SWP policy on Cuba
walterlx at earthlink.net
Fri Aug 15 01:27:35 MDT 2003
The two positions are completely incompatible.
Think about it, Laura: Fidel called it a victory
and the SWP called it a blow to the working
This would politically signify that Fidel was in
favor of something against the interests of
the working class. But Fidel Castro didn't
favor something against the interests of
the working class. That's not what the
Cuban Revolution is about. Elian was
a traumatized child in need of return
to his father and family. But to those
wealth rightist exiles in Miami, he was
nothing but a pawn, a plaything to be
used in their maniacal campaigns and
efforts to defeat the Cuban Revolution.
The views cannot be reconciled. The SWP
said the rescue was a blow to the democratic
rights of the working class. But there is no
democratic right to kidnap other peoples'
children, nor privacy rights for kidnappers.
There were only two sides in that struggle.
It was not possible to be on both of them.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Laura Kamienski" <tkd at kicks4women.com>
To: <marxism at lists.panix.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2003 12:05 PM
Subject: Re: SWP policy on Cuba
Cuba is in a post-revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat,
surrounded by imperialist threats and a criminal embargo. This often
requires completely different strategy in terms of the relationship of
forces, especially in maintaining diplomatic relations and striving to
increase those relations with the US. I suspect that this could end up
going too far, but as of yet Cuba has dealt with their situation as
does the SWP, with discipline, analysis, dedication and principle.
I support Cuba's position on this incident AND I support the SWP's.
Because of differences in objective political conditions each strategy
makes sense AND they do NOT contradict one another.
More information about the Marxism