Fidel Castro with the material used in attacking "Trotskyisn. " . “The proof that Blas Roca had this issue of the Monthly Review before him is, I-think, compelling. In his article, he quotes the. following sentence written by Adolfo Gilly, but without indicating: its source: "The vertiginous political evolution of the Cuban leadership in recent months confirms the opinion that it is true that they have either assassinated Guevara or that they are. restraining him by some means or other from expressing himself politically." The source of that quotation is page 29 of the April 1966 issue of the Monthly Review. This is the same issue that contained the editorial statement by Leo Huberman and Paul M. Sweezy. ‘(We will return to the question of Guevara. ) . -
Blas Roca failed to pefer to the “Monthly Review in order to facilitate evading the cardinal political issues. This is the same pattern followed by Gus Hall, the main spokesman of the American Communist party, in his response to the stand taken by the Monthly Review. [See World Qutlook May 6.] Huberman and Sweezy challenged Fidel Castro on the "ugly and perhaps ominous" aspect of his speech in which he charged that Trotskyists- are "agents of imperialism. ' "Tt was precisely this accusation which provided the. rationalization for the Soviet purge trials of the 1930's," they said. Fidel Castro has not yet responded to. the challenge issued by Monthly Review. Blas Roca chose to step forward instead. ‘But he remained Silent about the reference to. the” Moscow. trials.
Does he still support the "rationalization" used in purging Stalin's opponents or possible opponents? Does he think the Soviet government under Khrushchev was:wrong.in adding to. the mountain of evidence proving vhat” ‘Stalin framed UP his victims? He does not say.
However ; we see ‘that. he proceeds as if Stalin had been vindicated. ‘Thereby he provides a most illuminating insight into the nature of some of.Fidel-Castro's advisers and offers confirmation of the reasoning of’ the' editors of Monthly Review that to revive the. accusation used in the Moscow trials is a "sure sign of either. ignorance or.malice" and that in this matter "the malice comes from advisers who ‘never abandoned ‘the attitudes and methods which underlay ‘the trials. no = .
The Question of Che Guevara
Without naming the Monthly Review, Blas Roca does attempt an answer on Che Guevara's disappearance from the Cuban political scene. "Fidel," said the MR editors, "should be under no illusions that only imperialists. and their agents are’ interested in Che's fate." They expressed the hope that Castro would soon clear up the mystery, but they asked: "Is Fidel Castro aware of the real issues at stake in the Guevara affair? And does he realize that every day's delay in.’ clearing up the mystery brings anxiety and doubt to honest revolutionaries everywhere and Joy to their enemies?"
. Blas Roca simply repeats the accusations made in Castro's speech -- the sole interest in the matter allegedly lies with the a Yankee imperialists, whose "very active. auxiliary forces" spread:all » the contradictory rumors about Che Guevara in order to undermine the prestige and authority of the Cuban Revolution. The letter from Che read by Fidel last October was absolutely "definitive" for "genuine revolutionaries," says this prestigious authority. ,
Blas Roca takes up only one new point, a point which I happened to advance in the article published in the January 31, 1966, Militant from which Blas Roca quotes several times. On the assumption, which I accepted, that Castro told the truth about Guevara's taking a new assignnent, I called attention to the disproportion in that part of Castro's speech. If it was true that imperialism was making a big and damaging campaign against the Cuban Revolution by raising questions about Guevara's disappearance, then it was completely out of keeping to use this as-a springboard for an. implausible attack on "Trotskyism" which would only prove divisive in the revolutionary movement and would be rejected by the majority of today's revolutionary vanguard. On the other hand, it would have . been devastating for Che Guevara to imitate Mark Twain and write a letter of greetings to the Tricontinental Conference indicating that the rumors about his death were Srossly exaggerated.
Here is Blas Roca's réspétise: "But: in view of the facts, of what use would it have been? If before, with the last letter from Che, read by Fidel himself, the slanders and malicious speculations of these elements not only did not cease but multiplied, wouldn't they have responded in the same way to a new letter?" As if the content and style of sucha letter would not be sufficient to establish its authenticity! | ee
_ This is Blas Roca's answer not only to The Militant but to Monthly Review, both of which raised the question from the viewpoint of honest revolutionaries concerned about the welfare! and prestige of the Cuban Revolution. Does Blas Roca really think that the matter can be disposed of with the epithet "imperialist agents"? That kind of answer is alarming! |
Since Blas Roca wants it that way, there is little choice but to raise some further questions:
(1) Does Che Guevara know about the speculation over his disappearance from the public scene in Cuba? Yes or no!
