AN EVENT ABOUT LEON TROTSKY WHICH TROTSKY WOULD NEVER ATTEND

Share this statement of Reagrupamiento Hacia Pst and La Marx about Cuba!!!

4 July 2019

AN EVENT ABOUT LEON TROTSKY, WHICH TROTSKY WOULD NEVER ATTEND

By Daniel Campos
daniel.campos.d@gmail.com

An International Academical Event about Leon Trotsky was held in Cuba organized by the Instituto Cubano de Investigación Cultural (ICIC) - in English Cuban Institute of Cultural Research -, under the Ministry of Culture of the Cuban Government. It was a historical novelty since like all Stalinist regimes over the world, the Cuban one eliminated Trotsky from the history of both the Russian and the world revolution for decades. It was surprising then that such an event as a homage to Trotsky was held at "Benito Juárez de La Habana" House from May 6 up to May 8. The event tackled a wide variety of topics related to Trotsky, his childhood, his youth, his relationships with other revolutionaries, his role in revolutions, in political struggle, in art and literature, in the Opposition from Left, the foundation of the Fourth International.

The attendants were personalities, intellectuals and writers such as Paul Le Blanc, Susan Weissman, Robert Brenner or Eric Toussaint, along with researchers, filmmakers, professors and students. The Museo Casa León Trotsky was represented by his director Gabriela Pérez Noriega, whose management shares Esteban Volkov, Trotsky's niece. The event coordinator was the director of the ICIC Frank García, an official who is publicly a fervent supporter of the Cuban regime. The ICIC, whose director is García, is a member of CLACSO (Consejo Latinoamericano de Ciencias Sociales, in English Latin American Council of Social Sciences), associated with UNESCO which is a branch of the UN.

According with the different reports issued by the event attendants, it was quite striking watch the lack of any comment about the current political situation in Cuba. Taking into account that both personalities and the attending groups claim to de trotskists addressed the most varied issues, it was striking that in relation with Cuba only the imperialist blocade was mentioned and there was no debate about something essential for the Left and world trotskism. What would Trotsky have said about Cuban regime and, above all, about the situation that the workers and the people of Cuba are experiencing.

THE DRAMATIC SITUATION OF WORKERS AND THE PEOPLE OF CUBA

On april this year, just a month before this event about Leon Trotsky, the Cuban regime enacted a new Constitution which devastates both the rights of the Cuban people and the remains of the 1959 Revolution. The new Constitution strengthens capitalism in Cuba, explicitly affirms the private property of the means of production, abandons the proposal of overcoming the exploitation regimes of some people over others, and removes the part of the article 5 of the old Constitution that alluded to the "communist society". The new Constitution leaves gays and lesbians without rights by not allowing equal marriage, and openly proclaims that Cuba's regime is a one-party dictatorship pointing out that
Cuba's Communist Party is "the top leading force of both the society and State "and the only" party possible, stating explicitly that there isn't any chance for workers and the people of any other political organization in Cuba.

On June 16, 2018, Cuban President Díaz-Canel made the historic announcement of the "end of the centralized economy" during the closing of the Congress of Economists. The argument of the Cuban president is that the centralized economy that was implemented after the 1959 Revolution came to be a burden on the country's economy. The president's proposal is that from now on, state-owned companies must be "financially self-sustaining enterprises," according to the official newspaper Granma. Díaz-Canel justified his proposal by saying that his announcement seeks to end "corruption and illegality, low level of savings, indebtedness of the State and insufficient income from exports". The June announcement is in line with the proclaimed April Constitution which includes for the first time foreign investment and private property. In turn, in his speech, Diaz-Canel fosters the injection of foreign capital, posing that the role of the private sector is vital to refloat the economy. In that speech, Diaz-Canel called on the different ministers under his command to allow the private sector to be organized "without stopping or slowing down its performance".

