Machinisme et bricolages (Natures sociales) (French Edition)

---

Agence pour la Protection des Programmes site. Amaury Sport Organisation site. Centre d'Etude et de Valorisation des Algues site.

Centre de Recherches Politiques de Sciences Po site. Carrefour des Fournisseurs de l'Industrie Agroalimentaire site. Centre de forMation de la Profession Bancaire site. Centre international d'Art Verrier site. Centre d'Information des Viandes site. Centre d'Information sur le Volontariat International site. Centre National des Arts Plastiques site. Caisse Nationale des Prestations Familiales site.

Institut d'Astrophysique de Paris site. Institut National du Sport et de l'Education Physique site. Needless to say, the privatisation of State and collective property will favour dollar-holders and thus Miami money. Meanwhile, putative Cuban oligarchs have obviously smelled the profits that they could personally derive from the exploitation of the oil-rich Northen Cuban Basin, avidely eyed by the oil-starved USA, as well as from the privatization of the rich nickel mines and all the other collectively-owned resources, including the knowledge-capital emboddied in the socialist Cuban great scientific achievements.

Again, the process is entirely unconstitutional: It represents a real anti-communist coup d'Etat. The Bolivarian movement itself is now in great danger: There cannot be any socialist mode of production without the strict, if flexible, implementation of the Marxist Labour Law of Value and of the absolute anti-exclusivism Marx laid out in his Jewish Question. You will easily recognize the renegade stooges, particularly within academia, because they now try their best to sell this regressive bourgeois redistribution of wealth through the operation of the capitalist market, hence of private property and private labour contracts, as the Socialism of the Twenty First Century.

Of course, this has nothing to do with the Bolivarian movement, which for its part, tries to walk along the authentic socialist path in the opposite direction, inventing its own, national-specific peaceful and revolutionary itineraries as it goes. Because I had asked for an ecumenical return to the Communist International without numeral, some pitres, like Samir Amin, have immediately asked for the formation of a Fifth International! But there is even worse: For instance the grotesque Vasapollo and other like him, including his co-authors in Cuba.

All these people, paid as professors out of public funds, never learned much about the Marxist critique of political economy. Yet, all these people and self-portrayed Marxists did not even now how to distinguish properly between living labour and crystallized labour. Interestingly, they assiduously ignored the demonstration or, like the grotesque Bellofiore, they started to bray their pitiful and obscurantist reversed plagiarisms songs.

Not only did they pretend to occult my crucial Marxist finding despite academic and scientific deontology, but because they are easily published and diffused quite a sing in itself , they did all they could to bury it under their own philo-Semite Nietzschean typical obscurantist narratives, either as self-selected awokenpitres or as their usual lower-clergy and servi in camera. You do not need to have read sun Tzu to understand that in order to dominate you need to infiltrate and neutralize your adversary.

Of course, this strategy fails once these pitres are unmasked. When the communist parties and the proletariat unmasked them, their battle quickly was lost as in Russia in , in China in and in , in Cuba in and elsewhere. Be it as it may, the present ongoing betrayal of Marxism in Cuba is the straw which breaks the camels back: For all those who had venally liked to ignore it, this proves, as taught by Marx and again by Lenin and Trotsky against Martov et al, , that Socialism and Zionism are ontologically not compatible and that there can be no compromise whatsoever between science and philo-Semite Nietzschean narratives.

This Appeal argues in favour of a Cuban Central Planning respectful of the Marxist Labour Law of Value, which would develop clusters of integrated industries in the framework of an efficient import substitution strategy. The Cuban socialist Constitution rightly forbids private property of the Means of production and circulation. Although it will have to be rapidly specified in it, this naturally includes its most reprehensible form of all, namely the private property of labour power, through private labour contracts.

These can only perpetuate the exploitation of Man by Man, and send citizens back into the Prehistory of Humanity. The fundamental lineaments of the Marxist "function of productions" , necessary for the development of Socialist socio-economic Statistics and for Central Planning, are laid out at the end of this essay. There is a diseased thinking among pseudo-socialist according to which, in order to increase efficiency and stimulate production, capitalist measures should be introduced in socialist regimes.

Instead, Marxism teaches us that capitalism is irrational and that it treats human beings as mere things. Marxism demonstrates that capitalism squanders resources, increases inhuman inequalities and devastates the environment. Efficiency must come from a better implementation of Marxist principles, according to the circumstances of the day i. Otherwise, nothing would make sense anymore, and purported socialists will increasingly exhibit a capitalistically alienated mind, a 1 forma mentis that is not yet ready for the system they pretend to establish and to lead.

There exists a fundamental difference in strategy between the peaceful transition from capitalism to socialism on the one hand, and the bettering of already existing socialist societies on the other hand.

