Defend Cuba!

[Xiao Banfa]

This is a one-sided bourgeois hatchet job. We need comrades to refute its assertions. Comrades like CDL/Nothing Human is Alien, Australian Socialis Alliance members and any other members of right-thinking CP's ar needed to help refute this desperate slander.

Cuba
Events of 2007

Cuba remains the one country in Latin America that represses nearly all forms of political dissent. There have been no significant policy changes since Fidel Castro relinquished direct control of the government to his brother Raul Castro in August 2006. The government continues to enforce political conformity using criminal prosecutions, long-term and short-term detentions, mob harassment, police warnings, surveillance, house arrests, travel restrictions, and politically-motivated dismissals from employment. The end result is that Cubans are systematically denied basic rights to free expression, association, assembly, privacy, movement, and due process of law.
Legal and Institutional Failings
Cuba’s legal and institutional structures are at the root of rights violations. Although in theory the different branches of government have separate and defined areas of authority, in practice the executive retains control over all levers of power. The courts, which lack independence, undermine the right to fair trial by severely restricting the right to a defense.

Cuba’s Criminal Code provides the legal basis for repression of dissent. Laws criminalizing enemy propaganda, the spreading of “unauthorized news,” and insult to patriotic symbols are used to restrict freedom of speech under the guise of protecting state security. The government also imprisons or orders the surveillance of individuals who have committed no illegal act, relying upon provisions that penalize “dangerousness” (estado peligroso) and allow for “official warning” (advertencia oficial).

Political Imprisonment
In July 2007 the Cuban Commission for Human Rights and National Reconciliation, a respected local human rights group, issued a list of 240 prisoners who it said were incarcerated for political reasons. The list included the names of 12 peaceful dissidents who had been arrested and detained in the first half of 2006, five of whom were being held on charges of “dangerousness.” Of 75 political dissidents, independent journalists, and human rights advocates who were summarily tried in April 2003, 59 remain imprisoned. Serving sentences that average nearly 20 years, the incarcerated dissidents endure poor conditions and punitive treatment in prison.

While the number of political prisoners has decreased in the last year, this decrease cannot be attributed to leniency or policy change on the part of the government. The political prisoners who were released had already served out their full sentences. In September 2007, approximately 30 activists were arrested and held for 24 hours. According to one of the released prisoners, Jorge Luis Garcia Perez—who was released from prison in May 2007 after serving out a 17-year sentence—the prisoners endured beatings, strip searches, and threats of future arrest.

Travel Restrictions and Family Separations
The Cuban government forbids the country’s citizens from leaving or returning to Cuba without first obtaining official permission, which is often denied. Unauthorized travel can result in criminal prosecution. In May 2006 Oswaldo Payá, the well known Cuban human rights advocate, was awarded an honorary doctor of laws by Columbia University in New York City in recognition of his work. However, he was denied an exit visa by the Cuban authorities and could not receive the degree in person.

The government also frequently bars citizens engaged in authorized travel from taking their children with them overseas, essentially holding the children hostage to guarantee the parents’ return. Given the widespread fear of forced family separation, these travel restrictions provide the Cuban government with a powerful tool for punishing defectors and silencing critics.

Freedom of Expression and Assembly
The Cuban government maintains a media monopoly on the island, ensuring that freedom of expression is virtually nonexistent. Although a small number of independent journalists manage to write articles for foreign websites or publish underground newsletters, the risks associated with these activities are considerable. According to Reporters Without Borders, 25 journalists were serving prison terms in Cuba as of July 2007, most of them charged with threatening “the national independence and economy of Cuba.” This makes the country second only to China for the number of journalists in prison.

Access to information via the internet is also highly restricted in Cuba. In late August 2006 the dissident and independent journalist Guillermo Fariñas ended a seven-month hunger strike in opposition to the regime’s internet policy. He began the strike after the Cuban authorities shut down his email access, which he had been using to send dispatches abroad describing attacks on dissidents and other human rights abuses.

Freedom of assembly is severely restricted in Cuba and political dissidents are generally prohibited from meeting in large groups. This was evident in mid-September 2006 during the 14th summit of the Non-Aligned Movement in Havana, when the Cuban government issued a ban on all gatherings that might damage “the image” of the city.

Prison Conditions
Prisoners are generally kept in poor and abusive conditions, often in overcrowded cells. They typically lose weight during incarceration, and some receive inadequate medical care. Some also endure physical and sexual abuse, typically by other inmates and with the acquiescence of guards.

