Rock Around The Blockade
‘I thought they were brilliant, very informative. They answered a lot of questions and impressed me with their intimate knowledge of the Cuban system…I wish I had told more people. It was illuminating.
Do it again!’
Layla, Manchester meeting
‘Last Saturday’s meeting was something that I will never forget … I am from Brazil and to hear Orlando Borrego speak about Cuba and Che was something incredible. For Latin Americans Che is not just a face on a flag, he is our hero.’
Farah, London meeting
From 21 February to 7 March 2008, Orlando Borrego, Jesus Garcia and Yoselin Rufin, representatives of three generations of the Cuban revolution, toured Britain with Rock around the Blockade (RATB) on the ‘Cuba: Socialism into the 21st Century’ speaking tour. They came to confront the lies about Cuba, drawing on their own experiences of the process of building socialism.
The tour reached an audience of 2,700 people in 11 cities, and membership of RATB has nearly trebled as a result. Following this success, RATB will expand its work: starting groups in new areas and holding regular organising meetings all over Britain. RATB is non-sectarian: all participants who support the aims of RATB are welcome to participate, speak, promote their views and sell literature at events.
RATB’s aims are: to campaign in support of the Cuban Revolution and Cuban socialism; to campaign against the US blockade and oppose any British government collaboration with it; to support the revolutionary democratic movements in Latin America and the Bolivarian Alternative of the Americas (ALBA); to oppose the US occupation of Guantanamo and demand the release of prisoners held there; to campaign for the freedom of the Cuban 5; and to support the Boycott Bacardi campaign. In all of our campaigning work we will be part of building a socialist movement in Britain. If you support these aims we urge you to come to an RATB meeting and get involved (see events listings page 14).
RATB owes a huge debt of gratitude to the three Cuban speakers, who inspired thousands of people while they were here with their revolutionary example.
Orlando Borrego is possibly the most distinguished contributor from Cuba’s revolutionary leadership to have spoken on tour in Britain. Many people who attended the tour were attracted by the chance to hear about the role he played in the revolution. However, they also heard in-depth discussions about socialist political economy and Che’s contribution to economic development in Cuba. Borrego’s contemporary links to the Bolivarian revolution in Venezuela gave a sense of the urgency of the contemporary struggle in Latin America.
During the tour Jesus Garcia’s exposition of Cuban democracy counteracted the lies and distortions found in both the bourgeois and left press. In a meeting in Glasgow, attended by 350 people, Garcia read aloud from a copy of Socialist Worker, newspaper of the Socialist Workers Party (SWP), denouncing its lies about Cuba, and expressing incredulity that people who call themselves socialists could write such reactionary propaganda. He said that in a sense the article was right: that in Cuba socialism is imposed from the top down, however not by an elite as the SWP makes out, but by the Cuban people, who are at the top of Cuba’s system of popular power. As he went on to explain, all elected representatives in Cuba are subject to the right of recall if they do not carry out the wishes of those who elected them, and they receive no special privileges for their political work. Garcia is especially qualified to answer critics who say there is no democracy in Cuba because he has been elected to the system of People’s Power since 1989, and was elected again to his municipal assembly in Cuba’s most recent elections in December.
As a young woman Yoselin Rufin could relate to the hundreds of young people who came to the tour. It was obvious that they felt comfortable asking her questions about everything from the Cuban political system to everyday life for a young woman in Cuba. Yoselin is a National Council member of the Cuban Federation of University Students, an organisation that played an active role in the revolutionary struggle preceding 1959. Today it is one of dozens of mass organisations represented in Cuba’s National Assembly. In 2007, at just 22 years of age, Yoselin became one of the youngest members of the Cuban Communist Party. She is a member of the government’s Permanent Commission for Candidacy, Social Prevention, Drugs and Recreation. She works as a teacher, so she was able to describe, based on first-hand experience, the progress of the Cuban education system, for example, reducing class sizes to 20 students per class in secondary schools and 15 in primary schools, despite the Special Period and the continuing effects of the blockade.
