I mean technically there's some truth to that if your conception of the revolution is Non-Marxist and limited to armed struggle. Because that was a broad coalition for national liberation. "The first revolution" going from feudalism to socialism so to speak.
However, we know that revolution doesn't begin and end at armed struggle. The real smashing of the state, those incremental administrative steps ultimately resulting in a qualitative leap after quantitative change - as Lenin puts it - happen after armed struggle takes over the state. In Cuba that very quickly happened at the exclusion of bourgeois forces and became explicitly Marxist, along with Castro himself, within like 2 years of the defeat of Batista. Any self proclaimed Marxist that doesn't understand this...idk should read State & Revolution (again) or stfu
I mean technically there's some truth to that if your conception of the revolution is Non-Marxist and limited to armed struggle. Because that was a broad coalition for national liberation. "The first revolution" going from feudalism to socialism so to speak.
However, we know that revolution doesn't begin and end at armed struggle. The real smashing of the state, those incremental administrative steps ultimately resulting in a qualitative leap after quantitative change - as Lenin puts it - happen after armed struggle takes over the state. In Cuba that very quickly happened at the exclusion of bourgeois forces and became explicitly Marxist, along with Castro himself, within like 2 years of the defeat of Batista. Any self proclaimed Marxist that doesn't understand this...idk should read State & Revolution (again) or stfu