Samuel Farber.
Published in The International Journal on Thursday, September 30, 2010
Interview with Samuel Farber, a veteran socialist who was born and raised in Cuba, on the meaning of the layoff announcement and what it holds
Last week the government of Raul Castro announced that next year would lay off half a million state employees. According to official labor confederation, at least half of those 500,000 employees are licensed to work for himself and another 200,000 will be placed in cooperatives. The announcement of these layoffs is the latest event in the campaign of Raul Castro and the Cuban economy to turn away from the model of monopolistic state ownership that goes back to the early years of the Cuban revolution of 1959.
Sam Farber in a veteran socialist who was born and raised in Cuba. He is the author of numerous articles and books on the island, including TheOrigins of the Cuban RevolutionReconsidered. Alan Mass interviewed him about the meaning of the layoff announcement and what it holds for Cuba. Mark Selma SINPERMISO translated the interview.
What is the background of the announcement that Cuba is to get rid of half a million employees of state?
I think the first thing we do is place this in the context of a Cuban regime that is in decline, a decline that has accelerated due to a terrible economic situation. This situation is the result of a combination of factors. One is the irrationality and the crisis generated by the same bureaucratic system. Another is, of course, the global recession has beaten very hard on the Cuban economy.
For example, although the rate of tourism in Cuba has remained more or less the same level, has lowered the income of that sector. And the income from the production of nickel, which in recent years has been more important than tourism, decreased dramatically because the market prices of raw materials have foundered - although have recently recovered somewhat.
So the economic crisis has been severe and years ago that the government has been talking about having an excess of a million employees, not half a million but a million. So I guess that the announcement reflects an intermediate position - will lay off half a million people instead of the million which had been talking.
Of that half a million, it is assumed that 250,000 will receive licenses to work for himself and another 200,000 will be placed in jobs non-state, specifically in cooperatives managed by employees. This is what has already been put into effect with the taxis, barbershops and beauty salons. And they want to do the same with many other occupations and industries.
The notice of dismissal, officially announced by the main federation of workers - announced that, as such, rather you have made corresponding to the pattern - no mention of plans for the 50,000 remaining workers perhaps because the jobs will be located in different state they did before.
This is not the first step in making arrangements in that direction, is not it?
I would say that this initiative is a milestone in a process that began long ago. Several years ago, after the sugar industry went down, leaving behind large areas of wasteland, the government began to lease the land, with contracts renewable every 10 years, people interested in working. The purpose was to turn these people in private farmers who work the land under their own initiative. But these farmers are not landowners. We pay rent the state to use public lands and are forced to sell the state most of what they produce at a price fixed by the state.
I think this experience with agriculture gives us an idea of \u200b\u200bthe tremendous problems that lie ahead and that they doubt that the displacement of half a million state employees to work on their own and cooperatives will work.
In the case of private farming, most people who rented the land he had no experience in such work. People of the city was desperately grabbed the opportunity to try to improve their economic situation.
But those people would have been very difficult to get the tools they need. And I do not mean high-tech equipment or tractor or the like. I mean only the most basic tools needed to work the land. The state has done little to help these people even the most basic things. So far not spoken of any worthwhile result with respect to that change.
I think business private face similar problems. For example, one of the occupations that are to be transferred to self-employment or cooperative is the repair of automobiles. Say a person who worked for the state becomes mechanical automobiles: where to get the parts you need for your trabao? Where will you get the tools you need if not the state itself?
And here is where it enters the problem of corruption. Corruption in Cuba has impregnated the whole of society, people have to steal to survive. In a very fundamental level this happens just it is impossible to survive on the monthly ration of government that meets the needs of people for only two weeks. The book has suffered constant ration cuts and expected cuts looming larger.
steal Since the state has become a general standard in order to survive, I suspect the former employee recently become mechanical condition of vehicle will have to steal even more for your little business also to survive.