Trade union support
The speaking tour received substantial support from sections of the British trade union movement – both financially and in terms of publicity and providing venues for meetings. Sponsorship came from the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers (RMT), at national and branch level, and from branches of the Communication Workers Union (Manchester Combined Branch) and the National Union of Miners (North East area). The RMT also hosted a press conference and a formal reception for the Cubans in London. RATB intends to build on this link with the RMT, which was one of the first trade unions to cease financial contributions to the Labour Party.
Bob Crow, General Secretary of the RMT, spoke at the inaugural meeting of the tour at Bolivar Hall (part of the Venezuelan embassy), where people queued around the block to get in. Sharing the platform were the Cuban Ambassador, Rene Mujica Cantelar, and Felix Plasencia, Minister Counsellor of the Venezuelan Embassy in London, demonstrating the revolutionary links between contemporary Cuba and Venezuela. Bob Crow described the event as ‘a cherished day for our union’ and stated ‘The battle of ideas taking place in the world at the moment is one of global capitalism against the ideas of socialism… The reason we’re supporting this tour is that we believe what’s taking place in Cuba is the opposite of the battle of ideas that’s being pushed by imperialism, capitalism and big business … The reality is that a little island, being squeezed economically by the biggest power in the world, has, for 49 years, demonstrated that there’s a different world.’ He continued, ‘You can’t just be a communist, you’ve got to learn to be one. I’ve learnt a lot off a revolutionary here today and I feel sorry for those people that didn’t get involved in this tour because they said it might be too sectarian. I tell you what, the ones who make these tours sectarian are the ones that don’t want to get involved.’
Unfortunately, the sectarianism that Bob Crow referred to was a real obstacle to the tour. RATB has always been prepared to work with the Cuba Solidarity Campaign (CSC), but the CSC has tried to monopolise solidarity with Cuba. In the run-up to the tour the CSC ignored invitations from RATB to get involved in the speaking tour. At the CSC-organised Latin America 2007 conference Rob Miller, director of the CSC, prevented an RATB activist from handing out leaflets for the tour because he said RATB was in ‘competition’ with the CSC. As became clear from conversations with CSC local branch members, the CSC National Executive warned branches not to organise joint events with RATB as part of the tour, causing some that had initially shown enthusiasm to pull out.
The speaking tour attracted hundreds of young people to the main public events. In addition RATB held meetings at six universities, four schools and two youth groups to ensure that as many young people as possible could hear the Cubans speak. On Monday 3 March Yoselin Rufin and Jesus Garcia spoke to 70 people at Farnborough Sixth Form College, including 60 students who had returned to school in the evening to attend the meeting. Yoselin spoke about political representation of young people in Cuba, pointing out that there are four students in the newly elected 31-member Council of State. At Pimlico School in inner London 37 students attended an optional after-school meeting in their school library. Pimlico has just been turned into an ‘academy’, and a question was raised about the British government’s selling off of the education system. Yoselin recalled that, during the Special Period, students had proposed to the government that some families should make a financial contribution to the cost of university education, but discussions in the National Assembly concluded that free education was a non-negotiable right of all Cubans.
The popularity of the meetings and the high calibre of questions from the audience at every event show that British people are not just hungry for an alternative to capitalism, but also recognise that Cuba is building an alternative. The frenzied reporting from all sections of the British media that followed Fidel Castro’s decision not to seek re-election to Cuba’s Council of State showed how out of touch with reality mainstream ‘opinion formers’ and journalists actually are, and how desperate they are to tarnish Cuba’s example. However, the inspirational example of our three speakers spoke for itself: Borrego, with a life spent making sacrifices for the revolution, who still works as a government adviser on a salary of 650 pesos (approx £14) per month, and knows equally well how to make an audience laugh as how to debate the finer points of socialist economics. Jesus, an elected representative in Cuba’s democratic system and a strong critic within it, astounded by the lengths people will go to slander Cuba. And finally Yoselin, a young, educated woman, ready to defend the revolution ‘till my last breath’, as she said in one meeting.
In the closing speech of the tour, the Revolutionary Communist Group’s David Yaffe spoke about the need to recognise Cuba as the vanguard of anti-imperialist and socialist struggles. He encouraged people to join RATB and the RCG in the fight for a revolutionary movement.
The speaking tour exceeded all expectations. We are forever indebted to the Cuban comrades for their hard work and openness in speaking about their revolutionary experiences. At a time of increased attack on Cuba from the bourgeois media and imperialist politicians, solidarity with Cuba is more important than ever. The speaking tour proved that there is interest in political discussion, something that RATB intends to build on.
Our society is as unequal as ever. The Labour government presides over war, poverty, racism and corruption. The most important thing our Cuban comrades have shown us is that the power of capitalism can be challenged.
‘It’s very important that people know about Cuban reality… What people know is just propaganda… about how bad socialism is… It’s not true. I was born in Cuba and lived there for 28 years and I can say for a fact that socialism is a system that gives benefits to people… I believe that this tour will open minds, especially when you are bringing Cubans in and asking what the reality is.’
Rene, Newcastle meeting
INTERVIEW WITH ORLANDO BORREGO
FRFI: What were the changes that took place when Fidel Castro declined to stand for election to the post of President of the Council of State?
OB: The first point is that Fidel has not resigned. Due to health problems he considered that it was essential to pass on his responsibilities. This was done in a fundamentally democratic way with an election in the new assembly for the President of the Council of State and of the Council of Ministers.
I think this was an intelligent decision, so that he could use his time in a calmer manner to develop his ideas and make reflections that are of fundamental importance for the young, for the country and indeed for Latin America. He can now work with more efficiency than ever in this line, and honour his life-long working commitment to the Cuban people.
FRFI: Tell us about Raul Castro
OB: He is a very modest man and never allowed himself to be an object of publicity. However, we know of his long history as a communist militant since before Moncada [the attack on Moncada barracks in 1953] and he identified with Che Guevara for this reason. At Moncada he showed an outstanding attitude and distinguished himself even as a prisoner by striking down the rifle of one of the Batista guards, so saving a comrade.
Later in the Sierra Maestra he was an exceptional fighter and revealed his capacity after the landing of the Granma and the atrocious conditions that were faced by the revolutionaries. When they re-grouped at Five Palms (Cinco Palmeras) he was the only one who appeared with five rifles, whereas the majority of the others had lost their own. From this we have the famous saying ‘now we can win the war!’ Afterwards he was military chief of a column, on the eastern second front of the country. It is known that as a military chief he practically created a structure of preparatory government there, with schools and so on. He paid great attention to this task. In the armed forces he was very successful. Imperialism couldn’t beat us, and this, combined with his human qualities, guaranteed the future of the state.
One cannot speak of Raul simply in terms of his brother. He has his own definite merits, which the country recognises, and as a result he has now taken up the leadership. It’s clear that everyone thinks he will be successful in the future.
FRFI: Commentators outside Cuba have said that Raul shows a tendency to return to the use of capitalist elements in the economy.
OB: Well such commentators are misrepresenting matters throughout the world. Raul
Castro has demonstrated great initiative and a creative capacity which is very important at this stage. He has initiated very important organisational changes which do not challenge the principles of revolution, but strengthen its supreme object: to construct a socialist state which will enhance the welfare of the people. The organisational and economic changes that he brought about in the armed forces were very successful. Those who say he could return to the market economy don’t know Raul. For Raul, it is absolutely clear that to reach socialism we can’t use capitalist methods.
FRFI: Tell us about the deepening relations between Cuba and Venezuela.
OB: Chavez revealed that he has enthusiastically informed himself of Fidel’s and Che’s thoughts and has become the greatest of friends with Fidel. The Bolivarian revolution has called upon Cuba for support to consolidate the process. This project provides the possibility for wealthier Latin American states, for example Venezuela with its oil and other resources, to help the poorer ones. Cuba has given intense support to this project, in public health, education and its experience in almost all other areas. The collaboration between Cuba and Venezuela is centred on the ALBA project. Cuba has a ministry for Venezuelan relations to deal with the frequent meetings in many areas. Many important projects have been agreed for example in transport, railways, ports and harbours and so on, in the basic industries, in agriculture, all pursuing the dreams of Bolivar and Jose Marti.
