Sid Schniad:
> Does anything and everything go under such circumstances?
Of course not, but on the big question of NEP-like measures, there are no
alternatives. With the collapse of the USSR, these measures became
painfully necessary. In order to make them disappear, it requires money not
political exhortation.
>Following this line of reasoning, would place criticism of the Sandinistas'
>adherence to IMF-imposed neoliberal strictures (as published in NACLA
>Reports and elsewhere) similarly off limits.
>
The neoliberal adjustments that took place in Nicaragua in 1989 have the
same cause as those taking place in Cuba today: the collapse of the USSR.
When Gorbachev was in power, Eduard Scheverznade told Nicaragua that it
would have to fend for itself. All aid was cut off to placate Washington.
These neoliberal measures are not the sort of thing that Sandinistas had an
ideological predisposition toward--they were forced on them. After they
adopted them, they unfortunately developed a vision of socialism that was
more social democratic than anything else. They made a virtue out of
necessity. A new left is emerging in Central America and surely will
sidestep Daniel Ortega and company.
>It seems to me that Louis's position comes down to this: genuine socialists
>should treat the revolutionary party in power as being beyond criticism.
I advocate that socialists concentrate their fire on the American
government. Mostly what Brian Green has to offer is a variation of the sort
of thing I hear from Trotskyites all the time on the Spoons mail-list. It
is an abstract call for proletarian democracy, with no clue as to how to
achieve it. It is a harmless pasttime, which functions as rotisserie
baseball for frustrated leftists in imperialist countries. Who can be
opposed to democratic socialism everywhere at once? Not me.
>If this is an improper inference from what you've been saying, Louis --
>apologies in advance if it is -- could you please provide some specific
>instances of policies/actions of the Cuban government that you yourself
>have criticized from your own perspective?
I regard the task of constructing socialism in Russia in the 1920s or Cuba
today as akin to juggling chainsaws. It is a miracle if you can keep them
all in the air and not lose too many fingers in the process.
My main complaint with Castro is not unlike the criticism I have made on
the net of another revolutionary icon, Lenin. They both failed to
understand the nature of the revolutionary process that allowed them to
take power and fostered the development of poorly conceived clones. Lenin
gave his blessing to the "21 conditions" which would create clones of the
Bolshevik party everywhere in the world. Guevara tried to recreate the
Cuban experience in Bolivia with disastrous results, while a myriad of
"Castroite" armed groups came to naught through the 60s and 70s. The FSLN
succeeded, and the FMLN nearly succeeded, because they achieved roots in
the mass movement and did not make a fetish of armed actions.
The other big mistake that Castro made was to give political credit to
Allende, whose horrible class-collaborationist policies helped drown the
workers movement in blood.
Louis Proyect
