Fidel Castro At 90: A Review

Source: thewillnigeria.com

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 of the 1959. 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 equipment and fuel, this also had a negative effect on 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 bourgeois lifestyles of Soviet bureaucrats which are not available to ordinary Russians. This incurred the wrath of the Soviet bureaucracy, which tagged Che, a Trotskyist (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). 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 “guerrillaist” 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).

It is however doubtful whether the change-seeking youths of today with their exposure will be enticed by guerilla movement. This boldness of Fidel and Che is further expressed by the fact that the Soviet bureaucracy that had the power to build genuine international socialist movement deliberately abandoned this for national bourgeois democratic revolutions. 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 in the 1970s and '80's, which is now haunting the 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 Stalinists 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 anti-capitalist 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 was 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 few 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 and defeating the powerful US imperialism, 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 (over 90 percent literacy, 0ver 80 years lifespan, advanced medical system, free mass housing, etc., 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.

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 does will. 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.

Thus, the real task before the working class activists from Nigeria to Kenya, Venezuela, Georgia, 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 legend.

Written by Kola Ibrahim, Author and Activist.
[email protected]
08059399178

Disclaimer: "The views expressed on this site are those of the contributors or columnists, and do not necessarily reflect TheNigerianVoice’s position. TheNigerianVoice will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements in the contributions or columns here."