DEMOCRATIC CENTRALISM
IN THE COMMUNIST PARTY OF CUBA*
Raul Castro Ruz
* Speech given by Division Commander Raul Castro Ruz
before the cadres and officials of the Central Committee, May 4. 1973.

This structure of the Central Committee apparatus and its functional mechanisms approved by the Political Bureau have been developed on the basis of Marxist-Leninist principles of party organization and in keeping with instructions given by Fidel.

In the first paragraph of the document approved by the Political Bureau that I just read, mention is made of how, in May 1970, Fidel put forward the need to strengthen the entire administrative apparatus, the mass organizations and, above all, the Party.

Reference is also made to the emphasis placed by Fidel on this matters in the course of the Political Bureau meeting with the main leaders of the Party. the state and the mass organizations held August 1970.

More recently, in a Political Bureau meeting which lasted eight hours and which was held April 30, 1972 on the eve of Fidel's departure for several African and socialist European countries, he expressed the need to hold a Party Congress in the near future and to study the most adequate structure for the state and the Party.

Soon after Fidel's return, the Political Bureau began to analyze these issues during successive meetings and, in keeping with comrade Fidel's instructions, the Council of Ministers was first restructured along with the establishment of its Executive Committee with which you are familiar. Now the structure and the operative mechanisms of the Central Committee are to be determined and the objective is for the Central Committee to have a functional organization, to regularize the life of the Party and its leadership and, in this way, to overcome the abnormality which the Central Committee has historically suffered from in being practically entirely directed by the Secretariat of Organization — a task which was really beyond the possibilities of any comrade heading the Secretariat.

This structure, which is now approved by the Political Bureau should not be considered as definitive in every detail. It has a certain provisional character until the Party congress is held and this body ratifies or modifies it. However, we think that the basic definitive forms approved by the Congress will be very similar to these.

On the other hand, if we carefully examine the diagram that has been developed and the document we just read and even take into account the decisions regarding the Council of Ministers and its Executive Committee, you will certainly note certain gaps in what refers to the state. For example, in the Department of state and judicial organs we see a section entitled --about people's power bodies" which envisages the future establishment of the state's representative institutions, democratically elected by the masses, whose concrete forms for our country will be the object of study by the Political Bureau in upcoming meetings.

We think that for the best understanding of all these questions - of the Party's structure approved by the Political Bureau and its interrelationship with state and mass institutions - it would be useful for us to concentrate on a clarification of the theoretical foundations on which we have based ourselves and, although they may seem elemental, they are not always adequately applied or correctly understood.

Therefore, allow me to proceed to a discussion of these conceptual considerations.

In a revolution whose objective is the construction of socialism and communism, the establishment of what Marxist classics call the dictatorship of the proletariat, becomes necessary and indispensable after the taking of political power. What is meant by dictatorship in this case? The political domination which a certain social class exercises over the whole of society; the possession of power which allows the class in question to impose its will and interests and to make them obligatory for the entire society, for the other existing classes and social groups.

The dictatorship of the bourgeoisie in alliance with other exploiting classes prevails under capitalism regardless of its character, be it more or less fascist, or more or less democratic. Since exploiting classes represent a small minority of the population, it is always the dictatorship of the minority over the majority.

The dictatorship of the proletariat, that is, the working class, prevails in the stage of the construction of socialism and of communism.

The dictatorship of the proletariat, says Lenin, implies and signifies a clear concept of the reality that the proletariat, because of its objective economic position in every capitalist society, correctly expresses the interests of the entire mass of working and exploited people, all semi-proletarians,... all small peasants and similar categories." (Collected Works. Vol. 30, p. 339)

From this it follows that the dictatorship of the working class is not the dictatorship of the working class alone and isolated from all other classes or social groups, but rather the dictatorship of that class in close alliance with the rest of the working and revolutionary masses, especially the peasants.