In the first instance see my 1 , the challenge it to slowly change the constellation of power and the dominant property forms, in such a way that the logic of ''social surplus value', as opposed to profit for private accumulation, becomes hegemonic. They would be protected from speculation by their status and by a public fiscal policy benefiting long term returns instead of being subjected to a destructive Darwinian strategy based on speculative short-term capitalist profitability. Whatever the speed of the march forward, as long as the Left does not renege on its socialist objectives, this strategy can cope with small private enterprises: In effect, they would be working in a framework establish by the Indicative and Incitative Central Planning and would benefit from national credit facilities; in other word, they would be slowly transformed into de facto cooperatives, finally freed from private banks and from the descendants of Flaubert's ideologically hysterical power-that-be ''notables''.

It does not pretend to refute the Leninist revolutionary dismantling of the bourgeois State apparatuses; instead, it recognises the validity of Lenin's analysis but tries to provide some theoretical guidelines for the peaceful road to socialism alluded to in Lenin's 1, but left undeveloped. For the rest, as Lenin would say: Life and the class struggle would decide which road to chose at each specific time. This peaceful transition road from capitalism to socialism would however represent a serious setback from the perspective of an already existing socialist society, one that already went through the acute class struggle, necessary to achieve the collectivisation of the means of production and of commercialisation.

Nevertheless, this does not detract from the flexibility of the socialist mode of production, which can very well adapt its current forms of redistribution, or epochs, to the present circumstances of the day, without changing its own socialist property forms. These need to be enshrined once and for all in the Constitution. Private property, particularly in the form of labour contracts, should be made anti-constitutional because it only perpetuates the prehistoric exploitation of Man by Man. The flexibility of the socialist Mode of production would come from the individual or cooperative possession forms as opposed to private property.

The Dacha system would allow each 1 family to have its own cottage 1 or 2 acres at most, which can coincide with individual parcels in collective farms without interfering with commercialised small-farm production and commercialisation; this would in turn help harmonize the relationship between cities and countryside, in the framework of a complete agricultural zoning, aimed at protecting the best farm land and reserving it specifically for agricultural needs; this would happily complement the very successful urban garden Cuban experiment in the large cities.

Private socialist possession would remain the property of the State but could be transmitted within the family according to a socialist definition of succession rights, which should be capped to avoid private accumulation as even Thomas Paine knew in his remarkable 1, etc It could also be voluntarily exchanged among citizens. I have tried to show the unmatched potential of this highly flexible character of socialism in the chapter " Pour le socialisme cubain" in my book, 1.

Agriculture Adopted by the Baka Pygmies in Cameroon

True, I had to consecutively correct myself on the role of the Party's internal democracy democratic centralism: Within this latter realm, the greatest liberties are exercised as long as: The only exception, tolerated while this is put in place and tested in order to insure that the Party will work as a cohesive unit, is for the founders of the new regime.

The Cuban present system is already more advanced than bourgeois democracy, which now tends to return to its classical Censitarian moors. It will become even more efficient once the other aspects of socialist democracy will be reinforced - i. Obviously, capitalist roaders will do everything they can to confuse both strategies in order to legitimate the reintroduction of private property, hence of labour exploitation and of private accumulation. If we were to simplify without betraying it, we could say that Marxism stands on three solid legs: Trotsky cannot be reverted back to Martov on this crucial question for socialism and human equality.

This centre-piece of Marxism elaborates the conceptual basis of the triptych of Human emancipation, namely religious emancipation, political emancipation and human emancipation, this triptych being realized within an historical becoming strictly governed by the Marxist Labour Law of Value, either blindly or consciously, and by its accompanying class struggle. Needless to say, there does not exist a single version of Marxism understood as a 1 theory applied to a specific object of study, which would be valid for all times, since its laws of motion are expressed within historical becoming.

However, the dialectical laws of motion themselves are scientific and valid for all times. This is because they rest on the scientific 1 dialectic ontology and methodology of Marxism. Or else this statement should be scientifically refuted; occultation is not an acceptable refutation, but instead constitutes a crime against both science and socialism, just as a reversal to sorcery and alchemy would be in the field of human hygiene and health care after Lavoisier's and Pasteur's contributions. With some necessary corrections on Feuerbach - the real rabbinical predecessor of Nietzsche as I will prove in a forthcoming article - Marx's contributions places us way ahead of these pitres.

And also well ahead of the charlatanesque self-serving and philo-Semite Nietzschean chitchat of S. Freud, who was, in fact, doing, albeit in a different form, exactly what Rosenberg and Yeshov were doing elsewhere, according to the same underlying logic. The capitalist dominant class together with its Masonic occult selection processes and power centres, especially the rabbinico-philo-Semite Nietzschean lodges, do everything they can to occult the scientific Marxist principles and methodology. This is simply because authentic Marxism, true to the teaching of the Jewish question and of the Marxist Labour Law of Value, can lucidly inform the class struggle.

Simultaneously, it can organically create the Proletariat as an autonomous class capable to act as the Collective Modern Prince Gramsci , through its Communist Party and its socialist democratic institutions. While Capitalism is always blind on its own becoming, Socialism can travel on an adequately illuminated and planned road, adjusting itself as it goes; it can devise historical epochs best fitted to the prevailing circumstances, without betraying itself. See my article on the Institutionalisation des moeurs.