Political prisoners who denounce poor conditions of imprisonment or who otherwise fail to observe prison rules are frequently punished with long periods in punitive isolation cells, restrictions on visits, or denial of medical treatment. In October 2006, Juan Carlos Herrera Acosta, who was sentenced to 20 years in prison following the government’s 2003 crackdown on dissidents, was beaten and placed in a cell infested with rats and insects after demanding the right to telephone his family. Some political prisoners have carried out long hunger strikes to protest abusive conditions and mistreatment by guards.

Death Penalty
Under Cuban law the death penalty exists for a broad range of crimes. It is difficult to ascertain the frequency with which this penalty is employed because Cuba does not release information regarding its use. However, as far as is known, no executions have been carried out since April 2003.

Human Rights Defenders
Refusing to recognize human rights monitoring as a legitimate activity, the government denies legal status to local human rights groups. Individuals who belong to these groups face systematic harassment, with the government impeding their efforts to document human rights conditions. In addition, international human rights groups such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International are barred from sending fact-finding missions to Cuba. Cuba remains one of the few countries in the world to deny the International Committee of the Red Cross access to its prisons.

[RNK]

For a second there I thought I was reading about the US.

[BobKKKindle$]

Indeed. The United States has the largest per-capita prison population in the world (and at any time in Human history, with the brief exception of Russia during Yeltsin's declared state of emergency) and unlike Cuba, a large part of the American population will be unable to access a high standard of health care if they fall sick, and may be forced to go without treatment or pay high fees - this is a terrible violation of human rights, and exposes the unfairness of the capitalist system.

[Dr Mindbender]

isnt it the case that if an american citizen uses the Cuban health system when they go there they are arrested and detained upon arrival home?

[Gitfiddle Jim]

Over here every single news programme has followed the resignation by reporting on the "tyrannical", "repressive" regime of Castro, yet disregarding the views of Cuban citizens for those of exiles in the States (former Batista followers). Like you said, we need to see an end to this nonsense.


For a second there I thought I was reading about the US.

It certainly has more in common with the US than Cuba.

[Xiao Banfa]

I wanted you bastards to help refute this shit, or else I'll get pwned on this other forum. But what's worse is that Cuba will be disreputationalised.

CDL!

[Asoka89]

A lot of that is true. And no people dont get arrested for visiting Cuba. Jimmy Carter did it. some 9/11 victims did it for medical aid, I uphold Cuba as a workers' state with strong anti-imperialism, education and health care, but Cuba does attack freedoms of speech and expression and has an unfortunate human rights record. It needs to be reformed from within. Revolution within revolution without counter-revolution.

[BobKKKindle$]

has an unfortunate human rights record.

How, exactly? What do you even mean by "human rights"? The US government allows its citizens to go without a basic standard of health care, and thousands are forced to sleep on the streets because they don't have anywhere to live - isn't this a denial of human rights? The United States has deprived millions of their "right" to life through it's wars and support for dictators. Any accusations of human rights abuses in Cuba are thus hypocritical.

It is true that Cuba detains some of its citizens, on the grounds that they pose a risk to the security of the nation - and yet we must always consider the perspective of the Cuban government. They are facing the threat of invasion by the world's most powerful military force - the United States - and have also endured a crippling economic embargo. Is it therefore unjustified that the government should implement stringent security measures?

Also be aware that many of those detained have been convicted of spying for the United States - Cuba should be praised for not executing or torturing these spies.

[Dominicana_1965]

Cuba remains the one country in Latin America that represses nearly all forms of political dissent.

Obviously this article, has horribly failed to take a look at Colombia, a country which is currently the most dangerous to be a trade unionist. In 2002 alone, 185 trade unionists were murdered in Colombia. Thousands upon thousands have historically been killed in Colombia due to the state's repressive measures, even such a event where 5,000 members of the Patriotic Union leftist party that was supported by the trade unionists were wiped out. The repression of leftist sympathy and practice still goes on a daily basis in Colombia as we speak, and the repression has only increased (more unionist deaths, more political prisoners) as the Uribe administration continues on.

In Peru hundreds were wounded and four killed, and another hundred were arrested due to protests against the Free-Trade Agreement with the U.S.

In El Salvador where people were planning to attend a forum that was going to talk about the attempt of the state to privatize water utilities, 400 Salvadorans were attacked by police firing rubber bullets and the ever casual, tear gas. More interesting , or yet, ironic in this case is that the Salvadoran state committed the repression based on a Decree modeled on the USA Patriot Act!