The other possibility is that the self-employed receive the help of the Cuban capital outside particularmenet South Florida. Although it is illegal from the standpoint of the United States, you may not be to Cuba because that want the capital from the island. But by allowing the entry of Cuban foreign capital, whether large or small scale, Cuba is entering uncharted waters as to what this might unleash on the island.
The Cuban government is in a classic Marxist-type conflict. You have to take these actions, but if it does the results can subvert the system. The government is between a rock and a hard place.
Before the announcement, in Cuba had 591,000 people employed in private businesses. This figure includes the above and also farmers to 143,000 self-employed in urban areas. The layoffs will add 250,000 people to the group of self-employed and 200,000 cooperatives. If we limit ourselves only to private business, private farmers have over 400,000 450.000 self-employed in cities, which in turn can legally use to others. So we are talking about 850,000 people in a workforce of 5 million - or 17 per cent of the total workforce in the island.
This means that the government is creating a legal petty bourgeoisie in Cuba - and mentioned the term "legal" because so many people that it takes time to work on their small business, but illegally. It is impossible to know the consequences this will have because there has been a situation like this since the sixties. We are entering uncharted territory - especially if the self-employed can get their friends and relatives in Miami Cubans on the island to invest money. This is illegal under U.S. law. But there has always been a wing of the American political establishment that thinks it's important to support with money private enterprise in Cuba to the extent possible. For now, the Cuban government probably permits, which will put great pressure on the United States to amend the terms of the economic blockade of the island to make it feasible.
Raul Castro Is responsible for the new direction of economic policy adopted, or perhaps part of that policy goes back to the days when Fidel Castro was in charge? All this - starting with the initiative of private farming - has occurred under the leadership of Raul Castro. Raul Castro took over de facto in 2006 and officially 2008, so he has been the principal person at the head of government of the island daily. It is unclear the extent to which Fidel has played any role in defining the politics of those years and the role they will play in the future.
But these measures have been put in place since Raul Castro took over, which in part explained by his great admiration of the Chinese model long before he took power. Although, of course, even more important was the severity with which the economic crisis has beaten Cuba.
The media describe what is happening in Cuba mostly as a turn toward capitalism and a move away from socialism. Is it correct to describe as socialism that has existed in Cuba for the past 50 years?
I have always maintained that what has taken place in Cuba is not socialism. Unfortunately, there are wide areas of the left who have confused socialism with the nationalization of the economy.
When I speak of socialism I mean the process by which workers in the city and the countryside together with its allies as the peasantry class, control and manage society. This has never happened in Cuba.
What is certain is that the regime was popular for a long time because it significantly improved the living standards of the poorest people, and led to a great social mobility, something that is not always recognized as one of the sources of popular support for the Cuban regime. The very fact of mass migration of large and small bourgeoisie and professionals allowed a large number of people will advance to the positions vacated by those who left.
But the point is that a socialist society is not only because the state has nationalized the economy. Because what one has to ask is who controls the state. In Cuba the workers control the state. The state is controlled by a bureaucracy organized around the Communist Party.
So there is a socialism that is being replaced. The kind of bureaucracy in charge of the state has decided to incorporate in the economy as very much a minority partner, the petty bourgeoisie emerging - some of whom have achieved success in their businesses, and when I have managed to form a new group of private capitalists, something that has not existed in Cuba since the 1960s.
bureaucracy is when share power with a new group - but only economic power that may lead to a situation similar to that of China. As political power, the bureaucracy is not going to share with the new capitalists unless and until the latter have been fully assimilated to the bureaucracy in power. That is what has happened in China, there have been a number of capitalists who have joined the Communist Party and have become part of it.
What implications does this analysis for the Socialists over the economic blockade of Cuba by the United States?
This is something you have to repeat and repeat, regardless of the current crisis in Cuba, regardless of the many crimes and misdeeds committed by its bureaucracy, blocking should be abolished .
