We come finally ta what ja -reslly at the bothom of the attack agai net
"Trotskyien". Hlas Roca intimates it in his sneering references to the "super revolutionary” lengusge of the Trotskyists- You would think ws were ati Ene: in the thirties when the Blas Roces were defending the Steliniat (not Leniniet) “thesis of the possibility of the triumph of socialism in one eouwtry" aa againet the Trotskyist position that the very defense of the : secialist achievementa of the October Revolution required the extension of the cavolution and its oulmination in an international revolution thet would fisciiy establish socinlism in the industrially advanced capitalist countries. The correctness of the Trotskyist position has been confirmed by reality in the extension of the revclution into Eestern Europe, in the toppling of e-pitalism and landlordism in Chins, end last, but by no means least, by the revolution in Cuba itself, only 90 miles from the world's sajor capitelist power.
A single additional socialist revolution in Latin America today could and the iselation of Cuba from the American continent at one blow and asaure the rapid spread of revolutions throughout the americas. Never has the Trotskyist program had such reality 1s today. This ia precisely what the Blas Hooas, representing the miserable remnants of Steliniam in the Weatern Hemisphere, fear and are seeking to block. Consider the following paragraphs from Blaa Roca'"s article, in which ha tries to come to grips with Trotskyian:
"With ultraleft slogans and calls for the immadiste reslizetion of the socialist revolution, they isolate thia movement from the masses, they cut thoir road of developrent. 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 practicsl strugele to overthrow Beatiata's tyrenny and to destroy his mercenary army which served to support his and which was the instrument of neoenlonislism and all the reactionary gociel forces!
Whatever quotations Blas Roca may find in the aticles and reports of J. Posadas, the Trotsakyists do not osll for the “immadiete raslisation of the socialist revolution." This is a carioature, like the Stalinist caricature of former dooades which claimed that Trotsky'sa theory of parmanent revolution meant "simultansous revolutions” everywhere.
"The Trotskyista," continues Bles Roos, "like to say that the measures of soolalist transformation were taken in Cuba under thea pressure of the Masses; what they are not even capable of understanding is that tha reyolutionary leaderahip under the guidance of Companero Fidel Castro prepared each atep and teok it in oonsonaice with the same state of sonsciousness which they had crasted in tha masses. In 1955 the proclamation of socialism would have divided the country; in d4pril 1341 the masses unaninously supported the declaration of Comnanaro Fidel Csaatro on the socialist character of our revolution and carried it to victory, with their blcoed, an the beaches of Playa Giron. "
docomiing to Blaa Roca, "The Trotskyists like to say---+" Again, it ia
Posadas who likes to say. The decisive slement in tha yietory of the Cuban Revolution was unquestionably the leadership provided by Fidel Castro, who sucteaded in oyerconing the long default in loadership fue to Stalinieta like Blas Roos, by-passing them from the left. Naturally the massea reaaponded. 5c aid the Trotskyists and many other genuine revolutionists on an international acale. But Blas Roca's reference to Posadas here ia only part of the amckeacreen under which he advances a line in opposition to tha line followad by Fidol Castro up to now of revolutionary struggle and declared socialist aims.
Blas Roga's line, as indioated in these paragrephs, is the aame line as the one advanced by the U.3.Communiat spokeaman,Gus Hall, in his oriticisa of Monthly Reviews It ia the concept that the revolutionary process in industrially underdeveloped countries must go thppugh two separate stages, a tourgecis-demooratic stage led by the progressive-minied bourgeoisie and: a later stage in which the revolutionary lesdership of the proletariat osm same forward. The concept is the one advanced and defenied by tha Mengheviks in opposition to bath Lenin and Tretaky- Something more is involved, howerer, than just -a long outmoded soncapt.
IT do not deny that in 1959 a "proclamation of sccialiam" in Cuba would have bean widely misunderstood.» Tha reason had nothing to do with the olasa character of the developing revolution» It was due te the enormous disaredit brought on the very name of socialism or communiee by tha recerd cf Stalinism in the Seviet Union and in Cubs where the Communist Party aupported Batista. 4 "proclamation of socialian” would have been misunderstood as 4 “proclamation of Stalinism".
It waa correct of Castro to avoid that misunderstanding: to which we should add that Castro himself had been repelled by the recormi of the Communist Party and did not yet consider himself a Marxist. Imnetead of developing around a proclaimed program of soclalian, tha revolution moved forward under a slogan of action; namely, armed atruggle against Batiatae And even on this level, the Communist Party under Blas Roce's leadership failed miserably, ettecking Castro's movement as adventurist and putachist.