But Diaz-Canel denies a reality. The introduction of capitalism in Cuba is a process that has taken years and has caused a disaster among the workers and the people of the island. This process promoted by the Castro brothers has caused the Cuban workers earn miserable wages at an average of 30 dollars per month which barely serve the subsystem in horrible conditions. The Oficina Nacional de Estadística e Información, ONEI (in english, Nacional Bureau of Stadistics and Information) reports in 2017 that the salaries average in Ciego de Ávila region is 32.7 dollars per month, in Pinar del Río 32.5 dollars, in Matanzas 31.2 dollars, in Sancti Spiritu 30.2 dollars and in Guantánamo, the eastern province of the island and one of the poorest, is 24.9 dollars. ONEI's data reveal that the lowest paid workers are those of culture and sport with an average of 21.2 dollars, those of communal services, associations and individuals with 21.28 dollars and teachers and education workers with 21.3 dollars. Poverty and misery worsen because of the aberrant measures imposed by the double currency system, a horrible economic apartheid for the Cuban people established for more than 24 years. This system consists of the distribution of 1 cuban peso for common people and 1 peso convertible in dollars for tourists, businessmen and regime officials.

In 2018 four Cuban medical workers, Ramona Matos Rodríguez, Tatiana Carballo Gómez, Fidel Cruz Hernández y Russela Margarita Rivero Sarabia, denounced human trafficking, forced labor and exploitation in American continent Cuban missions. The claims are linked to the program that the Brazilian government of Dilma Rousseff created to face the historical problem of the lack of doctors and to improve the Basic Care in Brazil in 2013 called "Mais medicos" (in English, more doctors). The program was a sample of the brutal exploitation that the Castro regime imposes on the workers. The denunciations fall against the authorities of the Organización Panamericana de la Salud (OPS, in english Pan-American Health Organization) because of the contracts signed with the Sociedad Mercantil Comercializadora de Servicios Médicos Cubanos (in english, Trading Company of Cuban Medical Services) that acted as an intermediary between the governments of Brazil and Cuba.

The payments of the Brazilian government were directed 5% to the OPS (in English, PHO), 10% to the doctor's salary, and the remaining 85% to the Cuban State, which means the contribution of billons of dollars per year and explains horribly the submission of the doctors who take part in the Cuban missions. The doctors' complaint is that since 2013 the OPS (in en English, PAHO) had a profit of 75 million dollars just as an intermediary between the Brazilian and Cuban governments. The doctors can not reject the request; they are bound to sign a paper accepting the conditions, not knowing neither where are they going to nor how much are they going to earn. They learn about their destiny just before arriving to the place, they cannot carry neither their passports nor their families, thus the regime ensures that the professional will return to the country. The doctors don't go alone: they are accompanied by intelligence agents who watch them at any times, whether in Brazil, Venezuela, Bolivia or Angola. They are spied and forced to carry out political and propaganda functions. In 2019, in addition to the Cuban doctors' denunciations, there were many more ones against over 300 European companies with branches in Cuba filed before the Fiscalía de la Audiencia Nacional y la Presidencia del Parlamento Europeo (in english, Prosecutor's Office of the National High Court and the Presidency of the European Parliament). The complaints cover hotel groups, industrial firms, services and banks, which violate the labor rights and lower standards of the Organización Internacional del Trabajo (OIT; in english, International Labor Organization- ILO). Business corporations were protected by Law 118-2014 on foreign investment enacted in 2014 by the Castro regime, which attacks labor rights of workers by warranting the imperialist capital.

In 2017 the Cuban Foreign Trade and Foreign Investment, Rodrigo Malmierca, declared that, despite the blocade, Cuba registered "records figures of foreign investment" for an amount exceeding 1000 million dollars. Foreign investments are concentrated in the "Special Zones" such as the Mariel Special Development Zones, which receive investments from more than 20 countries. Most of europena companies which landed in Cuba are 269 spanish, 42 italians, 20 germans, 20 french, 13 from Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, Slovakia, Estonia, Holland, Ireland, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Czech Republic and Switzerland.

