Important article(s) on Guevara and Cuba interacting with the Russian oligarch(s). A moment of peril as the Yankee vultures get an assist from the Russian vultures. Poor Cuba. But there is a way out here which noone can seem to take;
We have discussed Cuba many times here and have tried to show how our DMNC model of (eco-socialist) ‘democratic market neo-communism’can help to resolve the constant and destructive indecision between Marxist axioms or dogmas and capitalist ideology and its deceptive liberalism. We see here a perfect example of the indecision over how to proceed as the Marxist fundamentalism fails and drives thinking back to capitalist capitulation. There is hardly anything more incompetent than the Bolshevik (Marxist) legacy and its limits in practice rise to overwhelm practical and effective socialist economy (a subject with absolutely no exemplars, not Bolshevik Russia, not China, not Vietnam, let alone Cuba).
The DMNC points beyond single-term sloganeering ‘socialism (or communism)’ and demands one do four things at once (or five with the ecosocialism angle, or more): create democracy ( multiparty parliament or Congress, next to a revolutionary guardian party in the context of revolutionary authority tending to (Leninist, what to say of Stalinist) dictatorship (laughing out of the ballpark the obsolete and utterly absurd (archaic) term dictatorship of the proletariat), find a resolution of planning and markets in a hybrid system based on a Commons, socialist markets being based on a Commons by really existing revolutionary expropriation of large-scale capital but with a lower threshold indifference level where the neo-communist state allows multipolar social mixtures: under the umbrella of enterprises under the Commons (not the same as state capitalist ownership: the Commons is checked-balanced between state and individual. This allows low-level markets (small farms, shops (petty bourgeois, egad), small start ups (like the first years of Apple, etc …) and individual careering, etc) in a mix of regulation and a touch of anarchism. A key factor here is a new kind of international, although our system is designed to work in one country. This system will thrive on trade within strong limits and might find external investment but NEVER allows control by external capital. Anything that grows beyond the threshold enters the large-scale Commons sector. This not communism but neo-communism. You must leave behind the whole morass of marxist confusion and start over.
This kind of system could produce a robust economy in the context of socialism in a manner that is light years beyond the club-footed Bolshevik/Marxist state economy formulation while at the same time being a genuine socialism with genuine markets of a new kind. One could modify the American Constitution in a week to match this model. It would be far better to start from scratch but the Leninist temptation will always move to wreck the heritage of liberal rights. But these are vital and will be accompanied by new companions, economic rights along with new versions of labor unions. Note this model seems silent on the working class. It is in fact keyed to that issue but the working class meme has been misunderstood on the left (although it was clear enough in the early stages of industrial capitalism). The working class tends to be a hybrid of the middle class. This model allows one to throttle up or down on the working class meme. If the ‘working class’ is all those who wage labor then most of the middle class is working class. The classic left was in a muddle on this point. The point is that capitalism partitions into population sectors (classes?): a bourgeoise (bad term now) or capitalists and everyone else, middle class etc… This partitions in permanent conflict (class struggle).
One shakes one’s head in frustration as the same old fallacies occur ad infinitum at which the capitalist vultures arrive to second guess the inexorable failures of the archaic socialist models.
Cf. The_Last_Revolution_Postcapitalist Futures_ ED5_5_2_23