The claim that Cuba represses nearly all forms of political dissent really has no basis in that "dissident" movements like the Women in White are casually protesting for the release and recognition of their imperialist spy husbands without meeting any form of repression from the Cuban state. This includes well known imperialist paid "advocates" like Paya & Roque who have even been proven to say that they wouldn't mind the "Yankees invading". Apart from that Cubans are free to say what they wish, even something as "fuck Castro". (Peter Ripley's Conversations with Cuba, which documents all forms of opposing complaints towards the regime and revolution)



The end result is that Cubans are systematically denied basic rights to free expression, association, assembly, privacy, movement, and due process of law.

How can that be?

When the Cuban state structure relies immensely on most of these things?

When the National Assembly is made up by working-class Cubans who are openly saying what they think? (Whereas in the U.S. the Congress has repressed and arrested protesters for expressing their views)

When students at universities are openly asking questions to what the capitalist press considers "high officials" in the Cuban state like Ricardo Alarcon?

Where is the repression of movement and dissident expression for Cuban "independent" journalists that are posting on blogs their opposite views?


Legal and Institutional Failings

Cuba’s legal and institutional structures are at the root of rights violations. Although in theory the different branches of government have separate and defined areas of authority, in practice the executive retains control over all levers of power.

Wrong.

Like I said before, the state is controlled and wielded by the Cuban working-class. From municipal, to provincial to national :

Here's a outline of the "executive" which is made up again, by the working-class of Cuba which contains a wide range of diversity (race, sex, age, education level, etc) with the majority of it being members for the first time.


Assembly of People's Power is invested with the following powers:

a) deciding on reforms to the Constitution according to that established in Article 137;

b) approving, modifying and annulling laws after consulting with the people when it is considered necessary in view of the nature of the law in question;

c) deciding on the constitutionality of laws, decree-laws, decrees and all other general provisions;

d) revoking in total or in part the decree-laws issued by the Council of State;

e) discussing and approving the national plans for economic and social development;

f) discussing and approving the state budget;

g) approving the principles of the system for planning and the management of the national economy;

h) approving the monetary and credit system;

i) approving the general outlines of foreign and domestic policy;

j) declaring a state of war in the event of military aggression and approving peace treaties;

k) establishing and modifying the political-administrative division of the country pursuant to that established in Article 102;

l) electing the president, vice president and secretary of the National Assembly;
m) electing the president, the first vice president, the vice presidents, the secretary, and the other members of the Council of State;

n) approving, at the initiative of the president of the Council of State, the first vice president, the vice presidents and the other members of the Council of Ministers;
o) electing the president, vice presidents and other judges of the People's Supreme Court;

p) electing the attorney general and the deputy attorney generals of the Republic;
q) appointing permanent and temporary commissions;

r) revoking the election or appointment of those persons elected or appointed by it;
s) exercising the highest supervision over state and government bodies;

t) keeping informed and evaluating and adopting pertinent decisions on the reports on the rendering of accounts submitted by the Council of State, the Council of Ministers, the People's Supreme Court, the Office of the Attorney General of the Republic and the Provincial Assemblies of People's Power.

u) revoking those provisions or decree-laws of the Council of State and the decrees or resolutions of the Council of Ministers which are contrary to the Constitution or the law;

v) revoking or modifying those resolutions or provisions of the local bodies of People's Power which encroach on the Constitution, the laws, the decree-laws, the decrees and other provisions issued by a higher body, or those which are detrimental to the interests of other localities or the general interests of the nation;

w) granting amnesty;

x) calling for the holding of a referendum in those cases provided by the Constitution and others which the Assembly considers pertinent; y) establishing its ruler and regulations;

z) all other powers invested by this Constitution.





The courts, which lack independence, undermine the right to fair trial by severely restricting the right to a defense.

I suggest you read up on Cuban lay judges. Which, really can't be anymore independent and fair than you could possibly get, which is far more than I could say regarding the case of the Cuban 5. Where is the incarceration of known terrorists like Luis Posada Carriles and Orlando Bosch?



Political Imprisonment
In July 2007 the Cuban Commission for Human Rights and National Reconciliation, a respected local human rights group, issued a list of 240 prisoners who it said were incarcerated for political reasons. The list included the names of 12 peaceful dissidents who had been arrested and detained in the first half of 2006, five of whom were being held on charges of “dangerousness.” Of 75 political dissidents, independent journalists, and human rights advocates who were summarily tried in April 2003, 59 remain imprisoned. Serving sentences that average nearly 20 years, the incarcerated dissidents endure poor conditions and punitive treatment in prison.

While the number of political prisoners has decreased in the last year, this decrease cannot be attributed to leniency or policy change on the part of the government. The political prisoners who were released had already served out their full sentences. In September 2007, approximately 30 activists were arrested and held for 24 hours. According to one of the released prisoners, Jorge Luis Garcia Perez—who was released from prison in May 2007 after serving out a 17-year sentence—the prisoners endured beatings, strip searches, and threats of future arrest.