This is simply because of the Masonic regressive strategy quickly described above. When we read these speeches, we are slapped in the face with the overt reversal of the main Marxist principles: On salaries, we are offered Max Weber, together with an upsetting moralizing tone which tends to blame the workers for the short coming of the managers It sounds as if someone had decided to use Raul's personal mode of expression to legitimise the open return to a Protestant ethics, in favour of new purported philo-Semite Nietzschean ''masters of the world'', always lurking behind the power in place, just like Beria and Molotov - and Molotova, for that matter -, when they agreed to assassinate Stalin and transfer the East bloc - including Zionist Hungary - to the USA.

That is to say, just before being blocked in time. This is aggravated by some kind of pseudo-relationship between unequal salaries and presumed personal meritocracy, which rapidly pushes us from Weber to Giddens and Rawls and their crummy neoliberal ''social justice''! On pension, we are offered the same regressive and self-destructive neoliberal policies now implemented by neoliberals in Europe. Incredibly, this is done with the same rational! Is this not what socialism is all about? The division of labour makes all labour ''alienated labour''.

This is because I have to alienate my product to obtain that produced by someone else, which I need to survive or which I desire. Many Marxists, especially those insane pitres who like to oppose a Young to a Mature Marx, only to understand the first according to the bourgeois and rabbinic 1 historicism of the likes of Lukacs and Benjamin, are perpetually confused on these simple notions: These brainless epigones should re-read 1 book I on reification. The recovery of Man by himself according to Marx is not a function of an illusory abolition of surplus value but a function of its transformation into collectively produced and allocated ''social surplus value''.

Hence, a normal secular increase of public intervention and spending. Perhaps, but not only But, of course, fails to tell us how many percentages of onerous foreign debt, caused by dangerously persistent external imbalances, are incurred for each small and largely fictitious increase in such Marginalist GDP.

But such is the state of Marxist political economy in Cuban Universities as elsewhere hi-ha? I personally think so, and I believe to have scientifically demonstrated it: Again occultation is not a valid refutation The simplistic culinary equilibrium recipes offered by Marginalism are now consciously used in Cuba by all those who have succumbed to a primitive ''acquisitive mentality''. They do so consciously in order to destroy the rational bases of the system: It is a true pity after all the sacrifices already made!

Please note further the direct relationship between the indebtedness of Easter Europe and Yugoslavia, an indebtedness that was linked to binge imports, just before the double-digit rate of interest hikes by the Volcker-Reagan's monetary counter-reform in The necessary adjustments, without Soviet support, aggravated by unopposed Western philo-Semite Nietzschean meddling, quickly led to the most abject internal, renegade-led, collapse.

One can legitimately ask what is going on? If the property forms are changed to accept private property, together with private labour contract and exploitation, then with the help of Miami money, capitalist hegemony will be re-established in very few months. The Revolution would have again been betrayed from inside, ''once again''; and by the same self-chosen groups. We cannot fail to note that this neoliberal and moralizing tone, which accompanies these regressive reforms, are consciously used to hide the real problems.

Most obviously, the real problems will not be solved but will, in fact, be compounded by the proposed regressive reforms. This being the case, authentic communists cannot remain silent, even if they are conscious of the fact that Cubans and Cubans alone must decide for themselves. But they can do so only is they are offered good critics. As a Marxist theoretician who has been manipulated by over-represented philo-Semite Nietzscheans like Beresovski, I cannot remain silent.

Beresovsky and others took my analysis presented - for instance on Stalin's national and constitutional policies -, in order to destroy the USSR manipulation of the Caucasian nationalities to foster internal wars etc. If I remained silent again, I would never be able to forgive myself. I just sincerely hope to be wrong and to be over-reacting. I would know that immediately if two related criteria are met: In this way small variations in individual salaries would be the result of socialist emulation between ''production units'', and not the result of a struggle between individual workers.

Note that, if the modern and ergonomic standardization of effort for each profession, through Taylorization, is not respected, and if the legal duration of labour - working day and week and active life before retirement - is too long, then you will abolish the overtime stimulation effect on extra volume and quality production. You will end up with increasingly unequal salaries and social benefits, and this would signal the death of any kind of socialism worthy of the name.

Of course, the coterie and camarilla behind these regressive reforms are accelerating the pace; if nothing is done rapidly to impose these two minimum socialist constraints, they will present the Cuban people with a ''fait accompli'', despite the clear anti-constitutional character of the reform legitimised by the manipulation of a naive Raul Castro in person. This accelerating strategy goes hand in hand with the pushing away from the domestic scene of the General Secretary of the Cuban Communist Party and Commander-in-Chief, the great socialist egalitarian and flexible strategist Fidel Castro: It just seems obvious that a pseudo-role for a pseudo-world anti-nuclear struggle was found for him.

This, in turn, helps prepare the way for a cooptation of Fidel's sincere fears, in favour of the condemnation of Iran before it is attacked by Israel and the USA-Nato alliance, while not one word will be said about the more than nuclear weapons and the military nuclear plants already available to Israel. Consequently, the only logical struggle in this sphere, - i.