The investments increased so much that the government created a special ministry for its management. So, emerged the Ministry for Foreign Investment and Economic Colaboration (MFIEC), which states a frightening labor regime, imposed by the State and the Cuban Communist Party. Under the laws enacted by the Castro regime the workers hired cannot deal anything with their employers but it is the MFIEC, authorized by the Ministry of Labor and Social Security, who establishes the hiring conditions for workers in joint ventures. The MFIEC is the one that receives the foreign currency from the foreign firm for the salary of each worker, and after the discount of more than 90%, leaves for the operator scarce coins, which are not even perceived in foreign currency but in pesos convertibles. From the 690 dollars that each worker should charge monthly, he barely gets between 25 and 40 dollars after the slice that the MFIEC takes.

The leaders and officials of the Castro regime have become a bourgeoisie that enjoys great luxury. They handle important businesses and delight in a life of oligarchs enjoying special diets. Most of the Cuban hotels are part of the Business Management Group, the corporate holding of the Revolutionary Armed Forces. Hotel workers framed in their payrolls are subject to military legislation, which warrants the oligarchy of the RAF enjoy the privilege of exploiting thousands of workers in the tourism industry of Cuba. In 2007, Raúl Castro announced the beginning of the economic reforms aiming to shorten expenses and launched a campaign to "eliminate undue gratuities". In return, state employees could access hotels at preferential prices.

But for a long time these recreational facilities were taken over by the dominant elite. Fearing criticism from the population could be said about the oligarchy of the Cuban Communist Party (CCP), the Army commander decided that the activities in the recreational facilities would take place in visiting houses, villas and hotels subordinated to the CCP and the government, away from the eyes of the population, at points far from the beaches of Varadero, Cayo Coco or Guardalavaca, or outside of Havana and provincial capitals. In those facilities, the Cuban elite enjoys such a comfort comparable only to that enjoyed by international tourism. The conclusion of this process is that it is typical of the Accumulation of Capital that Marx described as common to all capitalist societies. Inequality is huge in Cuba between the workers and the people on the one hand, and the bourgeoisie made up of the elite of the CCP, the officials and the military, on the other. And this inequality gets worse day by day.

A CAPITALIST STATE, DISGUISED OF "SOCIALISM"

Millions of people in the world believe that Cuba is a socialist country. Contributes to this deceit the fact that the current regime speaks of socialism, is headed by a so called "communist" party and uses the figure of the revolutionary Che Guevara who led the 1959 Revolution, to make the propaganda of the state and the regime Cuban. Also contributing to this deceit is the propaganda of US imperialism which refers, both to Cuba and Venezuela, as "socialist countries". In this way, both the campaign of imperialism and that of the Cuban regime, lie to hide the reality of the workers and the people of Cuba, as well as that of Venezuela.

Cuba is a capitalist state. What defines a state as socialist or capitalist is for what social class the state works. If the state is socialist, it is a state that goes against capital and the exploitation of man by man, defending the rights of workers and the people. But if it is capitalist, what the state defends is the exploitation of workers and the people in benefit of capital, no matter what the party that manages the state is called. In the case of Cuba, the capitalist character of the state is expressed both in the brutal conditions of exploitation and subjugation of the population and in the new Constitution imposed by the regime. The Constitution seeks to consolidate capitalist Cuba with an anti-worker and anti-popular offensive in benefit of capitalist investments in the Island.

This terrible situation of the Cuban workers was imposed on the basis of brutal crackdowns of the regime against the people and the union, social and political activists. In Cuba it is forbidden to have union activity outside the official state unions that respond to the CCP, it is forbidden to have another political or social organization other than the CCP or its related organizations. The imposition of this crushing of the most elementary democratic liberties is based on more than 20,000 political prisoners, who suffer aberrant conditions and a systematic methodology of disappearances, torture and robbery to the victims.

The situation of women in Cuba is cruel. The Cuban regime imposes conditions of machismo and oppression of women with appalling levels of degradation. On the island, the prevailing feeling of male power manifests itself in family relationships, in sexual abuse, in the treatment of bosses with their subordinates in jobs, and in the exponential growth of prostitution. Under the Castro regime the prostitutes were renamed "jineteras", so called because their activity is to "ride" tourists to be able to sustain their families financially. In this way, "jineterismo" has become one of the main economic activities and suppliers of dollars, based on the "sex tourism" industry in Cuba.