This is a matter of principle: the United States has no right to intervene in the internal affairs of Cuba and to use their economic power to impose their capitalist system on the island. This is the main reason for our opposition to the embargo - to assert the right to self-determination and stop U.S. imperialism.
But there is also a practical reason: the Cuban regime has used the embargo imposed by the United States as a pretext to hide its dictatorial nature and its economic inefficiency.
So both on grounds of principle and for practical reasons the economic blockade that has been perpetrated for 50 years must come to an end.
What effect will the layoffs in Cuba? Provoking a new resistance?
I think many people will end up in the street because many of these companies are not going to get the resources they need to function.
As cooperatives, are a creation from above. Not arise as part of a labor movement as happened, for example, in England and Scandinavia where the cooperative movement developed as an ally of the labor movement in the making. To the members of cooperatives in Cuba will lack both access to resources such as the political motivation to run your business.
So it is very possible that many of these cooperatives and private companies end up failing for the above reasons.
And that will happen to these people? Emigration from Cuba has been operating as an outlet for a while. But migration is very expensive and bureaucratic tangles. In Cuba there is no the right to travel. So migration will not solve the problem.
So far, of the discontent and anger with the political system has spilled into criminal activity. The problem of theft in Cuba is huge, and it is not stealing just to keep a little business, it is stealing to survive.
What looks promising in terms of the possibilities that exist in Cuba, is related to the tremendous alienation that prevails among the youth, especially among black youth. In Cuba there is a movement focused on hip hop to express anger black young people specifically from harassment and brutality they suffered at the hands of the police.
Perhaps at some point the frustration and alienation comes to be expressed in terms of political protest. But this is only a possibility. Do not want to fall into the trap of insisting that something will happen just because I want to happen. Unfortunately, things do not work that way.
But I have no doubt that the measures being taken that the scheme will substantially increase the objective possibility a radicalization and a higher level of struggle.
SocialistWorker, September 20, 2010. Sinpermiso.info Translation: Selma Marks.
eldiariointernacional.com
Published in The International Journal on Thursday, September 30, 2010
Interview with Samuel Farber, a veteran socialist who was born and raised in Cuba, on the meaning of the layoff announcement and what it holds
Last week the government of Raul Castro announced that next year would lay off half a million state employees. According to official labor confederation, at least half of those 500,000 employees are licensed to work for himself and another 200,000 will be placed in cooperatives. The announcement of these layoffs is the latest event in the campaign of Raul Castro and the Cuban economy to turn away from the model of monopolistic state ownership that goes back to the early years of the Cuban revolution of 1959.
Sam Farber in a veteran socialist who was born and raised in Cuba. He is the author of numerous articles and books on the island, including TheOrigins of the Cuban RevolutionReconsidered. Alan Mass interviewed him about the meaning of the layoff announcement and what it holds for Cuba. Mark Selma SINPERMISO translated the interview.
What is the background of the announcement that Cuba is to get rid of half a million employees of state?
I think the first thing we do is place this in the context of a Cuban regime that is in decline, a decline that has accelerated due to a terrible economic situation. This situation is the result of a combination of factors. One is the irrationality and the crisis generated by the same bureaucratic system. Another is, of course, the global recession has beaten very hard on the Cuban economy.
For example, although the rate of tourism in Cuba has remained more or less the same level, has lowered the income of that sector. And the income from the production of nickel, which in recent years has been more important than tourism, decreased dramatically because the market prices of raw materials have foundered - although have recently recovered somewhat.
So the economic crisis has been severe and years ago that the government has been talking about having an excess of a million employees, not half a million but a million. So I guess that the announcement reflects an intermediate position - will lay off half a million people instead of the million which had been talking.
Of that half a million, it is assumed that 250,000 will receive licenses to work for himself and another 200,000 will be placed in jobs non-state, specifically in cooperatives managed by employees. This is what has already been put into effect with the taxis, barbershops and beauty salons. And they want to do the same with many other occupations and industries.