In other words, although the dictatorship of the proletariat means that the working class has control of society as a whole giving it the ability to impose its will and interests on society in an obligatory way, it nevertheless becomes necessary to take into account that the working class, maintaining its hegemonic and leading role, must exercise its dictatorship in alliance with the other working classes which, in their entirety, must have the institutional opportunity to participate in the control and rule of the society as well as the institutional mechanisms that permit them to express their will and take an active and constant part in "the dictatorship of the proletariat."

This is one of the principles among those which must serve as a basis when the concrete forms of our dictatorship of the proletariat are established.

On the other hand, it's necessary to take into account that the working class considered as a whole, in its entirety, does not have the conditions to exercise its dictatorship since, in leaving behind bourgeois society, it retains defects and vices of the past making it heterogeneous in terms of its level of awareness and social behavior.

As Lenin said, the dictatorship "can be exercised only by a vanguard that has absorbed the revolutionary energy of the class." (Collected Works. Vol. 32, p. 21) In other words, only through a political party, which groups together its conscious minority, can the working class implement its dictatorship and construct socialist society.

On countless occasions Lenin emphatically insisted on the necessity of a political party "forged in the heat of struggle," and this principle has current validity justified by the diverse experiences in constructing socialism in the different countries which have undertaken this task. Moreover, this principle is even included in the Constitutions of these countries in many cases.

Thus, for example, we see that article 126 of the Constitution of the USSR puts forward that the Communist Party is the leading nucleus of all the organizations of the workers, social as well as of the state.

Similar statements are found in article 1 of the Bulgarian Constitution, article 4 of the Czechoslovak Constitution, article 3 of the Rumanian Constitution, article 82 of the Mongolian Constitution, etc.

Another fundamental principle to consider at the time of implementing and institutionalizing our dictatorship of the proletariat is the governing and leading role of the Party within itself and completely extended to all activities, state as well as social in general.

But the dictatorship of the proletariat is not limited in the least to the important and main role that the Party must play. The Party is only the vanguard minority of the most advanced social class in charge of leading and carrying on its shoulders the bulk of the weight in the construction of socialism. Therefore, in order to exercise its leading role vis a vis the entire society, the Party relies on the state, the mass organizations and, when necessary, on the direct mobilization of the working masses. The most ideal and direct instrument for exercising control of society is not a political party, but rather the state, an apparatus without which neither the dictatorship nor the fulfillment of the tasks of socialist construction are possible. In addition to the Party and the state, the complete system of the dictatorship of the proletariat includes the mass organizations which Lenin called "transmission belts" that group together one or many sectors of society's revolutionary forces: the trade unions, youth, women's and peasants' organizations, the Committee for the Defense of Revolution, students and Pioneers. In an article written in December 1920, Lenin said that the dictatorship "cannot work without a number of 'transmission belts' running from the vanguard to the mass of the advanced class, and from the latter to the mass of the working people."

Thus the working class cannot effect its dictatorship and its task of constructing socialism in its entirety in a direct manner, but rather it must do so through the Communist Party which joins together its vanguard minority. But, in turn, neither can the Party exercise the dictatorship by itself, but rather it does so with assistance and through the state apparatus and the mass organizations. The dictatorship of the proletariat is not the dictatorship of the Communist Party. The Party is the main leading force within the entire mechanism of the dictatorship of the proletariat and the body responsible for coordinating, controlling and channeling the tasks of the state apparatus and the mass organizations for the same objective.

The state is, then, a part of the system of the dictatorship of the proletariat and comprises its most direct instrument which, unlike the Party and the mass organizations, has the particular character whereby its dictates are legally binding for all the country's citizens and whereby it has a spe cial apparatus of force and coercion to impose its dictates when necessary.

The Party directs and reviews work, with its own ways and means which differ from the ways, means and resources which the state possesses to exercise its authority.

The directives, resolutions and decisions of the Party do not directly have this binding legal character for all the country's citizens and must be followed obligatorily only by its members. To ensure this, moreover, it does not have any apparatus of force and coercion. This is an important difference which distinguishes the role and the methods of the Party from the role and the methods of the state.

