Tweet

Article

DSAqin-shi-huangdi-fireball

Honestly its rude to be invited by a country to meet their president who decided to respond to your criticisms of their administration only to not show up and go meet the opposition.

Being invided and then no showing shows complete disregard to basic diplomatic Etiquette since it was a mission to show solidarity against the embargo

Bonus socdems being cringe part 4.5: about another member that didnt show up to the presidential meeting

Show

Deeply unserious people

  • usa_suxxx [they/them]
    ·
    3 months ago

    I skimmed some portion of Maria Franzblau Criticism of Cuba

    https://reformandrevolution.org/2024/02/17/cuba-between-imperialism-and-socialism/

    We should be critical of socialist and anti-imperialist forces when necessary. Most times this should take place internally when other parties take actions we disagree with strategically. But when a leftist party actively betrays socialist principles, such as by attacking abortion rights or supporting Israeli apartheid, we should be willing to make our disagreements public. As for reactionary, anti-communist forces like the governments of Iran and Russia or groups like Hamas and the Houthis, we should make crystal clear our fierce opposition to their politics while also condemning imperialist aggression against them.

    Most egregious considering the Palestinian genocide.

    The first weakness is in our analysis and understanding of Cuban socialism. There is no shortage of inspiration we can draw from positively appraising the Revolution’s gains in literacy, healthcare, education, and more. We should not deemphasize the role of the brutal US embargo in the country’s crises. But one simply cannot understand the full picture of Cuba this decade without also understanding the political repression of independent organizing, the threats that private business and austerity pose to the socialist economy, or the crisis of legitimacy the government faces. If one were to attend this delegation and fully accept the party line put forward in our itinerary, the political side of this crisis would go completely unmentioned.

    Having it both ways, the embargo is bad for the economy but also the threats that private business and austerity pose to the socialist economy

    Second, it limits the effectiveness of our external messaging and organizing, especially in regions of the country with large Hispanic and Cuban-American populations. While it is true that there are large sections of these diaspora communities, particularly Cuban exiles, who are hardcore reactionaries and have petty-bourgeois class interests, it would be a mistake to treat these communities as monolithic or immovable. In my own experience organizing in Miami, there is a large presence of Cubans in every local struggle, whether it be university students and faculty walking out against our far-right state legislature’s censorship of education, or local Starbucks workers’ struggling to unionize their stores.

    DAH POCS. like fr what do you mean?

    https://reformandrevolution.org/2024/02/17/cuba-between-imperialism-and-socialism/

    • usa_suxxx [they/them]
      ·
      3 months ago

      Meanwhile, a notably large “No” campaign against the Family Code was led by the churches and right-wing dissident groups through social media. While the referendum passed, “No” received 33% of the vote, which is remarkably high for a government initiative in a one-party state.

      Like what?

      edit:

      In many ways, the Family Code represents the bureaucracy working at its best. They corrected an error in the party’s stances under the pressure of LGBTQ Cubans and the international movements for those rights, used mass meetings to influence public opinion and respond to it, and mobilized the party and its mass organizations to advance a “Yes” vote to expand womens’ and LGBTQ rights. But a lack of independent organizing or popularly-controlled institutions means that this was necessarily a slow going and top-down process. Put bluntly, Cuba’s transformation on LGBTQ rights was facilitated in no small part by Mariela Castro’s position as a prominent figure in the party bureaucracy with a famous family name.

      You see, this good thing they did, is actually bad.

      • usa_suxxx [they/them]
        ·
        2 months ago

        Earlier in the piece:

        We visited the center on our second day in Havana and heard a lecture from Mariela Castro about the history of CENESEX and of women’s and LGBTQ rights in Cuba. During the Q&A, one comrade asked for any advice Castro could give to US socialists fighting for queer rights. She mostly dodged the question regarding advice for US socialists, and she opted instead to describe her internal struggles within the Communist Party on this topic. She told the story of how she found old writings from her mother, the revolutionary Vilma Espin, in support of same-sex marriage and used it to argue for the Party to support same-sex marriage. She went on to describe the process of winning LGBTQ rights as a slow, gradual, consensus building project rather than a rapid, activist struggle.

        Castro’s struggles within the party have been admirable and won considerable gains for queer people. But it is worth examining that, in response to a question about what LGBTQ organizing should look like, her answer was a course of action really only available to her: using old family documents to make an argument to top party brass. I was left wondering what avenues for change might exist for ordinary working people without the same access.

        Another GOOD THING BAD

        Her criticism at the end:

        Our delegations, if they are not for a discrete purpose like observing an election, should include longer meetings between DSA members and members of other parties and organizations. Instead of solely hearing lectures, we should have more collaborative discussions where we learn about each others’s organizing conditions and trade ideas. Where we can learn from each other, we should seek to. Where we disagree on key issues, we should feel free to discuss and debate these matters in a comradely way.

