Re: [Marxism] On Cubaphilia

[Courtney Smith <cleighs@xxxxxxxxx>]

I thank you for pointing out areas of my knowledge that need to be
broadened.  I will look into Cuban elections.  But I personally find this
whole disagreement hinges, to a certain extent, upon of interpretation.
Just as Daniel Pipes can look at facts about the Russian Revolution and come
up with a bunch of nonsense, we can look at them and find something utterly
inspiring.  Facts do not speak for themselves, unfortunately.  Just because
there are elections does not mean there is a sufficient degree of democracy
(I read a great article from Inter Press Service that reported on a study
that stated the oldest democracies actually had weaker freedoms, such as
freedom of the press - hello, US!).  As people who live in the "greatest
democracy in the world," we are all too familiar with what a sham elections
can be.  You can look to elections to prove your point and I can look to
them to prove my own - there is a point at which people have to agree to
disagree.  Figures and facts are not always as they appear and it may be you
are correct.  But, the idea that people vote for the same leader for 50
years until he essentially dies does not sound democratic to me.  It sounds
very stale and a situation that I know angers younger revolutionaries who
feel they have no say because people in their 80s are still running the
state.

I do not foresee being turned around by a Stalinist ruling party to believe
that Cuba is a paradise of democratic discussion and decision making.  Five
party congresses in roughly 25 years (to 1997) does not inspire me to
believe that the grassroots are influencing policies, more like they are
implementing them.  But, to somehow "blame" this on Castro or any
individuals is not fair and I do not think that way.  They had to respond to
extraordinary circumstances - just as Lenin and others did in Russia.
Temporary measures in Russia, while holding out for the world revolution,
were not appropriate for long-term governance.  And one has to operate on
the assumption that one will win, so it was absolutely right to make the
hard decisions that the early USSR had to make.  But at a certain point one
has to reconcile oneself to failure.  It's not the fault of any one person
or party - there were huge forces against the success of a socialist
revolution in Cuba.  I'm sure the ridigity of my position is not
significantly more than yours even if I do not know all that I wish I did.
The thousands of things I must know, the millions of books I must read will
always weigh upon my mind and no one ought to be penalized or mocked for
trying to work things out.  We weren't born Marxist theoreticians after all
and we all must continually overcome our socialization.  There are reasons
there is an IST and other groupings - it's because we don't all agree on
important questions.  There is surely something between support for Cuba as
a socialist state and resembling the ideas of the bourgeoisy reactionaries
in Miami.  It's not prudent to go around screaming, "it's a dictatorship,"
but it's certainly not helpful to see things that aren't there.

Agricultural practices, ways of organizing health care etc. can be seen for
the wonder they are without feeling obligated to defend a fundamentally
top-down situation, formed by historical conditions.  I unswervingly support
Cuba against intervention, political, economic and military, aimed at
forcing some other kind of government on it.  Against U.S. imperialism or
any other imperialism, one must side with Cuba and stand for the
self-determination of the Cuban people.  But just as we have criticisms of
Hamas, for instance, we cannot hold them back unless the situation requires
we stand firmly and unequivocally with them - such as the situation in Gaza
when picking apart Hamas was not the thing to do. I think the rise of
left-of-center parties and uptick in struggle across Latin America combined
with the Castros' impending deaths may create a situation in which people
can revamp their embattled island.  I follow with great interest that which
is going on now.  Cuba has proven that it is amazingly resilient and I don't
expect Cubans to simply sit on their hands as things change all around
them.  A dynamic situation in such a regional context, where challenging US
hegemony is not a one-player game, will hopefully bring positive changes.



in reply to:

"Guerrillas do not a workers' revolution or a workers' state make.
 Period... For it to have been a workers' revolution it would have required
the creation of formal institutions of working-class rule, such as existed
in the Paris Commune or the Russian Revolution?real decision-making bodies
directly elected and subject to instant recall."

Ahh, nothing like rigid schema.

Paraphrasing Che: "Either Marxism or a caricature of Marxism." I leave the
reader to figure out where I place statements like the one above.

And, by the way, Courtney Smith needs to become a lot more familiar with the
Cuban electoral system.
________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: 
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40archives.econ.utah.edu