It could be argued that, in essence. the state's dictates have been previously determined by the Party through a resolution or a decision and that, therefore, in the final analysis, Party decisions assume binding legal force through the state.

Through this false reasoning it could then be concluded that the Party and the state are essentially one and the same thing. As is popularly said [in Cuba], "the same dog with a different collar."

But that is not the case here, or at least it shouldn't be nor has any reason to be if we base ourselves on a correct understanding of the complementary yet different roles that the Party and the state must play. The Party and its institutions must not be identified with the state apparatus and its institutions (in the sense of substituting for them).

The Party's power directly rests on its moral authority, in the influence it exerts on the masses, in the clarity with which it expresses their interests and aspirations, in the awareness it imbues in them of their social, economic and revolutionary duties and ultimately, in the trust that the masses place in it. Hence its power is based, above all, on persuasion, be it through its actions or its political and ideological positions.

The state's power directly rests on its material authority in that it possesses a special force to compel all to fulfill its decisions and to contain, restrain and subject all to the legal norms it dictates. Hence its action is based, above all, on coercion, on the binding character of the laws, regulations and orders it dictates.

Thus, if the Party is confused with the state this is, first of all, harmful to the political and ideological conviction of the masses, to the work which the Party should carry out and which the Party alone can carry out, and, secondly, it is harmful to the activities of the state whose officials cease being responsible for their decisions and actions.

The Party directs the state, reviews its functioning and its fulfillment of the outlined directives and plans; it encourages, moves forward and contributes to the best work on the part of the entire state mechanism, but under no circumstances should the Party substitute for the state.

1. The Party directs state organs through the elaboration of general directives on fundamental questions of the economic, political, cultural and social development of the country and the ways to manage such questions. The organs of the state apparatus should guide themselves and channel their activities by such directives and should not settle any important matter without taking into account these directives which originate from higher Party bodies: the Congress, the Central Committee and the Political Bureau.

2. It directs them through the selection and placement of main leading personnel of the state apparatus and through the education of such personnel for the best carrying out of their functions.

3. It directs them through the control (this is understood to mean evaluation and observation) of their work by different agencies and divisions of the Party apparatus, suggesting needed changes without interfering in their administrative work and without replacing them in their decision-making.

4. It directs them through the support and help it provides them in the carrying out of their activities by virtue of its apparatus and with its means and resources.

5. It directs them through Party members who, regardless of where they work and the position they occupy, are obligated to fulfill and implement Party decisions and convince nonmembers of the fairness of these decisions and the need to follow them

6. It directs them through the circumstances -- necessary and inevitable for a long time - whereby the main leaders of the Party, or at least the majority of them, are also the main leaders of the state.

In reference to this, Lenin said in one of his speeches to the Tenth Congress of the Bolshevik Party, held March 1921: "Being the ruling party, we had inevitably to merge the Party and government leadership - they are merged and will remain so."

Fidel expressed the same position during an August 1970 meeting: "The only place where absolute subordination occurs is at the highest level, because it must obligatorily occur there according to the principle that the Party has maximum responsibility in administration."

And later he added: "Then let there be no doubt that neither on the regional, provincial or any level, does duality exist. This duality occurs a little higher up for institutional reasons and to establish some umbilical cord between the Party and the state."

Lenin also repeatedly emphasized the needed delimitation of the institutions of the Party from those of the state.

In item 12 of the Eleventh Bolshevik Party Congress's resolution regarding the strengthening and new tasks of the Party, Lenin stated:

12. A very important current task is the establishment of the correct division of labor between-the institutions of the Party and those of the Soviets, the exact delimitation of the rights and duties of each organization.

The Eighth Congress of the Russian Communist Party (1919), in its resolution regarding organizational questions (See Section B - Mutual relations between the Party and the Soviets), had already emphasized: Under no circumstances should the functions of the Party collectives be mixed with the functions of state organs like the Soviets. Such a mixing would have fatal results, especially in the military sector. The Party strives to direct the activity of the Soviets, not to replace them.

