Fidel Castro at 86: A Review
Fidel Castro at 86: A
Review
This article was first
written in August 2008 under the title Tribute to Fidel Castro, in
commemoration of 82nd birthday of Fidel Castro, the leader of the Cuban
revolution. It is edited today and republished for today’s lessons.
There has been a lot of attempt to denigrate Fidel
Castro and consequently the Cuban revolution. This write up tend to do
otherwise and give a critical review. This year’s August, the ailing Fidel
Castro is 86 years. While British ruling
class, after destroying the future of millions of youths, is committing
millions of pounds to ‘celebrate’ the diamond jubilee of the last vestige of
feudalism – the Queen Elizabeth-led British monarchy, Castro is being
celebrated with ideas on how to move society forward from capitalist horrors.
Indeed, Castro used early part of his life for the emancipation of Cuba and
laying the basis for the radicalization of a new layer of youth in search of
social justice. Fidel along with the late Che Ernesto Guevara led the armed
struggle for the liberation of Cuba and indeed the whole Latin America. The
eventual success of the armed struggle (itself a product of the inability of
the Cuban capitalism under Batista to grant democratic rights) – after a series
of setbacks – led to the formation of the first deformed workers’ state in the
Latin America. Deformed in the sense that while the society was created in the
interests of the working people, they (the working people) have no direct
political control on how the society is run.
Though Fidel, hesitated in moving the
revolution (that was massively welcome by the working poor of Cuba) towards
socialism, the pressure of events especially of the attacks from the US
imperialism and further radicalized the working poor of Cuba (and some leaders
like Che), pushed Castro to take the road of socialism. This was done through
nationalization of the commanding height of the economy, which was previously
held under the stranglehold of US imperialism, while mass social works were
undertaken to lift majority of the poor and youth out of poverty, want and
ignorance. Inability of the US to derail the radicalization that was pushing
Castro forward led to the eventual embargo on Cuba by US imperialism after a
failed attempt to curtail the revolution at its backyard.
Less than three decades after the revolution,
the Cuba society under Fidel, despite US embargo and isolation was able to
achieve what many leading capitalist countries could not achieve in centuries –
a well educated population (with over 90 percent literate), a sound health
system (with an average lifespan of 80 years) and provision of accommodation
for the citizenry. Of course, it can be argued that the presence of the Soviet
Union under the Stalinists’ bureaucracy (as counter-posed to Lenin’s idea of
workers’ democracy) helped Cuba, but the Soviet Union only supported Cuba as
long as the Stalinist state policies of “peaceful coexistence” with imperialism
and its so-called “socialism in one country”, are not threatened. This means
that the Cuba will not criticize the Soviet bureaucracy; it will not ensure a
democratic socialism within its own country or propagate the idea of workers’
democracy in a socialist country; neither will it internationalize genuine
working class revolution. While the terms of trade between Soviet Union and Cuba
were exceptionally favourable to Cuba, as Cuba’s sugar was traded at higher
prices with Russian equipments and fuel, this also had a negative effect on
Cuba, aside the political straitjacketing of Cuba, as many inferior goods were
brought to Cuba without any alternative. Any attempt to turn to the then
“Communist” China would have incurred the wrath of the Stalinist costly bureaucracy
in Russia.
These realities were exemplified by the
experience of Che Guevara when he visited Soviet Union and Soviet Union’s reaction
to his (Che’s) attempt at spreading the revolution to other Latin American
countries through a guerrilla movement. When Che went to Soviet Union in early
1960’s, he was compelled, despite his likeness for the Soviet Union, to
criticize the bourgeon lifestyle of Soviet bureaucrats which are not available
to ordinary Russians. This incurred the wrath of the Soviet bureaucracy, which
tagged Che, a Trotskyite (a term used then to denigrate the followers and ideas
of the foremost leader of the Russian Revolution, Leon Trotsky who fought
against Stalinist degeneration of the revolution after the death of Lenin). Of course, looking at the Guerilla-ist
method of Che, along with his nebulous idea about internationalization, he
could not have been a Trotskyite (though there are debates of whether he had
access to Trotsky’s idea before he died). This should not however mean denial
of Che’s commitment and sincere dedication to expansion of the revolution and
defence of equality of men. For instance, he lived a clearly austere and
working class lifestyle, while working along with workers in factories; indeed
he and Castro abhorred all bourgeois privileges.