The notice of dismissal, officially announced by the main federation of workers - announced that, as such, rather you have made corresponding to the pattern - no mention of plans for the 50,000 remaining workers perhaps because the jobs will be located in different state they did before.
This is not the first step in making arrangements in that direction, is not it?
I would say that this initiative is a milestone in a process that began long ago. Several years ago, after the sugar industry went down, leaving behind large areas of wasteland, the government began to lease the land, with contracts renewable every 10 years, people interested in working. The purpose was to turn these people in private farmers who work the land under their own initiative. But these farmers are not landowners. We pay rent the state to use public lands and are forced to sell the state most of what they produce at a price fixed by the state.
I think this experience with agriculture gives us an idea of \u200b\u200bthe tremendous problems that lie ahead and that they doubt that the displacement of half a million state employees to work on their own and cooperatives will work.
In the case of private farming, most people who rented the land he had no experience in such work. People of the city was desperately grabbed the opportunity to try to improve their economic situation.
But those people would have been very difficult to get the tools they need. And I do not mean high-tech equipment or tractor or the like. I mean only the most basic tools needed to work the land. The state has done little to help these people even the most basic things. So far not spoken of any worthwhile result with respect to that change.
I think business private face similar problems. For example, one of the occupations that are to be transferred to self-employment or cooperative is the repair of automobiles. Say a person who worked for the state becomes mechanical automobiles: where to get the parts you need for your trabao? Where will you get the tools you need if not the state itself?
And here is where it enters the problem of corruption. Corruption in Cuba has impregnated the whole of society, people have to steal to survive. In a very fundamental level this happens just it is impossible to survive on the monthly ration of government that meets the needs of people for only two weeks. The book has suffered constant ration cuts and expected cuts looming larger.
steal Since the state has become a general standard in order to survive, I suspect the former employee recently become mechanical condition of vehicle will have to steal even more for your little business also to survive.
The other possibility is that the self-employed receive the help of the Cuban capital outside particularmenet South Florida. Although it is illegal from the standpoint of the United States, you may not be to Cuba because that want the capital from the island. But by allowing the entry of Cuban foreign capital, whether large or small scale, Cuba is entering uncharted waters as to what this might unleash on the island.
The Cuban government is in a classic Marxist-type conflict. You have to take these actions, but if it does the results can subvert the system. The government is between a rock and a hard place.
Before the announcement, in Cuba had 591,000 people employed in private businesses. This figure includes the above and also farmers to 143,000 self-employed in urban areas. The layoffs will add 250,000 people to the group of self-employed and 200,000 cooperatives. If we limit ourselves only to private business, private farmers have over 400,000 450.000 self-employed in cities, which in turn can legally use to others. So we are talking about 850,000 people in a workforce of 5 million - or 17 per cent of the total workforce in the island.
This means that the government is creating a legal petty bourgeoisie in Cuba - and mentioned the term "legal" because so many people that it takes time to work on their small business, but illegally. It is impossible to know the consequences this will have because there has been a situation like this since the sixties. We are entering uncharted territory - especially if the self-employed can get their friends and relatives in Miami Cubans on the island to invest money. This is illegal under U.S. law. But there has always been a wing of the American political establishment that thinks it's important to support with money private enterprise in Cuba to the extent possible. For now, the Cuban government probably permits, which will put great pressure on the United States to amend the terms of the economic blockade of the island to make it feasible.
Raul Castro Is responsible for the new direction of economic policy adopted, or perhaps part of that policy goes back to the days when Fidel Castro was in charge? All this - starting with the initiative of private farming - has occurred under the leadership of Raul Castro. Raul Castro took over de facto in 2006 and officially 2008, so he has been the principal person at the head of government of the island daily. It is unclear the extent to which Fidel has played any role in defining the politics of those years and the role they will play in the future.