(2) If he does not know, ‘how is this to be explained? |
(3) If he:does know, why does he fail to respond to the concern of his comrades and friends? Why doesn't he indicate to the world that everything is all right with him? At the moment, what Single act by him could conceivably be of greater assistance to the. Cuban Revolution?
Blas Roca becomes most effusive in praising the "stout and beloved comandante of our revolutionary war" Che Guevara and in defending him from the alleged slanderous attacks of the Trotskyists who,:we:are told, seek to pit him against Fidel. But Che's opinion of the ' Trotskyists is quite different from the view contained in the Shanders’: put into Castro's January 15 speech. I noted this in the — article in The Militant which Blas Roca cited Blas Roca ignored the paragraphs quoting the tribute paid by Che Guevara to the Peruvian Trotskyist peasant leader Hugo Blanco who has been held in prison at Arequipa without trial for three years. Neither Guevara's tribute nor the picture of.a Trotskyist leader rotting in a Peruvian jail for the "crime" of leading a peasant struggle can easily be fitted. into Blas Roca's slanderous picture of Trotskyism as a "vulgar instrument of imperialism and reaction. "
While Blas Roca. is answering the questions asked him above about Guevara, he might tell us also if he thought the stout and beloved comandante did wrong in paying tribute to. Hugo Blanco. Speak up, Blas: Roca, you have: the floor. Adolfo Gilly and Leo Bernard
Blas Roca singles out. as. one of: his targets Adolfo Gilly and he tries to make something out of. the:fact that. "other Trotskyists" should both "defend" him and "denigrate him and his group." "It seems strange," says Blas Roca. "...But this is in. perfect harmony with the fundamentally. confusionist: and provocative | role of Trotskyism. se
: And in the very week that. Blas Roca! s article slandering Adolfo Gilly in the foulest way appeared in Mexico City in Politica, Adolfo Gilly was arrested by the Mexican police and held without bail because the charges were so serious that he might receive more than a five-year sentence. And what. are the charges? That he engaged in a "Communist. conspiracy" to overthrow the Diaz Ordaz government ; that he was involved. in -such."crimes" as seeking to organize ‘protest demonstrations against ‘the visit of ‘President Johnson!
Where does ‘Blas Roca stand in this? With the witch-hunters. and red-baiters of the corrupt Mexican bourgeoisie? Or with the victim? We hope that Blas Roca will take a correct stand in this and express solidarity in the defense of Adolfo Gilly and the. other victims despite his political differences with them.
: Does a stand like that seem "strange "'? It is perfectly con-. prehensible to every militant. And: in the same way, the stand of Monthly Review in disagreeing with Adolfo Gilly's negative appre-.. ciation of the Tricontinental Conference and his estimate of Fidel | Castro's course while agreeing with him on other issues is completely rational and understandable. The position of most Trotskyists toward Adolfo, Gilly:is. not; fundamentally different. They consider that he has made vaiuable. journalistic contributions; at the same time, insofar as. he is influenced by the views.of Posadas on some issues,. they would like to see him take a more independent course. No matter how mistaken. they might think him to be in his views, they would _ unanimously reject with indignation the Stalinist slander that he is_.am. "imperialist agent."
If Blas Roca chooses ‘not to understand this, perhaps another case will sink home. I had barely begun this reply when the news came from Detroit that an ultrarightist, racist-minded gunman had entered the Eugene V. Debs Hall, the local headquarters of the Socialist Workers party, to. kill some "Communists." He ordered three young antiwar fighters there,.one of whom belonged to the Young Socialist Alliance and two to the Socialist Workers party, to line up against the wall. He then pumped nine bullets into them, killing Leo Bernard and critically wounding Jan Garrett and Walter Graham.
As Staughton Lynd said, "Leo Bernard is the first person in the peace movement to be murdered." I do not know whether this political assassination was reported in the Cuban press or what stand Blas Roca. took on it. In the United States the entire antiwar movement has rallied in a spontaneous expression of solidarity in face of this murderous blow struck against the movement as a whole.