        The criticism is self defeating. She clearly admits she had the opportunity to ask questions. Then she dismisses their wins for playing within their organizing conditions

        edit:

        More of Maria being able to ask questions and have a dialogue

        During the Q&A, I asked the following question to Álvarez: “In 2021 there were mass protests across the whole island of Cuba. While it is true that many on the far-right supported these protests, and Washington cheered it on, the protests also involved thousands of ordinary Cubans, workers, feminists, socialists, and members of the CPC. Many participants from 2021 remain in prison today. How should Cubans who support the revolution but have criticisms of the government make their voices heard?”

        She did not like his response, which is fair but did not provide proof of what she said either, which she certainly could have in a blog post.

          • Frogmanfromlake [none/use name]
            ·
            2 months ago

            NATO leftists who think that their identity as an American citizen makes their opinion worthwhile. Fucking hate these scum

    • zed_proclaimer [he/him]
      ·
      3 months ago

      Second, it limits the effectiveness of our external messaging and organizing, especially in regions of the country with large Hispanic and Cuban-American populations. While it is true that there are large sections of these diaspora communities, particularly Cuban exiles, who are hardcore reactionaries and have petty-bourgeois class interests, it would be a mistake to treat these communities as monolithic or immovable.

      she's more sympathetic to Miami gusanos than she is to Cuban revolutionaries. She wants to do tailism to appeal to gusanos and is worried that having solidarity with a socialist project would endanger her "organizing" among Cuban-Americans.

      • usa_suxxx [they/them]
        ·
        2 months ago

        During my time in Havana, I made contact with several members of what is often called Cuba’s “critical left,” a term used to refer to left-wing activists, journalists, intellectuals, and everyday people who are critical of either certain policies of the PCC or broader systemic issues in the party bureaucracy. I organized three meetings, two with independent journalist Maykel Vivero and one with members of the leftist La Tizza collective. I also spoke to and attempted to meet with Marxist writer Frank Garcia Hernandez but could not arrange it while I was in Havana.

        On Maykel Vivero:

        He is one of the few journalists who cover the persecution of the San Isidro Movement and its leader Luis Manuel Otero Alcántara. In his journalistic work, he thinks it’s very important to provide the most complete information possible without getting carried away by personal feelings.

        https://www.memoryofnations.eu/en/gonzalez-vivero-maykel-1983

        On Luis Manuel Otero Alcántara:

        State television revealed a document indicating San Isidro leader Luis Manuel Otero Alcántara receives monthly $1,000 payments from the National Democratic Institute, which is funded by USAID and NED.

        https://twitter.com/bellybeastcuba/status/1382680866439172103

        edit:

        The small San Isidro Movement in question campaigned for the re-election of Donald Trump in October, speaking to a South Florida-based audience, while applauding the damage being done to Cuba by the U.S. blockade, while asking for additional sanctions. Images have earlier circulated of the main leader of the San Isidro group, Luis Manuel Otero Alcántara, with the Charge d'Affaires of the U.S. embassy in Havana. Another member, Omara Ruiz Urquiola, also paid a visit to the diplomat; and Carlos Manuel Álvarez, who resides in Mexico and is linked to U.S. special services, through the CIA front National Endowment for Democracy (NED), arrived at the headquarters of the San Isidro Movement last Tuesday, November 24.

        They have advocated for the tightening of the blockade and the cutting off of remittances and their end goal is an overthrow of the revolutionary Cuban government.

        https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/cuba-condemns-us-operation-in-havanas-san-isidro-20201129-0001.html

        • aaaaaaadjsf [he/him, comrade/them]
          ·
          2 months ago

          State television revealed a document indicating San Isidro leader Luis Manuel Otero Alcántara receives monthly $1,000 payments from the National Democratic Institute, which is funded by USAID and NED.

          And there it is folks.

      • VILenin [he/him]M
        ·
        2 months ago

        Western chauvinist getting pissy that the know-nothing Cubans won’t listen to her enlightened sage advice.

        Bonus points for engaging in parenti

    • SacredExcrement [any, comrade/them]
      ·
      2 months ago

      They literally just list off all of the State Department's current baddies as 'still bad but less bad than the US says they are'

      the threats that private business and austerity pose to the socialist economy, or the crisis of legitimacy the government faces.

      Are they talking about that weak color revolution the US tried to stage a year or two back lmao? Where like half of the media came from people in the US? And the actual march in Cuba was pitifully small?

      In my own experience organizing in Miami, there is a large presence of Cubans in every local struggle, whether it be university students and faculty walking out against our far-right state legislature’s censorship of education, or local Starbucks workers’ struggling to unionize their stores.

      Fuckin being all "yes, these former bourgeoisie who turned liberal because conservatives were too openly racist to them disadvantaged former small business owners and their children deserve to be treated well" after insulting and then openly flouting the Cuban president, you know, actual socialists.

      Pathetic or an OP.

    • PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmygrad.ml
      ·
      2 months ago

      We should not deemphasize the role of the brutal US embargo in the country’s crises. But

      "But" in Polish means "shoe", something that should be thrown at her.