A Revolutionary's View In Favor of Socialism
Customer Rating: 
Humanistic Socialism. When you read this book, you can really see the flexibility, a far cry and major difference from the scientific Hegelian materialism of Marx, the dogmatism of Luxemburg and the authoritarianism of Lenin. The difference is a socialism, which emphasizes the need to listen to and work with the people in a democratic means, rejecting the exploitation found in authoritarian and bureaucracy found in the former Soviet and European socialism.
Of course this socialism is also against the neo-liberal free market fundamentalism in the framework of the capitalistic economy dominated by the strong players who take advantage over the weak, under the same rules applied for all under the misleading terminology of "free trade."
In this system of humanistic socialism, che speaks of the flexibility of state control, which in turn, acts in accordance between the state and the masses or proletariat, which includes compromises as to private ownership in certain cases, as in the many farmers, and in creating a societal structure devoid of exploitation, one based on the principles of socialism in an equalitarian, fair and just society where all are entered into the economic privileges which are available. There are of course limitations, however much is due not to the system itself but to the U.S. blockade against Cuba in obtaining raw materials, oil and other necessary items for people to survive and have any degree of prosperity.
The esteem in the whole thing is Guevara and Castro's efforts in this regard, rejecting all dogmatic and Hegelian formulas which create bureaucratic nightmares as witnessed in Soviet communism and the Eastern European block, which subsequently failed and is no more. Unfortunately, the results of such a fall are U.S. imperialism on the rise and on a much more dangerous level to the world community of autonomous and independent existence.
Now in response to the claim against socialism, (Von Mises) that socialism cannot perform economic planning from lack of a free market, Guerra speaks of a planning of fixed prices and trade agreements prior to the trading itself. The trading of goods for goods and services is also endorsed.
The only question that really hangs in the balance is that while humanistic socialism is flexible, fights exploitation, fights bureaucracy and so forth, it is still state control. And like a monarchy, the kingdom is ideal when the king works for the common interest of the proletariat, but when his successor replaces him or her, the balance of power can be radically altered to the point of Leninist and Stalinist authoritarian proportions. And so it is, the humanistic socialism practiced by Castro hangs in the fragility of his successors and/or the successors of the present leaders in the government. Over all, I find Che's political philosophy in this book very well to both read and consider. There is no question in the issues raised of both the fight of super power imperialism and the need for an equalitarian, non-exploitive government and society.
However my above question on socialism strongly argues against this fragility. For what Che's socialism espouses is really democracy, unlike the capitalistic representative forms. And this difference entails both education and self education where all citizens become active participants in government, where the culture itself is self-governing, removed from economic alienations. So in this sense, the succession of leaders would not alter the social and cultural fabric of the democratic individualization found in socialistic practice.