Che Guevara delivering a speech
Also, when Che launched a guerilla campaign for international revolution, he was categorized as an adventurer by the Soviet bureaucracy. However, a Marxist position would counter-pose to guerilla movement, the building of revolutionary movements among the working people of the third world countries who were radicalized by the liberation movements and especially the Cuban revolution. This is important rather than launching a revolution over their heads thus giving the capitalist state excuse to isolate and behead genuine working people’s movement. However, the singular attempt and aspiration of Che and Castro for seeking extension of revolutions against imperialism within the limit of their understanding is a commendable challenge which has maintained a hold on generation of youth activists across the world who have taken them as their heroes (in fact the capitalist businessmen have turned this to a business). I however doubt whether the change-seeking youths of today with their exposure will be enticed by guerilla movement. This boldness is further expressed by the fact that the Soviet bureaucracy that had the power to build international socialist movement deliberately abandoned this. It is unfortunate that Che had to learn the lesson about the inadequacy of guerilla-ism in a tragic manner with his murder in the hands of the CIA agents in Bolivia. The same CIA that killed Che for guerilla movement supported the ultra-right, religious conservative Osama bin Laden’s Mujahideen guerillas (against the pro-Soviet Afghanistan government) in the seventies, which is now haunting the capitalist world. The same CIA, representing US imperialism, gave huge support to various terroristic regimes like the Chile’s Pinochet (where over ten thousands poor people were massacred).
Lack of internationalization of the
revolution along a genuine Marxist line, both within and outside Latin America
also isolated Cuba. With a Stalinist’s shortsighted interest in Cuban affair –
expanding its sphere of influence to maintain global relation and not building
a genuine international socialism – this will mean Cuba’s dependence on the
Soviet Union without socialist revolutions in other Latin American countries that
can give, Cuba much needed breathing air to truly flourish and surpass in
material, technological and economic terms the capitalist states. Yet, despite
the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s, Cuba – though witnessed
economic difficulty in the early 1990’s – was still able to survive, reflecting
the huge potential in a nationalized economy, even the distressed and isolated
one like Cuba’s. but attempt of some pro-Cuban ‘leftists’ to equate Castro’s
and Che’s support for some anti-colonial movements in Africa and Latin America
to genuine socialist internationalism is misplaced.
Of course, Cuba supported liberation and anticapitalist movements in many
countries including Africa like the one led by Laurent Kabila in Congo. This is progressive, and it is the task of genuine working people's government to give solidarity to nations fighting one form of oppression or another. However, it
must be noted that not only Cuba helped some colonial countries achieve
independence; other pro-West countries like Nigeria also did. Therefore, the
issue is not only about helping to fight colonialism, which is a progressive move. The
point is helping develop working class international movements in those
countries where there are struggles against imperialism and colonialism as a
step toward orientating such movements to socialist goals, which would have
also helped resolve the isolation experienced by Cuba. This is what is needed
not alliance with some capitalist (and indeed tyrannical and corrupt)
governments in the name of building "progressive" support against
imperialism. The failure of Fidel Castro to condemn the Mexican government's
attack on students' and workers' struggle in the late 1960s in the name of
preserving Soviet Union’s friendship is a typical example of the limitations of
Castro on internationalism.
Although, currently there are some elements
within the Cuban ruling class who want a return to capitalism, but the example
of the social collapse that Russia witnessed could not easily put this on the table, even
as the US imperialism plan for the total take-over of Cuba. The final task will
be decided by the working masses of not only Cuba but the whole of the Latin
American continent. Surely, there were limitations to the socialist government
of Fidel Castro; while Castro himself has had many metamorphoses since he led
the Cuban revolution (e.g. questionable support for Iranian regime and Qaddafi,
among others), it is on note in history that Castro alongside Che Guevara, for the
singular reason of leading a social revolution in Cuba remain heroes among the
growing layer of youth and working class activists around the world. This, in an era of global capitalist recession and wars, shows the gripping
effects a radical, anti-capitalist idea and movement can have on the
consciousness of young and working people. What Castro had achieved for the oppressed
people of Cuba could not be compared with the destruction inflicted on the
world by the capitalist rulers – civilian, military or monarchy - despite all
whitewashing of their terrible records. The best of the contemporary capitalist
‘leaders’ from US to Europe to Asia cannot stand the feat of Fidel. He inspired
a generation to fight for their freedom under the yoke of imperialist
capitalism while the former brought the working people of the world wars,
misery, poverty and exploitation in the search for profit. Of course, Cuba
needs democracy but not the “free market democracy” that has led to misery for
the working poor. Cuba needs genuine socialist democracy where the huge gains
of the nationalized economy will be realized by the collective leadership of
the working people.
