Ideological Definitions before the 7th Congress of the Cuban Communist Party
Rogelio M. Díaz Moreno
HAVANA TIMES — We are on the eve of 2016 and the 7th Congress of the “immortal” Cuban Communist Party (or PCC, for those unfamiliar with the phraseology) is at the gates (April, 2016). To date, the most evident concerns expressed by the top leadership at the different provincial assembly gatherings have had to do with the production of sweet potatoes and things of this nature. What truly concerns me, however, is the fact the members of this organization should not miss this opportunity to clear up a number of programmatic points.
It seems to me this honorable institution should make a priority of clearing up its current class nature. Allow me to expand. Till recently, all Cubans were allegedly workers, be it urban or rural, manual or intellectual, proletarian or peasant. But the times of reform came along and, now, we are seeing the emergence of an “enterprising” class and an openly private economy, complete with small and not-so-small businesspeople.
My question is the following: let us imagine one of these fledgling capitalists, the owner of a business with salaried employees, the whole kit and caboodle, who wants to join the PCC. We could also imagine someone who is already a Party member and becomes the owner of a business of this nature, a restaurant, let’s say, or a ranch that exploits farmhands, whatever.
Let us assume they respect the country’s current laws, that they pay their taxes on time, that they are socially accepted in their community, that they do voluntary work for their Committee for the Defense of the Revolution (CDR), that they help old folk cross the street, pitch in to buy paint for schools and they are even good people. I wonder: what will be the reply from the pertinent Party office? What policy will it implement with respect to the member of a class pitted against the proletariat, someone applying for membership to a Party which is allegedly, to a certain extent, the representative of the proletariat?
I would also like to know what side the Party will take in the event of labor disputes between workers and owners in the private economy. If the employees of one of these businesses decide to, say, go on strike, who will the Party side with?
I would be curious to find out how the concept of proletarian internationalism will be tackled if the following situation arose: let us suppose employees of the Spanish hotel chain Melia suddenly have enough one day and go on strike to demand improvements in work conditions. Let us assume they ask for help from their Cuban class brethren in the same sector, in the name of the good old days of the International.
I feel these kinds of clarifications are more important for the Party right now than to try and manage potato harvests, like they’ve been doing for the past 40 years. I feel production issues should be left in the hands of those who work, and that the Party would do well to focus on ideological matters related to the handling of power, participation and things of this nature. The Party should make it clear, once and for all, whether it considers itself capable of directing the development of a socialist project or whether it continues to maintain that no one truly knows how to do this. Then, working people will have real, concrete elements – and will be better informed – to judge whether supporting this entity is still worth their while.
I have a feeling as to what the answer will be. After all, the overwhelming majority in the Cuban parliament approved the notorious neo-liberal Labor Code which is in effect today, and the members of parliament who voted in favor of this abomination were all – or nearly all – members of the Party. At any rate, imagining the answer is not the same as seeing the Party Congress – the highest authority (or at least in theory) clearly define these postures.
True, officially and explicitly acknowledging these issues may prove a tad difficult, for it would be tantamount to recognizing that they are no longer a proletarian or communist party, in the Marxist sense of the term, that they’re not even a social-democratic one, for that matter. It would amount to confessing they are something along the lines of a Christian democratic party.
In short, these are types of definitions that are supposedly important for parties, particularly in times of reform like these – so that people can know who is speaking to them, and on behalf of what ideology.
I’m sick of hearing how the economy is in terrible shape. Economy crap! The real point is terrible shape for whome. In the Great Depression the bosses did alright. The working people of Cuba have done alright too because they have shared the poverty. Take your Wall Street Journal and Financial Times and flush them. We know capitalism is the most efficient form of production. If efficiency is the criteria there cannot be socialism.. So lets get past that criteria.
I am calling Cuba exactly what they call themselves just as you choose to call yourself John. My agreement with the monsters that you listed begins and ends there. I would NOT make the trade you described. Rather, I hope that Cubans choose a future for themselves similar to the system in Norway.
Just because the Cuban Communist Party and the Brothers Castro call their state capitalism socialism, doesn’t make it so.
Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin also called their state capitalism socialism .
I never would have thought you would agree with any of these people on defining anything but ..so be it.
You know deep down you’re as totalitarian minded as they were and are .
You would trade state capitalism for the free-enterprise version that created conditions for the revolution in the first place and expect different results this time.
That is the definition of crazy, you know.
All these “congresos” are a pure fiasco. There is only one voice and that voice actually only mandates. There is no democracy in any stage of the cuban government (dictatorship). Same thing occurs in Viet Nam, China and Iran and nothing will change, because if the west is profiting off millions of citizens it’s al’good.