US imperialism is trying to destroy this. As the project of reunion of countries, of Bolivar’s dreams, makes progress, imperialism won’t be able to dominate us in the same way as it used to. Now in Venezuela the Congress of the PSUV (United Socialist Party of Venezuela) is determining its fundamental political programme for the Bolivarian revolution and consolidating its political base. For Cuba the Bolivarian project is a definitive project for the future which, as I have said, was dreamed of by Jose Marti, Che and Fidel and this is what the people deserve.
FRFI: Is it possible to foresee which states will be the next to join ALBA? What are the next important steps for ALBA to take?
OB: It’s clear that some countries are definitely identified with ALBA: Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua and Bolivia. Ecuador is to a certain extent incorporated and President Correa wants to reinforce this collaboration. Argentina which is clearly not socialist, yet involved in progressive measures, has strong relations with Venezuela. Latin Americans are an optimistic people who have realised that the neo-liberal line and US policies are not correct and never will be. It is an economic system and form of government that leads to suffering and problems in Latin America. To the extent to which the people become more aware of this and they construct social organisations, they will be able to accelerate their entry into ALBA.
In my opinion the future offers great promise with the incorporation of more states, such as in the Caribbean, into ALBA which will receive great benefits of membership, especially through the creation of Petrocaribe [Venezuela sells cheap oil to Caribbean signatories]. Now as never before Latin America has a promising future, and we see more opportunities to solve its social and political problems.
FRFI: Can we turn to the question of the Battle of Ideas and its relation to the concept of the ‘new man’?
OB: The Battle of Ideas is a concrete expression of comrade Fidel. We’ve worked with it for many years, and it has great significance in that for a revolution to be socialist it needs a motor for permanent renewal of ideas, not to let them age with dogmas or allow them to become stale or out of date.
From the point of view of the economy it has a very important role. We can’t speak of political or cultural projects if there are no material resources to make them happen. The Battle of Ideas has extensively treated the question of linking revolution and resources, providing social solutions to the problems of the country. Its significance is that it’s impossible to think of socialism if we can’t also think of the new person in that society, as was observed by Che.
Perhaps the most important contribution in this respect is Che’s thought. In every moment of every important battle his understanding of economics involved a battle of ideas. It signifies a new awakening, a new motor, pushing forward the Cuban revolution. Discussion of the ‘new man’ is a serious matter in revolutionary Cuba, introducing novelty into the Cuban revolution that prevents paralysis or stagnation. In this respect we can talk of the introduction of computers and a beautiful result of the Battle of Ideas: taking computers to the mountains so that primary school children there can become informed of these developments.
The Battle of Ideas has been extended through international collaboration, I have often heard Chavez speaking of it, and Venezuela and other countries are developing ideas jointly to develop the revolution.
FRFI: One of the proposals in the draft programme of the PSUV concerns the planned economy. It says that the object is to neutralise the operation of the law of value within the economy. Can you tell us more about this and link it to Che’s influence on the Bolivarian revolution?
OB: I can speak about this since I have been involved in the discussion about the model or models that might be adopted by the Bolivarian economy. Socialism as a system is very young, 90 or perhaps 100 years, counting the experience of the Soviet Union of course. In attempts to perfect such a system there have been many arguments about the experiments to date, in Russia and up until today, including us in Cuba.
I was asked to support ‘Mission Che’ in Venezuela, because of my experience, and was asked last year to discuss this question in the Bolivarian Assembly. The Bolivarian revolution and Chavez are very concerned with the mechanism of the market, the laws of capital, which were misinterpreted and misused in the socialist states of Europe, and which can damage the economy of the Bolivarian republic.
Of course we rejected market criteria when asked. When consulted I always agreed with Che’s ideas, not because it was him but because they were always grounded in a scientific approach, an historical approach, and are decisive today in the world in helping to find the most efficient path towards socialism. Che was furious at the way the Soviet Union was moving towards a corruption of its socialist economic system and predicted in 1966 that the USSR and eastern Europe were returning to capitalism. This totally negative experience is fully understood by Chavez, he knows he cannot copy such models, use auto financing methods [as in the USSR], or simply copy other countries’ experiences, including those of Cuba.