The Communist party, U.S.A., made an official statement May 18 as follows: “a
“The deliberate political murder in Detroit, Michigan, on May 16 of Leo Bernard ‘of the Socialist Workers Party and the shooting of Jan Edward Garrett and Walter Graham of the Young Socialist | Alliance in an attempt to kill them is a shocking consequence of the anti-Communist campaign of the ultra-Right. These three young men who were active in the struggle to end the war in Vietnam are | also victims of the domestic hatred engendered by the warmongers.
~"For the past several months, the murderer had planned '‘'to kill :some Communists.' On March 43rd, the Detroit police were warned that this was the ;plan of this political hoodlum and did nothing about it. The Féderal agencies were told about the murder plan before March 4rd by a consulate in New York and.did nothing about it except to tell the ‘Detroit police. The murderer lined up his victims and started shooting with a shout,-'You are all Communists. This is cold-blooded political murder and all who have responsibilty
ity must be called to ‘account. :
"This murder is related to- “the; ultra-Right action organization of anti-Communist hoodiums. in Detroit known as 'Breakthrough'
which tried to break up a meeting in Cobo Hall on May 6th at. which Gus Hall was the main speaker. On that occasion, one who tried: to intent to use it. That outfit gets its political direction | fromthe Birchites. nEre aa
“This” is also related to the bombings of ‘the Communist Party headquarters building in New York, the bombing of bookstores in. Detroit, Los Angeles and Chicago, the bombing of the DuBois headquarters in San Francisco and the Vietnam Day headquarters. in Berkeley, the acts of arson in Chicago and Indiana, the death = threats through the mails and by telephone in various cities -=-+.. all of which are known to city and Federal authorities who do noth- | ing about them. The Detroit murder must serve to halt this brand of terror in our political life. All who advocate peace, democracy and political freedom have the responsibility to speak up and strengthen these struggles.
Dorothy Healy, thie Southern California chairman of the Communist party, voiced ‘the following: opinion:
"The monstrous murder of Leo Bernard and the wounding of Jan Garrett and Walter Graham is a direct outgrowth of anti- Communist hysteria. This anti-Communism, which provides the justification for military aggression in Vietnam and domestic repression at home, has taken the life of Leo Bernard just as it has killed the Vietnamese fighting for independence. All Americans fighting to end. the war in the Mekong Delta and those fighting for freedom in the fississippi Delta should join in demanding an end to the hysteria which produced this attack on members of the Socialist Workers party."
We leave it to Blas Roca to fit these statements into his slander about the Trotskyists being "very active auxiliary forces" of American imperialism when in reality they are recognized by friend and foe alike“das "very active" in opposition to its "dirty wars" in Vietnam, Santo Domingo and Cuba! No doubt Blas Roca will say nothing. ven’ silver- ‘Gongued - orators | sonetimes find that Silence is golden. Do Communists. Starid con Democracy?
' For a genuine revolutionary Marxist, it is not sufficient to determine that. a position is "opportunist," or "“ultraleft," or "sectarian." The réason why sincere and intelligent revolutionists can sometimes be found in any of the various blind .alleys. leading... away fron the road to socialism must: be elucidated. Sociological reasons may be found, such as ties to the middle class: or the pressure of a bureaucracy or caste. i fod
Even if the enalysis is carried far enough to. “reveal these underlying sources, a grain of truth may nevertheless be found lurking in their political positions. That is:oné reason why a figure of the stature of Lenin did not brush:aside sincere revolu-~ °
_-3l1-
tionists who argued for a position he disagreed with. His language could be. very forceful, of course, but he neverthéless engaged in a: reasoned. discussion and he did not hesitate to appropriate something of value in an opponent's position. In the hands of Lenin, proletarian democracy was a genuine. revolutionary tool.
- It. was: injurious to the Cuban Revolution to muzzle the Posadas group....Blas: Roca quotes from the "mimeographed newspaper which was. printed. in Cuba by: an organized Trotskyist group after the triumph — of the Revolution: with the assistance of Posadas and Adolfo Gilly." He does not mention that the newspaper was mimeographed because they were denied the use of a press. He does not add that. even the mimeographed. newspaper was put out of ‘business through the arrest and imprisonment of those who produced and distributed it. Was the Cuban Revolution so weak ideologically that it was incapable of answering. the arguments of even a Posadas?
