I participated in the 2012 “Seminar on Socialist Renewal and the Capitalist Crisis” co-sponsored by the Radical Philosophy Association and the Institute of Philosophy, University of Havana. More than forty US/Canadian/ Latin American scholars met in conference with at least 75 Cuban scholars in a five day conference to discuss the political and economic changes occurring in Cuba and the United States.
I purposely entitle this essay “revisiting the Cuban Revolution” because I came away from this exciting conference convinced that the revolution continues. I say this because I saw no reason to revise what I wrote in 1992 about the Cuban Revolution (Cuba and the USA: A New World Order? International Publishers, 6):
“….the
Cuban revolution (even until this day) has constituted a living experiment that
most progressive forces around the world identify with. Even though each
society has its own history, class structure, level of development, and
revolutionary potential, Cuba’s desire to create a government to serve its
people and at the same time to transform them from a traditional consciousness
to a revolutionary consciousness is shared by progressives everywhere. For
progressives, Cuba is a laboratory, a grand social experiment that will provide
knowledge for others as they seek fundamental change in their own
societies…..Cuba’s successes in the years ahead are successes of all
progressive forces and, similarly Cuba’s defeats are defeats for all who wish
to create egalitarian and humane
societies”.
The idea of “revolution” refers to a fundamental
transformation of economic and political structures and peoples’ consciousness
of their place in society and the values that should determine human behavior. Also, revolution is not a fixed “thing”
but a process. That means that changes in structures, patterns of behavior, and
consciousness are changing over time and in the case of revolution are moving
toward, rather than away from, more complete human fulfillment.
What has been most fascinating to observe about the
Cuban Revolution is its constantly changing character. Cubans have debated and
made decisions about gradual versus fundamental changes, the need to experiment
with different ways to allocate scarce national resources and, most critical,
how to respond to external economic, political, and military assaults. Cuban society has been an experimental
laboratory, changing public policies as contexts demand. If one set of policies
became problematic, the Cubans moved in different directions. Usually change came
after heated debate at all levels of society.
For example, after the 26th of July Movement
seized power, the revolutionary regime launched programs to reduce rents for
urban dwellers, established a nationwide literacy campaign, and after a cool U.S.
response to the new government, put in place a large agrarian reform program.
As United States hostility escalated Cuba established diplomatic and economic
relations with the former Soviet Union. From that point US/Cuban hostilities
became permanent.
In the mid-1960s, Cuba engaged in a great debate, to
some degree unresolved, between those who wanted to move the Revolution along
the path to “moral incentives,” that is creating a society in which people act
because of their commitment to communist ideals, versus those who argued that
in the short run “material incentives,” wages and benefits, needed to serve as
the source of human motivation.
Later, the Cuban government embarked on a campaign
to produce more sugar than ever before to earn scarce foreign exchange in order
to advance the domestic economy. The 10 million ton sugar campaign failed with
negative consequences for the sectors of Cuban society that were ignored. Then
Cuba embraced the Soviet model of development, including joining the Eastern
European Common Market.
By the 1980s, while the economy grew, Cubans saw a
decline in the commitment to the Revolution. This recognition led to a campaign
of “Rectification,” to re-instill in society and consciousness, the spirit of
the Revolution. When the Socialist Bloc collapsed between 1989 and 1991, once
again the Cuban Revolution had to adapt. “The Special Period” was instituted in
the face of a decline in the economy of at least 40 percent. The Revolution
survived, contrary to the predictions of outside experts.
In the 21st century, despite devastating
hurricanes, a global economic crisis, and an escalating United States economic
blockade, the Revolution continued.
Now, the Cubans are embarking on a new set of
policies that are designed to overcome economic stagnation, inadequate
agricultural productivity, bureaucracy and corruption in government, and insufficient
grassroots participation in decision-making, particularly at the work place.
After extensive debate in the society at large, from the leadership of the
Communist Party to virtually every workplace, neighborhood and village, the
Cubans have decided on new structures and policies.
The new policy guidelines include the expansion of a
market in the production of goods and services. This expansion will include a
dramatic shift of employment from the state sector to self-employment. Emphasis
will be placed on developing cooperatives in manufacturing and services as well
as in agriculture. In the agricultural sector efforts are being initiated to
encourage a dramatic increase in those who can return to the land, increasing
domestic food production while reducing the need to import food from abroad. New
forms of grassroots participation in addition to revitalizing the mass
organizations will occur. And the ration system of food distribution will be
replaced by the establishment of a safety net for those still in need of food. And where possible, enterprise autonomy, such
as in the renovation of Old Havana, will be encouraged and supported.
The new guidelines, over 300 in all, are designed to
renovate economic and political institutions, stimulate local entrepreneurial
enterprise, increase political participation, and overcome the continuing
economic crisis that a small country such as Cuba finds itself in as a result
of natural and political disasters as well as a continued effort by the
“Colossus of the North” to overthrow the regime.
Debate within Cuban society (and among our North
American delegation) about these new guidelines has been animated. Perhaps most basic is the concern about
whether the economic reforms will undermine the Socialist character of Cuban
society after over 60 years of struggle. Some worry that the introduction of
markets may undermine the spirit of compassion and revolutionary consciousness
that was inspired by the heroic Che Guevara and the band of scruffy
revolutionaries who overthrew a neo-colonial regime in 1959.
Still others debate about whether cooperatives
constitute a productive and yet inspirational step in the long history of
building Socialism and Communism. And what about youth, people ask. Is the
revolution ancient history for young people, a youthful population that has had
access to a rich educational experience and live a healthful life. Will they
have the same fervor for the Revolution that their elders and foreign friends
have had? And, in fairness to the young, how can the Revolution be preserved
while serving the lives of people whose historical experiences are different
from their elders?
There are no easy answers to these questions; no
guarantees of success; no convincing narratives of a linear development from a
contradictory present to a utopian future. But, as I clearly saw in 1990 when I
started attending meetings of U.S. and Cuban scholars, there is reason for
hope. The Cuban Revolution has survived, given so much to the world, and
continued to intrigue progressives everywhere. I returned from my encounter to
Cuba in June, 2012, with renewed optimism.