The Eleventh Congress of the Russian Communist Party ratifies this declaration with special force. The immediate order of the day is the huge task of the national economy's rebirth which demands many years of tireless work. This task can only be accomplished with the establishment of correct and healthy mutual relations between the Party organizations and the administrative organs. If in 1919 the Party stressed that the mixing of the functions would have fatal results in the military sector, then in 1922 the Party declares that such a mixing would have absolutely fatal results in the economic field.

Under no circumstances should Party organizations interfere in the usual daily work of the administrative organs and they are obliged to abstain from issuing administrative decisions in the area of the Soviets' work in general.

Party organizations should guide the activity of the administrative organs, but under no circumstances should they strive to replace them or deprive them of their character. The lack of a strict delimitation of the functions and incompetent meddling lead to the lack of strict and exact responsibility on either part for the assigned task; it increases bureaucracy in the very organizations of the Party whereby everyone does everything and no one does anything; it hinders the serious specialization of the administrative officials, the detailed study of questions and the acquisition of truly practical experience. In short, it makes the correct organization of work difficult.

The Party does not hold its leading position by virtue of a popular election nor is it the product of an election by the working class of which it is the organized vanguard. Thus it is not a representative body resulting from the election of the popular will; it is a selective body.

During one of his speeches at the aforementioned August 1970 meeting, Fidel correctly said: "It's that you can't even say that the working class is represented as a class, if we try to represent it merely with the Party. In other words, the Party represents the interests of the working class but you cannot say that it represents the express will of the entire class."

Its leading position is won and maintained through the struggle and results from being the vanguard of the most advanced social class of society and from behaving as such, as the most loyal and firmest representative of the interests of the entire working mass. Its authority is not based on force nor in the possibility of using coercion and violence to impose its will and its decisions, but rather it relies on the confidence and the support it receives, in the first place, from the class it represents and, secondly, from the rest of the working people. Such confidence and support is won through a correct and rational policy, through bonding with the masses and using methods of persuasion and convincing sustained by the force of its example and the fairness of its policy.

However, for these reasons we cannot take for granted, as I said before. that the Party represents the will of the entire people nor can we consider it the supreme organ of power, because we would be ignoring the principles of proletarian democracy which, as we've seen, imply the participation of all the members of the working class (and not just its vanguard) and of the other working classes in the exercise of the dictatorship of the proletariat, that is, in the control and rule of society which requires corresponding institutions of power through which the working masses exercise this right and can express and make felt their will. Lenin said that "without representative institutions democracy cannot be conceived of, not even proletarian democracy."

Fidel expressed the same concern and guidance in August 1970 when he said: "Let's see how we are going to prepare ourselves to apply on a national level the famous democracy of the revocation of public offices, which is a tenet of Marxism. Gentlemen, how can we begin with some rudiments of democracy, even in an initial way... "

According to our understanding, these representative institutions are indispensable for the entire revolutionary people considered as a whole, as all the working masses of the country, to demonstrate their will and really participate in their government. We have previously seen the ways and the means through which the Party plays its leading role within the entire body of elements of the dictatorship of the proletariat without identifying or merging with any or replacing them in their functions.

The Party, personified in its supreme bodies (the Congress, the Central Committee and the Political Bureau) elaborates and issues directives regarding all the important questions of the country's life, those dealing with domestic policy as well as foreign policy, those incumbent on state institutions as well as mass organizations, or both.

But neither can the Congress, nor the Central Committee, nor the Political Bureau directly issue these directives to the appropriate people and even less so can they directly control, that is, check how they are implemented. Minimally they cannot do so in the absolute majority of cases; and in those in which they can to a certain extent, it will never be to a sufficient and necessary degree.

The Congress meets every certain number of years and the delegates attending it, from diverse places throughout the country, return after the conclusion of the Congress to carry out very concrete and specific tasks.

The Central Committee meets every certain number of months and its members occupy specific positions in one or another activity of the Revolution to which they must virtually devote all their time.

The Political Bureau is made up of a lesser number of comrades who meet every week or every 15 days. Each member also has a specific job involving great responsibility for one or another activity of the Revolution.