“It ‘may have seemed troublesome to pay attention to the "long, extremely confused and at times incomprehensible" articles or reports by J. Posadas which constitute the main grist of his small propaganda mill. No. doubt. there are youth in Cuba, however, who might have liked to: argue it out with the followers of Posadas as a way of sharpening their own thought. and advancing their revolution— ary education. The. overhead cost. of suppressing the group was rather high, for it gave substance..to the false. charge that the Cuban Revolution is going. the way of. the Russian Revolution; a. e., is becoming Stalinized. + -
Particularly in the United States where Stalinism has done. untold damage to the revolutionary socialist cause, the suppression. -of the Posadas group did injury to.Cuba. There were few campuses where the violation of the democratic rights of the Posadas group was not thrown at defenders of the Cuban Revolution, particularly Trotsk ist defenders of the Cuban Revolution,
Te as. all. the more brutally unfair of. Blas Roca to. tax the Posadas group with unwarranted criticisms of Fidel Castro in view of the unwarranted violation of their democratic rights. From their own experience they came to the conclusion that they had been given a raw.deal and there are others who would agree on this despite the deepest repugnance for their political positions. The treatment of the Posadas i:group demonstrated that as yet the Cuban Revolution has not evolved institutional forms providing for the free expression. of dissident opinion within the framework of loyalty to the Revolution. This is a grave weakness. a
The mistake of the Socialist Labour League arises “from the incapacity of. its insular-minded leadership.to recognize a revolution when they see one. This is quite a condemnation of their ~ theoretical and political capacities and signifies their doom as’ a” viable movement. But there is one kind of revolution they would deign to recognize (we hope) if they saw it. That is a revolution that organized workers power through soviets (or councils) and followed the norms of proletarian democracy laid down by Lenin in
State and-Revolution. Since the Cuban Revolution has not yet achieved soviets, the SLL denies that a proletarian power exists in Cuba. From this they deduce that capitalism must still be in power no matter what measures have been undertaken and no matter what-anybody says. They are, of course, mistaken. Their insistence on converting demo-: cratic norms into criteria marks them as sectarians; and their opposition to Cuba's revolutionary government despite its obviously tremendous achievements shows that they are ultralefts like Posadas. They are even less serious than Posadas, however. The entire colo-...: nial world remains largely a closed book to them. They are not really. interested in it. They are quite content to vegetate in their placid little island where not even the cops carry guns. Periodically they | announce- grandiose plans about "reorganizing" the Fourth Interna- -.. tional. and saving it from the "degeneration" brought. about by such things as ‘its support: for the Cuban Revolution and the Castro. team.
Nevertheless there is a kernel of truth in their criticism which must be recognized. Cuba does not yet havea soviet form of government. And this, boos isa grave weakness. =.
The mainstream of the world Trotskyist movement has held since . the beginning that the Cuban Revolution is inherently the. most democratic since the October 1917 Revolution in Russia. Evidence for this abounded in the early years. The blockade and armed aggression mounted by imperialism cut across. this tendency and prevented it from flowering. For instance, the humanist Cuban leaders abolished the death penalty but had to reinstate it in face of the murderous forays and bombings organized by Cuban counterrevolutionaries financed, armed and instigated by the CIA. Under the tightening grip of the imperialist: blockade Cuba necessarily took on some of the characteristics of a beleaguered fortress -- which is not exactly a greenhouse for the development arid. observance of the norms of proletarian democracy. And still the Cuban Revolution remained remarkably free of the bureaucratic sickness that wreaked such havoc. in the Soviet Union. When the bureaucratic danger became acute in © 1962, the famous move against Anibal Escalante and his cohorts was undertaken.
The Cuban leaders have indicated their awareness of the weakness in the Revolution on the side of political institutions and have expressed their intention many times of moving ahead in this field. They have made tentative experiments and have registered real progress in the construction of-the :Communist party of Cuba. But they still have a considerable distance to travel. before it need no longer be said that every important policy hinges on the . decisions and the life of a single leader. The slowness of the process of setting up democratic institutions of proletarian rule in Cuba is of. concern’ to many supporters of the Cuban Revolution besides the world Trotskyist movement.
Bourgedis or Socialist. Revolutions?