U.S. has for years now supported these reactionaries by sending millions of dollars to organize them. A support which is usually backed by USAID, the same agency that funneled millions of dollars to Venezuela's democratic opposition during April 2002 (You know Carmona and Fedecamaras and such that completely removed the democratic institution in Venezuela).:rolleyes:

On top of this, none of these 75 individuals had a paid work, they lived off the U.S. support which generally made them gain small fortunes. Even the right-wing Miami Herald, which has said itself, that it is under the paycheck of the State Department, admits that "journalists" in Cuba have been payed by the U.S.



Access to information via the internet is also highly restricted in Cuba. In late August 2006 the dissident and independent journalist Guillermo Fariñas ended a seven-month hunger strike in opposition to the regime’s internet policy. He began the strike after the Cuban authorities shut down his email access, which he had been using to send dispatches abroad describing attacks on dissidents and other human rights abuses.

The FPM has rounded up this very well:


Cuba is a third world country, and a former colony. These two obstacles are enough to limit the development – let alone internet access – of most similar countries. But on top of that, Cuba also faces a decades long blockade enforced upon it – against the will of almost the entire world – by the U.S. government.

The U.S. blocked Cuba’s access to the internet completely until 1994. The U.S. has also refused to allow Cuba to connect to the internet by laying fiber optic cable from the island to Florida, forcing it to instead rely on slow and extremely expensive satellite connections. As a result of all of this, Cuba doesn’t have the bandwith required to meet its needs.

But despite these problems and limitations, the country has been steadily working to make internet access available to all its citizens for years.

Computer courses are included in the education process in Cuba from first grade on (while students lack even desks in neighboring Dominican Republic!). There are 26 computer schools across the country, which are attended by 40,000 students free of charge. There is also a Computer Sciences University, which is attended by 8,000 students, again totally free of change.

There are more than 600 “Computer Clubs,” which anyone, regardless of age or occupation, can join. This allows everyone a chance to learn about and access computers and the internet.

Doctors, journalists, scientists and artists also have access to computers and the internet in their places of work.

Beyond this, steps are being taken every day to allow more and more people access.

Quite a feat for a country under constant attack and isolation! Furthermore, the internet censorship that the RSF bemoans doesn’t even exist!

Even sources hostile to the Cuba revolution concede that there is no internet censorship in Cuba. CNN admitted as much in an April 11, 2000 article (“Cuba’s internet elite emerges,” CNN.com), writing “granted, the government does not censor, filter or -- it appears -- survey [internet] traffic.”



Freedom of assembly is severely restricted in Cuba and political dissidents are generally prohibited from meeting in large groups. This was evident in mid-September 2006 during the 14th summit of the Non-Aligned Movement in Havana, when the Cuban government issued a ban on all gatherings that might damage “the image” of the city.

The image seems reasonable regarding the fact that the last time these reactionaries were allowed they were praising th U.S. Platt amendment which basically made Cuba a neocolony! Aside from this these U.S. lackeys are a walking representation (wearing U.S. army badges) of U.S. imperialism.



Prison Conditions
Prisoners are generally kept in poor and abusive conditions, often in overcrowded cells. They typically lose weight during incarceration, and some receive inadequate medical care. Some also endure physical and sexual abuse, typically by other inmates and with the acquiescence of guards.


Gee, you know what..this sounds like the general conditions of most prisons.
Thank you, for that already known fact about worldwide prisons.

Here's a quick summary made by one of the Venceremos Brigade that went to Cuba in 1988:



Visiting a women's prison reinforced the socialist objectives of creating humane conditions everywhere. Inmates are allowed the right to work and earn salary. Bankbooks are issued to keep record of their earnings. A marriage pavilion allows the women to bring in husbands or boyfriends for conjugal visits. Even penal leaves are allowed to visit a sick child. A mother may go home for a year, then come back and finish her time.
In touring the prison, we noticed its dining hall had tablecloths and beds in cells had attractive covers. There was a beauty parlor, sewing room, library, pharmacy and medical facilities. Noticeable in the library collection were the autobiographies of Angela Davis and Malcolm X, and also the Case of Dred Scott and the History of the Black Struggle in America. The finale of the prison visit was the presentation of the most fabulous musical imaginable, filled with vibrant talent, gorgeous costumes, and the enthusiastic backup audience of fellow inmates who roared approval along with the Brigadistas.