In this sense, with the possibility that Cuban women acquired by marrying a foreigner and leaving the country, they are exposed to a high risk of becoming victims of trafficking networks. The Federation of Cuban Women (FCW), who responds to the CCP, turns a blind eye to this fact of brutal oppression. To all this situation of horrible degradation is added that Lis Cuesta, the wife of the new president of Cuba Miguel Diaz-Canel, retakes the macho title of "first lady", eliminated by the Revolution of 1959 decades ago.

Millions of blacks also suffer brutal oppression on the island through discrimination, lower jobs, lower incomes, living in the worst housing, being minorities in universities and most in prisons. Gays and lesbians always suffered a great repression; the Castro regime has persecuted them and sent them to work camps called Military Units for Production Aid (UMAP). Now, after the sanction of the new Constitution that strips them of their rights, they decided to demonstrate on May 11 , but they were brutally repressed by the police, with LGBTI activists still in jail today.

Presenting this horrible political regime as "socialist" seeks to deceive millions about what socialism really is. And it also seeks to hide what capitalism has prepared for the workers of the whole world. What attitude would Trotsky have assumed if he were invited to expose on a panel in the capital of a country in which the regime subjects its people to this situation? Would Trotsky be silent about it? Would have passed over to issue an opinion? We do not know what Trotsky would have done in Havana in 2019. But we know perfectly well what he did throughout his life. And fundamentally, what he did in the Soviet Union between 1923 and 1929 when the terrible Stalinist dictatorship led by Josef Stalin and the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) arose.

A CAPITALIST DICTATORSHIP SEEKS TO PERPETUATE ITSELF IN CUBA

Trotsky was expelled from the USSR for denouncing that the government of Josef Stalin transformed the regime of the soviets into a dictatorship that endangered the conquests of the October Revolution. He denounced that the regime abandoned Marxist and socialist principles. Because of his denunciations, Trotsky was expelled from the USSR and several imperialist countries but he continued to denounce the capitalist governments and the regression suffered by the regime established in the USSR. Without a doubt, Trotsky would denounce today the regime of Cuba and the dramatic situation suffered by the workers and the Cuban people.

And not only would it denounce that: it would denounce the new Constitution of Cuba sanctioned by the CCP regime with the objective of liquidating the legacy of the Cuban Revolution of January 1, 1959, led by Fidel Castro and Che Guevara. This revolution originated the first workers' state in the history of Latin America, allowed an enormous advance of the Cuban people in terms of work, education, health, eradicated illiteracy and infant mortality, and became a beacon and example to follow, enjoying the sympathy of millions of workers and the poor of Latin America. and the world. For having started this revolution, Cuba suffered the criminal reprisal of US and world imperialism, with invasions, aggressions and a horrible economic blockade that had to bear for decades, until today.
But the Stalinist regime established by Fidel Castro refused to face the imperialist blockade with the most effective tool that exists for the defense of any state that wants to embark on a socialist course: the extension of the revolution to all of Latin America. Under the aegis of the Soviet bureaucracy, which imposed on the Castro regime the Stalinist doctrine of "socialism in one country," the Castro government refused to promote the revolution in Latin America. The strategy adopted by the Castro regime brought as a consequence, first the murder in solitude of Che Guevara in Bolivia in 1967, abandoned and betrayed by the Communist Party. Second, in the '70s, when the revolution in Nicaragua triumphed, Fidel Castro and the Cuban regime raised the doctrine that "Nicaragua will not be a new Cuba," making it clear that the position of the Cuban state was not to extend the Socialist Revolution to Central America, which would have allowed Cuba to break its isolation.

