Sixth Congress of the CPC: Paper socialism

Authors:
José Alberto López Rafaschieri and Luis Alberto López Rafaschieri
www.morochos.net

In the Sixth Congress of the Communist Party of Cuba, the guidelines that will govern the economic model of this Caribbean nation in the coming years were agreed. To maintain the facade of a dictatorship that still endures despite Fidel's convalescence, and the pride of not admitting internal idealogical conflicts, the discourse that graced the event was "socialism, revolution and more socialism", without making a stop at the anti-communist reforms of Raul Castro, or openly discussing the increasingly evident crisis of faith of the upper levels of government in the Marxist philosophy.

The previous Congress had occurred in 1997. At that meeting, the final document mentions the word "socialism" only three times, while the same word is invoked 26 times in the document prepared in 2011; demonstrating the Cuban leadership's desire to emphasize the socialist character of the post-Fidel era.

But the repetition of the word socialism, more than before, does not help if the signs that the Cuban regime shows illustrate serious internal contradictions. Fidel told the world few months ago, "the Cuban model no longer works even for us", while the Communist Party shouted the "continuity and irreversibility of socialism" at the past week's convention. Who should we believe?

Although Cuban politicians tried to keep the revolutionary rhetoric, the final document coyly warns a socialism that is unlike that of Fidel. The text says, for example, "the economic system will continue to prevail based on the socialist ownership of all the people over the fundamental means of production". We note the intentional inclusion of the word "fundamental" in the declaration, which leaves the door open for private sector participation in non-strategic areas of the Cuban economy, as Raul has been allowing in the small farming and other business.

Classical Marxism, in which Fidel believed, has among its ideological pillars the collective ownership of the means of production and the abolition of private property, regardless of whether these resources were fundamental or not. They may include 26 times more the word socialism in the conclusion of the Sixth Congress of the Communist Party of Cuba, but the socialist ownership of some means of production, the fundamentals, sounds more like a mixed economy model than a socialist one.

---

Related articles:

• The Fidel Castro we didn't know
• The Cuban Perestroika
• Cuba, living without the US?

Humala, like Chavez or like Funes?

Authors:
Luis Alberto López Rafaschieri and José Alberto López Rafaschieri
www.morochos.net

Ollanta Humala and Hugo Chavez came from the military, they reached the same rank of lieutenant colonel, and are those who believe that yelling at a battalion is the same as governing a country. Ideologically, they seem to agree on several things, at least in words, because Humala also wants to come to power by talking about Constituent Assembly, referendum, nationalization, "a great transformation," and praising past military regimes. However, Humala's intentions and discourse are not entirely sufficient to assume that, if this ex-coup leader becomes president in Peru, we will see the consolidation of another Chavez in the Andes.

Humala's time is different. For 2011, the social, economic and democratic crisis in Chavez's Venezuela is well known; while the former governments of Lula and Bachelet, in Brazil and Chile respectively, are considered the two best examples for Latin American leftists.

The last imitator of the Venezuelan comandante appeared in 2007 in Nicaragua, Daniel Ortega. Since then, almost all leftist groups in Latin America have tended to resemble their Brazilian and Chilean comrades.

Mauricio Funes came to power in El Salvador in 2009, with the help of radical leftists and former guerrilla combatants. Chavista style policies were also feared in El Salvador in that moment, but Funes was wise enough to realize that following the Chavez path would be a mistake. Today, Funes is one of the most prestigious Latin American leaders because he is not ignoring democratic principles.

If he wins the presidency, Humala will have to choose in similar circumstances to those of Funes. Will he be so foolish as to copy the political crises caused by Chavez imitators in Ecuador, Bolivia and Nicaragua?

---

Related articles:

• The male chauvinist nature of castro-chavism
• Gaddafi and the Latin American left
• US legislative elections, Chomsky and Stiglitz

Chavez goes to the Souht: The counterattack

Authors:
José Alberto López Rafaschieri and Luis Alberto López Rafaschieri
www.morochos.net

Barack Obama came to Brazil, Chile and El Salvador last week. From there, he launched criticisms against the castrocommunist models of the region and congratulated the countries with democratic political systems. At the end of that trip, like two candidates vying to win over the electorate, Chavez announced a similar tour through Argentina, Uruguay, Bolivia and Colombia, trying to reheat the anti-US sentiment and the sympathy for the Cuban-Venezuelan socialism.

Chavez's journey has the potential to make more noise than Obama's visit. Of the four countries to be visited, Bolivia is the place where Chavez has the greatest opportunity to cause more controversy, because Evo Morales is carrying, just at this moment, an intense campaign to recover the Bolivian coast, which surely will be supported by Chavez with his characteristic imprudence.

In another idea, the visit to Colombia and the non-visit to Brazil are events that should not be overlooked. The stop in the land of Santander evidence that relations between Caracas and Bogota are narrowing, despite ideological differences. While the non-visit to Brazil has a contrary interpretation. In his journey through the South, Chavez will border the Latin America's largest economy without going to say hello to President Dilma Rousseff, making it clear to Itamaraty that Chavez and his petrodollars are not happy with Obama's recent visit to Brazil, nor with the distance the new Brazilian president has shown with the "Bolivarian revolution."

---

Related articles:

• Obama in Latin America: Transition to democracy
• The Palmer code
• Gaddafi and the Latin American left

Obama in Latin America: The transition to democracy

Authors:
Luis Alberto López Rafaschieri and José Alberto López Rafaschieri
www.morochos.net

The U.S. president traveled to Latin America. Barack Obama visited Brazil, Chile and El Salvador, on a five-day tour organized by the White House. Drug trafficking, terrorism, free trade, human rights, etc., were among the topics covered, but of all these issues, the transition to democracy could be one of the most remarkable.

It is no coincidence that the three countries visited by Barack Obama have had a recent political history that shows the successful replacement of authoritarianism with democracy. Until 1985, Brazil was ruled by military juntas that were gradually replaced by civilian governments. In Chile, the dictator Augusto Pinochet was deposed in 1988 to make way for a golden age of democratic reforms. And in El Salvador, a bloody civil war ended in 1992, leaving behind years of political instability and despotism.

Obama's visit to these three countries has been accompanied by criticism of the Cuban political system and Latin American leaders "who cling to bankrupt ideologies to justify their own power", in clear reference to Hugo Chavez. In addition, the tour is parallel to the beginning of U.S. military operations in Libya and to the anti-dictatorship revolutions in the Arab world, making it clear that one of the main messages the U.S. president sought to send, during his visit to Latin America, is associated to revive the Western model of democracy.

---

Related articles:

• Polls for Peru's presidential election
• Gaddafi and the Latin American left
• The Palmer code

Polls for Peru's presidential election

Authors:
José Alberto López Rafaschieri and Luis Alberto López Rafaschieri
www.morochos.net

The upcoming April 10, 2011, Peruvians will elect a new president and members of the National Congress of the Republic of Peru. The contest involves several personalities of the Peruvian politics, like Alejandro Toledo, Keiko Fujimori and Ollanta Humala.

In one recent opinion poll, developed by Ipsos, the presidential candidate with more support is Alejandro Toledo -Peru Posible- with 27%; followed by Keiko Fujimori -Force 2011- with 22%; Luis Castañeda -Solidaridad Nacional- with 17%; Ollanta Humala -Gana Peru- with 16%; and Pablo Kuczynski -Gran Cambio- with 10%.

According to Peru's electoral system, if none of the presidential candidates gets 50% + 1 of valid votes, a second electoral round should be performed, involving only the two leading candidates of the first round. This means that, assuming the above-mentioned opinion survey, the 2011 Peruvian presidential elections would be decided in a runoff, in which Alejandro Toledo and Keiko Fujimori would participate. That is, a competition between the daughter of the last dictator of Peru against the leader of the so-called "peaceful resistance" that overthrew him.

---

Related articles:

• Gaddafi and the Latin American left
• The Cuban Perestroika
• US legislative elections, Chomsky and Stiglitz

The male chauvinist nature of castro-chavism

Authors:
Luis Alberto López Rafaschieri and José Alberto López Rafaschieri
www.morochos.net

We always remember that the governments of Cuba and Venezuela are enemies of democracy, but few times we consider the impact of such authority models on the so-called gender equality.

It is not possible to build a more equitable society, in terms of social roles of men and women, where a military warlord assumes he is the one with the right to govern. In Cuba and Venezuela, the scheme of one man that holds indefinitely the highest authority of the nation reinforces the stereotype that men are superior to women.

Worse, in the case of Cuba or Venezuela, it is not only that the same man is always occupying the role of head of state, but also the government is exercised with abuse of power and repression, inculcating despotism in the male population.

Even something as simple as Chavez's constant radio and television official interruptions symbolize the political discrimination against women under the Cuban-Venezuelan schemes. Meanwhile Chavez spoke in all media, for hours, no women in Venezuela have a similar right, which is understood by the general population, especially children and adolescents, as if the man had more right to speak and lead.

So serious are these issues that the third Millennium Development Goal of the UN seeks "greater participation and representation of women in politics and decision-making of States", and UNICEF indicates that "the distribution of socially constituted roles too often frustrate the potential of girls and women". Few days after the 100th anniversary of International Women's Day, it is not a bad idea to include the Castro-Chavista authority model in the Latin American debate on gender equality.

---

Related articles:

• Gaddafi and the Latin American left
• The Cuban Perestroika
• US legislative elections, Chomsky and Stiglitz

Gaddafi and the Latin American radical left

Authors:
José Alberto López Rafaschieri and Luis Alberto López Rafaschieri
www.morochos.net

Daniel Ortega was the first to speak in defense of Gaddafi, giving moral and diplomatic support to the repression in Libya. Subsequently, Fidel Castro appeared, not only to offer help such as Ortega, but also to use Cuba's resources, according to journalist Hugh Miles, to send military pilots for bombing, using warplanes, against ordinary people in the Libyan streets.

And after a relatively long waiting time, trying to find a better opportunity, Chavez spoke, but he only reaffirmed the support their comrades in Cuba and Nicaragua did before him.

Due to the bloody repression of the protests taking place in Libya at present, Gaddafi has lost the support of almost everyone, including the Arab League. However, in Latin America, those who say the word "people" every day fall short when it comes time to do something truly democratic. For the Latin American radical left, the protection of a violent socialist revolution is above the defense of human rights, despite the political cost this position would have on their images, and despite being a small group that contradicts the widely held view on the situation in Libya.

---

Related articles:

• Castro: Down with Mubarak, long life to Gaddafi
• The Palmer code
• Cuba, living without the US?