Real socialism vs. today’s Radical Left

On the need for encounter with the revolutions and leaders of the Third World

      In the late 1960s and early 1970s, we radical youth in the USA, having recently seen through the lies that we were told about American democracy and the world, protested the war in Vietnam and celebrated the emergence of anti-colonial movements in the world.  In the decades since, we utterly failed to forge a sustainable people’s movement that could take the nation toward foreign policies of support for the just claims of the colonized.  As a result of our failure, U.S. public discourse knows nothing of the world of the colonized and of the real socialism emerging in its breast.

Real socialism vs. today’s Radical Left on issues of gender and social equality

     Real socialism today has emerged in China and in vanguard nations of the Third World.  Its conceptions have been forged by exceptional leaders in the context of revolutionary practice.  It is a synthesis of the concepts of the bourgeois revolutions of Western Europe of the late eighteenth century; the worker-peasant revolutions of the period 1848 to 1925 in Europe and Russia; and anti-colonial and anti-imperialist revolutions of China, south and southeast Asia, Africa, and Latin America and the Caribbean from the nineteenth century to the present, which have drawn from traditional philosophies in their respective regions. It is this synthetic historic and social process that I have in mind when I refer to “real socialism.”

     Real socialism, so defined and understood, affirms that all human beings are endowed by their Creator and/or by nature with certain inalienable rights, that is, rights that no just society can abridge.  They include the classic political and civil rights of speech, assembly, and due process, interpreted and implemented in real socialism in a context defined by continuous imperialist aggression and war in one form or another.  The inalienable rights also include social and economic rights, such as a minimal standard of living with respect to housing, nutrition, and transportation; full access to free education and free health care; and widely distributed general prosperity.  They include the right of nations to sovereignty, free from interference in their affairs, so that states, directed by the will of the people, can formulate plans for the long-term development of the economy in a form consisted with the needs and desires of the people.  And they include the right of the self-determination of peoples, so the national culture(s) will evolve in accordance with the historic and contemporary beliefs and aspirations of the people, influenced by the world but not manipulated by powerful external forces.

     This synthetic and integral emphasis on political, civil, socioeconomic, national, and cultural rights has an affinity with a philosophy of natural rights, natural law, or what is assumed to be natural.  In accordance with this philosophical context, the rights of women are expressed in a manner consistent with what is taken to be the natural relation between men and women, a relation that is to some extent complementary by nature.  Under the influence of the international women’s movement, which originated in the West, real socialist countries have sought to create equality between women and men, such that there are proportionate numbers of women in the professions, and in the case of Cuba, in the National Assembly of People’s Power.  At the same time, women overwhelmingly assume these responsibilities without abandoning traditional roles with respect to childcare and home management, roles that are accepted and guarded by women as their domain of authority and control.  One can find in Cuba, for example, occasional calls for ending women’s double burden and for men to assume more housekeeping roles, but they do not gain much traction.  By and large, in a society of strong extended families, working women turn to their sisters and mothers for support in their multidimensional duties.  The Federation of Cuban Women, of which the great majority of women aged 16 and older are members, routinely disseminates celebrations of the achievements and contributions of Cuban women in all areas of society, including their extensive and vital contributions as mothers caring for their children and as daughters caring for their elderly parents. 

     At the same time, under the influence of the international movement for gay and lesbian rights, the Cuban constitution guarantees the rights of all citizens, regardless of sexual orientation.  And gay marriage is now legal.  However, gay unions are not widely celebrated.  Their legalization is more a consequence of respect for the fundamental rights of all.  This lack of celebration of a gay lifestyle reflects the deep appreciation for the necessary respect for the natural order of things, which includes the union of a man and woman in reproduction and in the creation of a family.  Their approach is that all persons should be treated with respect and have the right to their personal lifestyle choices, without persecution, but not all lifestyles need be celebrated by society.

      Influenced by the international movement for transgender rights, the Cuban Constitution affirms the rights of all citizens regardless of sexual identity.  However, in the context of the pervasive orientation toward the natural order of things and the widespread belief in the binary sexuality of the human species, the phenomenon has not advanced far.  The few transgender adults are accepted in the society, but for minors the issue plays out differently.  The wearing of gender-specific school uniforms until the age of 17 or 18 is a longstanding and widely accepted custom.  If there is a movement toward transgenderism among Cuban adolescent youth (my sources tell me there is not), it has not arrived to the point of challenging the assumption of two genders in the school system.  Moreover, gender-changing hormonal treatments and surgery would be difficult in Cuba, given the involvement of the family in all medical treatments of children, and given the pervasive conservative values on the issue.

     With respect to social inequality, Cubans widely assume that human individuals are by nature endowed with different capacities, which does not compromise commitment to the equality of rights that all human beings possess.  As a result of this assumption, the emphasis is on equality of opportunity, rather than equity, or equality of results.  When there is a situation in which identifiable sectors of the society have lower levels of attainment, as had occurred in Cuba with respect to blacks and rural folk prior to the triumph of the revolution, the focus is on structural reforms that would make possible equality of opportunity, which in the case of socialist Cuba involved the construction and development of rural schools, among other measures.  In Cuba, the recognition of differences in human capacities does not have the ideological function of justifying social inequalities.  Recognition of natural differences in capacities among individuals does not negate the universally held principle that all persons are by natural right entitled to a minimum of human needs, regardless of their capacities.

     Cuban socialism has a long-term vision of equity for a future epoch in which socialist construction has reached maturity.  In the stage of socialist construction, the long-term vision is implemented through the development of structures of equality of opportunity, particularly quality public schools throughout the national territory and free universities with equal access.  University admission is based on individual merit, on the basis of the assumption that equity cannot be forced but must be developed.  Forcing equity would have long-term negative consequences that could undermine the revolutionary project of socialist construction.

     In the 1980s, there was in Cuba an affirmative action policy in favor of men in admission to medical schools, established to compensate for the lower enrollment of men in medical school.  But women protested, saying that affirmative action in favor of men was unfair, because men have as much opportunity as women to prepare themselves for admission to medical school.  In response to the protests of the women, affirmative action on the basis of gender in favor of men was eliminated after one year.  As a result, most doctors today are women.  No one considers it an injustice; it is viewed as one example more of the important contributions of women to Cuban society.

On the question of truth

     In the epistemology in practice of real socialism, there is a difference between truth and untruth and between right and wrong.  All persons have the personal and collective duty to seek to discover the truth and the right.

     In the modern world, the quest for truth has been driven by revolutionary processes and by progressive social movements.  Five revolutions/movements have been fundamental in shaping human understanding, namely, the anti-feudal bourgeois revolution, the anti-capitalist proletarian revolution, the anti-colonial revolution of the colonized, the anti-patriarchal feminist movement, and the ecological movement against environmental destruction.  These revolutions/movements have left humanity with a legacy of insights, including the political and civil rights of all, the social and economic rights of all, the right of all nations to sovereignty, the right of all peoples to self-determination, the equal rights of women, and the need for human harmony with nature.

     Real socialism is more advanced than each of the five revolutions/movements because it has attained an integral perspective rooted in a synthesis of the five modern perspectives.  Real socialism assumes that the integral truth and right can be understood through persistent dialogue and personal encounter, listening respectfully to one another across cultures, and taking seriously the perspectives of others.  The theory and practice of real socialism affirms that universal truth and right can be attained through a persistent dialogue of civilizations.

     In the heyday of liberalism and capitalism, before real socialism arrived to lead the construction of an alternative world order, each of the five perspectives expressed what in reality were partial truths, but they defended their claims as universal truths.  They based their reasoning on empirical observation and critical reflection, even if rooted in a partial perspective.  In doing so, all five expressed in theory and practice a respect for universal truth, which each was endeavoring to discover.  They did not consider it acceptable to construct their claims out of thin air, and they did not consciously manipulate evidence and distort understandings.  Real socialism, by integrating the five, pushes human understanding to a more advanced stage.

