What is democracy? This recent and
very topical article by Mythily Sivaraman is an excellent introduction to
what I view as real democracy--a political system, unlike capitalism, in which both
the political and economic aspects of public life are subject to the will of
the majority. As we shall see later, Cuba's unique form of socialism
qualifies as a real democracy--one that, amazingly, has evolved under what can
only be seen as siege conditions over 43 years of imperialist aggression.
--Dan
By Mythily Sivaraman
The Hindu, India's National Newspaper
July 26, 2002
The economic policies of Cuba... are the exact opposite of what Mr. Bush recognises as the the core of democracy... But then, not all may have the same definition democracy.
ON THE 100th anniversary of the Cuban independence, in May this year, George W. Bush, addressed Miami-based Cuban exiles, a constituency that played a not insignificant role in the nail-biting climax of the U.S. presidential contest in 2000; he claimed that the Cuban Revolution's "legacy of courage has been insulted by the tyrant who uses brutal methods to enforce a bankrupt vision". He challenged Fidel Castro to "begin to adopt meaningful market-based reforms, then — and only then — I will work with the U.S. Congress to ease the ban on trade and travel between our two countries".
When the world's most powerful man speaks of a "bankrupt vision of Cuba" and then of democracy through a market economy, it needs to be seriously examined — even if his historic statement, "if you are not with us, then you are with the terrorists" is a little troubling example of his democratic instinct. A brief appraisal of the Cuban situation is also in order when that country is celebrating the historic attack on the Moncada garrison — July 26 — at the trial for which Mr. Castro delivered his celebrated defence, "history will absolve me".
"Today there is only one nation in our hemisphere that is not a democracy — Cuba," roundly declared Mr. Bush. The economic policies of Cuba — Government control over the economy, private entrepreneurs having no political clout, heavy Government subsidy for essential commodities and for services such as education and health, tight control over foreign investment and non-convertible currency — are the exact opposite of what Mr. Bush recognises as the core of democracy: the liberalisation, privatisation, globalisation (LPG) mantra of the market economy. But then, not all may have the same definition of democracy; they may wish to look at health and education and the quality of life of the Cubans before passing judgment.
Healthcare and education were declared human rights — the core of democracy — five decades ago in the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights. One sees that Cuba's performance in these two areas — critical for determining the quality of life of a people — is endorsed by the UNDP's Human Development Index, the World Health Organisation and by the market economy's super cop, the World Bank. Jo Ritzen, World Bank vice-president for Development Policy, confirmed to himself that the Infant Mortality Rate for Cuba was just 6 — the same as for several European countries — while on a private visit to the island to study its social indicators. For Latin America and the Caribbean region as a whole, the average was 30 in 1999. In the Human Development Index, Cuba ranks above Mexico, Venezuela, Colombia, Brazil and Peru.
In education, primary school enrolment in Cuba touched 100 per cent in 1997, even higher than in the U.S. Its performance in education as a whole is higher than in Argentina, Brazil and other countries where LPG has been mandated the ruling religion. This achievement has been possible because its leadership, defying the market regime prescription of reducing subsidies, spent 6.7 per cent of the GDP on education, twice the percentage in other Latin American countries. 9.1 per cent of Cuba's GDP was spent on health, roughly equivalent to Canada's rate. Observers have commented on the spirit of dedication of its doctors as incredible, not seen anywhere in the rest of Latin America, perhaps anywhere else in the world; certainly not in India, where the quality of public health has deteriorated abysmally and private medical care has been turned into a commodity to be sold to the highest bidder. Yet, Mr. Bush would have us believe that India is a great democracy while Cuba is a dictatorship. Mr. Bush's man in charge for globalising the market economy, the World Bank president, James D. Wolfensohn, told reporters while releasing the World Development Indicators 2001 of the Bank that showed Cuba topping the list of poor countries in health and education: "Cuba has done a great job on education and health... it does not embarrass me to admit it." This is no ordinary compliment as Cuba's policies are the very anti-thesis of the neo-liberal orthodoxy of the "Washington Consensus". Perceptive commentators have suggested that the Bank's dictum that economic growth is a pre-condition for improving the lives of the poor is over-stated, if not downright wrong.
Criticism of Cuba as a Godless and soulless country in a region that is dominantly Catholic has now become muted. There is a greater appreciation today of the nearly five decades of the Cuban experiment in fine-tuning the human mind away from acquisitiveness and into giving and sharing that are the essence of all religious ideals. This civilisational gain and the enormous sacrifices made by its people in standing up to the Northern Colossus cannot be bartered away to get a democracy certificate from a country whose record in wiping out democracy in that region is unparalleled. Only recently, when a democratically-elected South American President, Venezuela's Hugo Chavez — who, uncaring for such a certificate, sought to distribute unused land to the landless and doubled the royalty taxes paid by the oil companies — was kidnapped in a military coup, the U.S. could not hide its glee at this murder of democracy, though it proved to be short lived; Mr. Chavez was reinstated within two days through popular protest and with the help of loyal troops. A popular joke doing the rounds in South America is: "Why has there never been a military coup in the U.S.? Because there has never been a U.S. embassy there!" Such are the democratic credentials of Abraham Lincoln's descendants till now. When a preposterous allegation was made about Cuba having biological weapons and trading them with "rogue states" such as Iran, by a senior State department official, with the rider, "Cuba should understand that states that fail to renounce terror can expect to become our targets", it was left to Jimmy Carter, former U.S. President, to give the lie to Washington's claims. The British liberal daily The Guardian asked editorially: "When is the U.S. right going to stop persecuting Cuba and seek a partnership for peace?" When, indeed? There is increasing pressure on the right wing administration, even from some business interests — like the airlines industry — that would stand to gain by trade with Cuba, to moderate its hard-line stand. (Late on Tuesday, the U.S. Congress voted to lift many of the curbs on travel and trade but a presidential veto could still negate it.)
To go back to Mr. Bush's understanding of the convergence of market reforms and democracy, contemporary history has thrown up abundant examples of how it is the market that kills democracy. Samir Amin, social scientist and director of the African Office of the Third World Forum, considers "the market" as "short hand for capitalist management of economic activity" that reveals its essence in "long live competition, let the strongest win". He calls the convergence theory "pure dogma; a theory of imaginary politics" as it falsely presupposes a society without conflicts. To quote him: "In a market economy, all that is potentially dangerous for the market is emptied... you can vote freely any way you like: white, blue, green, pink or red. Whatever you do, it will have no effect, because your fate is decided elsewhere, outside the precincts of Parliament, in the market."