In my book The way to Socialism [Rumbo al Socialismo Caracas 2006] – which I dedicated to Chavez on his presidential election victory of 2006 – I examine how Venezuela can deal with these problems and what Che thought about these things. The Bolivarian revolution has every possibility of taking advantage of the experience of all those countries that have fought for socialism. Nevertheless the case of Cuba is one where the state has remained firmly committed to defending socialism throughout its existence and Venezuela can use this experience in its own development.
FRFI: What is your evaluation of the speaking tour, and do you have a message for members of Rock around the Blockade?
OB: Well this was the most exhausting tour! We visited more than eight important cities and towns, London, Glasgow, Nottingham etc in each of which we held two or three meetings, some 15 to 20 altogether, and if we add the TV, radio and newspaper interviews that we gave, it was very intensive. I have never undertaken such an intense tour in any country!
This tour has given me great satisfaction, and the effort made has been very productive. The tour was built by a majority of young people, who were working with few resources, full of arguments and knowledge.
I always say that in such a tour as this where we are able to exchange ideas, to assess changes and developments in the world, aiming for a happier and more equal world, if we can clarify the ideas of only 10% of those we met, it will be a big achievement, and in this case I think we have achieved 100%.
I must congratulate the organisers of this tour for their hard work, the extraordinary programme they arranged. Almost all the meetings we had were full, some to overflowing with people unable to get in. I should also like to thank the Venezuelan and Cuban embassies for their support.
The tour had important results. As Cubans we thank you very much for the support received for Cuba, for supporting the Cuban 5, heroes unjustly imprisoned in the United States. I urge our comrades here in Britain – those of Rock around the Blockade – to continue their fight for unity, to become more effective. I hope that you can continue your activities with other comrades and from other countries.
The young people I toured with were very educated, very conscious, very revolutionary. If we can multiply these forces we will have completed the tasks we set ourselves.
‘It was particularly interesting to learn about how the Cuban system of government works and how members are elected. This was quite a revelation in light of the way our media only ever talks about dictatorship in Cuba.’
Michelle, Glasgow
JESUS GARCIA ON THE PARTY
The Cuban concept of ‘party’ is deeply rooted in Marti’s concept of the party [from Jose Marti, Cuban national hero in the struggle against Spanish colonialism, ed]. It is not a party as an electoral instrument, nor a party as a formal instrument for the ruling of society by one particular group. Marti decided that we needed one party for the ruling of the war, and after the war to develop the new republic. Following that concept, Fidel always tried to develop a different kind of unity among revolutionaries and when the revolution won there were three forces that had supported the revolution. These three forces immediately understood that it is necessary to unite in one political party. Our party was formed in that moment.
Why in Cuba after the revolution did the other parties disappear? It is very simple: they did not have social support. They were parties supported only by the Cuban bourgeoisie. The bourgeoisie either decided not to participate legally in Cuban political life or they left Cuba to become counter revolutionaries. They decided not to use the opportunities for participation that the Cuban revolutionary government gave from the first moment. As a result after 1959 only the three forces I spoke of remained: the Revolutionary Directorate, the Socialist Party and the 26 July Movement. After that they founded the Cuban Communist Party.
The role of this party now is the rule of society from the position of a political, ideological group. What does this mean? For instance, the decisions of the Communist Party are not obligatory for all people, even for Communist Party members, they are obligatory only in a political sense. If you disagree, the most that can happen is that you could be expelled from the Party, nothing more. The decisions of the Party are political decisions – decisions that the Party should try to enforce through the example of its militants, through creating conviction in the people, explaining why they have taken these decisions. This is different from decisions of the state that are obligatory for everyone, which are laws; if you disobey those you could be imprisoned.
Of course the Party has another quality: authority. This is based on the example of its members and on the fact that people know its decisions are taken after a wide process of discussion, not just including Party members. For instance, at the Fourth Congress of the Party held at the beginning of the Special Period, the CP put forward a document with proposals about the changes that needed to be introduced in our society. This document was discussed with the Cuban population first, and only after this participatory process was it presented and analysed at the Party Congress and agreed. As a result of this process, people not only believe in the Party, they also feel, in some sense, part of this Party even though they are not members.
