Honestly its rude to be invited by a country to meet their president who decided to respond to your criticisms of their administration only to not show up and go meet the opposition.
Being invided and then no showing shows complete disregard to basic diplomatic Etiquette since it was a mission to show solidarity against the embargo
Bonus socdems being cringe part 4.5: about another member that didnt show up to the presidential meeting
Deeply unserious people
These fucking idiots get the possibility of meeting with and creating an ally for their cause with state resources that has actively used those resources to secretly fund and support foreign causes in the past and they stupidly do this shit?
Absolute fucking idiots. I have no other words. The complete and total failure to see an opportunity presenting itself to these morons is beyond stupidity.
The complete and total failure to see an opportunity presenting itself to these morons is beyond stupidity.
It’s beyond stupidity alright. No one is this fucking stupid, so the only reasonable conclusion is that they’re ops.
I genuinely don’t think they actually thought through any of this. They’ve treated it like it’s some school trip where a class gets to meet the prez and say a few words. Not as a real and serious political organisation trying to make ties that will benefit their cause.
Would they behave this way with the UK? With Norway or Sweden? Countries that wouldn’t give them the time of day and wouldn’t support them? Would they offend them with criticisms of how they run their states if given any kind of diplomatic welcome? I somehow think they wouldn’t. They’d treat it like a westerners day out.
They went there to lecture them. Imbeciles. A country that in the past has not been against literally arming their allies in foreign nations. Let alone providing lukewarm resource support.
Just incredible shortsightedness. These are people you should be building trust with to eventually reach the point of collaboration.
They went there to lecture them.
Exactly. Why did this arrogant westoid think they have any right to share their “critiques” anyway. Extremely patient and kind of Diaz-Canal to even entertain their bullshit and offer them a private meeting to address their critiques. Critiques and reforms of the Cuban project should come from Cubans, not from Americans. Why does she think she has any right to dictate anything to the Cubans whatsoever? She’s so arrogant she thinks she has the solution while Cubans are just too stupid to figure it out? She should have been there to learn, not to lecture.
How ironic that her defenders try to attack others with “she’s actually doing something in real life” when she’s a rep from a succdem party trying to lecture a socialist country governed by the heirs to a real life, actual, communist revolution.
I’ve noticed the “X has done more praxis than you ever could” is a very common line from radlibs and succs and the squishier types of leftists when they can’t actually defend them based on any argument or principles. Every time I’ve heard it has been in defense of AOC or Bernie or NJR or someone similar.
Lol no, they’re just idealists.
Idealism was the ultimate op.
The ultimate
People of the movement
No trust me there are people exactly this stupid and they’re the dominant members of the DSA.
The DSA is made up primarily of Sanders Dems and entryist Trots that think they’re very sneaky. There are minorities that are better but these groups are louder and maintain their positions by being exhausting, i.e. fundamentally liberal.
Trots that think they’re very sneaky.
giggling rn
The trots and succdems are currently the minority faction on the national political committee?
Bread and Roses are Trots. They have almost out-sneaked themselves to the point that many members don’t know their ideological heritage. Bread and Roses brought a Hong Kong protester to the 2023 convention and is anti-China in a precisely Trot way. Its internationalism focuses almost exclusively on independent trade unions, usually in opposition to anti-imperialist organizations and actions. They aligned with the libs to kill the BDS working group and do the exact same kinds of things that Maria did.
MUG is neo-Trot. They don’t specifically highlight Trotsky but their focuses are all the things Trots in DSA care about and frame. They are less focused on causing drama, though.
SMC, Groundwork/GND are SocDems.
Red Star and Communist Caucus are the only not terrible DSA groups anyone might recognize. And they’re still a bit lackluster because they’re trying to reform a reformist org into something a bit more commie without being abrasive which is basically impossible given the opposition.
DSA itself arose from a Trot trying to be more reformist so it’s not surprising to see that legacy everywhere.
Tallying up just B&R, SMC, and Groundwork, that’s 11 of the 18 NPC positions. If you include MUG, it’s 13 of the 18.
