Ideological Definitions before the 7th Congress of the Cuban Communist Party

Rogelio M. Díaz Moreno

General/president/Communist Party First Secretary Raul Castro (r), 84, and the Party's second in command Juan Ramon Machado, 84.
General/president/Communist Party First Secretary Raul Castro (r), 84, and the Party’s second in command Juan Ramon Machado, 84.  Photo: Estudios Revolución

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.


18 thoughts on “Ideological Definitions before the 7th Congress of the Cuban Communist Party

  • December 26, 2015 at 1:56 pm
    Permalink

    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.

  • December 26, 2015 at 8:24 am
    Permalink

    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.

  • December 25, 2015 at 5:39 pm
    Permalink

    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.

  • December 25, 2015 at 5:10 pm
    Permalink

    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.

  • December 25, 2015 at 7:29 am
    Permalink

    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!

  • December 24, 2015 at 8:21 pm
    Permalink

    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.

  • December 24, 2015 at 8:06 pm
    Permalink

    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?”

  • December 24, 2015 at 6:49 pm
    Permalink

    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.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *