A - I n f o s
a multi-lingual news service by, for, and about anarchists **

News in all languages
Last 40 posts (Homepage) Last two weeks' posts

The last 100 posts, according to language
Castellano_ Deutsch_ Nederlands_ English_ Français_ Italiano_ Polski_ Português_ Russkyi_ Suomi_ Svenska_ Türkçe_ The.Supplement
First few lines of all posts of last 24 hours || of past 30 days | of 2002 | of 2003 | of 2004 | of 2005

Syndication Of A-Infos - including RDF | How to Syndicate A-Infos
Subscribe to the a-infos newsgroups
{Info on A-Infos}

(en) Cuba: Exploring the "chasm": A libertarian reply to Celia Hart

From Worker <a-infos-en@ainfos.ca>
Date Tue, 26 Apr 2005 10:11:32 +0200 (CEST)

A - I N F O S N E W S S E R V I C E
News about and of interest to anarchists
http://ainfos.ca/ http://ainfos.ca/index24.html

* Responding to the invitation extended a few days ago from Havana by Celia
Hart Santamaria – member of the Cuban Communist Party and daughter of prominent
figures of the regime – calling for discussions on leftist alternatives for Cuba’s
future, and where she explicitly asks for an anarchist opinion, the Cuban
Libertarian Movement makes public its proposals for the debate.
>>> It is with great curiosity, interest and care that we have read your
letter "About my Interview in the pages of La Jornada of April 5th",
published simultaneously by the Spanish web pages Rebelión and La Haine.
There are very many things we could discuss in your letter, Celia,
really very many things. But, to be frank, we care little whether you
await the definite prophesized assumption of Christ, Buddha and Mohammed
or that you sit besides Lincoln and Whitman; we don’t care you feel you
are a “princess of the Race” or that your brief opinion about John Paul
II insinuates a certain disagreement with his trajectory that Fidel did
not show these past few days: as far as we’re concerned, you may
continue happily with your poetic experiments which we won’t censure nor
will we care a whole lot about your lyric output. Also with continued
frankness, you may change what you say as many times as you please;
whether because of a reprimand or whether your conscience and/or your
intellectual pickiness drive you to correct a shot that you yourself
know is in danger of being misinterpreted: you have all the freedom in
the world to do so and it will be up to your readers from now on to
grant your words whatever credibility and trustworthiness they deserve
and you are capable of earning. Besides, again in all honesty, in your
letter you touch upon issues of vital importance such as the “inertia”
of the Communist Party or the existence of “certain mechanisms of
capitalist restoration” in Cuba; facts more than well known and of
little novelty whose really interesting feature is the fact that it is
precisely you who admits to them: but that isn’t what we want to discuss
exactly at this moment either. What matters at this time, only as a
beginning, is that we take our position in the ideological and political
map, that we adopt a position regarding such and such situations, such
and such trajectories and such and such persons. In that order of things
we would like to minimally and briefly debate with you. Let’s be a
little more precise. You say you’re looking for, and perhaps building a
leftist option, a leftist alternative for Cuba. We tell you then that
your concern is also ours and of a very large number of people, in whose
front lines -and not because of being vanguards but because of being
coherent - are the anarchists you mention in your letter. But for sure
what we cannot share is your affirmation that “to the left of Fidel is
the chasm”. That sentence, and only that sentence, is what we would like
to discuss now.

The first thing we want to point out to you is the logic problem such a
statement creates; a statement that momentarily negates, barring some
rectification on your part, the expectations you have been generating
with some of your performances. By logic, only two things can follow
from your statement: either the leftist option you’re looking for is
found to the right of Fidel or else that alternative is the very same
Fidel and the total continuity of the self-sufficient monologue he has
followed all along. You realize that, if your leftist alternative is to
the right of Fidel - which we doubt, you don’t look dumb - this debate
is totally meaningless and it would be better to stop it right now. But
you’ll also notice that if that option you speak of is nothing but the
very self-same Fidel for all eternity, even in his physical absence, it
is not very clear why all the hoopla on your part when it’s only a
matter of, like a bland condiment, reading Trotsky, Lukacs, Rose
Luxembourg and Gramsci. But also, not from the logical point of view but
from the political point of View, you would have to explain what would
that left to the right of Fidel be. Is that left to the right of Fidel
responsible for the “inertia” of the Party and for the “mechanisms of
capitalist restoration”? How come such things can happen? Is it Fidel’s
carelessness? By chance the Commander in Chief, First Secretary of the
Party and President of the Council of Ministers and State was overridden
and his orientations have been ignored? Or perhaps Fidel also performs
the biblical feat of trinity and, like Jesus - who is one with God the
Father - sits to the right of himself? These questions only pretend to
illustrate the confusion generated by the shortness of your expositions
and the truth is that we have not yet touched upon the core issue: that
is, we haven’t as yet fallen in the “chasm” you claim is the only thing
that exists to the left of Fidel.

- The lost words

We’ve tried to approach the subject respectfully and with care for the
sake of this exchange, leaving aside for the time being the deceptions
and reservations accumulated over several decades. We likewise strive to
be ample and exhaustive, at least within our limited means. It occurred
to us to take a range of subjects normally associated with leftist
thinking, link them to Cuba and with Fidel by extension and ask what
elaborations or illuminations were available as a starting point for the
debate. For that purpose we made use of the most powerful tool at our
disposal at this time: the Google advanced search, limiting the search
to the exact sentence, in the Spanish language, in any file format and
for all possible domains. This way, anybody could verify the exactness
of our findings and you yourself would be in good shape to do so, for we
don’t doubt that you have access to the Internet without any
inconveniences. Let’s look at the results of our little research and
perhaps you will agree with us that they are indeed surprising.

Let’s start by saying that to the phrases “Cuban worker’s councils” and
“worker’s councils in Cuba” Google’s search yielded a “no document
found”; which is probably due to a very simple fact and that is that one
does not reflect on something that does not exist or has not even been
imagined. The same result happens with the expression “self-management
in Cuba” although in

this case we did find one -only one - about “Cuban self-management”
which you can find in
<es.geocities.com/anticivilizacion/antonfdr_GANDHI.htm> and which only
informs us that the idea is practically unknown in the island. Following
the same procedure, we arrive at the sad conclusion that as far as Cuba
is concerned one doesn’t write and one doesn’t talk about “worker’s
autonomy” or “autonomous unions”; which only confirms that the
leadership of such organizations are not terribly interested in the
matter and that the predominant orientation consists of keeping them
within the sphere of dependency on the state. Things being what they
are, it is not surprising that something as “extremist” as the
collective and voluntary interruption of work barely yields discourses
of very low intensity: the search for “strikes in Cuba” results in 5
documents of a historical character and when we input “Cuban strikes” we
find one lonely and exotic result in
<www.bibliotecagnostica.com/Poscla22.htm> . Even so, we didn’t give up
in our quest, but to our amazement, in the case of “class consciousness
in Cuba” and “Cuban class consciousness” Google again replies to our
query “no documents found”. Things get a little better when we use
“Cuban cooperatives” or “cooperatives in Cuba” and there finally we find
a modest thirty-odd documents, not necessarily of official origin nor
mostly adulatory and among which we note some pearls of interest such as
that of Jesus Cruz Reyes where he takes deep offense when asked whether
those organizations are independent or not. Faced with such a
promissory - when compared to the former- result we continued our
spirited quest, only to be told right away that nothing is said about
“Cuban social movements” or about “Cuban autonomous university”;
although to be fair, we do note now that there are 4 documents which
contain the phrase “university autonomy in Cuba” to inform us of the
lack thereof, naturally, and another 5, mainly in reference to the past,
that consider it opportune to make use for some reason or another of the
phrase “social movements in Cuba”.

And so, after many successive failures we decided to steer our research
towards a concept we certainly don’t regard with much sympathy: worker’s
state. Do you know how many documents show up containing the expression
“Cuban worker’s state”? Only 30, the overwhelming majority Trotskyite
and not all of them favorable. Among them only one came from Cuba’s

<www.lajiribilla.cu/2002/n57_junio/1413_57.html> and in reality it was a
collaboration by John Hillson sent from the city of Los Angeles. We
think this lack might be due to the strong identification of the
expression with the Trotskyite tradition; we think that your rescuing
the founder of the red army would face obvious difficulties and we tried
to see if a similar expression would yield better results: proletarian
state. Not even now did success crown our efforts: the phrase
“proletarian state in Cuba” had a single orphan result. The article
belongs to Luis Ramirez Caraballo and Antonio R. Barreiros Vazquez,
entitled “Place and role of the FAR (Revolutionary Armed Forces, tn) as
a especially significant component of the Cuban proletarian state” and
you can find it in the Revista Cubana de Ciencias Sociales (Year 4, no.
12 September - December 1986). Perhaps, Celia, you share our
disillusionment and you also loathe that, when one speaks in Cuba about
the proletarian state, in reality it’s not fundamentally the
proletarians but rather the armed forces. Does this have anything to do
with the militarization of Cuban society?

- The “chasm” is the absence of liberty, equality and solidarity

To wit: we have used a range of indicators that are far from perfect and
can only be of an approximate character; even so, we have the firm
impression that they also allow us to maintain a trustworthy hypothesis.
That is, reflections on building a leftist option in Cuba face an almost
untouched and virgin field. And we ask you please -assuming a reply on
your part- be a little bit

imaginative and don’t recommend that we perform a similar search with
the expressions “health in Cuba”, “education in Cuba”, “sports in Cuba”,
etc., because what we’re proposing doesn’t necessarily contradict such
things but rather it imbues them with a different content, redefines
them and infinitely enriches them. As you’ve probably seen, therefore,
there is a body of ideas

that in embryonic form represent their corresponding revolutionary
social achievements - normally belonging to the left imagery - that in
Cuba are used badly or very little. And we are absolutely convinced of
three things that are intimately linked to our theme, as this has been
established from the beginning: in the first place, Fidel hasn’t shown
to have on top of his shoulders the most adequate head to elaborate
thought and define the necessary actions: he’s had over half a century
to do it and … nothing!; second, this field of ideas and realizations is
located not to his right but to his left; and lastly, that none of them
represent the “chasm” so feared and whose mention causes you so much
worry. We have only to show you three examples especially significant
and with possibilities of immediate implementation.

First, a leftist alternative in Cuba should consider an urgent
demilitarization in the widest sense of the word. It would consist of
not only the re-dimensioning of the armed forces, with the attendant
savings and the corresponding transfer of resources to other sectors of
the economy infinitely needier. It would also entail the loss of the
armed forces’ historical privileges and that the diverse problems of
Cuban society would no longer be seen as questions of “national
security”. Above all it would be a matter of thinking about socialism
like what it should really be, that is, a new living relationship of
solidarity among free and equal beings; and to avoid superimposing on
these facts a not so socialist articulation between “commanders” and
subordinates. These things are immediately attainable Celia, and there’s
no reason to counter them. For sure you’ll tell us that the revolution
would not survive without “its” armed forces but that’s nothing but a
fallacy the “Commander in Chief” and his minions have gotten you
accustomed to. This is because the Cuban armed forces are constituted as
a response to a hypothesis of conflict – in theory, a U.S. invasion –
that is wrongly proposed or that will not happen. In the first place,
the Cuban armed forces would have no power – and I agree with you that
this is a disgrace for all humanity – against the aerial bombardment and
ruination that the USA uses as its main method in the initial phases of
the war. As has been demonstrated in Iraq, guerrilla resistance is much
more effective than a regular army that simply cannot be up to the task.
Second, there are plenty of elements to assume that such conflict does
not nor will it conform tomorrow to that model: Cuba does not warrant
the same reasons given for Afghanistan and Iraq – nor those given later
for Iran and North Korea – nor does it constitute a relevant strategic
threat nor has it deserved a real military consideration. Do the math
Celia and you will see: the financing given by the USA to the “dirty
work” in Cuba in the last five years is less than the cost of one single
night of bombardment over Baghdad, even if the Commander in Chief’s
megalomania is hurt a little with such calculations. In consequence, the
demilitarization is feasible now and has nothing to do with the “chasm”.

Second, a leftist alternative in Cuba should immediately embark on the
road to elf-determination. Do you believe that the construction of
socialism should be strongly identified – sine qua non condition, we
would say – with the direct self-management of the economy by the
workers? Unfortunately, in Cuba for many years self-management has been
assimilated in short order to the Yugoslavian experience and has been
implicitly associated with the imminent threat of the market and the
attendant “chaos”. Thus, all hopes were deposited in the myth of
centralized planning that has been mistaken in the real world with the
wisdom of the technocrats or the omnipresence of the military or the
ineffable occurrences of the “Commander in Chief” that have always taken
first place to the ideas of the collective organisms. Besides, it’s
enough to analyze the results: Would you say, Celia, that the road
traveled from the first impulse to establish communism in the Island of
Youth to the actual presence of transnational corporations is a road
towards socialism? No Celia, centralized planning has not only not
brought us socialism but rather it can be qualified as a succession of
blunders, before and after that failed sugar harvest of the ten million
tons of sugar. Self-management, meanwhile, has all the credibility and
that is the way undertaken by dozens of social movements in Latin
America as a strategy of resistance and as a way to solve in a practical
way – even if success is mixed, even in clearly neoliberal contexts –
their most pressing needs in terms of food, health, shelter etc. Once
again: self-management is also possible now and it has nothing to do
with that “chasm” that you assume lies to the left of Fidel.

Lastly, a leftist alternative in Cuba must reclaim with force and
determination the problem of the essential freedoms. We have to only
demilitarize the brains and stop suspecting that behind every Cuban
hides a potential “agent of imperialism” and immediately the subject
becomes a blinding light. Pray tell us, how would a project to build
socialism be affected should 12 million Cubans enjoy –among a thousand
other prerogatives – the possibility of speaking, traveling or
organizing in whatever shape or form they see fit? Let’s repeat one of
your sentences: “All young people today who harbor political questions,
those worthy of being heard, will always be of the left, anarchist,
Trotskyite etc. But ALL are revolutionary”. Very well, stop playing hide
and seek and be sincere with yourself and your readers: Do you or don’t
you know that those revolutionaries can’t have the political
organization they would like because that right is reserved for the
Communist Party? Do you or don’t you know that those revolutionaries are
not allowed to have their own library open to the public, can’t put on a
radio show, can’t meet without asking permission, can’t have their own
newspaper nor can they freely defend their orientation in labor, youth,
neighborhood, gender-based, or ecological movements? These things
require a framework of freedom actually non-existent and demand not
state intervention but autonomy, they demand nothing less than the
socially guaranteed possibility that every collective – whatever its
nature, as long as it doesn’t threaten the other’s freedom – set its own
rules. You enjoy a privileged position Celia, and you cannot have missed
that the obsession with surveillance, control, repression etc. is one
thing, and another very different thing is freedom. On what side do you
think socialism and the left are? We know your preoccupation with the
causes for the fall of the Soviet block: then, don’t you think that the
fatal disregard for freedom displayed by them might have had at least
something to do with the debacle? This experience is a gold mine of
teachings and they unequivocally say, in this beginning of the XXI
century, that socialism can no longer be conceived as the spontaneous
outcome of a vaporous historical necessity or as a sophisticated
operation in social engineering or the genius of a messianic will. XXI
century socialism can only be built starting from the collective
consciousness and such cannot flourish except from a root of liberty.
And once again Celia, this has nothing to do with the “chasm”.

- For a leftist alternative for all Cubans

Demilitarization, self-management, basic freedoms: three minimal
elements and three roads to travel to make a leftist alternative in Cuba
and to involve in it not the current ruling elite but the whole of the
Cuban people. These proposals are not the “maximum program” of the
anarchists and they may perhaps be qualified as “reformist” in the
current Cuban context. However, they are a good base for the
articulation of a really leftist policy for Cuba. You know better than
we what degree of participation and commitment Cuban communists will
have to have – in particular the younger ones – with this policy and
what weight may have within the Party those who subscribe to this type
of orientation. Nevertheless there’s no doubt that it overwhelms the
Party’s organization and makes room for, among others, the currents that
you yourself have recognized as revolutionary. For the same reason,
there’s also no doubt that that policy clashes head on with a
constellation of interests, privileges and expectations that are clearly
situated to its right, within and without the Communist Party: a
situation and a process that, if our memory doesn’t fail us, up until a
few years ago were considered part of the class struggle.

Be that as it may, Celia, we must go on fine tuning the analysis and
strengthening the will. If we have been ironic with you in many
instances in this letter is due to the fact that we understand that you
have not yet immersed yourself in the problem nor are you anywhere near
ready to come out publicly with your real roots. Your intentions seem
sincere and perhaps even compatible, but you still speak with a half
tongue, you get distracted with metaphors that go nowhere and you
haven’t had the courage to put on the table the fabric of concrete
conflicts that underlie the process of building a leftist alternative
for Cuba. Bread is bread and wine is wine Celia: that is the real start
of any alternative that pretends to remain firm before the eventual
adversities and not start from the palace intrigues but from the
collective conscience of the Cuban people. You have carefully avoided
talk of factional conflict but you must agree with us that it is
precisely what everybody reads between your lines. And you also know
that the fight must be fought at any price because what’s at stake is
nothing less than the future of our beloved Cuban people. That struggle,
Celia, can only be fought with clear ideas, with precise ideas, with
ideas of strength and not with the customary odes to the untouchable
figure of Fidel; it can only be waged with people organized around their
deepest convictions and not with vague warnings or diffuse insinuations
about the comings and goings of the elite. You have to pay the
ideological price and you suffer directly the pressures from the system,
that is understandable and it makes your position prone to difficulties
and harassment. But at least you can speak, Celia, and that’s a
possibility the majority of us Cubans do not have. We everyday Cubans
have many disadvantages compared to you, and a single but enormous
advantage: we already know that El Cid Campeador will not return astride
Babieca and we also know that to the left of Fidel there isn’t any
chasm, any cliff, any deep hole. What opens up, not to the right of
Fidel but to his left, Celia, is nothing more nor less than the wide
course of liberty.

Cuban Libertarian Movement / April 2005

More information about the MLC at

****** The A-Infos News Service ******
News about and of interest to anarchists
INFO: http://ainfos.ca/org http://ainfos.ca/org/faq.html
HELP: a-infos-org@ainfos.ca
SUBSCRIPTION: send mail to lists@ainfos.ca with command in
body of mail "subscribe (or unsubscribe) listname your@address".

Options for all lists at http://www.ainfos.ca/options.html

A-Infos Information Center