Source: some of my comrades try to do commie things in the DSA and complain to me a lot.
Huh. I was misinformed. Why are there trots siding with the ML adjacent groups over other trots and succdems?
There are specific reasons but don’t forget that the people Trots fight with the most are always each other.
But basically they have different ideas about what direction to go in and how to “lead” “the movement”. They’re like little parties within a party but neither of those things is really a party at all. But seeking self-promotion and being more vanguardy than each other is part of it.
deleted by creator
Why the fuck are you even going to Cuba as a member of a political party if you skip a meeting with the goddamn president? This should get them expelled, but I suppose that might be too authoritarian.
To platform your bad ideas.
They’re both from groups that define themselves through anticommunism. They think doing good actions involves attacking countries run by communist parties and parroting the NGO-industrial complex lines. They think they’re so clever.
How to build bridges, apparently
- Go to foreign nation and berate it’s leadership
- Skip meeting with it’s president who actually was going to try and address aforementioned comments
This reminds me of a recent podcast on Rev Left where he interviewed three Pan-Africanists who were part of a delegation in Cuba: https://revolutionaryleftradio.libsyn.com/on-cuba-and-haiti-the-fight-for-liberation-self-determination-in-the-caribbean
One of them has been to these conferences in Cuba multiple times and would mention how US leftists would constantly bring ideological and sectarian baggage with them and how Cuban communists have to constantly tell them to remove their heads from their asses and stfu (It’s around 13:00 into the podcast).
Just commenting so I can listen to this tomorrow
If anyone still wonders why the global south thinks the western “left” is a joke, this is a perfect example.
If I were to conduct a diplomatic faux pas on that level, I would resign from embarrassment.
nah instead double down and cause internal strife in your organization, that’s the American pigheaded way
Well shit, that’s a truism anywhere you go lol.
If I got to visit the actual fucking leader of Cuba then I would be there early and probably listen for the vast majority of the time; berating or asking sectarian questions would be almost at the bottom of my list. They’re the people who have succeeded while we have failed, we have to listen to them
I really hate succdems
Goes to show how hilariously distant the Cuban government is from the cartoon of a totalitarian cartel regime US media paints them as that Canel even bothered to hear them out.
jesus christ, imagine being able to meet the top goat of cuba and SKIPPING OUT
fucking losers
Maria in particular met with anti-government opposition groups while on delegation
Bruh
And there it is. I knew she’s an op because absolutely no one who’s honest about their intentions would skip out on missing the head of state.
Missing the head of state of one of the few socialist countries in the world. Virtually a once in a lifetime opportunity that most don’t get.
It was the two succdem caucuses, the image describing events is from the commie caucus calling out their asses
Hopefully Maria and Renée get blowback for this.
R&R are communists. This is from Redstar not Commie Caucus. You literally have no clue what you are talking about. Commie caucus generally doesn’t care about DSA internals, they are into renters unions
Cool it with the name-calling, please edit.
Just ban them for being a DSA chauvinist
Edited
Thanks
I said the commie caucus not the Commie caucus
The Commie caucus are less commie then Red Star.
Also I was calling R&R succdem as a reductionist insult, what would be a more accurate insult?
I don’t know comrade, I don’t know the rules of this game you are playing. But I know this debate and the people involved. Its not my fault you can’t keep your facts straight, maybe keep quiet if you’re clueless. No investigation, no something something
I think you’re misreading me in search of a dunk.
I don’t want to dunk, I have to defend my comrade
Do you have to defend your comrade when they’re doing lib shit like refusing to meet with the president of Cuba?
We joke about Mao’s “combat liberalism” on this site a lot, but this is EXACTLY the time where those principles are meant to be exercised. You do not HAVE to defend them.
Defending your comrade from bad actions they took just because they’re your comrade is liberal bullshit and you are a disappointment
R&R split from Socialist Alternative to join DSA. They’re Trotskyists.