Another important point is that the Party doesn’t stand in elections because in our system that is what we decided. Before 1993 the Party was head of the Candidacy Commission. After 1993 we decided that the Party would no longer be in this position.
DAVID YAFFE (RCG) ON BUILDING A SOCIALIST MOVEMENT
Cuba represents the vanguard in the long struggle ahead to create ‘another world’ – to build socialism. Cuba is in the vanguard of the world fightback against imperialism, having withstood the mightiest empire the world has ever seen for nearly 50 years. Cuba is in the process of building the most developed form of socialism that the world has experienced so far. That is why all real socialists and progressive people throughout the world give their solidarity and support to the Cuban revolution.
In imperialist Britain we can best consolidate our support for the Cuban revolution by beginning the process of building a new socialist movement here…
Throughout this tour the Cuban speakers have demonstrated Cuba’s vanguard role in the global struggle to build a more just and human world – a socialist one. How can we respond to them when no real movement against imperialism exists in this country? How do we account for our failure in this country to begin to take our place with the Cubans in this struggle for socialism? How can this situation be changed?
First we must recognise that we live in an imperialist country. Britain is a leading imperialist power and this is decisive in determining all the major economic and political developments in this country.
…As an imperialist nation Britain benefits from the super-exploitation and profits sucked out of the underdeveloped world. This allows the creation of privileged layers of the working class or a labour aristocracy bribed out of the super-profits of imperialism. This reality has had a very negative impact on the British labour movement – a movement which reflects the interests of the more privileged sections of the working class. Britain expresses this parasitism more than any other country of the world. Today Britain acts as an offshore banking centre for much of the world’s capital. The City of London is at the heart of this process.
Imperialism has enabled Britain to live well beyond its means… Labour’s justification for ‘humanitarian wars’ and its support for military intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan alongside the US is explicable in terms of the need for any bourgeois government in power to protect Britain’s vital global interests.
But the gains from imperialism are spread ever more unequally, so that inequality has rapidly grown and widespread poverty has remained throughout the more than 10 years of Labour governments… The poorer sections of the working class have no political representation in this country…
The political elites, no matter what government is in power, run capitalism in the interests of the large corporations and international banks. In Britain these political elites in government have become the supine agents of the City of London. The Labour Party is no exception to this – its leaders personify parasitic capitalism…
No socialist movement can be built in this country without a total break with the rotten imperialist and racist Labour Party. Opposing war in Iraq and Afghanistan means totally breaking with the Labour Party. Opposing racist immigration law and defending asylum seekers means totally breaking with the Labour Party. Opposing the increasing privatisation of the NHS and the state education system means totally breaking with the Labour Party.
To build a socialist movement in Britain we must support all those throughout the world resisting imperialism. To build a socialist movement in Britain we must stand in solidarity with socialist Cuba and the developing revolutionary democratic states in Latin America.
We must start now and build a new tradition that breaks with the sectarian attitudes in the British labour and left movement. It is no longer acceptable that some who call for solidarity with Cuba can, at the same time, call for a boycott of this speaking tour…
The latest global financial crisis, triggered by the downturn in the US housing market, threatens to halt the relentless expansion of credit that has been the driving force behind economic growth in the major capitalist countries over the last 60 years. This will have serious social consequences. In Britain the reactionary Labour government is preparing for this outcome by attacking the working class.
Labour is tightening further its brutal reactionary ‘welfare to work’ regime. It is cutting the wages of public sector workers. Attacks on our democratic rights to protest and organise will be strengthened. Increased surveillance and police powers will become the norm.
All these developments mean that time is not on our side. The decision to build a new socialist movement cannot be delayed.
From the Cubans we know that another world is possible – a socialist one. What can we do? If you are not in RATB join it today. If you are in RATB and not in a socialist organisation begin to work with the RCG today…
YOSELIN RUFIN
‘My impression is that young people in Britain are excluded from political life and, in most cases, social life. They are not an important priority for this government. Not everyone has the opportunity to study and to gain further knowledge. They can live however and wherever and no one cares. I think that in future projects, if you [RATB] organise another tour, the most important thing is for young people to be informed about what is happening in Cuba and the role of young people there. Young Cubans take decisions about things that affect them; 25% of the national assembly is made up of students of our universities.’
