Cuban Farming

DigitalDjigit

Honky Tonk Woman
This is such a great article. Harper's is a wonderful magazine. When I heard about this article a month ago I went down to the library to read it. It's really sad that the moment Castro dies this whole arrangement is likely to collapse (unless of course he holds out until oil is permanently above $60 or so which is probably already the case). It's surprising that farming now requires less education than before and how much knowledge was lost. We may need Cuba's experience in this a few years down the road as oil continues to increase in price.
 

Melchior

Taking History Too Far
I guess the upside is that it might becoem easier for some people to learn from Cuba's experience once Castro dies and the liberalisation of Cuba begins.

You can't really blame Cubans for not wanting to participate in labour intensive farming methods once the opening begins and other options are around. I don't want to be an urban farmer particularly, but I can't help but think that if circumstances forced me into it, then I might be better off for it.

It also sounds as if American science academia is so incredibly co-opted that we'll never get a chance to see a lot of this work developed further.
 
O

Omaar

Guest
Cheers for that nick, interesting read.

I didi however find the writer's tone a little patronising, bits like:

"Castro’s Cuba was so rigidly (and unproductively) socialist that simply by slightly loosening the screws on free enterprise it was able to liberate all kinds of pent-up energy."

What does he mean by this? That there is an essential human drive to sell things that is repressed by socialism?

There are some currents running through his thought that I totally do not agree with. But it was interesting to hear about this phenomenon nonetheless.
 

Melchior

Taking History Too Far
I think that what he ment was that there is a human desire to do stuff, and previously they weren't allowed to. when the screws were loosened in one area, the pent up energy was bound to ehad in that way.

So it's not about the inherent nature of selling stuff, it's about taking freedom where you can.

I'm not sure it's inherent (ie. biological/genetic), but I'm not sure that there isn't a reasonably fundamental drive to share the products of your labours in return for recognition...
 
O

Omaar

Guest
Melchior said:
I'm not sure it's inherent (ie. biological/genetic), but I'm not sure that there isn't a reasonably fundamental drive to share the products of your labours in return for recognition...

I'm starting to sound like a Marxist, but you definitely don't get that by selling your labour in a capitalist system.

And I don't think you need free enterprise to share products of your labour/ get recognition. A 'free' market can make that just as difficult as an authoritarian socialism system.

I guess I just don't like to think of freedom in terms defined by market ideology - er, not to imply that you do ;)
 

DigitalDjigit

Honky Tonk Woman
Omaar said:
I'm starting to sound like a Marxist, but you definitely don't get that by selling your labour in a capitalist system.

And I don't think you need free enterprise to share products of your labour/ get recognition. A 'free' market can make that just as difficult as an authoritarian socialism system.

I guess I just don't like to think of freedom in terms defined by market ideology - er, not to imply that you do ;)

Please explain how it is possible to get recognition for your labour outside of a free market. It is wrong to conflate free markets and capitalism. Markets existed since the beginning of recorded history and probably long before too.

I could see how you could for example grow food and not have it be sold on the market. For example in Soviet Russia families would get plots of land where they could grow their own food. However if you didn't get one or simply didn't feel like working on it you would be restricted in your food choices to the crappy produce that made it to the state-owned store shelves. Allowing people to freely sell their produce would give these people access to better food.

Another result of the tightly controlled socialism is that you may find it hard to implement your ideas. You could have some great new invention or process but since there are only a few official channels through which you can push it through and there are people there who are have an interest in the status quo, you will have a hard time doing so.

This is likely what the author meant by the release of pent-up energy.
 
O

Omaar

Guest
DigitalDjigit said:
Please explain how it is possible to get recognition for your labour outside of a free market.

Recognition for labour doesn't have to be solely about monetary rewards.

DigitalDjigit said:
It is wrong to conflate free markets and capitalism.

I don't think I agree with this, in any case its perfectly legitimate to equate the Free Market with Capitalism.

DigitalDjigit said:
Markets existed since the beginning of recorded history and probably long before too.

I don't know enough about this to comment on it very well, but I don't like the idea that markets are 'natural' or inevitable. Any Anthropologists or Historians here who could shed light on this?

DigitalDjigit said:
You could have some great new invention or process but since there are only a few official channels through which you can push it through and there are people there who are have an interest in the status quo, you will have a hard time doing so..

Same diff with capitalism though, it just works in a different way.
 

DigitalDjigit

Honky Tonk Woman
Even though this doesn't belong in the Nature forum but short of the thread being moved out of here....

It is not possible to not have markets if separation of labor is present, at least at the level of a community. As soon as there is something the community wants and cannot provide for itself it must trade for it. Even within the community you need a certain amount of social cohesion for people to forgo trading and provide for each others needs. If there is not enough then people start abusing the system.

Since Cuba is a modern society it needs trading to provide for people's needs.

What other form of reward can there be but money? Money is everything material. The only other form of reward is social. This works in a tribal society where it is set up so that the strong support the weak but in Socialist countries it often turns out that the low status people support the high status. This probably has to do with the size of modern societies and separation of labor.
 
O

Omaar

Guest
DigitalDjigit said:
What other form of reward can there be but money? Money is everything material. The only other form of reward is social. This works in a tribal society where it is set up so that the strong support the weak but in Socialist countries it often turns out that the low status people support the high status. This probably has to do with the size of modern societies and separation of labor.

I'm thinking of things outside of the market system of exchange - not necesssarily as alternative models to build a society/economy on - volunteer labour, gifts, artistic creation, honour, prestige, love, potlatch .. so yeah social I guess.
 

Melchior

Taking History Too Far
Omaar, I think what DigitalDjigit is saying i that you are using to narrow a definition of market. Volunteering still requires some form of distribution in order for people to make use of it right? That's a market.
 
O

Omaar

Guest
No, that is too broad a definition of a market!

Must everything be encompassed within a logic of exchange? No!
 
O

Omaar

Guest
Perhaps we use the terms market and economy slightly differently?
 
Top