The Castro regime maintained the same strategy against the Salvadoran Revolution when almost a third of the territory fell into the hands of the revolutionaries and the masses. At that time, the CP propitiated the murder of Cayetano Carpio, who represented the most radical wing of Frente Farabundo Martí. Even when Chavismo emerged in Venezuela in the '90s, Castro attended the inauguration of Chávez to suggest that Venezuela should not follow the path of Cuba, in a speech given at the University of Caracas.

The strategy of "socialism in one country" left Cuba defenseless and made it easier for imperialism its blockading and isolating policy, allowing the CP elite to become a new bourgeoisie as happened in China, in the USSR, in Vietnam and in all the states where the revolution had begun; but it suffered the brake of Stalinism. Trotsky's prognosis in The Betrayed Revolution of 1937 was thus confirmed: "An indefinite isolation would infallibly provoke, not the establishment of a national communism, but the restoration of capitalism." What the regime headed by the CCP and Díaz- Canel wants is to perpetuate a capitalist dictatorship on the island that deepens the defense of multinationals' investments. The dictatorship has President Diaz-Canel in one corner, the Armed Forces in the other and Raúl Castro as general secretary of the CCP in the other, in a triangle legalized by the new Constitution in a desperate attempt to adjust the tourniquet against the masses.

A CHORUS OF FLATTERERS AT A SUPPORT EVENT FOR THE REGIME

What did the group of intellectuals and the groups that are claimed trotskists that gathered in La Habana have spoken? They talked about the human and the divine. There was almost no subject to which they did not refer. But there was one issue that they avoided modestly: the question of the political situation in Cuba. When referring to Cuba, they only spoke of "imperialist aggression and blockade", a question that is correct; but of the dictatorship and the Castro regime as well as the new Constitution, they did not say a word.

Of course, nothing could be expected from the pleiad of intellectuals summoned, and in some cases financed, by the Consejo Latinoamericano de Ciencias Sociales (CLACSO, in English, Latin American Council for Social Sciences. LACSS) Eric Toussaint was an official of the capitalist government of Rafael Correa in Ecuador, of the capitalist government of Fernando Lugo in Paraguay and of the capitalist Chávez government, acting as advisor to the Venezuelan Minister of Economic Development and Planning. Toussaint is a salaried official and ideologist of Castrism and Chavism, whose greatest contribution was the creation of the Southern Bank. What criticisms of the Cuban regime could we expect from an official like Toussaint?

And what could we expect from Robert Brenner? The Marxist writer is currently director of the New Left Review. This publication had a lot of prestige among the North American left in the '60s and' 70s but it went into decline and ended up being financed and published by the regime of Rafael Correa in Ecuador, becoming a sad spokesperson of Castro-Chavismo. Paul Le Blanc was a member of the ISO of the USA, a group that spectacularly disbanded this year and currently supports the social democrat Bernie Sanders who is a senator for the North American Democratic Party. We could not expect anything from Brenner, Le Blanc and Toussaint, a whole group of intellectuals, ideologues and spokespersons of LACSS and Castro-Chavismo.

Some groups claiming Trotskyists were present at the event, among them The Militant of England, PTS of Argentina and ITU which also has its headquarters in Argentina. What attitude did these groups have? The Militant is a group that for a while has acted as an advisor to Castro-Chavismo. Alan Woods, its main leader, boasts of acting as a collaborator of Hugo Chávez, and his current formed the Unified Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV, in English USPV) along with Chavez. Nothing interesting could come from a group that some time ago broke with Trotsky and Trotskyism to become a shameful agent of Castro-Chavism.

The PTS group from Argentina presented their report saying proudly that they acted as sponsors of the event. Through their NGO "CEIP Leon Trotsky", they paid tribute to Cuban official Frank García: "... we thank Frank Garcia for the words of recognition that gave us the inauguration ..." The group uses the NGO "CEIP Leon Trotsky" to finance the publication and sale of Trotsky's books and, seeking funding, has obtained donations and economic agreements that have allowed it to install a branch of the NGO in Mexico to act in partnership with the Leon Trotsky House Museum, which is in turn financed by the government of Mexico.

