====================================================================== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. ======================================================================
David Thorstad ([email protected]) wrote on 2010-09-11 at 10:02:37 in about [Marxism] Fidel Castro Says He Was Misinterpreted (was: Fidel (acc. to Goldberg): "Cuban model doesn't work, anymore"): > > Yes, thanks. It's clear now that Castro was addressing the idea that a > "Cuban model" was one of "exporting revolution." Not, as I had > originally read it, a reference to an alleged Cuban economic or social > model--which I think Goldberg's sloppiness implied. It was to that > supposed "model" that I was referring when I asked earlier just when the > "Cuban model" began and what it consisted of. These are two different > things, and it looks like Goldberg mixed them up. The whole issue is that one can' t make a revolution and defend it by applying models, i.e. preconceived ideas. Reality is concrete, and what is objectively required has to be found by a scientific analysis of the concrete situation, and what policies to apply and how to mobilize the masses is a question of the _art_ of politics. Let me repeat: political leadership is not a science, it is an art. Fidel Castro is one of the masters of that art, with the caveat that as a human being, he is not infallible and may make errors. He is not the pope, and no saint. BTW, were Fidel's comments on what Goldberg made of his conversation with Fidel already posted to this list? I had no chance to read all those contribution on this issue; I have been out working all day today. It was published on Cubadebate as "message on the presentation of the book "The Strategic Counteroffensive" (La contraofensiva estrategica). > <http://www.cubadebate.cu/fidel-castro-ruz/2010/09/10/mensaje-en-la-pre sentacion-de-la-contraofensiva-estrategica/> The English translation can be found here: > <http://www.cuba.cu/gobierno/reflexiones/2010/ing/m100910i.html> I just post the text again, please be lenient with me if this is a duplication. Any way, what Fidel says can be read several times and is worth to be spread worldwide. ----- full text ----------------------------- We are living through an exceptional moment in human history. The deadlines established by the United Nations Security Council for Iran to yield to the demands imposed by the United States regarding nuclear research and uranium enrichment for medical purposes and to generate electricity will be expiring in these days. This is the only nuclear use that has been documented in Iran. The fear that Iran is looking forward to producing nuclear weapons is only based on an assumption. With regard to this delicate issue, the United States and its western allies, among them two of the five nuclear powers with veto power -France and the United Kingdom- supported by the richest and most developed capitalist powers of the world, have promoted an increasing number of sanctions against Iran, a rich, oil-producing Muslim country. Today, the measures adopted include the inspection of Iran's merchant vessels and severe economic sanctions aimed at suffocating its economy. I have been following very closely the grave dangers that may result from that situation, because if a war breaks out in that region, it could very quickly go nuclear, and this will have lethal consequences for the rest of the planet. In referring to such danger I was not looking for publicity or sensationalism. I just wanted to warn the world public opinion hoping that, being advised of such grave danger it could contribute to avoid it. At least we have managed to draw attention to a problem that was hardly mentioned by the big world media. This has made me use part of the time scheduled for the launching of this book, on which we worked diligently. I did not want this to coincide with the dates of September 7 and 9. September 7 marks the end of the 90 days term established by the Security Council to know whether Iran complied or not with the requirement of authorizing the inspection of its merchant vessels. September 9 marks the expiration of the three months term fixed by the Resolution adopted on June 9. Quite possibly the establishment of this last term was what the Security Council intended to do originally. So far we have only had the weird statement made by the Director General of the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency), the Japanese Yukiya Amano, a man who serves the interests of the Yankees. He added all the fuel to the flames and then, like Pontius Pilate, he washed his hands of the issue. A spokesperson from the Foreign Ministry of Iran commented his statements with a well earned contempt. According to a news report published by EFE, Amano's assertion that "'our friends should not worry, because we don't believe our region is in the position to engage in new military adventures' and that 'Iran was fully prepared to respond to any military invasion' was an obvious reference to the Cuban leader Fidel Castro, 'who warned about a possible Israeli nuclear attack against Iran with the support of the United States'". News on this topic are pouring and get mixed with others of remarkable repercussion. The journalist Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic magazine, already known by our people, has been publishing some excerpts of the long interview he made me. He has been discussing some interesting aspects of it before he finally writes a future and long article. "There were many odd things about my recent Havana stopover, [...]", he wrote, but one of the most unusual was Fidel Castro's level of self-reflection [...] but it seemed truly striking that Castro was willing to admit that he misplayed his hand at a crucial moment in the Cuban Missile Crisis [...] that he regrets asking Khrushchev to nuke the U.S." It is true that he addressed the topic and he asked me that question. Literally, as he wrote in the first part of his report, his words were the following: "I asked him: At a certain point it seemed logical for you to recommend that the Soviets bomb the U.S. Does what you recommended still seem logical now?" He answered: "After I've seen what I've seen, and knowing what I know now, it wasn't worth it all." I had thoroughly explained to him -and there is written evidence of that- the content of that message: "...if the United States invades Cuba, a country with Russian nuclear weapons, under such circumstances Russia should not allow to be dealt the first strike, as the one dealt against the USSR on June 22, 1941, when the German army and all European forces attacked the USSR." As can be observed from that brief reference to the issue, from the second part of his report to the audience on that news, readers could not realize that "if the United States invaded Cuba, a country with Russian nuclear weapons", under such circumstances, my recommendation was to prevent the enemy from launching the first strike; nor the profound irony embedded in my response - "...and knowing what I know now...", which was an obvious reference to the betrayal by one Russian President who saturated himself with some ethylic substance and revealed to the United States the most important military secrets of that country. Further on Goldberg wrote about another moment of our conversation: "I asked him if he believed the Cuban model was still something worth exporting." Obviously, that question implicitly suggested the theory that Cuba exported the Revolution. So I responded: "The Cuban model doesn't even work for us anymore". I said this to him without any bitterness or concern. And now I laugh at the way he literally interpreted what I said and how, according to him, he consulted it with Julia Sweig, a CFR analyst who accompanied him and worked out the theory he described. But the truth is that the meaning of my response was exactly the opposite of the interpretation made by both American journalists of the Cuban model. My idea, as everybody knows, is that the capitalist system does not work anymore either for the United States or the world, which jumps from one crisis into the next, and these are ever more serious, global and frequent and there is no way the world could escape from them. How could such a system work for a socialist country like Cuba? Many Arab friends worried when they knew I had met with Goldberg, and sent some messages describing him as "the staunchest advocate of Zionism." >From all of these we can infer the big confusion that exists in the world. Therefore I hope that what I am telling you about my thoughts could be useful. The ideas I expressed are contained in 333 Reflections -see what a coincidence. The last 26 refer exclusively to the problems affecting the environment and the imminent danger of a nuclear war. And now I should very briefly add something. I have always condemned the Holocaust. I my Reflections entitled "Obama's Speech in Cairo", "A Swipe Waiting to Happen", and "The Opinion of an Expert" I expressed this very clearly. I have never been an enemy of the Jewish people, which I admire for having resisted dispersion and persecution during two thousand years. Many of the most brilliant talents, such as Karl Marx and Albert Einstein, were Jews, because that was a nation where the most intelligent managed to survive by virtue of a natural law. In our country and in the whole world they were persecuted and slandered. But this is just pat of the ideas I defend. They were not the only one who were persecuted and slandered for their beliefs. Muslims were attacked and persecuted for their beliefs by the European Christians for much more than 12 centuries, just as the first Christians were in ancient Rome before Christianity became an official religion of that empire. History should be accepted and remembered just the way it happened, with all its tragic realities and its fierce wars. I have spoken about that and that is why I have all the more reason to explain the dangers jeopardizing humankind today, when wars have become the biggest suicide risk for our fragile species. If we add to this a war against Iran, even if it were of a conventional nature, the United States would rather turn off the light and say goodbye. How could the US put up with a war against 1.5 million Muslims? For any true revolutionary, defending peace does not mean to renounce to the principles of justice, without which human life and society would be meaningless. I still believe that Goldberg is an excellent journalist who is able to set out, in an enjoyable way and masterly way, his views, which promotes debate. He does not invent phrases; he transfers them and interprets them. I will not refer to the content of many others aspects of our conversation. I will respect the secrecy of the issues we discussed and I eagerly await his future long article. The current news that have started to pour from all sources make me to complement his presentation with these words whose essence is contained in the book "La contraofensiva estratégica" (The Strategic Counteroffensive), which I have just presented. I believe that all peoples have the right to peace and enjoy all the goods and natural resources of the planet. What is currently going on with peoples in many countries of Africa, where there are millions of emaciated children, women and men out of lack of food, water and medicines is a shame. We feel astonished by the images we see from the Middle East, where Palestinians are deprived from their lands, their homes are demolished by gigantic equipment, and men, women and children are bombed with white phosphorus and other extermination means; the Dantesque scenes of families exterminated by the bombs dropped over Afghan and Pakistani towns by drones; the Iraqis who are dying after years of war; and the more than one million lives lost in that conflict imposed by a US President. The last we could expect to see were the news about the expulsion of the French gypsies, who are victims of a new sort of racial Holocaust. The strong protest by the French is only logical. At the same time, the millionaires restrict French citizens' rights to retirement while reducing the possibilities to get a job. >From the US we have heard the news of a pastor in Florida that intends to burn the Holy Book of the Quran in its own church. Even the Yankee and military chiefs engaged in punitive war missions were disturbed by the news which they believed would put their soldiers in jeopardy. Walter Martínez, the prestigious journalist who conducts the Venezuelan TV program Dossier, was amazed at such madness. Yesterday, Thursday 9th in the evening, some news asserted that the pastor had relinquished his idea. It might be necessary to know what the FBI agents who visited him told him to "persuade him". That was a colossal media show, a chaos. Those are things proper of an empire that is sinking. I thank all of you for your attention. September 10, 2010. ------------- end text -------------------- By the way, there were some commentaries posted to this Fidel's article on Cubadebate, asking for making this text available to the Cuban public in the regular Cuban press. Similar demands had been voiced outside of Cuba, one of those was posted to Cubanews, the mailinglist managed by our faithful Walter Lippmann. Cheers, Lüko Willms Frankfurt, Germany -------------------------------- ________________________________________________ Send list submissions to: [email protected] Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