‘It helped me understand about Cuban elections and how they work, what the universities and health care were like. Even though it is a poor country, no one is starving. And there is a sense of community, no one is out for themselves. It’s really made me want to get to know more about what is happening in Latin America.’
Sandra, student, Liverpool meeting
What Fidel Castro said
Given the overwhelming and vitriolic response from the British media, it would have been easy to lose sight of the essential facts about Fidel Castro’s decision not to seek or accept re-election to Cuba’s Council of State.
On 19 February Fidel Castro, after being nominated and elected to the Cuban National Assembly, announced that he would neither ‘aspire to nor accept’ re-election as president of Cuba’s Council of State due to continuing health problems. It is important to note this was the appropriate time in Cuba’s electoral process for this decision to be made public. In July 2006 Fidel Castro had temporarily stepped down from most of his duties as head of the Council of State due to ill health.
On 24 February, the following Sunday, the new National Assembly was to elect the 31-member Council of State from among its members. ‘[I]t would be a betrayal to my conscience to accept a responsibility requiring more mobility and dedication than I am physically able to offer’ wrote Fidel in a letter published in Granma, the newspaper of the Cuban Communist Party. The vote at the National Assembly followed and Raul Castro was elected President of the Council of State (the de-facto President of Cuba).
During his recovery from the serious health complications of last year, Fidel Castro has been writing for Granma on diverse topics, from biofuels and the environment to the candidates in the US primaries. In his announcement in February he pledged to continue this role, drawing on a lifetime’s experience of revolutionary leadership: ‘My only wish is to fight as a soldier in the battle of ideas. I shall continue to write under the heading of “Reflections by comrade Fidel”. It will be just another weapon you can count on’.
Poisoned pens: abusing Castro and Cuba
‘Many people in the world not only lack freedom of thought but also the capacity to think, because it has been destroyed. Billions of human beings, including a large percentage of those living in developed societies, are told what brand of soda they should drink, what cigarettes they should smoke, what clothes and shoes they should wear, what they should eat and what brand of food they should buy. Their political ideas are supplied in the same way.’ Fidel Castro 1 June 2000, cited by Nelson P Valdes, Counterpunch, 17 March 2008.
When Fidel Castro wrote, ‘I will neither aspire to nor accept the position of President of the Council of State and Commander in Chief’ on 18 February 2008 it drew the predictable response of anticipation from the Miami counter-revolutionaries. President Bush declared: ‘The international community should work with the Cuban people to begin to build institutions that are necessary for democracy.’ The British government solemnly reiterated: ‘Our position on Cuba is a long-standing one, which is that we have always sought to encourage a peaceful transition to democracy in Cuba.’ It is to be expected that these contemporary representatives of the class that tried to ‘strangle Bolshevism at birth’ (Churchill) will use any opportunity to denigrate the Cuban revolution. Castro’s decision is revealing: the British media planned a deluge of misinformation. It is psychological warfare; a propaganda blockade. Their formulations are stereotypes intended to prevent thought and are repeated by what passes for the progressive and left media in Britain.
In 1897 William Randolph Hirst, owner of the New York Journal, sent a cable to his Havana correspondent, ‘You furnish the pictures and I’ll furnish the war.’ The picture was furnished and the US duly acquired Cuba.
The major British newspapers are controlled by monopoly corporations. The Independent is considered a liberal newspaper; its 20 February edition devoted seven pages to Castro’s decision not to stand for election. The Independent belongs to a group that owns 200 media titles and whose leading shareholder is Sir Tony O’Reilly, billionaire and former chief executive of the US food corporation Heinz. The main article sets the tone: ‘Castro is a relic of a vanished age and fossilised revolution,’ and proceeds to claim that ‘Castro’s regime holds large numbers of political prisoners, suppresses freedom of expression and otherwise tramples on human rights’. Does the writer of these words, Rupert Cornwell, provide any evidence to support these accusations? Has he ever attempted to research the substance or otherwise of these denunciations? No! A journalist who in other circumstances appears intelligent is obliged to parrot this. Does he have any shame?