There is need for a socialist multi-party
democracy from local to national level in Cuba and the ability of the people to
determine and discuss every government policy. This will mean forming communes
at local levels linked up at regional and national levels. This will radicalize
the working poor and youths of the world, and deepen the growing movements for
change globally. It is not for the capitalist apologists to teach Cuba on
democracy because the history of capitalism is that of subjugation of the
people’s will. Is it not hypocritical for US to claim to be fighting for
democracy in Cuba when the whole world rejected the US embargo on Cuba and yet
the Bush government still went ahead? Despite millions that protested around the
world against invasion of Iraq, the US along with the willing allies still went
ahead to plunge the world to another misery. The same US government that claims
to be championing democracy supported Pakistani military rule of Perwash
Mussharaf (for over eight years thus boosting the strength of fundamentalists),
Hosni Mubarak in Egypt, Ben Ali in Tunisia, Abdullah Saleh in Yemen, among
several others.
The human developments in Cuba that has led
to over 90 percent literates and unprecedented medical advancements (comparable to
the advanced capitalist countries) gives a glimpse into what genuine working
class government can achieve. Building a genuine workers’ democracy, and
leading internationalization of socialism are the tasks before the working
people of Cuba if Cuba is not to become another degenerate Russian state where
the gains of nationalized economy has been thrown back as a result of lack of
working people’s democracy through the restoration of capitalism. Despite the
so-called increase in GDP by many third world countries in the past few years billions
are still wallowing in abject poverty while a tiny clique continues to increase
their wealth. This shows the limit of capitalist market economy. A genuine
socialist state will use the resources of the society to develop the economy under working people’s control. This will mean billions of dollars of, for
instance, Nigeria’s oil wealth going to the coffer of the tiny clique and
foreign corporations, and their local accomplices will be used to develop
education, health, infrastructures, social amenities, etc. It will mean trillions
of dollars wasted in bailing out handful of capitalist big businesses, will be
used to lift billions of impoverished people out of poverty, want and
ignorance. It will mean making the wonders of technology and scientific
advancements that can make living more meaningful for the people but are
currently patented for capitalist profits, available to the working and poor
people. Neo-liberalism will only mean diversion of the society’s wealth for a
tiny clique as has been seen in Nigeria where just one percent controls 80
percent of the nation’s wealth while over 70 percent go hungry.
Thus, the real task before the working class
activists from Kenya to Venezuela to Georgia to Pakistan and the rest of the
world is to build a genuine working people’s political platform that will wrest
power from the hands of the capitalist class and enthrone a genuine socialist
society, and not to depend on capitalist politicians for liberation. As Castro
prepares for the eventual end, he remains a hero. Despite his historic
limitations, he, along with Che Guevara remains legends. The so-called
victory of capitalist neo-liberalism since the collapse of the Stalinist
states, have only meant growing miseries for greater percentage of the
population. Despite the growth in wealth and technological advancement, more people are suffering from one form of want or the other. Since the
so-called triumph of neo-liberal capitalism, tens of millions have died of wars
and conflicts engineered by capitalist scramble for profits. The current great
capitalist recession has shown that capitalism cannot move society forward. On
the other hand, mass of working people have been responding through mass
revolts and movements from the nooks and crannies of the world to the centres
of capitalism. However, these movements must learn from the mistakes of and be
inspired by the heroic movements of the past revolutions including the Cuban
revolution. Rebuilding the mass organizations and parties of the working and
young people under genuine socialist and revolutionary ideas is the first step
in this direction.
Kola
Ibrahim
P.O.Box 1319, GPO, Enuwa, Ile-Ife,
Ile-Ife, Osun State, Nigeria
kmarx4life@gmail.com, 08059399178
Comments
Post a Comment