“We | come finally to what is: : really. at ‘the bottom of the attack against "Trotskyism." Blas Roca intimates it in his sneering references to .the “superrevolutionary language".of the Trotskyists. You would think we were stikl back in the thirties: when.thé Blas Rocas were idefending the Stalinist (not -Leninist) ."thesis of the possi-. bility-oef ithe triumph of socialism. in .one,country" as against the Trotskyist.position that the very, defense . of the socialist achieveménts of ithe “October Revolution required - the extension of the revolution and its culmination in an. international revolution that — woulad:finally ‘establish socialism-in the. industrially advanced capitalist: countries.:The correctness.of the Trotskyist position has 7 been ‘confirmed: ‘by reality -- in the-extension of the revolution into Eastern Europe, in the toppling of capitalism and landlordism in China, and last, but by no means least, by the revolution in Cuba itself, only ninety miles from the. word Ss major capitalist power.
A single additional socialist. ‘revolution in Latin America today could end the isolation of “Cuba from the American continent at one blow and assure. the rapid-spread of revolutions throughout the Americas. Never:has the Trotskyist program had such reality as today! This is precisely what the Blas Rocas, representing the miserable remnants of Stalinism in the Western Hemisphere, fear and are seeking to block.
Consider the following paragraphs from Blas Roca's article, in which he really tries to come to grips with Trotskyism:
"With ultraleft slogans and calls for the immediate realization of the socialist revolution, they isolate this movement from the masses, they cut their road of development. With no little frequency they point to socialist Cuba; but in 1958 the Rebel Army did not proclaim the socialist revolution, but united the people in the practical struggle to overthrow Batista's tyranny and to destroy his mercenary army which served to support him and which was the instrument of neocolonialism and all the reactionary social forces.
Whatever quotations Blas. Roca may find in the articles and reports of J. Posadas, the Trotskyists do not .call for the “immediate realization of the socialist revolution." This is a caricature, like the Stalinist caricature of former decades which claimed that Trotsky's theory of permanent revolution meant "simultaneous. revolutions" everywhere.
"The Trotskyists," continues Blas Roca, "like to say that the measures of socialist transformation were taken in Cuba under the pressure of the masses; what they are not even capable of understanding is that the revolutionary leadership under the guidance of Companmero Fidel Castro. prepared each step and took it in consonance with the same state.of consciousness which they had created in the masses. In 1959. the proclamation of socialism would have divided the: country; in April. 1961 the masses unanimously sup-
34H
ported the declaration of Companero Fidel Castro on the socialist. character of our revolution and carried it to victory, with their blood, on the beaches of Playa Giron."
According to Blas Roca, "The Trotskyists like to say. Again, it is Posadas who likes to say. The decisive element in the victory of the Cuban Revolution was unquestionably the leadership provided by Fidel Castro, who succeeded in overcoming the long default in leadership due to:Stalinists like Blas Roca, by-passing | them from the left. Naturally the masses responded. So did the Trotskyists and many other genuine revolutionists on an international . scale. But Blas Roca's reference to Posadas here is only part of the smokéscreen under which he advances a line in opposition to the line followed by Fidel Castro up to now of revolutionary struggle and declared : socialist aims.
Blas: Roca's line, as indicated in these paragraphs, is the same line as the one advanced by the U.S. Communist spokesman Gus Hall in his criticism of Monthly Review. It is the concept that the revolutionary process ‘in industrially underdeveloped countries must go through two separate stages, a bourgeois-democratic stage led by the progressive-minded bourgeoisie and a later stage in which the revolutionary leadership of the proletariat can come forward. The concept is the one advanced and defended by the Mensheviks in opposition to both Lenin and Trotsky. Something more is involved, however, than just a. long outmoded concept.
I do not deny that in 1959 a "proclamation of socialism" in Cuba would have been widely misunderstood. The reason had nothing to do with the class character of the developing revolution. It was due to the enormous discredit brought on the very name of socialism or communism by the record of Stalinism in the Soviet Union and in Cuba where the Communist party supported Batista. A “proclamation of socialism" would have been misunderstood as a "proclamation of Stalinism.
It was correct of Castro to avoid that misunderstanding; to which we should add that Castro himself had been repelled by the record of the Communist party and did not yet consider himself a larxist.. Instead of developing around a proclaimed program of socialism, the revolution moved forward under a slogan of action; namely, armed struggle against Batista. And even on this level, the ‘Communist party under Blas Roca's leadership failed miserably, attacking Castro's movement as adventuristic and. putschist.
The truth is that Blas Roca's line, of avoiding the "super— revolutionary language" of socialism, of advancing the concept of two stages, had already been tried out in Cuba and had been found: wanting, to say the least.