Political prisoners who denounce poor conditions of imprisonment or who otherwise fail to observe prison rules are frequently punished with long periods in punitive isolation cells, restrictions on visits, or denial of medical treatment. In October 2006, Juan Carlos Herrera Acosta, who was sentenced to 20 years in prison following the government’s 2003 crackdown on dissidents, was beaten and placed in a cell infested with rats and insects after demanding the right to telephone his family. Some political prisoners have carried out long hunger strikes to protest abusive conditions and mistreatment by guards.

And this is said despite the fact that "political prisoners" have been known to even themselves claim that they had unrestricted access to literature, stayed in excellent health and stoutness after their release, even after their wives and supporters were denouncing the "horrible conditions"!

Abu Ghraib ring a better bell?

[lombas]

T
Prison Conditions
Prisoners are generally kept in poor and abusive conditions, often in overcrowded cells. They typically lose weight during incarceration, and some receive inadequate medical care. Some also endure physical and sexual abuse, typically by other inmates and with the acquiescence of guards.


I agree with the comrade above that this is the reality in most prisons in the world.

Might be a very easy way of refuting it, but it's a fact.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Comrade trinitario has done a great job refuting that slander. If you have any more specific questions you can ask them here, and I'll do my best to answer them. It's hard for me to post a lot right now as my internet access is spotty at best, and I'm working with an EEE Pc which is only a few inches long.

[BobKKKindle$]

Like I said before, the state is controlled and wielded by the Cuban working-class.

Cuba is a workers state, because capitalist property relations have been abolished. However, Cuba is not a healthy workers state, because the original revolution was not led by the working class, and Cuba has, since the collapse of the Soviet Union, suffered prolonged economic isolation. This has led to bureaucratic degeneration - although not to the same extent as in other states, such as the "People's Democracies" of Eastern Europe. This requires a political revolution, to expand the power of the working class.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Thats a common, but nonetheless incorrect analysis. The Cuban revolution was made by the toilers. Don't forget the revolution was won with a general strike as the final blow!

There are a handful of bureaucrats (which have grown out of Cuba's isolation and imperialist encirclement), but they've been kept in check. The working class remains the ruling class in Cuba, and that's demonstrated by things like the Ochoa incident and the first and second Escalante affairs.

[Vanguard1917]

There are a handful of bureaucrats (which have grown out of Cuba's isolation and imperialist encirclement), but they've been kept in check. The working class remains the ruling class in Cuba, and that's demonstrated by things like the Ochoa incident and the first and second Escalante affairs.


There's no workers' control over the Cuban economy and there's no workers' control over the Cuban state. But the workers are still the ruling class? How exactly?

[BobKKKindle$]

Thats a common, but nonetheless incorrect analysis. The Cuban revolution was made by the toilers. Don't forget the revolution was won with a general strike as the final blow!I disagree. When Castro first came to power, he did not profess any support for Socialism - and, in interviews with the American press, he actually made comments which suggested he was hostile to Socialism at that stage. He only changed his views after American opposition to the nationalization of enterprise (especially the sugar industry, which as an important American asset) and redistribution of land pushed him towards the Soviet Union, and thereafter Cuba became part of the Soviet bloc. If the American government had approached Castro in a different way, Cuba might be a very different place today.


There's no workers' control over the Cuban economy and there's no workers' control over the Cuban state. But the workers are still the ruling class? How exactly?What you suggest is not true - Cuban workers elect delegates to the national assembly and these delegates are subject to recall at any time during their term of office, so they can be replaced if workers feel they need a new delegate to fight for their interests. It is not necessary to be a member of the Communist Party to run for office, which allows ordinary people to be elected, if they are trusted by the community. By law, there must be at least 2 candidates standing in every constituency. Even if all this were not true, however, this would not mean that workers do not comprise the ruling class - because all property is nationalized, capitalist relations have been abolished, and so it makes no sense to speak of any bourgeoisie, because the bourgeoisie is defined as a class by it's ownership of private property. Workers are a ruling class, and there is no exploited class, only hostile imperialist powers which aim to undermine the achievements of the Cuban revolution. As we enter a new era of Imperialist war, the revolutionary defense of Cuba is a pressing need for all Socialists.

[Vanguard1917]

What you suggest is not true


Come on. It is the truth that those who possess real political power in Cuba are not subjected to democratic workers' control.



Even if all this were not true, however, this would not mean that workers do not comprise the ruling class - because all property is nationalized, capitalist relations have been abolished, and so it makes no sense to speak of any bourgeoisie, because the bourgeoisie is defined as a class by it's ownership of private property. Workers are a ruling class, and there is no exploited class, only hostile imperialist powers which aim to undermine the achievements of the Cuban revolution. As we enter a new era of Imperialist war, the revolutionary defense of Cuba is a pressing need for all Socialists.