They also pretend to replace the UN Charter and the Universal Declaration of Rights a text embodying the progressive spirit of the anti-Nazifascist alliance achieved thanks to Stalin's diplomatic prowess in favour of a scoundrelous return to the Leviticus. I personally doubt whether these regressive reforms could be pushed through without first being overseen by the Cuban Communist Party and, above all, by the General Secretary and Commander-in-Chief: After all, it is his life's work which is now at stake.

We will first review Cuba's main problems. Then as objectively as we can - given also the scarce information in our possession - we will review the proposed reforms and show that they are in utter contradiction with their alleged objectives. We will show that these ill-intentioned reforms cannot achieve their demagogically stated goal; instead, they would quickly lead to a restoration of capitalism.

It is a shame: Especially that, after so much sacrifices, including the heroic Special Period, Cuba is now starting to do much better. It can now count on the backing of ALBA, among others, and in a few years the oil revenues from the Northern Basin will be available. The reforms proposed by the entourage of Raul Castro will lead to the infiltration of Miami money, via the growing mix economy, thus totally disrupting whatever remains of the socialist planning; it will further pave the way for the emergence of repugnant so-called Red Barons, a species that is already lurking at the Cuban potential oil wealth, in tacit understanding with their old pre masters The main problems are well known.

They can be summed up in two main systemic failures: At best, production will remain a stop-and-go affair. This is further constrained by a growing debt, in appearance the main worry of the Cuban silly closet-Marginalists who portray themselves as socialists, but are silently buying into the same bourgeois simplistic economic credo and statistics, which in turn influence their priorities and expected fallouts. When Vasapollo's manual was published, I immediately knew something wrong was happening: Something, which is truly shameful, once you realize it.

Furthermore these conformist ideologues, so enamoured with the useless mathematical apparatus of Marginalism - see Jules Ferry's mischievous letter to Walras - or with Marshall's simplistic and soporific visual diagrams, fail to grasp the arithmetical necessity of inverse proportion, which is at the heart of the scientifically correct demonstration of productivity as the emblematic capitalist form of extraction of surplus value. With socialism, productivity remains necessary, but is subjected to the collective use of social surplus value, via the Central Planning and socialist democracy; macro-economic competitiveness is thus hegemonic over micro-economic productivity a fact that Keynes, as well as Sraffa, failed to demonstrate in a totally coherent scientific manner.

Here lies the heart of Che Guevara's search for a correct and rigorous socialist accounting and statistical basis, which then informs both the Central Planning allocation of resource, via budget priorities, and the accounting and management practices at the firm level. Let us start by enumerating the main known problems: But it is also aggravated by the running of existing joint-ventures established in Cuba proper: First created to help foster exports, they have increased imports instead.

Food production is disastrous, except for urban gardens. Furthermore, these desirable alternatives would not interfere in any way with the socialist planning of production and commercialisation, as opposed to private small farms. To continue with the main problems: The production of rice and potato, two basic staples - or other similar cereals and tubercles -, is more than inadequate and must be compensated by increased and costlier imports. Incredibly Cuba now even imports sugar We will stop here, except to recall the fact that oil import have been paid for by the lending of many thousand teachers and doctors, thus perhaps depleting the domestic ranks in these essential professions.

The temporary recall, on a voluntary basis, of retired specialized workers, engineers etc do not pose any specific problem, nor does it necessitate the general postponing of the retirement age without proven productive necessity. The creation of mini and precarious jobs through a workfare system totally disconnected from productive logics is a capitalist necessity when this archaic mode of production enters its highest and last historical phase: It cannot possibly have anything to do with the building of socialism. Let us now look at the main reforms that are proposed.

Namely postponement of the retiring age and restructuration of the labour force and contract; property forms; and international posture. Where socialism understands that pension is a ''differed salary'', bourgeois ideologues wax demagogically about active to passive labour force ratios and about pseudo-generational cleavages. They, of course, do so only to destroy public pension schemes in favour of private schemes invested on the Stock market due to the last financial crisis, US K are now reduced at most to K: A year old worker confronted with such losses cannot possibly recoup them, even if he were to work until three years before the average age of death, as was indeed coldly and actuarially planned by the very first capitalist retirement plans to which the current philo-Semite Nietzschean bourgeois want to "return''.

The ill-advised councillors of Raul Castro caused him to use the very same language used by the worse neoliberals in today regressive European Union. On this dossier, he would squarely stands with Sarkozy is this Ramonet's et ali, influence? Or perhaps even worse? All active or passive workers are State workers because the Socialist State belongs to them: The active workers are lent to firms and coops which participate together with Central Planning and other regional and local instances in the most effective use of globally available manpower.

Workers in capitalist England and elsewhere won successively the right not the work on Sundays; then the working day passed from 12 hrs to 10 hrs and then to 8 hours. In France, the socialists introduced the hour workweek and then the hour workweek in effect 39 hours effectively worked when you compute overtime and yearly average annualisation , compared to no legal limits but only 34,5 effective hours worked in the USA at the time, and even less today: Although damage control techniques tried to present this Report as a satirical prank, Galbraith had certified its authenticy on his honour when it was first published.

Not only does greater productivity reinforce the capitalist two main laws of motion - centralisation and concentration of capital - but it equally liberates previously employed workers. This creates a dangerous Reserve Army of labour. The critical questions are at least two: This strategy is at the heart of the tentative to establish Jews as Greater Brothers in Western Masonic lodges, in which Gentiles are considered mere Little Brothers, in a pseudo Judeo-Christian hegemonic Western world. Gentiles being moreover fed the secular and guilt-inducing catechism of a repugnant exclusivist Shoah, complete with the Schindler List and many Stern.

The answer to the second question derives from the first: The destruction of permanent, especially unionised jobs, followed by the creation of pseudo-mini, part-time and precarious jobs through the substitution of Workfare to Welfare see the same Book III. The unsurpassable superiority of socialism at least when you understand Marx on the Marxist Labour Law of Value and in particular on productivity and on what I called ''social surplus value'', following Marx's logic consists in that these contradictions disappear with the hegemony of the socialist mode of production: What is a problem for capitalism becomes an advantage for socialism.

At least, if you abandon the usual contrite and righteous pseudo-morality destined to make workers feel guilty, thus exonerating their incapable but irremovable managers and leaders As Stalin well knew Stalin was a great Marxist totally misunderstood and vilified by the repugnant over-represented Zionist Jews who betrayed socialism and the USSR in favour of a theocratic, Zionist, fascistic and racist Israel , a socialist regime must strive for the greatest possible productivity for all industries and firms, because it does not fear surplus labour; it can easily share the work socially available among all its active labour force, in tune with real productivity and competitiveness increases, thus leading to the secularly increasing well-being of the population and to a constant increase of social free time.

This is the general socialist rule, even though specific circumstances might force a socialist regime - particularly when socialism, in whatever form, is only represented among a tiny minority of sovereign countries - to momentarily reverse part of the free time gains in the form of both shorter working week and working life. But then it would do so without affecting the general principle itself. Emile Pacault said the same thing; the One Big Union and Closed Shop movements in the USA in the 20's and 30's later elaborated on his theory; indeed, the institution of overtime in modern management teaches the same thing in a different form: Taylorism is necessary because it standardises the day of work - with the addition of ergonomic principles - and extra productive effort is taken care of by overtime, paid extra.

Even animal traction will do for a while, if you will. However, domestic agricultural machines propelled in this way should be conceived to be polyvalent with motorized traction. Not even Rome was built in one single day. But it is always better to stand on both legs and count on one's own strength. The general tendency is for the secular reduction of the working week and of the working active live, but temporary reversals can be accepted. However, in both cases, the policy should be coherent with micro-economic productivity and macro-economic competitiveness, unless one wants to flirt with national bankruptcy.

This being said, why would present day Cuba need to postpone the retirement age? And, what is more, to fire public employees? To me this makes no sense at all, except in an infiltrated ideological perspective: Cuba's sheer existence constitutes an irrevocable condemnation, in theory and practice, of the capitalist system. This is particularly true today, at a time when the capitalist system is going through one of its most regressive and fascistic philo-Semite Nietzschean phase - together with its already half-lost warmongering postures and its imperialist and barbaric foreign military adventures.

It is true by definition that in socialist countries there will always be a potential lack of manpower. This is because the system strives to answer all human needs, instead of private accumulation. Even here the postponement of retiring age for women does not seem a good, nor a fair idea. In fact, early retirement age has become a modern geriatric necessity in aging societies like Cuban society; the cost of home care maintenance, as long as it is feasible, is drastically lower than institutionally organized care, and certainly more humane both for retirement needs and palliative care. Cuba is now under a very tight blockade and does not yet have a working Ecomarxist recycling and substitute strategy, nor a good import substitution strategy: It cannot possibly plan for a longer working week, both in the form of new and illusory sectors, longer working hour and postponed retirement.

The needs for new productions - for instance import substitution both for food and energy production - can very well be planned in the existing context by a disciplined redeployment of the labour force. It simply makes no sense. Except ideologically, of course, because in effect Raul Castro's inconsiderate reforms can only undermine the proletariat class struggle in the West in the present tense context, and thus comfort the worse Reaganites.

The only doubt I have left in my mind is this: Is it due to his entourage or to his own policy choice? Furthermore, we have noted the scarcity of food production: I will argue that private property and the ridiculous and counter-productive fractioning of the land for the benefit of small peasants will not help; this is because, unless these are placed into the context of some sort of European PAC adapted for socialist Cuba, it will be a waste of time; at most, it will work for impoverished vegetable productions, which will necessarily lead to the inevitable emergence of an anarchic, disorganised and proto-capitalist black market.

Cattle and other livestock, milk, butter, cheese, yoghurt and powder milk productions etc. Small, isolated and impoverished individual farms cannot be the future of Cuban agriculture, agribusiness and agroindustries, can they? As for the liberalization of trades, it is possibly worse since the wild price distortions this will inevitably cause will play out in the densely populated urban areas.