On December 4, 1939, the ‘Cuban Communist party nominated its candidate for the office of president. His name? Colonel Fulgencio Batista, the Chief of Staff of the Cuban armed forces. Blas Roca and his fellow Stalinist leaders backed ‘Batista’ ‘because ithey considered
him to be a "man of the people," a good bourgeois democrat, a leader of the "first stage" of the revolution. And Batista rewarded his Communist party supporters: by giving ‘thei posts ‘in his cabinet.
Without: this’ voalition’,” Batiste eoula never have gotten into: a position to establish’ his: bloody: dictatorship. There were two stages all right. Two stages of a counterrevolution. In the first stage, the revolutionary forces were hoodwinked and duped into supporting a bourgeois democrat -- a figure like Sukarno or Chiang Kaishek, ‘who Was also touted by Stalin in the "first stage." In the second stage , the revolutionary forces were decimated as the counterrevolution consolidated its dittatorship. This tragic process was duplicated in Brazil two years ago when Goulart was pictured as the good bourgeois democrat on whom all reliance should be placed in stage No. l.
The Castelo Branco coup d'état in April 1964 demonstrated in
the most emphatic way that the line of a "two stage" revolution is still quite capable of paving the way for a "two ‘stage" counterrevolution. This lesson has been freshened since October 1965 with the blood of hundreds of thousands of Communists in Indonesia. If Blas ~ Roca's line is applied elsewhere in Latin America,’ it will most : certainly guarantee another defeat as it did in Cuba in Batista's » day, in China in 1925-27, Brazil in 1964, Indonesia in 1965 and many other countries where it has been tested.
“The question then comes’ up: can a successful revolution be . organized around a mere slogan of action as ha: pened in Cuba under Castro? To answer, yes, implies two things: 5 The indigenous bourgeoisie and their imperialist backers have iSamned nothing froem. the
Cuban experience. (2) The masses in Latin America have learned nothing from the Cuban example of going forward to the socialist stage -in other words, "socialism" still has not recovered in their outlook from the terrible discredit brought on it by Stalin and his hand-~ picked lieutenants like Blas Roca.
‘Both éonelusions are wrong, in my opinion. American imperialism and its stooges are far readier to act in the most violent way. at the first sign of a revolutionary upheaval ‘no matter what attempts are made to disguise it. Johnson's occupation ‘of Santo Domingo and the repressive measures taken against the Peruvian guerrilla fighters in the past year are proof enough without adding the lesson of Johnson's escalation of, the war in Vietnam. .
On the other hand, the Cuban Revolution has had an immense effect on popular consciousness throughout Latin America and this effect will -grow as the contrast between Cuba's gains and the stagnation in the rest of Latin America becomes more glaring. In ‘record .. time Cuba achieved such things*as the liquidation of illiteracy. Unemployment was ended, social ‘security guaranteed, an education. assured: to every child. Despite all the difficulties of the imperialist blocade and a number of serious errors, the planned economy is. developing and offers a bright perspective for the future. And what
an impressive fact -- little Cuba, only ninety miles from the imperialist U.S. has been able to hold. out against the world's mightiest power for seven years now! "Socialism," Cuban-style, is bound to . appear more and more attractive -- as the socialist revolution was to the. masses of the world in the first years after the October Revolution. The Latin-American masses will become increasingly impatient to achieve what the: Cubans did -+ a socialist revolution. And why shouldn' % they have - it?
This rehabilitation of the word "socialism" and the program of socialism: will likewise be listed in history to the credit of the Cuban Revolution and it will be achieved despite everything that the Blas Rocas, with their treacherous advice, can do to stop it.
In their editorial on Castro's January 15 attack against Trotskyism, Huberman and Sweezy made the following point:
"Whatever its role in Guatemala, Trotskyism is certainly not a large or important political force in Latin America as a whole. But if Fidel Castro and the Latin American Communist Parties duck: the question of socialism, and still more if they attack as Trotskyites all those who openly struggle for a specifically socialist rev-. olution, ‘then: the prospects for. Latin American Trotskyism will be vastly improved."