     The integral universal truth and right of real socialism is an unprecedented threat to the still reigning big bourgeoisie, which has attained unprecedented wealth and power.  To respond to the threat of real socialism, the U.S. corporate elite has come to the support of the Radical Left, which rejects the realist epistemological assumptions of both real socialism and the five modern perspectives.  The Radical Left today sees truth as subjective.  In its view, there is your truth versus my truth.  Each individual has his or her own truth, which is based on their interpretations of their lived experiences.  With these assumptions, public debate becomes the expression of subjectivities rather than a quest for truth through dialogue.  With these assumptions, the people are left fractured and confused, to the benefit of the elite.

     Real socialism assumes and takes as given that a society cannot be constructed on such a subjectivist foundation.  But the Radical Left, alienated from its own society, is satisfied with subjective self-expression, because it is not trying to construct a society.

      The Radical Left is the product of a profound alienation and pervasive cynicism in the societies of the global North, which are rooted in the fact that the four post-bourgeois modern revolutions delegitimated but could not transform the bourgeois world order.  Unable to exercise real political power, the Radical Left censors and cancels, establishing themselves in various institutions as local bullies.  The corporate elite, taking advantage of the Radical Left’s dysfunctional interruption of the reasoning process, disseminates the Radical Left’s ideas and supports their institutional presence, thereby blocking the dissemination of the concepts of real socialism, which constitutes the logical and reasonable next step for the five modern revolutions. 

     For the Radical Left, truth does not emerge on the basis of a quest rooted in observation, reflection, personal encounter, and dialogue among civilizations.  Rather, truth becomes what those with power say it is, so that truth contentions unfold in the terrain of power.  The Radical Left bullies the creators of critical reflections into silence, with the support of the corporate elite, which is prepared to censor and silence all persons who express ideas contrary to its interests. 

     The epistemological assumptions of the Radical Left have little traction in real socialism.  To the contrary, real socialism is constructed on the foundation of universal values, such as: everyone has the right to speak, on the condition of being respectful to others; everyone has the right to equal access to education and employment; and every nation has the right to sovereignty.  On the foundation of such principles, a just world order is being constructed, concretely and day-by-day.  But the Radical Left is oblivious to this phenomenon.

On patriotism

     The alienated Radical Left does not see the sacredness of the nation, which is the political pillar of real socialism.  Negative national narratives can be readily constructed on the basis of the misdeeds of the villains of the nation’s history, or the misconceptions and worst moments of its heroes.  However, such national narratives rooted in alienation are dysfunctional for the progressive construction of society.  Such negative consequences are unimportant for the cynical and unpatriotic Radical Left, which is satisfied with subjective self-expression.  In contrast, a revolutionary perspective formulates a national narrative based on the best deeds of the leaders and the people, calling the people to further construction on this foundation.  We should remember that Fidel and Ho Chi Minh were patriots, and their revolutionary exhortations to their peoples were rooted in a patriotic sentiment.

Conclusion

      Since the 1960s, we have shouted slogans that invoke “revolution” and “socialism,” but we have not seriously investigated what these words mean or ought to mean.  Given the fact there is a relation between theory and practice, such that ideas are nurtured by human experiences, it follows that we ought to observe those revolutionary movements that have triumphed as well as those nations that are constructing socialism, not to copy them but to develop insights appropriate for our own conditions.  Since the middle of the twentieth century, such nations are found in China and the Third World.  Today, the key to revolutionary consciousness is personal encounter with the Third World plus China, taking seriously their insights.

A free subscription option is available, with capacity to read, send, and share all posts. A paid subscription ($5 per month or $40 per year) enables you to make comments and to support the costs of the column; paid subscribers also receive a free PDF copy of my book on Cuba and the world-system.  Ten percent of income generated through subscriptions to the column is donated to the Cuban Philosophical Society.

 Follow me on Twitter (Charles McKelvey@CharlesMcKelv14) and Facebook