In the same issue of The Independent Elizabeth Nash recounts her time in Havana working as a researcher for the Labour Party’s international department in 1979, under the standard heading ‘I shook hands – then sat though a nine-hour speech’; ‘To their [Cuban communists’] unease, I chummed up with fellow social democrats including the recently installed Grenadian prime minister Maurice Bishop, shortly to be assassinated after US troops invaded his island…’ Not one to let facts get in the way of her purpose (Bishop was killed before the US invaded and was a close ally of the Cuban revolution), Nash tells of meeting a Cuban who had heard of the Sandinistas’ overthrow of Somoza in Nicaragua and hoped that the same might happen in Cuba. This preposterous equation of Castro with Somoza is an insult to the Sandinistas who in 1979 and today look to Cuba and Castro for inspiration.
On The Independent’s comment pages the SWP’s humourist Mark Steel descended to the cliched heading ‘So, farewell, Fidel – but please don’t give a speech’, cue for canned laughter. Steel repeats criticisms of Cuba so commonplace as to be presumed factual: ‘It’s true that there’s no legal opposition permitted in the country, that independent trade unions are illegal, and the poor are kept away from areas where they might put off tourists.’ This no doubt satisfies his paymaster, but Steel reveals a disregard for Cuba that is politically inspired and serves a privileged class interest.
Ignorance compounded by arrogance
The Socialist Worker of 1 March 2008 felt compelled to condense as many of the caricatures of Cuba as could possibly be got into one article. Thus we have ‘While ordinary Cubans did not play much of a role in the 1959 revolution,’ (a demonstrable falsehood)… ‘All the paraphernalia of a Communist one-party state came with the package, including exclusive facilities and relatively high living standards for Communist Party leaders,’ (what facilities and what privileges? None are ever identified). ‘Today Cuba’s economy is far from being a socialist paradise, with a thriving black market and widespread prostitution…’ ‘Once a revolution with mass popular backing, if not mass popular participation, it became a stagnant hierarchy with authoritarian control’, and so on. Peter Taaffe in The Socialist (29 February 2008), falsely implies that all Cubans elected to office are ‘from just one party’ and concludes, ‘Steps should be taken now to organise a mass campaign in Cuba to prepare the ground for real workers’ democracy.’
Taaffe, the SWP and The Independent, the British government and President Bush might as well be reading from the same script. It is arrogant, ignorant and chauvinist. For the bourgeoisie to lie about Cuba is consistent with their class interests. When much of the British left displays the same disdain for finding out the facts about Cuba and giving them serious consideration, it reveals that they are imbued with the same chauvinism as the British ruling class. This is the same British left that supported the reactionary Solidarnosc in Poland and counter-revolutionary mujahedeen in Afghanistan and cheered the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Castro’s lengthy speeches warrant study not sneering contempt. This is a leader who believes that the Cuban people require information and analysis if they are to be able to build socialism; the method of government is far from the stereotype of dictatorship that the left presents. Castro and the Cuban Communists have maintained a dialogue with the Cuban people. When the government was forced to retreat from socialist measures they did not make a virtue of it; they recognised the retreat and called it by its name, the better to debate and advance when circumstances allowed. The Cuban government and people have not ‘fossilised’ the revolution in dogma nor do they turn the Party and its leaders into icons for worship. Problems are identified, discussed and confronted – not all have easy solutions. Given the constant US threat to Cuba, the attempts to assassinate Castro, the invasion, bomb attacks, sabotage, biological warfare and attempted economic strangulation of the revolution, state repression of counter-revolution is necessary. Anyone who has met the Cuban people in Cuba understands that it is precisely the political consciousness of the Cuban working class and their control of the Cuban state that has maintained the Cuban revolution in the face of terrific opposition from abroad.
We ask those people who are interested in building socialism to have the humility and integrity to recognise that we must study if we want to understand; that no blueprint for building socialism has been laid down. Reject the standard formulas that are supplied. For as long as imperialism exists it is certain that all steps forward risk being driven into reverse, even so far as to capitalist restoration. Only by continuing to build socialism can Cuban independence and the gains achieved thus far be maintained. The Cuban people and government know this.
Trevor Rayne
FRFI 202 April / May 2008