Nationalised property does not mean that workers are in control. That's a Stalinist prejudice which is absent in the Marxist understanding of workers' rule.

[BobKKKindle$]

Nationalised property does not mean that workers are in control. That's a Stalinist prejudice which is absent in the Marxist understanding of workers' rule.Nationalized property does not mean that workers possess political power, yes. It is possible for a bureaucracy to seize control of the state apparatus. This is called bureaucratic degeneration. However, if bureaucratic degeneration has taken place, that does not mean that a new ruling class has emerged - class is not defined in terms of political influence or the control of institutions, but in terms of one's relation to the means of production. Workers are still the ruling class, because there is no private property in Cuba - and so the bourgeoisie does not exist. Overcoming bureaucratic degeneration requires a political revolution, to restore political power to the working class. Trotsky explained in "The Revolution Betrayed' why the Stalinist bureaucracy should not be considered as a ruling class:


Classes are characterized by their position in the social system of economy, and primarily by their relation to the means of production. In civilized societies, property relations are validated by laws. The nationalization of the land, the means of industrial production, transport and exchange, together with the monopoly of foreign trade, constitute the basis of the Soviet social structure. Through these relations, established by the proletarian revolution, the nature of the Soviet Union as a proletarian state is for us basically defined.

The attempt to represent the Soviet bureaucracy as a class of “state capitalists” will obviously not withstand criticism. The bureaucracy has neither stocks nor bonds. It is recruited, supplemented and renewed in the manner of an administrative hierarchy, independently of any special property relations of its own. The individual bureaucrat cannot transmit to his heirs his rights in the exploitation of the state apparatus. The bureaucracy enjoys its privileges under the form of an abuse of power It conceals its income; it pretends that as a special social group it does not even exist. Its appropriation of a vast share of the national income has the character of social parasitism. All this makes the position of the commanding Soviet stratum in the highest degree contradictory, equivocal and undignified, notwithstanding the completeness of its power and the smoke screen of flattery that conceals it.Arguing that a bureaucracy can constitute a new ruling class is a rejection of the Marxist analysis of class - because it discards "relation to the means of production" as a key criterion in favor of ill-defined and subjective "power".

He also wrote that:


The overthrow of the Bonapartist caste will, of course, have deep social consequences, but in itself it will be confined within the limits of political revolution.

Aren't you a Trotskyist?


Come on. It is the truth that those who possess real political power in Cuba are not subjected to democratic workers' control.How, then, do you respond to my brief summary of the Cuban electoral system? How is this not democratic.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

I disagree. When Castro first came to power, he did not profess any support for Socialism - and, in interviews with the American press, he actually made comments which suggested he was hostile to Socialism at that stage. This demonstrates the reason to judge things by their content and not their labels. Here we have a comrade dismissing a revolution because it didn't break out the hammer and sickle early enough. In another thread, we have folks praising a capitalist party because it administers the capitalist state under the red flag. They're both symptoms of the same problem.


He only changed his views after American opposition to the nationalization of enterprise (especially the sugar industry, which as an important American asset) and redistribution of land pushed him towards the Soviet Union, and thereafter Cuba became part of the Soviet bloc. If the American government had approached Castro in a different way, Cuba might be a very different place today.This is a common claim of bourgeois historians, but it's simply not true. Castro was a communist (of the utopian variety) going back to his earlier days. When he was in prison after the Moncada assault, he was reading books by Marx and Lenin. Raul was a member of the communist party, and Che was a committed communist -- they were both leaders of the revolution. Cienfuegos also had a history of revolutionary politics. "History will absolve me" reads as a political program for revolution.

Of course the toiling masses had to be won over to socialism, and this was done through the revolution itself. They learned in the course of struggle that they couldn't overthrow imperialist domination and transform society as they wanted to unless they overthrew the exploiting class and took control themselves. If anything, this makes the revolution more genuine and organic than most others. It was a true product of class struggle.

And again, worker involvement can't be ignored. It was a general strike that finally brought down Batista.


Come on. It is the truth that those who possess real political power in Cuba are not subjected to democratic workers' control.Sorry comrade, but your assertions are trumped by cold hard fact. Not only are officials subject to recall, it actually happens fairly often. In some parts of the island, officials are regularly recalled. I suggest reading "Cuba: Dictatorship or Democracy" for more on that (though that book is limited by the time period in which it was written).