This liberalization would apparently concern professions, of which 83 would be open to private labour contracts. All sectors are thus directly or indirectly concerned. Consequently, Central Planning will be internally sabotaged and quickly whither away in less than one year. This obviously seems to be the real goal pursued by the occult influence behind these regressive reforms. Perhaps the real and tragic question in the present leadership mind is: How many tonnes of imported rice etc can we spare, given that such commodities as well as fertilizers are imported at speculatively increasing world prices?

Almost none, simply because the type of fragmented organisation wished by the reformers cannot possibly produce the volume of staples needed for an efficient import substitution food strategy.

Abréviations françaises

These cooperatives can be either on the traditional format, or they can be collectively self-managed coops in which each worker has an equal share and representation in the management and surplus allocations, once State taxes are paid. Obviously, to be self-manageable, they cannot comprise more than 10 or at most 20 farm-workers. They would be established in a planned fashion to maximise the incremental development of industrial clusters. They would then be integrated within an overarching Ever Green Granary strategy - i. The same State farms, traditional coops and collectively self-managed coops, together with their upstream and downstream clusters of industries, should equally apply to the fishery sector and to halieutic farms being careful here for the pollution this might cause when the method is used on the sea coasts in an interrupted capitalist intensive fashion.

In fact, Cuba should develop a well-rounded fishing industry exploiting it miles commercial zone and even negotiating the access to it to foreign industrial fishing companies. Small vertical wind turbines would provide the needed electricity together with a compressed air reservoir and generator.

This commercial sea fishing would serve both domestic commercial transformation and export needs. It would be flanked by small individual fishing boats organized in socialist cooperatives; these would be managed through fishing permits and fishing quotas. In addition, fish-farms would be set up. Finally old Soviet sea and river fish-sowing should be studied, for instance the giant and prolific crab introduced in the Soviet North Atlantic coast.

This, however, should be done with some precaution to protect endemic species. However, excess crab meat properly processed could help feet more priced fish species without altering natural taste. The postponement of the retiring age as well as the inconsiderate suppression of half a million positions in the public sector are in complete and frontal contradiction with real production and planning logic and national needs; they only pave the way for a social disaster which will discredit socialism.

The political consequences are obvious, if you think of Bukharin and the Kulaks after the misunderstood NEP which Lenin intended, just as Stalin, as one step backwards to prepare for two steps forwards, as Mao aptly phrased it. Given the loaded connotations of the correct assessment of the NEP for socialists, the main point might be illustrated in an easier fashion, if you think of the fragmented and impoverished countryside plebiscite of Napoleon le Petit, denounced by Marx in his magisterial analysis entitled. I sincerely doubt that, were the Cuban Communist Party to have a real say, without being held in check by undue reference to ''authority'', it would go along with this planned disaster, the first ideological victory of inside renegades.

If you think that this critique is too pessimistic and unfair, you should consider the next section dealing with property forms, labour contracts and contributions. Milton Friedman and von Hacek would not have dared go as far, at least not before the collapse of the Soviet Union: When will the ill-advised councillors of Raul Castro openly change the reference to the Tricontinental with a reference to the Trilateral, and call for an end to the ''rising expectations of workers'', following the rabbinco-philo-Semite Nietzschean Samuel Huntington?

Or, is this already done with these ill-considered reactionary reforms? In most of Cuban wealth was in private hands, mostly foreign and American hands. Cuba is still paying the price of the necessary nationalisations.

It does not sound very wise to reintroduce private property in the context of an already inflated mix society, soon to be dominated by Miami money. At a minimum, the development of socialist possession forms does not present the same legal hurdles, and maintains the necessary flexibility in the eventual re-allocation of the available scarce resources and Means of production.

This would be done through simple and equitable compensation to citizens.

Post navigation

In case expropriations are necessary, compensations can be negotiated fairly and without any legal complications. Joint-venture forms already exist to take care of foreign participation, without challenging one of the most important and constitutionally sanctioned foundations of socialism, namely State and collective property.

A mix society would soon be under the hegemony of capitalist interests: Were this to affect the control of the Means of production, it would quickly lead to the utter disruption of Central Planning, because corruption would soon help siphon the best available resources to the private sector. With a greater openness to foreign trade - even with tight export-import controls - the logic might become even more diabolical.

The same happens when commercialisation falls into private hands: When Gorby created a museum of bad socialist products, he should have exposed the usual over-represented corrupters instead in it! In Cuba, because of the overwhelming weight of the embargo, the essential raw materials and other resources are scarce. Such siphoning, with its inevitable general price increase on the parallel private markets, would quickly mean total disaster.

Poorly informed people often ignorantly attributed to Stalin the crimes committed by the Jew Yeshov in his Warburg-backed emulation of the provocateur-terrorist role of the Marquis de Sade during the French Terror in the Section des Piques. However, no matter what one may think, no authentic socialist should ever forget that Stalin transformed the USSR into a superpower capable to defeat the then first industrial and military power in Europe, Nazi Germany, with only two 5-Year Plans, while Yeltsin and its self-chosen Atlantist and Zionist circles destroyed it, with the help of the usual over-represented and renegades cliques, 1 in less than seven years.