I have to agree with Moses as the investment needed to kick start this nation needs to be ASAP! You can’t continue to have major infrastructure problems, namely, communication, water and electrical never mind structural with the numbers coming in 2016. Only after living in Hawaii and working indirectly with tourism do I absolutely know this to be true. The other factor IC is the discrepancy with Doctors making nothing and those in the tourist sector who are doing better and in some cases quite well. All in all my personal opinion is that Castro doesn’t know what he’s in for if he continues on this sad pace and system. Embargo is certainly an issue but Venezuela didn’t have that problem and they’re all but in the sewer, economically. I do think, after seeing some videos of Antonio Castro, that he knows the dilemma and handles questions very well. Personally, he’s better at being forthright than some of the candidates running here in the US.
Cuba needs real property rights, a stable legal system and a functional tax system. The state needs to get out of the business of direct management of production enterprises. They need to manage the legal structure not operational decisions best left to empowered enterprises and individual owners.
Well, you’ve lived there I haven’t so hopefully the day will come when the cards are turned against the Castro brothers and their puppets. Still think it can’t go on much longer, although the fact that some major baseball celebrities visited Cuba with few citizens aware tells me the internet/cell zone awareness is low. Government doing a great job in stifling that major danger to the system!
Cuba’s self-named socialist economy needs huge amounts of foreign investment…stat. This won’t happen as long as the Castros continue to limit ownership percentages and prevent foreign managers from making hiring and firing decisions. It is not necessary to democratize their economy. The rule of ‘highest and best use’ should be determined by hard work and innovation. The marketplace will determine winners and losers.
It is precisely because of the high level of education that I disagree that the current regime would prevail in an open election with a real and well-funded opposition. A campaign consultant with one hand tied behind her back could put together a campaign to dethrone the Castros. All things being equal, media buys, mail, get-out-the-vote, etc., the opposition candidate just needs one campaign slogan…After 57 years if it hasn’t worked, what makes you think it will work now?”
Moses, it certainly isn’t for me to decide. I’m here twice a day because after living and working in paradise, Hawaii, I know Cuba is far better and has the potential to be the leader in the Caribbean. Brilliant people and well educated, yes I give the present regime credit for that. It will be the new leaders in Cuba who will make the changes needed IMMEDIATELY or else the country will fall into an abyss. Look at Antonio Castro and his interviews as I feel this man has a vision and was brilliant during his ESPN discussions. I also like Bruno Rodriguez as well. I posted just a few minutes ago that if Cuba had a free election with serious opposition candidates the present regime would come close to winning. All in all a sad case for anyone who has an ounce of motivation but I am optimistic that change will happen.
Past experience, starting with NEP in the Soviet Union in the 1920s, suggests that economic liberalization is accompanied by political tightening up. So be careful.
Poor Machado probably doesn’t think its a good thing.
You have mentioned this before. Are you proud of this? Why?
Cuba can keep its state capitalist economy and do anything a free enterprise capitalist economy can . It already has foreign investors who do not get controlling share of any enterprise in which they invest in order to prevent a return to economic colonialism .
They could also democratize their economy but that’s something you wouldn’t care for.
Gordon, is that good or bad? What exactly do you mean.
My Cuban – Canadian children are related to Machado as their mother was adopted by the Machado. family. They are directly realted to the late Celia Sanchez.
email
[email protected]
The upcoming 7th party congress brings me the question of what to expect from the meeting, including whether Raul Castro and Miguel Diaz-Canel will adopt extra economic changes beyond those adopted at the last party congress. Raul Castro and his ilk still see multiparty politics as detrimental to the concept of political unity. For one, it would be somewhat naïve to think that the Congress could resurrect the one stock market that came into being in 1929 and was killed after Fidel overthrew Batista, because the 6th party congress guidelines made concentration of wealth forbidden. There’s also the possibility that the 7th party congress may amend the 1978 Code of the Child to remove all references to proletarian internationalism (even though Cuban children still display their nationalistic performance and express fealty to collectivism by being sent to hospitals to care for adults who need facelifts and require cancer treatment and IV injections, holding rifles above their heads to convey defense of the homeland and taking care of poor children by giving them cheap food, cheap ice cream).
Also, Raul Castro might announce amendments to the Cuban Constitution ahead of the Congress, including two five-year term limits he promised at the last Congress, and other unspecified potential changes. Because Jose Ramon Machado is 85 years old, and Miguel Diaz-Canel is positioned to take control of Cuba if Raul Castro dies, Raul may ask Jose Ramon Machado to quit the Party and all political positions if his health deteriorates.
Everything that Cuba needs to do to resuscitate its moribund economy over the new few years or at least until the next Party Congress is markedly capitalistic in nature. Moreover, Cuba needs to do these things with the help of successful foreign capitalist investors. Nearly every possible positive economic decision Cuba can make at this point must go counter to the beliefs of Marxists-Leninists purists. In other words, Cuban Communists Party Congress….why bother?