Not to mention that elected officials maintain their regular jobs and receive no special privileges. Even full time officials receive regular workers' wages.


Nationalised property does not mean that workers are in control. That's a Stalinist prejudice which is absent in the Marxist understanding of workers' rule.When the bourgeoisie is overthrown and capitalist property relations are overturned (by taking the means of production into public ownership and instituting a planned economy controlled by the toilers), that represents a gain, even if a bureaucracy is able to push the workers out of political power (as has happened in Viet Nam and DPRK; but not Cuba).


There's no workers' control over the Cuban economy and there's no workers' control over the Cuban state.Oh, but there is. The economy and state are administered by workers through People's Power, the mass organizations, the unions, etc. Things are not decided from above by some handful of evil 'Castroites' in a back room, but instead throughout the whole population. That's why their are elections and referendums, regular meetings at the local, provincial and nation levels, regular meetings of the unions and mass organizations (e.g. the Cuban Federation of Women), workplace meetings, etc.

[chebol]

BobKindles is half right - and Vanguard 1917 is wrong.
Every single member of the government of Cuba is elected and is subject to recall by their electorate.

However, BobK continues to peddle the same bulllshit about Castro and how the revolution was made. The point about the general strike is correct -it was the July 26 Movement's (and Fidel's) overarching strategy. And fidel was a socialist even when a youth. He became a marxist slghtly later, but before Raul, and was responsible for making Raul a marxist (still years before the revolution).

His decision not make that public was tactical, and it paid off.

I'm also somewhat surprised that BobK links to the UK SWP, as their position is deffernt to his on Cuba. The are, after all, State Caps, and reality has little to do with their analysis of Cuba.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Yeah, I've talked to him about that via PM. He also understands why communists supported the Red Army in Afghanistan, cutting against Cliffite nonsense. I believe he supports it because it is the most visible party in the UK, though I'll let him clarify if he wants.

[BobKKKindle$]

However, BobK continues to peddle the same bulllshit about Castro and how the revolution was made. The point about the general strike is correct -it was the July 26 Movement's (and Fidel's) overarching strategy. And fidel was a socialist even when a youth. He became a marxist slghtly later, but before Raul, and was responsible for making Raul a marxist (still years before the revolution).

Why the aggression, chebol? Let's just have an intelligent discussion - no need for insults. Anyway, regarding the issue of the strike, although it is true that a general strike did coincide with Castro's seizure of power, this strike was economic - workers were pushing for increased wages and improvements in their working conditions - not for a change in the way society was organized, and so just because a strike took place, this does not mean that workers had a developed class consciousness, or that the revolution was always socialist. There is also little evidence to suggest that Castro always had socialist views - Castro planned to stand as a candidate for the "Ortodoxo" party in the 1952 elections, which never took place, due to Batista's military coup. Moreover, upon coming to power, Castro said that:


"Our revolution is neither capitalist nor communist! ... Capitalism sacrifices the human being, communism with its totalitarian conceptions sacrifices human rights. We agree neither with the one nor with the other ... Our revolution is not red but olive green. It bears the colour of the rebel army from the Sierra Maestra". (Fidel Castro, May 21st. 1959)

These examples suggest that Castro did not become a committed Socialist until some time after he had seized power.

[chebol]

No personal aggression comrade, merely aggressively disagreeing with your ideas.

You seriously need to do some real research on Cuban history. The general strike did not simply "coincide" with the victory of the J26M - it was an integral part of their strategy. They had 30, 000 members and over 300, 000 close supporters (see Armando Hart's "Aldabonazo" for a bit of an eye-opener).

The first attempt at a general strike was around the Moncada attack, and there were two more failed attempts before January 1959. For another view on the internal dynamics of the revolution, try Julia Sweig's "Inside the Cuban Revolution" ...

And if you'd done ANY decent research into Fidel, you'd know that he was a socialist and a marxist well before Moncada. He made tactical and strategic decisions about the explicit politics of his movement based upon the political climate of the times (and yes, he was not only a socialist, but a marxist, when he planned to run for the Ortodoxos)...

Like I said, go do some research before spouting nostrums.

[Vanguard1917]

The political elite in Cuba is not subject to democratic, workers' control. This is a simple fact.


When the bourgeoisie is overthrown and capitalist property relations are overturned (by taking the means of production into public ownership and instituting a planned economy controlled by the toilers), that represents a gain, even if a bureaucracy is able to push the workers out of political power (as has happened in Viet Nam and DPRK; but not Cuba).


But the workers in Stalinist societies did not possess political power because they also did not possess any power over economic life. Yes, capitalist property relations were removed and property was nationalised. But an economy commanded by a bureaucratic elite is not a workers' economy - it's not an 'economy controlled by the toilers'.