The truth is that Blas Roca's line, of ayoiding the "superrevolutionary len guage" of accialisn, of advancing the concent of two atages, had already been tried out in Cuba and had been found wanting, to say the least-
On Dacember 4,1939, the Cuban Communist Party nominated its candidate for the office of president. Hia name? Colonel Pulgenoio Batista, the Thiat of Staff of the Cuban armed forces. Blas Rooa and his fellow Stalinist leaders backed Batista because they considered him to be « "man of the people", a good bourgeois democrat, a leader of the "first stage" of the revolution. 4nd Batista rewarded his Communiat Farty supportera by giving them posta in his cabinet:
Without this coalition, Batista could never have gotten inte a position to establish his bloody dictatorehip- There were two ateges all right. Two atages of a counterrevolution- In the firat stage, the revolutionary forces were hoodwinked and duped into supporting a bourgeois democrat - a fieure
like Sukarno or Chiang Kai-shek, who was alao touted by Stalin in the "firat stage-" In the second stage, the revolutionary forces ware decimated as the eounter-revolution consolidated its dictatorship. This tragic proogas waa duplicated in Brasil twe years ago when Goulart was pictured as the good bourgeois demoorat on whom all reliance should be placed in stage number ona-
The Castelo Branco coup d'etat in April, 1954, demonstrated in the most anphatio way that the line of tha “two stage” revolution is still quite ®apatle of paving the way for a “two stage" counter-revolution. Thia lesson has bean freshened aince Ootober, 1965, with the blood of hundreds of . thousands of Communists in Indonesia. If Bles Roca's line is applied alsewhere in Latin America, it will most certainly guarantee snother defeat as it did in Cuba in Batista's day, in China in 1925-27, Indonesia in 1965 and A tany other countries where it has been tested.
The question then somes up: can a successful revolution be organized around a mers slogm of action, as happened in Cuba under Castro? To anawer, yes, implies two things: (1) The indigenous bourgeoisie and their imperialist backers have learned nothing from the Cuban experiencee (2) The magses in Latin «America have learned nothing from the Cuban example of going forward to the socialist stage - in other words, "sosdalise" still hes not recovered in their outlock from the terrible diseredit brought on it by Stalin and his hand-picked lisutenants like Blas Roca.
Both conclusions are wrong, in my opinion. Jmericen imperisliam and its stooges are far resdier to act in the most violent way at the first sien of a revolutionary upheaval, no matter what attempts are made to disguise it. Johnson's occupation of Santo Domingo and the repressive measures taken ageinst the Peruvian guerrilla fighters in the past year are proof encugh without adding tha lesson of Johnocn's escalation of the war in Vietnen-
On the other hand, the Cuban Revolution has had an inmenge effact on popular conscicusness throughout Latin America and thia effent will grow as the contrast between Cuba's gaina and the stagnation in the rest of Latin America becomes icra glaring. In record time Cuba achiaved auch things as the liquidation of illiteracy. Unemployment was ended, social aacurity guaranteed, an education assured to every child. Despite all the difficult-— : ies of the imperialist blockade and 4 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 90 miles from the imperialist z U.8-, has been able to hold out against the world's mightiest power far seven years now! “Socialian," Cubarestyle, is bound to appear more and more attractive - a5 the socialist revolution was to tha masses of the world in the first years after the Ooteber Revolution. The Latinimerican masses will become increasingly impatient to achieve what the Cubana did - a socialist revolution. And why shouldn't they have it?
This rehabilitation of the word “sonialism" and the program of sooialiam will likewise be listed in history to the credit of the Cubm
Revolution and it will be achieved despite everything that the Blas Roceas, with their treacherous advice, can do to stop it.
in their editorial on Castro's January 15 attack against Trotekyisn, Huberman and Sweesy made the following point:
"Whatever its role in Guatemala, Trotskyiam is certainly not a: large or important political force in Latin @merica as a whole. But if Fidel Castro and the Latin american Communist Parties duck the question of aocislism, and still more if they attack as Trotskyites all those who openly struggle for a specifically socialist revolution, then the prospects for Latin American Trotskyiem will be vastly improved."
Whatever it is called - "consistent class strugele," "Revolutionary Marxian," "revolutionary socicliam," or "Trotskyias" - the prospects for socialist revolution in Latin ‘america are alrealy vastly improved. The prospects for “class collaboration,” "peaceful coexistence," "popular frontian,"” “soglitionism," or "Stalinism™ are on the decline» The great dividing line wos drawn by the successful Cuban Revolution. The popular appeal of the socialist gosl, noted by Yon Sosa, the Guatemalan guerrilla leader, is but one indication of the deep processes at work in this direction.
The defeats and setbacks of the past few years will prove to be but temporary. Latin dmerica's 200,000,000 people sare gathering their foroes for another giant step forward. Nothing will be able to stap them not all the dollars and mins of imperialism, and still lesa the pitiful labors of the Stalinist defilars of socialism.