The group presents a lengthy report to Castro's official Frank García entitled "In Cuba we needed Trotsky", taking advantage of the opportunity to present in Cuba the "Latin American Writings" by Trotsky, co-edited with the Leon Trotsky House Museum. In his report, the representative of the NGO "CEIP" does not say a single word about the Venezuelan dictatorship, not a word of the Cuban dictatorship's support for the Venezuelan dictatorship, nor the slightest criticism of the regime, nor do they say a word of the new Constitution, and do not say a word about the situation of the people of Cuba.

Simón Rodríguez Porras, Venezuelan representative of the UIT group in his report, also broke into praise for the official Frank García. So he explains it: "... Garcia admirably managed to overcome the obstacles to its realization, with the collaboration of equally tenacious young people like the journalist Lisbeth Moya and the writer Yunier Mena ..." The only criticism of Castro-Chavismo that sketches Simón Porras was about Venezuela. In the case of a Venezuelan, he had to refer to the appalling situation of the Venezuelan people, but even in his denunciation of Venezuela, the ITU Group's position is surprising. The Venezuelan people are experiencing a real tragedy under the boot of the Chavista dictatorship and its murderous paramilitary groups. They have caused 3 million exiles, hunger, misery, persecution and political prisoners.

But the UIT group avoided denouncing that the Maduro government is a dictatorship that looks more and more like the butcher dictator Bashar-al-Assad. He only said that in Venezuela there is an "economic adjustment", as if Venezuela were a capitalist country like Argentina or Brazil, where there is no dictatorship. Porras claimed the need for "full political independence", but did not say a word about the Venezuelan dictatorship.

AN EVENT TO WASH THE FACE OF THE CUBAN REGIME

Why the Castro regime organized an event to honor Leon Trotsky? And why is this event sponsored by LACSS, a "progressive" think-tank supported by UNESCO and UN? The explanation of the realization of this event offered by both intellectuals and Trotskyist groups is surprising. They say that the realization of the event expresses a struggle between different sectors of the Cuban state apparatus. All share this conclusion, and in doing so, they dust off the "Theory of progressive bourgeois fields", and apply it to Cuba. They say that there is a "progressive" sector of the Cuban state apparatus, in struggle against another "regressive" sector. Let's see how they explain the reasons why the event occurred.

This is expressed by Suzi Weissman, one of the intellectuals attending: ... "What does it mean that this conference took place in Havana? A conjecture could be that it represents an opening or the possibility of a political opening ... To the current Cuban president, Miguel Díaz-Canel ... they call him a "careful reformer" ... he was known for his long hair, for riding a bicycle and walking in "bermuda" pants, he was a strong defender of LGBT rights at a time when homosexuality was disapproved ... "

For Weissman, the event was: "... an opening or the possibility of a political opening ..." and for her the "opening" would be headed by: "... the current Cuban president ... a "careful reformist". Weissman beautifies Diaz-Canel by painting him as a" rebel ":" ... known for his long hair, for riding a bicycle and walking in "bermuda" pants. But Weissman gives a biography of Diaz-Canel in which she "forgets" an important part: the current president of Cuba began his career as an officer of the Revolutionary Armed Forces (RAF). The RAF are a fundamental pillar of the capitalist dictatorship that is imposed in Cuba.

Weissman offers the hypothesis that Díaz-Canel is a "progressive" wing against the "regressive" wing of Raúl Castro, and explains: "... On the other hand, Raúl Castro was notoriously more like the CCP's policy than his brother Fidel The microscopic, and even somewhat mysterious, political opening of a conference on Trotsky taking place in Cuba, had something to do with the end of Raúl's government and the rise of Díaz-Canel's?" Weissman's hypothesis, were published By the NGO "CEIP" of the PTS group without being contradicted by the NGO. The magazine Tool also published the hypothesis of Weissman. The magazine Tool is a publication that tried years ago to present itself as representatives of the theoretical debates of the left, and also abandoned the Marxist principles a long time ago to become an organ of the Castro-Chavism. The groups publish these statements of Weissman without arguing with them, spread them and let them run without rebutting them and scatter these absurd theories which provoke confusion in the vanguard and in the honest revolutionary militants.