Nationalised property relations do not equal socialistic property relations. The latter depends on active workers' management and control of economic life.


Arguing that a bureaucracy can constitute a new ruling class is a rejection of the Marxist analysis of class - because it discards "relation to the means of production" as a key criterion in favor of ill-defined and subjective "power".

I agree that the bureaucracy in Stalinist societies can't be considered a 'class'. Like Trotsky points out in Revolution Betrayed, the bureaucracy in the USSR was a ruling caste - a 'commandin stratum' whose 'appropriation of a vast share of the national income has the character of social parasitism.'

But Trotsky was wrong to claim that the bureaucracy had merely a parasitic affect in Stalinist societies, as though it was a sickness in an otherwise healthy body. In reality, the rise of the bureaucracy was a product of the disappearence of workers' power in the USSR and the emergence of a new bureaucratically-ruled social system.

It's worth noting that Trotsky's views on Stalinism were always evolving. Although it's true that he defended the USSR right until the end of his life, it was with less and less conviction. From the notes that he wrote in 1940, shortly before his assassination, we see that he was moving away from the idea that the Soviet Union was somehow more progressive than the capitalist powers. Instead, he began to see it merely as the lesser evil, which should be defended against Western aggression because imperialism is the main enemy:

'When Italy attacked Ethiopia... I was fully on the side of the latter, despite the Ethipian negus for whom I have no sympathy. What mattered was to oppose imperialism's seizure of this new territory. In the same way now I decisively oppose the imperialist camp and support independence for the USSR, despite the negus in the Kremlin.'

In similar spirit, we should fully support Cuba against all imperialist aggression. But that does not mean that we need to have to have any sympathy for the ruling caste in Havana.

[chebol]

In similar spirit, we should fully support Cuba against all imperialist aggression. But that does not mean that we need to have to have any sympathy for the ruling caste in Havana.

Which shows you know everything about theory and nothing about Cuba.

Shame really.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Nationalised property relations do not equal socialistic property relations. The latter depends on active workers' management and control of economic life.So you're just going to ignore everything I said about the way the Cuban state is administered and keep shouting the same thing over and over, without even attempting to back it up?

What's the point of discussing the issue then? You've obviously come to your position sin facts, and apparently intend to cling to it in spite of them.

[Awful Reality]

Whomever wrote this seems to have forgotten about Patriot Act America.

Political imprisonment? Check.
Poor Prison Conditions? Check.
Torture? Check.
Oppression of the press? Check (Rupert Murdoch essentially owns all information in America).
Travel Restrictions? Check. (http://www.cuba.com/Cuba/index.cfm?objectID=0B50CE78-C09F-22F2-195E59AF1ED0660A)
Excellent healthcare and education? No.

[Andy Bowden]

I'm not saying it doesn't exist/Isn't possible, but what examples are there of Cuban politicians being recalled from their positions by Cuban workers?

[chegitz guevara]

Thats a common, but nonetheless incorrect analysis. The Cuban revolution was made by the toilers. Don't forget the revolution was won with a general strike as the final blow!

Not only that, but in the immediate post-Batista period, it was worker actions that pushed the revolution to grow more and more radical, as they seized control of workplaces.

My Trotskyist brethren too often look at Russia as a model that most be followed to a "t," rather than one path among many. Lenin wrote that every revolution will make its own way, there is no blueprint for the revolution. Those who claim to be Leninists would do well to remember this.

Cuba's revolution is distorted and deformed not by original sin, but by proximity to the world's greatest imperialist power. It is a state under siege, one which must guard against constant terrorist attack and the threat of invasion.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

I'm not saying it doesn't exist/Isn't possible, but what examples are there of Cuban politicians being recalled from their positions by Cuban workers?

As I already said, in certain parts of Cuba it's been regular practice. In a part of Havana several people in a row were recalled a few years back.

I don't have time to find a source right now I have to leave for work in about 30 seconds. I believe "Cuba: Dictatorship or Democracy" covers it, if I'm not mistaken.. there are others too of course.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Here's a source documenting the right to recall and example of it being used in 1987: http://books.google.com/books?id=tFQ7bVuGkBsC&pg=PA124&lpg=PA124&dq=%22right+to+recall%22+in+cuba+havana&source=web&ots=D4Yu1gm_Aq&sig=8rPvmaX0PkGjYyKVBvmydjRqhbA&hl=en (bottom of the page and top of the next page). It comes complete with an argument that the right of recall is somehow anti-democratic because it is claimed, it benefits the PCC.