Stalin's major work on Socialist Planning is excellent: But Cuba itself is not without untapped resources, and has a highly qualified working force. For instance, it has developed its own Internet software industry in very few years. However, it now risks to see this tremendous feat used to destroy the Revolution by the introduction of private property equally at this level Instead, Cuban use of the Internet should be more properly concerned with the mass diffusion of high quality content not necessarily ''serious'', given the need for mass-entertainment already produced and paid for in the schools, university, cultural institutions etc.

Internet could also be used to advertise Cuban commodities and services alongside Tourism. The costs are then integrated in the selling prices of the commodities or services. Renegades use consciously obscure speech or discourse or ''doublespeech'' to confuse honest citizens. These days, they are obsessed with the reversal of my own Marxist thinking but fail miserably, at least when a few pre-eminent Marxists or honest citizens oppose them openly: We have now achieved a scientific victory against all versions of the bourgeois economic paradigm see my "''hi-Ha'' draft but we allow the bourgeoisie to occult and reverse it, even within communist parties and so-called socialist countries!

It just seems that very few people nowadays do understand the crucial importance of a good methodology backed by a good scientific deontology. The door it then wide open to capitalist roaders and renegades. I personally wonder how we can defend socialism and use its full potential, if we neglect the three aforementioned legs of Marxism; among these, the most important should be the Marxist Labour Law of Value, because it is necessary to coherently inform Enlarged Reproduction, hence Central Planning.

This deconstructivist strategy applied to Cuba logically involves the privatisation of the labour contract, hence of the accumulation process. This is certainly done to prepare the most complete capitalist restoration project, which is lurking behind the present change in property forms. This is easily explained. In my aforementioned chapter ''Pour le socialisme Cuban'' of my , I had insisted on the relationships between salary and social surplus value. One redistribution form or epoch can simply be based on a strictly equal individual salary for all this, in effect, would be the most advance socialist form.

This social surplus value is then redistributed by the State according to the socialist priorities decided upon by Central Planning, with the added inputs of socialist democracy. The whole process would remain under the control of the socialist Constitution and of the Party. The part of the salary destined to individual saving could be institutionalised through a voluntary payroll percentage or left to individual decision.

The main function of this individual saving is to allow some individual choice; but it can also help soak circulating dollars, which should however be exchanged for pesos, the national currency being uniquely authorized to circulate. The share of this modest individual saving would grow with the real economy. Some people want to self-destructively imitate Reaganite ''public policy''; yet, the reality is that Cuba is still far in advance, were it not for the fact that citizens did still feel the pinch for daily consumption, in particular for food variety and for massified essential domestic appliances and other goods necessary to alleviate daily choirs and spleen.

I want to be brief here: I will only point out that, at times, it might be necessary to adopt a strategy in which the individual salary might differ a little from worker to worker; it is, indeed, a difficult problem to decide how this is done and implemented, because it has many implications, including on the monetary mass and on monetary rotations The best avenue, is to link this residual difference to seniority and to overtime.

The sole reason to adopt this strategy, rather than the better but stricter equality of individual salaries, pertains to scarce resources, and therefore to added redistribution constraints effected, at least in part, through prices and individual choice: The residual difference in wage implies more cash in the worker's pocket, as opposed to institutionalised savings and thus institutionalised global net revenue pension, health care, education etc The price strategy allows some individual choice, but at the same time it recoups the wage difference and the buying power difference created by unequal access to US dollars.

This would marginally benefit the State and the collectivity, but risks furthering social resentment and inequalities. Such strategy will remain socialist as long as: First, the production of basic essential goods destined to be mass produced; this will then be followed by the renewal of the existing stocks through greater quality and short run products, which can then also be subjected to this residual individual preference. The present reform does propose something totally different: Fatally, if these social contributions are made to be proportionally dependent on the unequal wage, instead of depending on socialist rights conceived as a socialist insurance system benefiting from the mutualist and national solidarity advantages, richer workers - private workers in particular- will soon end up benefiting from different and more prosperous social rights.

Indeed, this is the root cause behind the structural crisis underlying the epiphenomenal financial and subprimes crisis. With such regressions, the national intra and inter-professional solidarity, created by socialist collectively paid and universally accessible social plans, will be replaced by vain and venal individual calculations quickly leading to ruin through the involvement of the likes of Jeffery Siegel et al Differed salary - pension, unemployment insurance, productivity funds - will be subjected to workfare.

They will be seen as available funds to be transferred to speculative capital, to be gambled on the global Stock market. Classes will then reappear, based directly on the control of wealth and, worse still, on the control of the production of wealth. At this point, socialism will be dead; to add insult to injury, it will be discredited, simply because anti-constitutional behaviour was not crushed in the bud and eliminated when it pretended to dictate its regressive non-socialist reforms, abusing from available naive ''authorities''.

If, on top of that, the legal duration of work is put in jeopardy and the new labour contract allows for the hiring of workers, then the capitalist restoration will be worse than it presently is in China. This is because Miami and the US money will rapidly take over. Contrary to China, which could easily absorb emigrated money inputs for a time by the sheer strength of its own State enterprises, Cuba does not have the land mass nor the demography to support a bourgeois-nationalist attempt to play by capitalist rules and hope to win, or at least maintain or better its sort and rank in the world Indeed, this is a process which threatens to destroy China itself soon, if it does not quickly return to more socialist and coherent domestic policies, particularly in the financial field.