The conclusions to which Simón Porras and the UIT group arrive on the conference are even worse. The UIT group does not put the "Theory of progressive bourgeois camps" in Weissman's mouth: they put it in their own mouths. This is explained by the Venezuelan representative of UIT: "... At the inauguration of the event, García considered the Cuban Trotskyists as misunderstood revolutionaries and, for many in the state apparatus, Trotsky is still a bad word ..." And he adds: "... There are many Cuban academics and intellectuals who strive to incorporate the study of the work and the theoretical legacy of the Russian revolutionary to reflect on the Soviet experience and on the changes currently underway on the Island, overcoming old-data institutional resistance ".

This report from Simon and the ITU group are surprising. When asserting that "many in the state apparatus regard Trotsky a bad word," does it mean that there will be "few" in the state apparatus who's are different? The UIT group does not dare to openly refloat the "Theory of progressive bourgeois camps" because of its past in the current promoted by the Trotskyist revolutionary Nahuel Moreno, who denounced and fought against this theory. But they suggest it by stating that: "... There are many academics and intellectuals who strive to incorporate the study of the work and the theoretical legacy of the Russian revolutionary..." Who are these "Cuban academics and intellectuals" for the ITU group that boost Trotsky. As we saw, there is a terrible dictatorship in Cuba that represses opponents, imprisons and torture. The "Cuban academics and intellectuals" to which refer Simon and the ITU group, are in hiding, facing the regime? Or they refer to Frank Garcia and those who organized the event under the auspices of the regime's Ministry of Education?

Simon and the UIT group explain that this group of intellectuals is urging Trotsky to reflect: "... On the changes currently taking place on the Island, overcoming old-data institutional resistance". What does Simon mean when he talks about "... the changes currently taking place on the Island"? According to their explanation, these changes overcome "old-data institutional resistance", all kinds of euphemisms not to say that in Cuba there has been a horrible dictatorship for decades. Simon and the ITU group see positive the actions of Frank García and his collaborators; according to them they "fought tenaciously" to make the event. They would be the ones who faced the "... old-data institutional resistance ..." Simon and the UIT group, contribute a subtle version of the "Theory of progressive bourgeois camps", of their own authorship.

AN EVENT ABOUT TROTSKY WHICH TROTSKY WOULD NEVER ATTEND

The hypotheses developed by the intellectuals and the groups that claimed to be trotskists who attended the event, are a true disparate. These hypotheses and Field Theory that publish, spread or explains have a single objective: to justify their capitulation to the Castro regime. The only way to conceal the capitulation they have played in attending the event is to depict a reality that does not exist. Frank García publicly supports the new Constitution of Cuba that sweeps away the rights of the people. He is not representative of any progressive sector. The event was limited to officials and present groups. It was not a mass act; no sectors of the vanguard and the Cuban people were allowed to attend. This is recognized in his report by Simon and the ITU group: "... Unfortunately the attendance of young students, researchers and Cuban activists was very limited. The activity was not publicly announced and the entrance to the "Benito Juarez" house was restricted to a previously prepared guest list..."

The attitude of the regime that Simon and the ITU "lament" is natural of a strategy that seeks to perpetuate a capitalist dictatorship; this is a risky policy in the middle of an acute world crisis of capitalism, because, as the oligarchs of the Cuban CCP know, dictatorships are not fashionable in the world. The Venezuelan people have risen up against the dictatorship; the Nicaraguan people have also risen up against the dictatorship. In the Arab Spring in 2011, billions have risen in the Middle East against dictatorships; now the Arab Spring has got into a new phase with the revolutions against the dictatorships of Sudan and Algeria. Why is the Cuban regime going to get away with it without the waves of world revolution infecting the island?

