The Goodness of Communism

Erasmo Calzadilla

Yes, I know you from there, from Cuba. I couldn’t believe your nerve when you denied that you were a Communist. You are incredibly shameless.

Make no mistake; these bullshitters are more Communist than the Castros. All of Erasmo and his gang’s unhappiness lie in the fact that the Revolution and its leaders annoy them because, according to them, they moved away from real Marxism and Communism. Erasmo was in Cuba one of most active defenders of Marxism and Communism. 

-Alexis Jardines PhD in Philosophy in a comment he placed on the article “El sueno americano de un cubano de izquierda” (The American Dream of a Cuban leftist).

HAVANA TIMES — Well, there you have it. This important Cuban philosopher lost, for a moment, the prudence and moderation that defines the members of his profession.

The man dealt a blow and now we haven’t heard anything else from him, I’m sure he went off to interpret one of Hegel’s texts and forgot about the loose end he left on the Internet. And he left me with this bad faith, which I, instead of denying it, will take advantage of.

It just so happens that I’ve been asking myself for quite some time now whether Marxism maintains anything contemporary about it, and Jardines has led me to focus on this neglected issue for a moment. So, here goes.

It seems to be some kind of historic law that wherever a movement for concentrating power arises, the extreme opposite is also born: calling for redistribution, leveling out and socialization. In political debates and analyses, the terminology which reflects this never-ending confrontation is very common:

Up – Down
Vertical – Horizontal
Elitism – Masses
Individual Spirit – Group Creation
Network Distribution – Pyramid System
Social Movement vs Political Parties
Monopoly – Free Competition
Popular Soviets – Supreme Soviets
Centralism – Federalism…

There is a kind of historic pendulum between the moment power is concentrated and that of when it is redistributed. One of them dominates for a while and then, when this model expires or reaches its peak, it gives way to the other.

Both trends evolve, change, and more interestingly, convert themselves into their opposite.

Primitive Christianity was a kind of Communism inspired by religion, but over time, this became an institution where power was concentrated and in the hands of a select few. Primitive Capitalism which gave birth to the US was a leveling economic process, and just look at what it has become.

Marxism would be another variant of Communism, but with a philosophical base this time, which was born within the context of industrial capitalism: Concentrated power in the bourgeoisie needs to return to workers’ hands via a revolutionary leap which is driven by the progress of science and technology.

Real Marxism and Socialism have effectively fulfilled their intention to level society, at least for some time. After their disappearance the concentration of Capital – the most dominant form of power today – has gained great impetus, knocking down every obstacle in its path. Who can effectively take on this damaging trend today?

Stopping this tumor without dying in the attempt is one of the most important challenges that humanity faces. In order to manage this, we have to learn from all of those people who have had to come face-to-face with a similar monster throughout history: Anarchists, the first Christians, the first Capitalists, Robin Hood and even Marxists.

Marxists too?

Of course. Putting aside their authoritarian vocation and their desire to have progress as the motor behind change – because it won’t be possible anymore – and also putting a large part of their outdated theories aside, we can rescue their vocation to fight against anything that attacks human empowerment.

For those who want to learn a little more about the process of concentrating wealth, I recommend reading this article by OXFAM.