After a Political Bureau meeting in which one or several directives concerning, in general, several bodies (of the state, the Party, the mass organizations) are agreed upon, it is not possible nor functional in practice for its members to be directly responsible for communicating them to all the corresponding people and then for checking on their implementation.

And if it is impractical as a system for all the Political Bureau's directives to be directly communicated by one of its members, it is more difficult, if not impossible, to check up on, watch over and assist their implementation.

And it is at least as difficult or more so (impossible) still for the Political Bureau to gather and process all the necessary information and to conduct all the analytical studies that are required to elaborate a directive.

Neither can the Political Bureau attend to and direct the daily work of the Party apparatus because the majority of its members are not Party work professionals, but rather they specialize in other specific activities. Moreover, if in some cases they are Party work professionals, they relate to a concrete task or to some area of the country in particular.

Thus an executive body which directs the daily work of the Party is necessary, a body which sees to it that the directives issued by the Congresses, the plenary meetings of the Central Committee, the Bureau and the First Secretary are implemented by those who are responsible and that the Party as a whole, with its own resources and methods, does its share in each case.

This executive body will be the Secretariat which will rely on the different departments and sections that make up the Central Committee apparatus in its work.

With regards to the Party apparatus and its tasks, this Secretariat will play a role similar to that played by the Executive Committee of the Council of Ministers in relationship to the government. The multiple tasks and responsibilities of the Party apparatus and the diverse departments which must exist within the Central Committee so that this body and the Political Bureau can fully carry out their work make it impossible for a single person to be able to give the due attention to all the work and even less so when the person who occupies this central position of First Secretary is, at the same time, the government's prime minister. Neither can he do it relying on only one or two people who are responsible for everything on an executive level because it is humanly impossible to manage all the necessary information and to master what's appropriate to each and every sphere of activity of the Party in order to give real and effective attention to each and every department and each and every task. It's absolutely necessary for the management of the diverse areas of work of the Party to be distributed among several comrades (which should number at least five or six) and for them to constitute a collective work body which, under the leadership of the First Secretary, works closely with him and facilitates and makes feasible in practice for him to systematically attend to and manage the daily work of the Party. All this becomes impossible without the Secretariat. The Secretariat and its adequate functioning constitute the cornerstone upon which the efficient work of the Party rests and the guarantee that this body assumes and really plays its role ensuring that the ideological unity that should characterize it is accompanied by organizational unity which, as Lenin said, is indispensable in guaranteeing unity of action. The existence and complementary interrelationship of these features are unavoidable if we want to have a genuine Party.

The directives issued by the Political Bureau will reach the appropriate people either in written form by way of the Section of the Department of General Affairs of the Central Committee, which functions as a secretariat of the Political Bureau; directly by way of a Political Bureau membr when that is advisable or simply feasible; or by way of a member of the Secretariat who, in such an event, should be the person who attends the agencies in question from the point of view of the Party. As a rule, in every case, the directives should go to the higher hierarchical levels of the agencies involved and go down through appropriate channels to the lower levels of the agencies.

Neither the heads of the departments of the Central Committee, nor any official of the departments will be responsible for transmitting directives to the ministers or presidents or heads of the agencies involved in the matter, nor for giving them instructions or asking them to account for their performance.

The departments of the Central Committee will be responsible for helping the Secretariat, the Political Bureau and the Central Committee to fulfill their functions. On the one hand this involves gathering and processing the necessary information and conducting all the studies that are advisable and pertinent to facilitating the elaboration of directives on the part of the higher Party organs. On the other hand, they will control (check on, watch over) how these directives are fulfilled by the corresponding state agencies, mass organizations, etc; they will try to help these agencies in the implementation of these directives with suggestions, guiding the work of the Party organizations in the relevant branches, etc. And they will collaborate with the Political Bureau and the Secretariat in the selection and placement of cadres in the branches they attend to, submitting the records of these cadres, making evaluations and proposals by way of their respective personnel sections.

