Thanks for the detailed analysis of the Cuban political system, Charles. It is very illuminating.
How would you respond to critics who argue that the institutions of representative grassroots democracy that you describe, which formally give decision making power to the people, are in practice heavily controlled and manipulated by the communist party?
In socialist Yugoslavia we used to formally have the institutions of "worker self-management", which on paper gave major decision-making power over management of state owned companies (as well as other major political decisions) to the company's workers, organized in worker councils. In practice, however, the party found various ways to intervene in the process of worker self-management to make sure that the decisions ultimately followed the political line laid out by the leadership of the communist party. This ultimately led to a great deal of apathy and cynicism on the part of ordinary workers, who pretty much stayed out of enterprise politics as they recognized the process as being heavily rigged. It also severely eroded the legitimacy of the system in their eyes.
Wheil I find your description of the Cuban governance mode very appealing, the cynic in me suspects that the Cuban system functions in much the same way our Yugolsav model did. However, I recognize that I am ignorant in these matters and am ready to hear your views and arguments.
Your friend in Moscow,
Andrej
PS: Did you get your Russian aid package? Was there any vodka inside? :)
Thank you, Andrej, for your useful commentary. I have not really encountered in Cuba the sentiment that you describe. I think the difference may be that in the case of Cuba, the revolution triumphed with the overwhelming support of the people, more than 90%, so that it did not fear establishing at the outset structures that would give voice to the people. Its enemies within Cuba were few in number, but powerful, and with powerful allies outside the country. In this situation, the revolution had an interest in not only giving voice to the people, but also to listen to the people, in order to understand how to keep them on board. The revolutionary leadership has had an interest in not setting itself up as a bureaucratic class above and distinct from the people, because when the revolutionary leaders took decisive steps to break the neocolonial relation with the United States, they generated powerful enemies, and their only road to survival was the continued support of the people.
The example that you give of “worker self-management” is a little bit different from what describe in the post, in which I write of the integration of structures of mass organizations and people’s power to establish a National Assembly of People’s Power that has legitimacy in the eyes of the people. And I write of the legitimacy enjoyed by Communist Party as a vanguard political party, due to its demonstrated commitment to the people, including its commitment to establish mass organizations and structures of people’s power.
In Cuba, something approximating worker self-management was developed in two ways. In state companies, the relevant ministries of the government appoint directors, and the workers elect the leaders of the workers’ organizations; the appointed managers and the elected leaders of the workers together manage the company. In cooperatives, the members elect the managers/leaders of the cooperative, which operates in an environment of state regulation and productive contracts with the state, in accordance with the plan of the state for the economy. I have encountered satisfaction with and appreciation for these structures.
The most common complaint among Cubans is not that there is an unofficial class of managers, bureaucrats, or party officials who have set themselves up apart from and above the people, and who are dedicated to protecting their particular interests. Overwhelmingly, the most common complaint is the low material standing of living, a complaint that does not convert itself into opposition to the government or the Party. Because anyone with a modicum of common sense sees the achievements of the revolution in providing education, health care, and basic human needs; and recognizes that far more would have been achieved with respect to social and economic development, if it had not been for the impact of the blockade.
You need to liberate yourself from your inner cynicism. We all do. We have been taught by the powerful that “power to the people” in an impossible dream, and that a better world is not possible. Cuba, along with other revolutionary peoples, is exposing that lie.
The Russian aid package is being distributed, but distribution has not yet arrived to our neighborhood. As you may know, aid packages are also arriving from Mexico and Nicaragua.
Thanks for the detailed analysis of the Cuban political system, Charles. It is very illuminating.
How would you respond to critics who argue that the institutions of representative grassroots democracy that you describe, which formally give decision making power to the people, are in practice heavily controlled and manipulated by the communist party?
In socialist Yugoslavia we used to formally have the institutions of "worker self-management", which on paper gave major decision-making power over management of state owned companies (as well as other major political decisions) to the company's workers, organized in worker councils. In practice, however, the party found various ways to intervene in the process of worker self-management to make sure that the decisions ultimately followed the political line laid out by the leadership of the communist party. This ultimately led to a great deal of apathy and cynicism on the part of ordinary workers, who pretty much stayed out of enterprise politics as they recognized the process as being heavily rigged. It also severely eroded the legitimacy of the system in their eyes.
Wheil I find your description of the Cuban governance mode very appealing, the cynic in me suspects that the Cuban system functions in much the same way our Yugolsav model did. However, I recognize that I am ignorant in these matters and am ready to hear your views and arguments.
Your friend in Moscow,
Andrej
PS: Did you get your Russian aid package? Was there any vodka inside? :)
Thank you, Andrej, for your useful commentary. I have not really encountered in Cuba the sentiment that you describe. I think the difference may be that in the case of Cuba, the revolution triumphed with the overwhelming support of the people, more than 90%, so that it did not fear establishing at the outset structures that would give voice to the people. Its enemies within Cuba were few in number, but powerful, and with powerful allies outside the country. In this situation, the revolution had an interest in not only giving voice to the people, but also to listen to the people, in order to understand how to keep them on board. The revolutionary leadership has had an interest in not setting itself up as a bureaucratic class above and distinct from the people, because when the revolutionary leaders took decisive steps to break the neocolonial relation with the United States, they generated powerful enemies, and their only road to survival was the continued support of the people.
The example that you give of “worker self-management” is a little bit different from what describe in the post, in which I write of the integration of structures of mass organizations and people’s power to establish a National Assembly of People’s Power that has legitimacy in the eyes of the people. And I write of the legitimacy enjoyed by Communist Party as a vanguard political party, due to its demonstrated commitment to the people, including its commitment to establish mass organizations and structures of people’s power.
In Cuba, something approximating worker self-management was developed in two ways. In state companies, the relevant ministries of the government appoint directors, and the workers elect the leaders of the workers’ organizations; the appointed managers and the elected leaders of the workers together manage the company. In cooperatives, the members elect the managers/leaders of the cooperative, which operates in an environment of state regulation and productive contracts with the state, in accordance with the plan of the state for the economy. I have encountered satisfaction with and appreciation for these structures.
The most common complaint among Cubans is not that there is an unofficial class of managers, bureaucrats, or party officials who have set themselves up apart from and above the people, and who are dedicated to protecting their particular interests. Overwhelmingly, the most common complaint is the low material standing of living, a complaint that does not convert itself into opposition to the government or the Party. Because anyone with a modicum of common sense sees the achievements of the revolution in providing education, health care, and basic human needs; and recognizes that far more would have been achieved with respect to social and economic development, if it had not been for the impact of the blockade.
You need to liberate yourself from your inner cynicism. We all do. We have been taught by the powerful that “power to the people” in an impossible dream, and that a better world is not possible. Cuba, along with other revolutionary peoples, is exposing that lie.
The Russian aid package is being distributed, but distribution has not yet arrived to our neighborhood. As you may know, aid packages are also arriving from Mexico and Nicaragua.
Your friend in Havana,
Charles