Whatever it is called -- "consistent class struggle," "revolutionary Marxism," "revolutionary socialism," or "Trotskyism" -the prospects. for socialist revolution in Latin America are already vastly improved. The prospects for "class. collaboration," “peaceful coexistence," "popular frontism," "coalitionism," or "Stalinism" are on the decline. The great dividing line was drawn by the successful Cuban Revolution. The popular appeal of the socialist goal, noted by Yon Sosa, the Guatemalan guerrilla. leader, is but one indicatiaqn, of the deep. processes at work in this direction. — ;
The defeats and setbacks of the past few years will prove tobe but temporary. Latin America's 200,000,000 people are gathexing their forces for another giant step forward. Nothing will be able to stop them’ -- not all the dollars and guns of imperialism, and still less the pitiful labors of the Stalinist defilers of socialism.
"LA BATALLA'S" REPLY TO FIDEL CASTRO
' [Among the publications which Fidel Castro attacked in his speech against "Trotskyism" last January was La Batalla, the organ . of the POUM (Partido Obrero de Unificacién Marxista -- Workers Party of Marxist Unification), which is active in the Spanish underground struggle against Franco. We have provided below a translation of the . reply which the editors ‘published in the February-March issue of. La Batalla. ]
_ -37-
On January .c0,* the final day of the Tricontinental Conference in Havana, Fidel . Castro, . the secretary | of the Communist party of Cuba and head of the. Cuban government, delivered” a long and truly disturbing Speech. oo “Th his ‘customary fashion, Fidel. Castro. ‘strongly denounced the current. offensive of imperialism throughout the world, and particularly in Latin America, and made a passionate plea in favor of — extending the revolutionary struggle. -
But, unfortunately, Fidel Castro devoted a large part of his speech to attacking in impermissible terms the Trotskyist movement, the Guatemalan guerrillas led by Yon Sosa and a whole series of groups. and, publications outside of the Communist movement in the orbit of the Russian bureaucracy, which have always defended the Cuban. Revolution. (The Montevideo weekly, Marcha, the North American magazine , Monthly Review, Mondo Nuovo, the organ of the PSIUP of | Italy, La Batalla...) . .
_In replying to Fidel Castro, some of the groups’ and’ ‘publications. ‘under attack have justly condemned the incredible” amaigam made by the Cuban leader.and have tried to spell out their particular positions. Before answering the remarks of special concern to us, © we must state, with the authority due us as virtually the only defenders of the Cuban Revolution in the Spanish workers movement, in the face of sarcasms and insults of all kinds, that we reject Fidel Castro's slanderous attack in toto. Fidel Castro has a perfect right to defend his political positions and to criticize or combat any working-class or anti-imperialist tendencies that do not approve one or another of his actions. But what he has no right to do, is to employ the old, discredited arsenal of Stalinist slanders against anyone, no matter who it may be, to speak like some vulgar Escalante and not like the responsible leader of the Cuban Revolution.
after his unspeakable attack on "Trotskyism," Fidel Castro said: "In the issue of October 1965 of the newspaper Batalla, organ of the Spanish Trotskyites, it was stated that the mystery surrounding the case of Che Guevara ought to be cleared up. It said that friends of Che supposed that the letter read by Castro was false and ask themselves whether the Cuban leadership tends towards submission to the Kremlin bureaucracy."
Of course, we could begin by saying that we do not belong to any of the tendencies in the Trotskyist movement, that we are not part of the Fourth International, that we are an independent workers party. And, furthermore, we could add that Castro did not quote faithfully what we wrote in our newspaper about the case of Che Guevara.
*This is evidently a typographical error. The date was actually January 15 -- Translator.
38
But since the language that we speak and write in is the same as the. one Fidel Castro speaks and writes in, we are not inclined to take that tangent. La Batalla had and has a perféct right to ask for political explanations on the Guevara case. La Batalla even has a right to criticize Fidel Castro; to say, for example, in common with the vast majority of the Spanish workers, that while we continue to understand the difficulties created by the blockade, we disapprove the present relations of the revolutionary government of Cuba with the Franco government. And, finally, La_Batalla also has a right to protest against the attacks against "Trotskyism," reminiscent of the worst period of the Stalinist epoch.
We. have defended. the Cuban Revolution from the very beginning. We are defending it now and will continue to defend it. But today as in the past and always, we are not among those who applaud Castro in ‘public and speak about him in private as "petty bourgeois" or an "adventurer." We are for freedom of criticism, which is one of the most precious assets of the international workers movement, and we feel hopeful that Fidel Castro and his companeros will come to understand that Stalinist-type slanders can only compromise and isolate the Cuban Revolution, solely to the gain of imperialism, which, as the Cuban revolutionaries know from experience, has declared an unrelenting and merciless war against them.