In addition to those which relate to work areas pertinent -to the Party (organization, internal education etc.), Central Committee departments include those which correspond to branches or sectors which have an auxiliary function with regards to the Central Committee, the Political Bureau and the Secretariat in the leadership, control and coordination of the activities of the state and of the mass organizations. These departments which relate to branches do not lead or administer these branches. They only assist and help the Political Bureau to direct them and help the Secretariat to check on the branches' implementation of the directives of the Central Committee and the Political Bureau and to direct the entire apparatus of the Party and the mass organizations. Without these instruments neither could the Political Bureau nor the Secretariat fully carry out their responsibilities.

Moreover, in order to fulfill its tasks, the Secretariat relies on the entire Party apparatus, its intermediate and base (nuclei) organizations. It is by way of this apparatus that the Party basically exercises its leading role, although the Party does not issue directives to the state and mass agencies at these levels (intermediate and base). However, it does participate in the review of these organs' activities and helps to move forward and fulfill their tasks by way of the performance of its members and the struggle to persuade the masses in general to make the necessary efforts in that direction.

The intermediate levels of the Party (provincial, regional and municipal) are or will be cognizant of the plans and tasks which correspond to the state agencies and enterprises included in their jurisdiction's territory and to the mass organizations which function in the same. It is their responsibility to make sure and demand that each entity does its corresponding part, to coordinate the activities of the different agencies and organizations to the necessary extent and to study and determine, together with the agencies and organizations, the concrete measures that should be adopted to achieve and ensure the implementation of the directives and resolutions of the higher Party organs and of the state plans.

To this end they mobilize all the resources and potential at their disposal by way of the Party apparatus and Party members trying to influence and persuade the masses in general to make their best contribution.

The intermediate bodies of the Party also have the responsibility of evaluating, selecting and placing the majority of the Party and state cadres who work in the territory where they carry out their activity.

The Party's base organizations (the nuclei) have similar tasks and responsibilities at their level, one of the main ones being the review of economic activity and administrative work in the work centers to which they belong.

The tasks of the nuclei include the growth and construction of the Party, support for the workers' movement in terms of emulation programs, the militia's political and cultural study, etc. However at present, while the Party is the entity which leads and organizes the country's economic activity, the economic sphere occupies first place among the nuclei's tasks. In Lenin's opinion the Party nuclei constitute the Party's basic organizations in this field because it is through them that the different levels of Party leadership are tied to the masses. They must be involved in familiarizing themselves deeply with the activity of the work centers to which they belong. They should make proposals which result in improving the work of the centers. They must struggle for the elimination of deficiencies. They must be concerned over the quality of the production or of the services, the fulfillment of the plans, the best use of the machinery and equipment in general and the rational use of raw and auxiliary materials. The nuclei must pursue the ways and the means to mobilize the working masses in their work places to fulfill their plans.

They must critically discuss with the administration of the work place all that which they consider necessary and which contributes to the improvement of the work. The nuclei must take up self-education to satisfactorily and convincingly explain to the rest of the masses the Party line. They must give their opinion in the evaluation and promotion of Party cadres and the administration belonging to their work place.

Only in this way can what Fidel put forward at the April 30 (1972) Political Bureau meeting be achieved with regards to the need to develop the Party as an organic force and not as a federation so that it constitutes a force which struggles and confronts the problems. In this vein the nuclei must exert pressure at the base to achieve the fulfillment of the/ planned tasks, and, therefore, an active membership is required.

The Central Committee and the Political Bureau of the Party will also have a specific control organ (the Control Committee of the Party and the state) which will not watch over the state and Party organs as such, but rather the public personal behaviour of the leaders and officials of these organs in their capacity as leaders and officials. Hence, by way of this process, a review of these organs will be conducted which will clearly result in their doing better work.

This review carried out by the Party aimed at checking to see if its directives are put into practice does not exclude other kinds of reviews which are conducted even with regards to the same activity. Thus, for example, with regards to the production work of a given enterprise, the respective Ministry and agencies and the Pa:rty will exercise control by way of their entire apparatus and the Control Committee; the trade unions will do so by way of the production assemblies, the Bank, etc.

