[Marxism] Cuban Assessment of Obama: Two Comments (Juxtaposed and Compared)

[Sukla Sen <suklasenp@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

The first one is an interview of a very senior and active politicain given
in the period intervening between Obama election and inauguratiion. The
second one is a blog by Fidel Castro - a semi-retired political figure who
nevertheless remains by far the most towering symbol, even if significantly
frayed, of Cuban revolution and whatever remains of it -  twelve days after
Obama inauguration. This is neither his first comment on the issue on hand
and also not his last. But a fairly detailed one.



Except to the "faithful", the significant difference in tone would be
clearly discernible.



The first one is visibly relaxed ("It's not going to be easy, chico"),
reasonably self-assured, and remarkably balanced - arguably fairly profound.
No overflow of emotions. No abuses. No entreaties. No inflated expectations.
Nor heartbreaks. No rancour. No extra frills.

*The election of Obama is undoubtedly a welcome and significant "change".
But does in no way go far enough to impact the US-Cuba relationship, at
least in the immediate future.*



The second one is a sort of sad testament of a quasi-defeat of an aging and
ailing once-legend. An admission, even if rather oblique, of quiet, but
striking, scaling down of the high ideals which once had informed the grand
and adventurous journey undertaken some half a century back.

Many of the words, in the midst of rather customary and valid critique of
predatory American imperialism, are laden with (perhaps rat
times unintended) deeper meanings. Deserves a close and careful look.



A more straightforward, even if rather surprising and highly welcome, is the
exposition:

*(Obama) includes the nuclear power plants among the sources of energy he
promises to hastily develop. These are already opposed by a high number of
people due to the high risks of accidents with disastrous
consequences for life, the atmosphere and human food. It is absolutely
impossible to prevent the occurrence of some of these accidents.*

*Modern industry has already contaminated all the seas on the planet with
the release of toxins, even without such accidental disasters.*

A clear and categorical rejection of nuke power!



Another striking observation:

*It is not my intention to blame the current President of the United States,
Barack Obama, for actions conducted by former presidents when he had not
been born or when he was just a 6-years-old boy born in Hawaii to a black
Moslem Kenyan fathers and a white Christian American mother. On the
contrary, this is an exceptional merit of the U.S. society and I am the
first to admit it.*



But far more intriguing, and almost heartbreaking, when coming from Fidel's
mouth:

*When Mr. Obama promises to make large investments to be self-reliant in
oil, despite the fact that his country is today the largest market in the
world, what could the future be of those countries whose main revenues come
from exporting that energy as many of them lack any other significant source
of income?*



*After the crisis, once the competition and the fight over the markets and
sources of employment is unleashed again, as it is usually the case among
those who are better off and more efficient in the monopoly of that
technology with sophisticated means of production, what possibilities will
be left to the not developed countries dreaming of industrialization?*

If the first portion is almost entreating in tone, the second part, *(a)fter
the crisis*, sees nothing but *the competition and the fight over the
markets and sources of employment is unleashed again.* Let alone any
explicit reference to any new dawn emerging at the end of the long and dark
tunnel, there is not even the slightest hint of that ever elusive dawn. Not
even any lament over it. The outcome is so much of a given.



And this is to be read together with:

*The U.S. House of Representatives with a Democratic majority launched the
extremely protectionist slogan of "buy US goods", to please the unions that
supported his campaign. This tramples on a basic principle
of the World Trade Organization, since every nation in the world, be they
big or small, dream of their development based on trading goods and
services; however, only the big and rich among them have the
privilege to survive to realize such dream.*

The world is defined in terms of "nations" - big and small, powerful and
weak, predator and victim - not even a mention of "class". But that apart:
the *dream* of the *small nations* *of their development based on trading
goods and services *is captured in the *basic principle of the World Trade
Organization.* And this has got to be defended as *the big and rich *are
brutally *trampling on *at* *evident cost to* *the* small *ones*.*



And the despondent mood of the piece is no doubt best captured in the line,
almost at the tailend: *As an old politician and fighter I commit no sin by
modestly exposing* (read: presenting and explaining)* these *(foreging)*
ideas.*



I/II.
http://72.14.235.132/search?q=cache:G2g6dTzmk98J:www.cubaresearch.info/node/11

II.
http://links.org.au/node/890

Sukla


      

________________________________________________
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