R&R are Trots that consistently adopt anticommunist, Western chauvinist positions.
not surprising. shameful, pathetic behavior, but not surprising in the least.
it is time, Maria and ReneéIs it really a struggle session? Everybody except one (Banned
) person is in agreement that they should be at least ejected be from the org for this shameful display.I mostly meant it in the literal, historical sense
public spectacles in Maoist China where people accused of being “class enemies” were publicly humiliated, accused
Idea for a
bitserious reform of the DSA: AES country invites DSA leadership to visit, then refuses to grant exit visas until they’ve harvested 100 tonnes of wheat by hand.Avignon
papacyDSA
Venceremos Brigade 2.0
The 1959 Cuban Revolution was a key event that galvanized and inspired the growing New Left in the 1960s. Cuba became viewed as a radical and anti-imperialist third world country worthy of praise by many of the radical activists of the 1960s.[3]
In 1969, SDS was composed of competing factions with individual priorities and visions.[4] SDS delegates travelled to Havana, and were inspired by Fidel Castro’s New Year’s Day speech, in which he called on Cubans to help with the sugar harvest.[5] Although the Americans originally offered to help by taking industrial jobs displaced by the massive sugar harvest, Fidel reportedly responded that if North Americans were to help, they would cut cane.[6]
Touch
grasssugar cane- Fidel
I skimmed some portion of Maria Franzblau Criticism of Cuba
https://reformandrevolution.org/2024/02/17/cuba-between-imperialism-and-socialism/
We should be critical of socialist and anti-imperialist forces when necessary. Most times this should take place internally when other parties take actions we disagree with strategically. But when a leftist party actively betrays socialist principles, such as by attacking abortion rights or supporting Israeli apartheid, we should be willing to make our disagreements public. As for reactionary, anti-communist forces like the governments of Iran and Russia or groups like Hamas and the Houthis, we should make crystal clear our fierce opposition to their politics while also condemning imperialist aggression against them.
Most egregious considering the Palestinian genocide.
The first weakness is in our analysis and understanding of Cuban socialism. There is no shortage of inspiration we can draw from positively appraising the Revolution’s gains in literacy, healthcare, education, and more. We should not deemphasize the role of the brutal US embargo in the country’s crises. But one simply cannot understand the full picture of Cuba this decade without also understanding the political repression of independent organizing, the threats that private business and austerity pose to the socialist economy, or the crisis of legitimacy the government faces. If one were to attend this delegation and fully accept the party line put forward in our itinerary, the political side of this crisis would go completely unmentioned.
Having it both ways, the embargo is bad for the economy but also the threats that private business and austerity pose to the socialist economy
Second, it limits the effectiveness of our external messaging and organizing, especially in regions of the country with large Hispanic and Cuban-American populations. While it is true that there are large sections of these diaspora communities, particularly Cuban exiles, who are hardcore reactionaries and have petty-bourgeois class interests, it would be a mistake to treat these communities as monolithic or immovable. In my own experience organizing in Miami, there is a large presence of Cubans in every local struggle, whether it be university students and faculty walking out against our far-right state legislature’s censorship of education, or local Starbucks workers’ struggling to unionize their stores.
DAH POCS. like fr what do you mean?
https://reformandrevolution.org/2024/02/17/cuba-between-imperialism-and-socialism/
Meanwhile, a notably large “No” campaign against the Family Code was led by the churches and right-wing dissident groups through social media. While the referendum passed, “No” received 33% of the vote, which is remarkably high for a government initiative in a one-party state.
Like what?
edit:
In many ways, the Family Code represents the bureaucracy working at its best. They corrected an error in the party’s stances under the pressure of LGBTQ Cubans and the international movements for those rights, used mass meetings to influence public opinion and respond to it, and mobilized the party and its mass organizations to advance a “Yes” vote to expand womens’ and LGBTQ rights. But a lack of independent organizing or popularly-controlled institutions means that this was necessarily a slow going and top-down process. Put bluntly, Cuba’s transformation on LGBTQ rights was facilitated in no small part by Mariela Castro’s position as a prominent figure in the party bureaucracy with a famous family name.
You see, this good thing they did, is actually bad.
Earlier in the piece:
We visited the center on our second day in Havana and heard a lecture from Mariela Castro about the history of CENESEX and of women’s and LGBTQ rights in Cuba. During the Q&A, one comrade asked for any advice Castro could give to US socialists fighting for queer rights. She mostly dodged the question regarding advice for US socialists, and she opted instead to describe her internal struggles within the Communist Party on this topic. She told the story of how she found old writings from her mother, the revolutionary Vilma Espin, in support of same-sex marriage and used it to argue for the Party to support same-sex marriage. She went on to describe the process of winning LGBTQ rights as a slow, gradual, consensus building project rather than a rapid, activist struggle.
Castro’s struggles within the party have been admirable and won considerable gains for queer people. But it is worth examining that, in response to a question about what LGBTQ organizing should look like, her answer was a course of action really only available to her: using old family documents to make an argument to top party brass. I was left wondering what avenues for change might exist for ordinary working people without the same access.
Another GOOD THING BAD
Her criticism at the end:
Our delegations, if they are not for a discrete purpose like observing an election, should include longer meetings between DSA members and members of other parties and organizations. Instead of solely hearing lectures, we should have more collaborative discussions where we learn about each others’s organizing conditions and trade ideas. Where we can learn from each other, we should seek to. Where we disagree on key issues, we should feel free to discuss and debate these matters in a comradely way.
The criticism is self defeating. She clearly admits she had the opportunity to ask questions. Then she dismisses their wins for playing within their organizing conditions
edit:
More of Maria being able to ask questions and have a dialogue
During the Q&A, I asked the following question to Álvarez: “In 2021 there were mass protests across the whole island of Cuba. While it is true that many on the far-right supported these protests, and Washington cheered it on, the protests also involved thousands of ordinary Cubans, workers, feminists, socialists, and members of the CPC. Many participants from 2021 remain in prison today. How should Cubans who support the revolution but have criticisms of the government make their voices heard?”
She did not like his response, which is fair but did not provide proof of what she said either, which she certainly could have in a blog post.
Who the fuck do these people think they are?
NATO leftists who think that their identity as an American citizen makes their opinion worthwhile. Fucking hate these scum
deleted by creator
Second, it limits the effectiveness of our external messaging and organizing, especially in regions of the country with large Hispanic and Cuban-American populations. While it is true that there are large sections of these diaspora communities, particularly Cuban exiles, who are hardcore reactionaries and have petty-bourgeois class interests, it would be a mistake to treat these communities as monolithic or immovable.
she’s more sympathetic to Miami gusanos than she is to Cuban revolutionaries. She wants to do tailism to appeal to gusanos and is worried that having solidarity with a socialist project would endanger her “organizing” among Cuban-Americans.
During my time in Havana, I made contact with several members of what is often called Cuba’s “critical left,” a term used to refer to left-wing activists, journalists, intellectuals, and everyday people who are critical of either certain policies of the PCC or broader systemic issues in the party bureaucracy. I organized three meetings, two with independent journalist Maykel Vivero and one with members of the leftist La Tizza collective. I also spoke to and attempted to meet with Marxist writer Frank Garcia Hernandez but could not arrange it while I was in Havana.
On Maykel Vivero:
He is one of the few journalists who cover the persecution of the San Isidro Movement and its leader Luis Manuel Otero Alcántara. In his journalistic work, he thinks it’s very important to provide the most complete information possible without getting carried away by personal feelings.
https://www.memoryofnations.eu/en/gonzalez-vivero-maykel-1983
On Luis Manuel Otero Alcántara:
State television revealed a document indicating San Isidro leader Luis Manuel Otero Alcántara receives monthly $1,000 payments from the National Democratic Institute, which is funded by USAID and NED.
https://twitter.com/bellybeastcuba/status/1382680866439172103
edit:
The small San Isidro Movement in question campaigned for the re-election of Donald Trump in October, speaking to a South Florida-based audience, while applauding the damage being done to Cuba by the U.S. blockade, while asking for additional sanctions. Images have earlier circulated of the main leader of the San Isidro group, Luis Manuel Otero Alcántara, with the Charge d’Affaires of the U.S. embassy in Havana. Another member, Omara Ruiz Urquiola, also paid a visit to the diplomat; and Carlos Manuel Álvarez, who resides in Mexico and is linked to U.S. special services, through the CIA front National Endowment for Democracy (NED), arrived at the headquarters of the San Isidro Movement last Tuesday, November 24.