But these measures have been put in place since Raul Castro took over, which in part explained by his great admiration of the Chinese model long before he took power. Although, of course, even more important was the severity with which the economic crisis has beaten Cuba.
The media describe what is happening in Cuba mostly as a turn toward capitalism and a move away from socialism. Is it correct to describe as socialism that has existed in Cuba for the past 50 years?
I have always maintained that what has taken place in Cuba is not socialism. Unfortunately, there are wide areas of the left who have confused socialism with the nationalization of the economy.
When I speak of socialism I mean the process by which workers in the city and the countryside together with its allies as the peasantry class, control and manage society. This has never happened in Cuba.
What is certain is that the regime was popular for a long time because it significantly improved the living standards of the poorest people, and led to a great social mobility, something that is not always recognized as one of the sources of popular support for the Cuban regime. The very fact of mass migration of large and small bourgeoisie and professionals allowed a large number of people will advance to the positions vacated by those who left.
But the point is that a socialist society is not only because the state has nationalized the economy. Because what one has to ask is who controls the state. In Cuba the workers control the state. The state is controlled by a bureaucracy organized around the Communist Party.
So there is a socialism that is being replaced. The kind of bureaucracy in charge of the state has decided to incorporate in the economy as very much a minority partner, the petty bourgeoisie emerging - some of whom have achieved success in their businesses, and when I have managed to form a new group of private capitalists, something that has not existed in Cuba since the 1960s.
bureaucracy is when share power with a new group - but only economic power that may lead to a situation similar to that of China. As political power, the bureaucracy is not going to share with the new capitalists unless and until the latter have been fully assimilated to the bureaucracy in power. That is what has happened in China, there have been a number of capitalists who have joined the Communist Party and have become part of it.
What implications does this analysis for the Socialists over the economic blockade of Cuba by the United States?
This is something you have to repeat and repeat, regardless of the current crisis in Cuba, regardless of the many crimes and misdeeds committed by its bureaucracy, blocking should be abolished .
This is a matter of principle: the United States has no right to intervene in the internal affairs of Cuba and to use their economic power to impose their capitalist system on the island. This is the main reason for our opposition to the embargo - to assert the right to self-determination and stop U.S. imperialism.
But there is also a practical reason: the Cuban regime has used the embargo imposed by the United States as a pretext to hide its dictatorial nature and its economic inefficiency.
So both on grounds of principle and for practical reasons the economic blockade that has been perpetrated for 50 years must come to an end.
What effect will the layoffs in Cuba? Provoking a new resistance?
I think many people will end up in the street because many of these companies are not going to get the resources they need to function.
As cooperatives, are a creation from above. Not arise as part of a labor movement as happened, for example, in England and Scandinavia where the cooperative movement developed as an ally of the labor movement in the making. To the members of cooperatives in Cuba will lack both access to resources such as the political motivation to run your business.
So it is very possible that many of these cooperatives and private companies end up failing for the above reasons.
And that will happen to these people? Emigration from Cuba has been operating as an outlet for a while. But migration is very expensive and bureaucratic tangles. In Cuba there is no the right to travel. So migration will not solve the problem.
So far, of the discontent and anger with the political system has spilled into criminal activity. The problem of theft in Cuba is huge, and it is not stealing just to keep a little business, it is stealing to survive.
What looks promising in terms of the possibilities that exist in Cuba, is related to the tremendous alienation that prevails among the youth, especially among black youth. In Cuba there is a movement focused on hip hop to express anger black young people specifically from harassment and brutality they suffered at the hands of the police.
Perhaps at some point the frustration and alienation comes to be expressed in terms of political protest. But this is only a possibility. Do not want to fall into the trap of insisting that something will happen just because I want to happen. Unfortunately, things do not work that way.
But I have no doubt that the measures being taken that the scheme will substantially increase the objective possibility a radicalization and a higher level of struggle.
SocialistWorker, September 20, 2010. Sinpermiso.info Translation: Selma Marks.
eldiariointernacional.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment