In the thread "Could Anarchists and Communists unite if there was a revolution?", I asked manic expression to provide "evidence that the states of the USSR and Cuba were composed of directly democratic federations of workers' councils with central bodies made up of delegates subject to instant recall". To this, manic expression responded:

If the state owns the means of production and the workers control the state, it follows that this would translate into worker control of the means of production--that is, socialism. With this in mind, I would like to pose three questions:

1) Does the degree of democracy outlined in the above links actually exist in Cuba?

2) Assuming that this degree of democracy actually does exist in Cuba, would it be enough to constitute worker control of the State?

and

3) If not, what would be required to constitute worker control? If you don't think it is possible for the workers to be in control of the State, how would an anarchist federation be organized differently?

I look forward to your answers.

It's a complex situation. Democratic control expresses itself in many different forms in itself, and I wouldn't consider the structures of the Soviet Union and Cuba all too similar. There are several aspects of the State which are more in control of the party, and others which serve constituents in the community through local organization; it is hard to say that it is fully socialist, however to say that it is state capitalist ignores the evidence. While the grassroots institutions and electoral processes that take place shouldn't make supporters hail as the "only real democracy on Earth" (as some have stated) they should be examined tediously through institutional analysis and sorted from those electoral setups that consist of mainly top-down party influence. The best source that I have seen is in a book called "Cuba: A different America." It's a pretty objective study (by a British author, I believe) on the historically changing relationship between workers and managers, unions and the sate. Here's the link.

http://books.google.com/books?id=9CJ...20cuba&f=false

You might want to talk to nightcrowred on youtube. He's a member of the CPUSA and from what I've heard, he lived in Cuba for about a year. I read it in one of his posts, but you might want to talk to him directly.

I doubt many here have actually been inside Cuba's territorial borders, let alone witnessed the daily political life of the average Cuban citizen. I would echo the above sentiment: find out from first hand sources. The internet won't give you a clear picture on life in France, let alone a self-proclaimed socialist republic.

I've been there, and as a hispanic I was able to talk to many Cubans there.

I didn't see this until now, or else I would have responded earlier. Some very good questions here, I hope I am up to answering them sufficiently.

From everything I have seen and read, yes. First, the vast majority of eye-witness accounts and studies confirm this:

http://www.quaylargo.com/Productions/McCelvey.html

The Cuban political system is based on a foundation of local elections. Each urban neighborhood and rural village and area is organized into a "circumscription," consisting generally of 1000 to 1500 voters. The circumscription meets regularly to discuss neighborhood or village problems. Each three years, the circumscription conducts elections, in which from two to eight candidates compete. The nominees are not nominated by the Communist Party or any other organizations. The nominations are made by anyone in attendance at the meetings, which generally have a participation rate of 85% to 95%. Those nominated are candidates for office without party affiliation.

It continues in more detail. In addition, here are two informative articles from Prensa Latina about the elections in 2005:

http://www.politicalaffairs.net/arti...ticleview/977/

Modern technology, goodwill among election committee staffers and a sturdy mule help this mountain town´s voice be heard.
[...]
Juana Carrillo Torres, 17 years-old, is a high school student and one of the youngest voting today.

"Elections are important," she says, because "if we don't elect someone who will stick their neck out for us who will? I think my vote is valid."

These articles and others like them show that the voice of workers is the driving force in Cuban society.

I would definitely think so. Not only does that degree of democracy promote for the voice of workers first and foremost, but the PCC itself is run in much the same way. From what I've heard from someone who's studying there (on a scholarship for students from impoverished nations), PCC members are nominated by their communities, meaning they must show a deep dedication to the Cuban Revolution and to Marxism in the eyes of their neighbors. Cuban candidates for the PCC don't just walk in an office and get their membership cards. This demanding process is why even the youngest revolutionaries of Cuba are making strong contributions:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7784234.stm

The majority of deputies elected to the national assembly, or parliament, earlier this year were born after the revolution.

The youngest, Liaena Hernandez, is just 18 years old. A petite young woman with long black hair and an engaging smile, she has been a political activist since her early teens.

That's an interesting question. From our discussions, I take it that you are not opposed to workers defending their interests through force (which most Marxists would term a state), it is simply that the emphasis is put on self-organization first and foremost. I suppose that if one views the Cuban government as a collection of working-class councils (which it essentially is, in a way), then the view of the government could change. If not, perhaps more of an emphasis on local bodies would be welcome, but in my opinion that would bring the challenges of coordination in the face of imperialist threats as well as economic problems, among other issues. In the end, it's hard for me to answer that because I find the Cuban government to be organized very well, if not ideally, as it is.

To be honest, I think this is a question that anarchists should confront and answer, and a dialogue between different ideologies would enhance this. Let me ask you, what do you think the Cuban workers should change? What do you find positive and what do you find problematic in Cuba?

There is a well-known problem with internal corruption in the Asamblea Nacional; worse, there is a certain amount of racial disparity in the representation- highly white-dominated, a lot like the tourism industry. No, I do not have precise citations; anyone interested would have to look around.

Expanding on proudcomrade's point, some sources put Afro-Cuban membership in the National Assembly at about 36%:

http://bloggersforcubanliberty.blogs...ournalist.html

(From a pretty anti-socialist source I believe, so a grain of salt is needed here)

However, discrimination is something that is being combated by the government:

The struggles against racism and sexism are vital elements in meeting Cuba's goals of equity. Old Cuba experienced a combination of an inherited Spanish colonial racism and an imported North American variety. Advances in eliminating racism are visible in the widespread and growing Afro-Cuban leadership, in the self-identification of Cubans as an Afro-Caribbean people, and in the deeply felt solidarity with Africa that sent Cuban soldiers to fight the South African apartheid regime when it invaded Angola. It is seen in the recognition of the Yoruba and Congo religions as co-equal with Christianity. But racist discrimination persists. For instance, there are no black prima ballerinas in the National Ballet, and Afro-Cubans are still underrepresented in academic fields and overrepresented in vocational schools. After making racial discrimination illegal, Cuba has become aware that this is not enough and that action is needed to extirpate racism from the culture as well as to prevent its re-introduction by foreign investors. One Spanish hotel chain was thrown out of Cuba in part because of racist hiring practices.



http://www.cubasolidarity.com/featur...wcubaworks.htm


To add to the above, the Cuban revolutionary government is presently promoting the living crap out of hip hop on the island; it even created a Ministry of Hip Hop, and has funded many festivals as of late. The reason for this is that hip hop is seen as a form of expression of the African diaspora, and Afro-Cubans are embracing it quite strongly.


Also, it should be noted that there are very few Black ballet dancers throughout the world. Personally, I think it's great that Cuba is (apparently) trying to buck this trend, and I hope the National Ballet of Cuba can become the first in the world with a significant Black presence.


I have to go now, but I'll try to discuss more of this later.

I don't know the exact situation in Cuba, but Socialism is always far more democratic than capitalist "democracy", since a Socialist economy is always ruled through direct democracy by the Workers themselves.

And indeed, during the Dictatorship of the Proletariat, the necessary fase in ultimately achieving Communism, there is no more-party system.

But why the heck do you need more parties for if you have Socialism, direct democratic control of the economy, free healthcare and education, a government that genuinely cares about you (as opposed to the more-party systems where none of the so many parties give a damn about you or the rest of the People), a superior social care system and a stabile economy that is not affected by any global economic crisis?

Well, the other thread had a very hostile atmosphere that wouldn't have been very conducive to the discussion I wanted to have. That's why I posted this here instead.

This is very interesting, as is the mention of federations of workers', farmers', and students' associations later on (I'd be particularly interested in finding out more about those). The article indicates that what I would regard as the key element of socialism--direct control by the workers of their places of work and by the members of a community of issues affecting their community--are indeed present in Cuba. I also had not realized that the structural role of Communist Party in the administration of the state was so small.

Well, the Cuban state IS indeed a state under the anarchist definition because national-level decisions (involving management of the economy) are made by a group of representatives of the working class rather than being merely proposed by such a group and then being ratified by the workers. Also, some of the judicial system's policies have been more repressive than I would like (e.g., the man who was thrown in prison for being filmed saying he was hungry), and there is the problem of white-dominance in the Asamblea Nacional. I don't know how the various departments of the government--health, education, etc.--are managed, but if it is by an unelected bureaucracy rather than some system of federations similar to that of the representative system of the State, that would be an issue as well.

That said, though, the degree of democracy in Cuba is clearly greater than that in bourgeois democracies such as those of the the United States or the United Kingdom. It may not be the "only real democracy on Earth", but this isn't that great a criticism when you realize that there AREN'T any real democracies on Earth at the moment. The fact that local issues are controlled directly by the citizens of the localities and that (apparently) workplace issues are controlled directly by the workers is also a huge plus. Also, one has to take into consideration the enormous challenges that Cuba faces. It's a tiny island country near the coast of what is essentially the metropole of a global capitalist empire. Historically, the problem of anarchism has been that anarchist experiments have been unable to effectively resist outside pressure, while the problem of Marxism-Leninism has been that it has degenerated from within, with the organs of working-class power atrophying and ultimately disappearing. This has apparently not happened in Cuba, though. Instead, the organs of working-class power have been maintained against both external and internal pressures.

I still think that the Revolution itself--the one that will topple the global capitalist system--will be able to have an anarchist character because it will have the advantage of not facing tremendous external pressure from capitalist superpowers. However, had the Cuban revolution taken an anarchist character, there is a good chance that exactly the problems that ultimately destroyed other anarchist experiments would have also destroyed the Cuban experiment. As such, while I still criticize the existence of a State in Cuba, I also acknowledge that it may well be necessary. Furthermore, the evidence shows that workers' power does exist in Cuba and, therefore, that it would be unfair to call Cuban society "state capitalist". Rather, it seems (barring conflicting evidence, of course), that Cuba has managed to build one of the few true examples of state socialism.

I understand completely and I support that decision, I was simply wondering why I didn't notice it until I did.

From what I can tell, there isn't a ton of stuff on those groups on the internet, which is a shame. I know it costs a lot on Amazon, but if you can get your hands on the book I posted earlier, that should detail those groups in some depth (I haven't read it, but it's been recommended to me by someone who lived in Cuba). However, here are some starting points:

National Association of Small Farmers official website:

http://www.campesinocubano.anap.cu/

Articles on the Federation of Cuban Women:

http://www.stanford.edu/group/womens...ban_women.html

http://www.efn.org/~ciscap/aviso/winter96-97/womovecu.html

On the rest of your post, I think you've made very fair points, and I think you definitely have a solid analysis of the general situation. I hope you've found this discussion to be as helpful as it has been for me, and I hope other RevLeft comrades will explore this issue as well.