see how ridiculous such a proposition is? Why is it ridiculous? The coup merely serves to overthrow an existing government. What replaces it will depend on many factors, material realities and geopolitical context. If a coup is done by a relatively progressive group, why could it not install a welfare state? Occasionally military governments have made moves in the direction of a welfare state as well, when this was necessary to maintain their rule (South Korea, Taiwan...). There's nothing inherently incompatible if other requirements are met.


No i don't. Cuba taking steps back from socialism and allowing more and more market influence is not China syndrome. It's the reality of being isolated from easy markets in the US and around the world by a fucking embargo. The Chinese state privatized their economy because that was what they politically wanted to do. To be friendly with the US. That is a major difference.They 'wanted to do'? Surely you will admit that is a ridiculously reductionist view. They just didn't sit up one day and suddenly decide, 'fuck this trying to be building socialist shit, let's just capitulate!', even if that is what it boils down to in the end.


What? If you think that was prosperity then i don't want to know your idea of poverty. Relative, fucker, do you know what it means? Compared to other countries in the region, Cuba was not destitute. Infrastructure was better developed, there was extensive railways and relatively good roads throughout most of the island, something that was and is largely absent from most of the other Caribbean Islands and Central American nations. Cuba had benefited from catering to wealthy tourists and visitors, as well as better than average (for the region) trade relations. RELATIVELY.

It was not prosperous, but compared to others-- you see?


Things are anything but stagnant. Political and economic life in Cuba is in transition. Anybody with the slightest hint of knowledge about Cuba would probably approach the situation bearing this in mind.Stagnant as in not fucking improving. If you think the current privatisation drives are going to improve... I'm sure you don't. You're just grasping at straws and willing to, in the face of all evidence, defend these miscalculated actions.


But they can be. Cuba combined public and private property with the public sector dominating; while private activity being restricted by the state. The point of this is to improve peoples lives by lowering the cost of basic necessities and by keeping power out of private hands. How is that not to improve; objectively; everyday life in Cuba? It's not a society moving forward towards communism, but a socialist society falling back and giving concessions to the world markets. The state is decreasing its restrictions. Private activity increasing. Private employers to be allowed to hire workers. Houses to be allowed to be sold and traded as commodities, and vehicles too. Returning to what was - steps back, sure?

They could possibly be, yes, but there is nothing inherent to any improvements that makes anything socialism.


Cuba is not Sweden. You suggested that the welfare was why Cuba was socialist. If that is the case, then Sweden is socialist. There was a point in the 1970's when the Swedish state-owned sector made up 53% of GDP, and the swedish state practised price- and supply control. These are not things that make something socialist as such.

If we go by ownership alone, that is not a reference either. Mere state-ownership is no guarantee of workers influence, nor a sign of anything but capitalism. Apart from the usual 'state-capitalism' examples, Fascist Italy, in the 1930's, because the state took over companies that failed in the great depression, had the state own more than 75% of all industry, second only to the SSSR. At one time, the British state owned the 'commanding-heights' of industry on the islands (the sparts must go to some lengths to get around that little nugget). Doesn't mean anything.


The type of exodus towards the cities and urban poverty one can see in China is not even comparable to Cuba. If anything, the opposite is the case. Cubans are more and more employing agricultural labour in an effort to increase food production. China is further down on the capitalist road. You are here defending Cuba's terrible inability to mechanise and reform farming? Many farms are still owned by individuals and families, and the state monopoly on agricultural product purchasing is being lifted.


States which share similar political economic traits are not on the same course; and may have conflicting interests. That is my point. Perhaps the US and Israel was a bad example. Cuba and China being compared is like comparing Russia and Ecuador. Objectively, their economies will not be very similar. Mode and relations of production aside. Objectively, their economies are similar. They are both in a state of transition. Cuba is only not as far along - yet - but they are working there. The reforms announced in the last few years are all attempting to mimic the shifts made in China since the 1970's, adapted to Cuban conditions. Chinese influence on Cuba is growing, too.


You just want to see Cuba keep going backwards towards capitalism. Criticisms of Cuba from "the left" are usually tantamount to supporting their moves for more privatization. Really? What the fuck gave you that idea?

If anything, it's you that want to see Cuba continue down that road. You are not at all disturbed by these moves, you defend them. I find them unacceptable.

[Rafiq]

Burkina Faso, Afghanistan, these were all home to progressive coups. The reason you do not hear of progressive coups is because they usually are veiled by Communist rhetoric and labeled as revolutions, Cuba, as Takayuki has said, is no exception. A revolution is something that is defined scientifically, when we say Cuba did not undergo a revolution, it is not rhetoric or propaganda, it is as factual as stating cooperatives are petite bourgeois.

[RedSonRising]

The guerrillas of the M-26th movement along with the mobilized workers and peasants within Cuba expropriated the bourgeoisie, eliminated the privatized exploitation of surplus labor, and established state control over the entire economy with an ever-evolving relationship to the working people which labor and produce for the needs of all. And people want to call that a coup?

! I consider the establishment of the Soviet Union as falling short of authentic socialism, that doesn't man what happened in Russia was not a revolution. Unless we're talking an incredibly restricted and fine-line approach to defining a revolutionary change in social relations.

[Yet_Another_Boring_Marxist]

It is understandable why some people are so earnest in trying to defend Cuba's credentials. After all, I imagine that it must be difficult to have no presently existing model of socialism to hold up as an example; and on the level of appearance it seems that is the last bastion of what the left wishes to achieve, a prosperous, healthy democracy which at the same time adheres to its desired economic system. Of course they aren't nearly as defensive of North Korea as they are of Cuba, despite the fact that the former seems to fit the model of uncompromising Anti-Imperialism and state oriented economics; after all that'd be an awfully embarrassing conversation when one brings up that the "Cuba of Korea" turned out to be a flop and that the last bastions of socialism are socialism's last stand for a good reason. But despite the fact that there are some who wish to laud the Cuban regime with praise for it's ideological consistency, such praise are to a large extent undeserved. After all, in the begining days of the Cuban Revolution the Cuban leadership wasn't exactly sure what sort of revolution they were leading. When Jean Paul Satre met with some Cuban friends on the eve of the Cuban Revolution, he noted the lack of any ideological commitments on their behalf:


“What first surprises one in Cuba – above all if you have visited the countries of the East –” he wrote; “is the apparent absence of ideology. Yet it is not ideologies that are lacking in this century; here too, they have representatives who from all sides offer us their services. Your leaders are not ignorant of them; they simply don’t employ them.

~The Ideology of the Cuban Revolution, Joseph Hansen

Now of course, Communism is the real movement which abolishes capital, and represents the logical end result of class struggle. So even if the broad working class were not well versed in the finest points of socialist ideology, if the working class were to mobilize en masse and create a state from the body of the soviet up, then such a state could indeed progress to a dictatorship of a proletariat when the class struggle continues.

However that is not what we saw with the Cuban revolution. What we saw was the working people waiting with high hopes for an army of guerrillas to storm the capital, when the guerrillas themselves had no idea what sort of society they wanted to construct. When a state is created not from the class struggle of the worker themselves, but from the displacement of one regime by a regime of guerrillas, then no matter how popular those guerrillas might be they can not institute socialism. For Socialism is the act where one class crushes the other, if it is not the act of the masses themselves then there will be no such thing. Likewise, in such a situation as the Cuban one, the Cuban people were left without a vanguard and instead found themselves with a guerrilla clique.

Hence we can not accept Cuba's initial claim to socialism as legitimate. In Russia and China we saw years of mass strikes before the armed conflict began, and the formation of soviets and communes along with the leadership of parties with clear intentions to establish socialism through class struggle. It seems that according to the principle of occam's razor, when there is no class basis for socialism, what swayed the Cuban leadership to the red flag was not the hopes of the working masses but the presence of a large imperial power in the form of the Soviet Union to provide them protection. After all they did recently just instigate an armed revolt against America's favorite henchmen and we all know what happens to those poor countries which crush imperialism without an imperialist to back them up.

Such a rationale seems likely considering that Cuba always stood by the Soviet Union as it's junior partner in crime. Considering the fact that the Cuban regime endorsed the Soviet invasion of the Czechoslovakian republic in words and sent troops to back up soviet imperialism with arms in Angola and guns in the Soviet misadventures in Somalia. Even more embarrassingly for the Cuban regime, they originally backed the Eritrean rebels in their fight for independence but switched sides to Ethiopia due to the fact that Ethiopia was in the Soviet sphere of influence and the Castro clique had no desire to interfere with that. Of course some will argue that this was all under the banner of proletarian internationalism, but as the RCP-USA put it back in the 70's before their degeneration:


In words, Cuba is socialist. Its thousands of troops fighting in Africa under Soviet leadership are said to be there to advance the cause of proletarian internationalism. But the American paid-for mercenaries fighting there also wave banners of freedom and "anti-imperialism." Obviously it is necessary to go beneath the appearance of things to understand what's really going on in the world. To understand a country we have to ask what class is in power there. And to understand a country's politics we have to ask what class these politics serve.

~Cuba: the Evaporation of a Myth - From Anti-Imperialist Revolution to Pawn of Social-Imperialism

Even towards the end Castro praised Gorbachev for trying to "perfect" socialism. And now there is some talk of Cuba trying to gain military ties with China.

Likewise, Cuba has a long history of rightward economic reform that makes the most recent attempts at privatization. From the same article:

Within Cuba, the first congress of the country's revisionist "Communist" Party in December, 1975, marked the economic and political consolidation of Cuba into the Soviet bloc and the formal emergence of capitalist relations into the sunlight in Cuba, after years of being hidden under "revolutionary" rhetoric.