And if, as Mao had properly done, it does not confine the re-emerged national bourgeoisie within the Popular Assembly instead of within the Party, as was incredibly allowed under Jiang Zeming The same choice would be offered to American citizens.

Environment and Society

This would earn foreign currency and political sympathy, while creating specialized nursing employment. Whatever is decided on the acceptable difference between individual salaries, this difference should never be allowed to affect the equality at the end of the process. Unequal redistribution legally creates the effective equality necessary to realize true citizenship. It is definitively wrong to think that private enterprises - and private labour contracts- can be superior to socialist firms and socialist production and commercialisation processes.

In effect, for some less ill-intentioned reformers, the basic idea is mainly practical and conjunctural: I have already mentioned, at the light of the now patent historical experiences, the perverse effect of a mix economy, coupled with a vacillating socialist planning. The contradictions this mixity creates are often ''solved'', for a little while with sectarian and self-righteous moralizing by hypocrite managers and leaders, before the system collapses from within. This is proven by the destruction of Hungary and of the Soviet Union by the Zionist over-represented successors of Stalin.

Until the situation is ripe to sell-out the regime from inside, these over-represented hypocrite crews act like a new secular clergy and Inquisition: This self-righteous moralizing and hatred for genuine socialist experimentations helped crush the Prague Spring and dishonour socialism. This was achieved despite the presence of Nato right at his door, and indeed right in West Berlin; and despite the unilateral and provocateur reintroduction of the Deutsch mark in West Germany as early as We should add that freeing public workers will legitimate the worse Western neoliberal scoundrels, who do exactly the same in their own capitalist countries, albeit necessarily at a more leisurely and calculated pace, for fear of their public employee unions; they also fear for their standing during the next legislative elections.

Thus, not only will it be without real effect on external imbalances, and consequently on the level of foreign indebtedness, but it will also disrupt the existing residual Central Planning which, obviously, needs to be quickly revamped for its obvious lack of coherence and synergies. Such massive lay offs of public workers simply make no sense in both economical and socials terms. At best, it is a half-backed expedient with no real connection to new productive and planned socio-economic endeavours. But, again, it obviously makes a lot of sense in terms of a deconstructivist strategy, characteristically pursued in an ideological and rabbinico-philo-Semite Nietzschean perspective.

Unfortunately, such commentators will not be sent to the individual and isolated farms themselves: Indeed, they already resent the residual but highly pedagogical voluntary work. Instead, Swiss citizens, perhaps in emulation of Rousseau's constitutional and socio-economic building principles, still take great pride in their annual weeks of military service Two basic points need to be addressed here: In truth, today, given the usual over-representation and biblical hatred for the Science Tree, these seem to be as proficient in all fields as they are in political economy: Self-chosen people lunatic theocracy?

In the context of the postponing of the retirement age, the best French unionists quickly point out that, in capitalist countries, workers die on average 7 to 11 years before their managers, and should therefore leave work with full pension 7 to 11 years, at least, before their managers, depending on the physical and mental stress endured, on average, in their professions.

Obviously, there is a logic in this folly, but it is a rabbinico-philo-Semite Nietzschean logic, which has nothing to do with good and modern labour relations, nor with socialism. These reactionary crew want to sabotage pubic pension funds to force their privatisation for the sole benefit of stateless speculative capital. This is because very few people chose them voluntarily; therefore, they are more meritorious when they do, and should be paid more. But, like Western military and policemen, they would still need to retire before the rest of the labour force, simply because of the greater risks they incur in their workplace, and because of the quicker degradation of their physical labour force.

Not surprisingly, the only point of agreement between the free-thinker and Enlightened Humanist Adam Smith and present-day barbarically regressive neoliberals is their common hatred for unions, apprenticeship and professional barriers, which all contribute to restrict savage wage competition among tradesmen, while preserving their know-how and their slowly acquired skills and professionalism. Except that Adam Smith was after those regressive feudal corporations and ''combines'', which were impeding the march of progress through the highest possible productivity, while, on the contrary, present-day neoliberals are only interested in a fascistic-Masonic subjugation of the surplus labour force, which capitalism can no longer meaningfully employ Those of us who knew something about productivity knew that Sarkozy was consciously proposing to the workers to ''travailler idiot, pour ganger moins, tout en maintenant le bouclier fiscal et les exonerations fiscales pour les plus riches''.

He is now reduced to abuse scare tactics, as well as racist and warmongering demagogy, just like G.

• Internet and Digital Economics: Principles, Methods and Applications
• The Color of Credit: Mortgage Discrimination, Research Methodology, and Fair-Lending Enforcement: M
• Pythagoras Revenge: A Mathematical Mystery
• Rogue President : The Presidency of Sarah Palin
• Sapphire Grosse Titten Mollige von DivineBreasts.com (German Edition)