They have advocated for the tightening of the blockade and the cutting off of remittances and their end goal is an overthrow of the revolutionary Cuban government.
State television revealed a document indicating San Isidro leader Luis Manuel Otero Alcántara receives monthly $1,000 payments from the National Democratic Institute, which is funded by USAID and NED.
And there it is folks.
Western chauvinist getting pissy that the know-nothing Cubans won’t listen to her enlightened sage advice.
Bonus points for engaging in
They literally just list off all of the State Department’s current baddies as ‘still bad but less bad than the US says they are’
the threats that private business and austerity pose to the socialist economy, or the crisis of legitimacy the government faces.
Are they talking about that weak color revolution the US tried to stage a year or two back lmao? Where like half of the media came from people in the US? And the actual march in Cuba was pitifully small?
In my own experience organizing in Miami, there is a large presence of Cubans in every local struggle, whether it be university students and faculty walking out against our far-right state legislature’s censorship of education, or local Starbucks workers’ struggling to unionize their stores.
Fuckin being all “yes, these
former bourgeoisie who turned liberal because conservatives were too openly racist to themdisadvantaged former small business owners and their children deserve to be treated well” after insulting and then openly flouting the Cuban president, you know, actual socialists.Pathetic or an OP.
deleted by creator
NATO leftist scum. Had the same experience when I visited a chapter as a leftist Guatemalan with actual success in my city and these fucks used obnoxious idpol to downplay our gains and whined about how we weren’t that strong while listening to European leftists who achieved less than us.
Read Maria’s response as she lists “poc voices” to use them against Cuba. This is what NATO leftists do and their irritatingly academic way of speaking combined with the sheer arrogance and chauvinism is why most in the global south hate them.
We went to Cuba as reps of our party and even warned them about NATO leftists. They laughed and said they’re well aware of them.
I visited a chapter as a leftist Guatemalan with actual success in my city
In Guatemala?
I mean, singling these losers out is cool, but it seems weird to call out all of DSA for the ugly behavior of these two bad actors. After all, this is a statement coming from within DSA. Its not coming from the Cubans themselves. The fucking President took time to meet with them, which would seem to suggest Cuban organizers are largely supportive of these outreach efforts.
Giving these two tickets was a mistake. But organizing the trip, getting Americans to visit the island, and putting them face-to-face with a bonafide AES state leader should be a huge mark in DSA’s favor.
Did you read the linked article? It goes into more detail about the organizational failures not limited to two participants.
It does, but I’m reading it as an outcropping of the fractured state of the returning committee membership.
I can’t speak to what the International Committee facilitated, but I can say I’ve seen some off-shot of the delegation’s visit via Noah Pasarán regarding the history of the embargo and its long term and most recent economic consequences. This is some of the most real and informative coverage of the Cuban Embargo I’ve had the opportunity to access, and I would consider this kind of outreach invaluable when attempting to shift views on our foreign policy.
To dismiss the efforts of the DSA participants as a whole seems shortsighted, as it appears more radicalized members of the delegation such as Noah continued to advocate for and send support to the country.
The article also seems to completely neglect that the DSA delegation brought 500 lbs of medical supplies to the island. Which seems like a bigger thing to crow about than two naysayers with shitty attitudes.
It’s written by DSA members trying to improve the DSA, it seems pretty clear they’d focus on what they want to improve rather than back-patting themselves on aid they brought.
Removed by mod
If the scope of your plan for Cuba is limited to the amount of supplies you can carry in suitcases, you might want to find more productive places to focus your efforts to help Cuba. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to not focus on the drop-in-the-bucket level of material support their delegation was able to bring for an entire nation. Either way, I guarantee the writers of the article can walk and chew gum just like the rest of us can.