This congress ratified Cuba's new "Economic Planning and Management System," sanctifying "the profitability criterion" as the country's highest principle. It also featured a long self-criticism by Castro for not coming around to the Soviet's way of thinking sooner, a "self-criticism" in which he tries to justify Cuba's present situation and bows down so low before the New Czars that it serves as an outstanding indication of Cuba's present neocolonial status,


"Had we been humbler, had we not had excessive self-esteem," Castro explained, "we would have been able to understand that revolutionary theory was not sufficiently developed in our country and that we actually lacked profound economists and scientists of Marxism to make really significant contributions to the theory and practice of building socialism..." (Castro's speeches and other congress documents can be found in Granma, the official Cuban publication

These words, written many decades ago ring expetually true today when the Castro clique is "reforming" it's food ration system due to their supposedly empty coffers:


What experience does he mean? That "economic laws" (especially the law of value) "govern socialist construction," and that "money, prices, finances, budgets, taxes, credit, interest and other commodity categories should function as indispensable instruments...to decide on which investment is the most advantageous; to decide which enterprises, which units, which collective of workers performs best, and which performs worst, and so be able to take relevant measures." (Speech at party congress)

This, Castro claims, is dictated by "reality," but it's not the reality of socialism. The working class must take these laws and categories into account so that it can consciously restrict and limit their sphere of operation and develop the conditions to do away with them once and for all. But socialism can't be governed by the economic laws of capitalism or else there wouldn't be any difference between the two systems! Castro's words here are taken lock, stock and profit margin from recent Soviet economic textbooks - summing up the experience of restoring capitalism in the Soviet Union.

The "new economic system" Castro goes on to describe is based on the same principles that govern all capitalist countries, especially in the form of state capitalism: that prices be fixed according to the cost of production; that the factories and industries which produce the highest rate of return on their investment should be the areas of most expansion; that the managers of these units should be paid according to their social position and also the profitability of their enterprises; that the workers be paid according to the profitability of the enterprises they work for and lose their jobs if production would be cheaper without them; and furthermore, that workers be paid strictly according to their productivity as measured by piecework (which, Castro reported, now determines the wages of 20% of Cuban workers) or by whether or not they meet the production quota set for their jobs - in other words, whether they make rate (this is already in force for 48% of Cuba's workers).

This is truly capitalism in its full glory. Nowhere is this more ugly than when Castro says that he's sorry that there's such a terrible housing shortage in Cuba, but "the revolution hasn't been able to do much" about it - while later revealing that the government is building 14 new tourist hotels and expanding others. Clearly, the consideration isn't what people need, but what's most profitable. Of course, Castro doesn't call this capitalism, any more than do the present capitalist rulers of the USSR. All the revisionists claim that this kind of thing is just a little more "realistic" version of socialism. My emphasis.

But of course, for those of you who wish to defend this last bastion of socialism and the charismatic personality behind it this is all of little consequence. If Castro were to come out tomorrow and declare that the coffers have finally been run dry and that capitalism must be restored, and he did so with a tear in his eye and a sigh of deep regret, then you'd all feel more sympathy for him than the working people of Cuba.

Though, of course this is all understandable as you would like to have one last thing to hold on to. However when you defend the Castro clique for it's economic failings, for it's military misadventures, and for it's blatant homophobia and racism towards the black people of Cuba, I'd like you to consider something. When ever you defend the Cuban regime, when ever you mention that it's awful better than the whole of Latin America, that it's better to be gay in Cuba than in Kenya, and that the inside of a Cuban prision is awful cleaner for a black worker than the inside of an American one, I'd like you to notice that you are defending the Cuban regime from other capitalist countries, some of which have outpaced Cuba by miles. Such a position is not a vision for an alternative to capitalism but rather of a cosmetic restructuring of it. A vision seeped in conservatism rather than imagination. So I must ask how such a vision which only sees itself in terms of defending the ruins of a past empire can led to a truly emancipatory position which can create a communist pole to draw the broad working masses around. Of course there is a time for looking at what has been done, but we should never sacrifice our vision for the future on the basis of the accomplishments of the past.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

The guerrillas of the M-26th movement along with the mobilized workers and peasants within Cuba expropriated the bourgeoisie, eliminated the privatized exploitation of surplus labor, and established state control over the entire economy with an ever-evolving relationship to the working people which labor and produce for the needs of all. And people want to call that a coup?


The point isn't the consequences of the event, but the nature of the event itself. A revolution cannot be said to be 200-300 people taking over an entire country. Such a definition is dangerous, insofar as it would encourage tiny fringe groups to attempt to take direct control of countries by means of guerilla war/terror, and in a country that hasn't been ruled by a Batista, that isn't crying out for an overthrow of the existing government and so on, could quite easily slide into dictatorship over the people.

1959 was a coup, regardless of whether the consequences were good or bad. You can have progressive coups, and 'bad' revolutions.