The homage to Trotsky aims to wash the face of the horrible face of the capitalist dictatorship led by Diaz-Canel and Raul Castro. They intend to use the incorruptible figure of the great Russian revolutionary Trotsky to show themselves "renewed" and to make the masses believe that there is a socialist course. And they use the salaried intellectuals and the "Trotskyist" groups to wash their faces. Even so, the CCP oligarchy is so afraid of its own people that the opening of the floodgates is only very limited. As reported by Simon of the UIT group, they made an event with a "guest list prepared previously ..." to avoid the entrance of some uncomfortable guest who talked about the reality of Cuba, criticized the dictatorship or denounced the new Constitution.

The International Academic Event on Leon Trotsky that took place in Cuba between May 6 and 8, 2019, was an event about Trotsky which, no doubt, Trotsky would never attend. No organization with a revolutionary moral can step on the ground of Havana and not rebel against the regime's clamp, to keep silence about the dramatic situation of the Cuban people and not make any criticism of the Castro regime. The organizations that claim Trotskyists and attended the event, showed their irreversible process of social democratization, acting as corteges of the Castro regime.

In his report on the event, Suzi Weissman says: "... The participants came from the whole spectrum of Trotskyist politics ... from Ernest Mandel to Nahuel Moreno, to Gerry Healy and Hillel Ticktin ..." At this point we must clarify something: just as Trotsky would have rejected this event, so would Nahuel Moreno. That the name of Nahuel Moreno appears linked to this pro-Castro event is the responsibility of the ITU group, which is still claiming morenist. Too many calumnies have already been received by Nahuel Moreno due to the responsibility of the daily actions of groups that claim to be publicly morenist, but which go against Moreno's entire tradition. The attitudes of the groups that claim to be morenist, but capitulate the counterrevolutionary leaders, cause confusion in activism and in those who approach the left. The ITU group, participating in this event, messed up the name of Moreno and his decades-long struggle in defense of orthodox Trotskyism.

The Castro regime allowed this event in the midst of the severe agony of Castro-Chavism, the political stream that they lead and has dominated the scene of the Latin American left for 20 years. Millions had expectations in Castro, Chávez, Lula, the Kirchners, Correa, Evo Morales, Lugo and López Obrador. Now, that political stream is disavowed, its leaders are imprisoned and millions turn away from them. The revolutionary process that moves Latin America goes against the Castro regime and is burying the Castro-Chavism. Precisely the final and definitive crisis of these streams is what opens the true possibilities for the development of revolutionary streams in Latin America. But for this development it is necessary not to awaken the slightest expectation in a wing of the broken Castro regime or any sector of Castro-Chavism.

Every Trotskyist and revolutionary policy in Cuba is based on the main task of promoting the broadest mobilization of the Cuban people against the capitalist dictatorship of the CCO and Díaz-Canel. The fight against the imperialist blockade is intimately linked to the struggle against the dictatorship because without liberating the forces of the Cuban people by removing all the ties and bars of the regime, the mobilization necessary to defeat the imperialist blockade cannot be carried out. The implacable denunciation of the regime is necessary to allow the Cuban people to find support to free their forces, claiming for the broadest democratic liberties and fight for the right of assembly, the right to strike, the right to free expression, the right of free circulation, the freedom of political and social prisoners, the right to build alternative workers and revolutionaries parties to the CCP; for the right to create unions and democratic social organizations independent from the State and the CCP, able to defend the interests of the workers and the people.

The revolutionary and Trotskyist program in Cuba includes eliminating prostitution, defending the rights of blacks, women, LGBTI and all other diversities. The proposals of the revolutionary organizations cannot awaken the slightest expectation in any wing of the broken Castro regime. The task starts from the impulse to the largest and important mobilization of the cuban people, joining it to the fight of all the peoples of Latin America, of the North American and world people. This is the only way to confront the criminal imperialist blockade and defeat it. It is the policy that Trotsky left us, far from the panels of intellectuals, academics and officials, together with the millions of Cubans who suffer the repression of the regime, along with the thousands who suffer from prisons and persecution. Trotsky would develop it with the passion that always characterized him; and with the same passion, following his teachings; we commit ourselves to develop the Regrouping of the Revolutionaries from the current we are building.