I don’t think it’s unreasonable to not focus on the drop-in-the-bucket level of material support
Then why fixate on the two members of a two dozen person delegation you’ve got beef with?
I don’t see anything in this article about the next step in extending relief to Cuba. I don’t even see a “follow my link to learn how to help us do X”.
The impression I get from this article is that the visit was a mistake, the DSA International Committee won’t be following up or doing anything like it again, and members should feel bad about even making this much of an effort.
Your criticism seems to boil down to “they should be doing X instead of writing this article” and I must once again suggest that they can do more than just write an article. The purpose of the article is clear. You might not like it, but it doesn’t mean the article is the sum total of the writer’s efforts.
What a silly argument. I’m done.
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
I mean, singling these losers out is cool, but it seems weird to call out all of DSA for the ugly behavior of these two bad actors. After all, this is a statement coming from within DSA. Its not coming from the Cubans themselves. The fucking President took time to meet with them, which would seem to suggest Cuban organizers are largely supportive of these outreach efforts.
Disagree. An organization is responsible for their members especially when their members are clearly acting in bad faith.
edit: A strong and healthy organization should be able to absorb the criticism and make internal improvements to regain public faith.
None of the goals are mentioned, none of the organizations leaders are named, and there’s no mention of when or how the author plans to
materially intervene against our government’s imperialist aggression by dismantling the embargo
The author as in the critic blasting the 2 losers? like is the critic supposed to be incompetent?
The author as in the critic blasting the 2 losers?
The opening complaint is that the International Committee didn’t follow up on the trip properly. This seems to be an indictment of the entire visit, as if the author is trying to dismiss it as a vacation for spoiled rich kids.
No word on who else attended or what they accompolished or how they planned to continue outreach to Cuba. Just some wishy-washy “We should be fighting imperialism at home” with no other plan of action.
Demanding that people come up with a detailed 69-point plan for global revolution before they can criticize social chauvinism in their party is absurd and bad faith behavior on your part
I’ll call out all of the DSA for wasting everyones time and energy giving life support to DNC instead of growing the PSL or Greens.
I wish there were more left orgs but the PSL and the Greens aren’t it.
is the genuine revolutionary vanguard in the United StatesCopy of my other response: The way they respond to sexual abuse allegations, I’ve also heard they have a very non-leninist idea of what democratic centralism entails.
Also the ones in my area seem more interested in recruiting than doing literally anything at all outside of recruiting
If this is how they act, this isn’t a mark in their favor it’s a fucking disgrace and Cubans will soon move on to another group with less chauvinist predispositions
Other groups send delegations to Cuba regularly, including PSL and Cuba-specific groups like those opposing the embargo. I’m not sure if FRSO has a delegation or not, or whether they join some of the amalgamation delegations that go every do often (they probably do one of those options).
I might be ignorant on this, but did DSA call these people out or apologize for their behavior? Because they were essentially acting as diplomats for the org and if not strongly refuted then indeed reflect badly on the org as a whole.
The DSA isn’t a single entity really, it’s a decentralized mass of tons of different squabbling groups. Some of them are attempting to repudiate them, others are defending them. The DSA isn’t really capable of enforcing discipline on its members.
:deeply-unserious:
I’d say the DSA is LARPing as the CNT-FAI with all the disfunction and infighting, but we all know that 90% of the DSA don’t deserve the honor of being compared to people who actually went out and shot fascists.
This whole organization is a mess, being able to keep a cogent message for the party is the bare minimum in organizing political action
It’s not a party though. It’s a site of struggle and a place where communists can organize and educate among a very large membership of people open to left wing politics.
How effective is that if all they have been able to produce is more liberals
That’s not the case though. This article should serve as an example of that. Red Star was a small ML caucus in San Francisco a few years back. Now they’re a national force that hold a sizable number of positions in DSA national leadership including one of DSA’s two cochairs. I honestly wouldn’t be surprised if the authors of this article were liberals when they first joined DSA.
I might be ignorant on this, but did DSA call these people out or apologize for their behavior?
Impossible to tell from this article