These theoretical considerations have served as the basis for the agreements made regarding the Party structure.

We think that it's clear to all. the cadres and officials of the Central Committee that we must channel our efforts in two basic directions in the immediate: on the one hand we must continue developing all the tasks that up until now have comprised the work content of the commissions and agencies which have to date made up the structure of the Party's central organs. At the same time, we have to put into practice all the measures leading to the progressive establishment of the new structure approved by the Political Bureau.

In other words, no planned activity should be paralyzed nor should any climate of expectation or inertia hoe encouraged in any way in the different work areas. At the same time, *while carefully analyzing each step, we should work for this transition p hase to be as brief as possible regarding cadre replacement and the redistiribution of functions without forcing the logical and necessary promotion process for the newly created departments and sections.

In this regard, the first tasl( of the department heads consists in organizing the collective study of the document approved by the Political Bureau for all the cadres and officials under their direction so that by the end of this week, that is, by May 15, they will have submitted all the questions and interpretations that need to be clarified or explained to the Secretary.

During this phase of transition from the present structure to the new one it is similarly important that the heads of departments, sections and work teams do not transfer, replace or change personnel without consulting with the corresponding secretary and without the measure being examined collectively in the Secretariat so that at all times it will be possible to evaluate the interests and needs .of the Central Committee apparatus as a whole. Starting now the comrades heads of departments will have to begin to work with the corresponding members of the Secretariat from whom they will begin to receive instructions on the steps to be taken in this transition to the new structure. We will undertake the tasks pertinent to this phase aware that, as comrade Fidel stated in the meeting with department heads held last Tuesday, any position that a Communist occupies is always at the service of the Party and that it is the Party - I will add - that confers authority to the responsibility that any one of us may assume at a given moment.

And, moreover, the Communist Party member assigned to assume any responsibility in the leadership of the Party, ranging from the most humble and anonymous positions to the highest leadership tasks, will be prepared for his work above all when he adds his own personal prestige, moral authority and capability to the authority and prestige of the Party.

This basic requirement is fulfilled, comrades, when Party members and leaders on all levels work with sustained tenacity and lasting ties to the masses; when we do not try to achieve spectacular successes and even less so personal ones, but rather successes resulting from analysis and collective effort; and when we struggle to put into practice a concrete policy with firmness, without losing hope, taking into account and creatively applying the experiences of the fraternal parties of the socialist countries.

These decisions of the Political Bureau and the subsequent strengthening of the entire apparatus of the Party and the state constitute unavoidable foundations upon which to move forward our work of constructing socialism in our country. Nevertheless, they alone are not going to solve our current difficulties.

We clearly enjoy extraordinarily favorable conditions which are incomparably superior to those of the recent past and which can be combined with the experience and maturity we have attained in the practical work of building socialism, in the reaffirmation of our Marxist-Leninist membership and in the strengthening of our alliance with the socialist camp to which we are honored to belong. A great deal still remains to be done and as comrade Fidel has said, it will not be an easy road. It depends on our ability to skillfully make use of these conditions and to use to our benefit the knowledge of the laws of social development and the political-ideological instruments for the construction of socialism and communism which have passed all of history's tests victoriously, namely, the dictatorship of the proletariat and the Marxist-Leninist Party. For this, one of our most urgent needs is that of cadres.

Fidel has emphasized on numerous occasions, the last one being barely two days ago, the need to promote cadres at the base, cadres who know directly and personally our problems and difficulties. We should rationally promote our cadres, essentially extracting them from within the Party itself and taking into account, above all, their ideological firmness and preferably their proletarian origin in combination with leadership ability. We should have them study here as well as in Party schools of some socialist countries as has recently begun to be done. They should be trained and constantly helped to develop a communist style of life and work.

It is precisely this attribute which should characterize our entire Party and especially the Central Committee apparatus. Without exhausting this theme, about which I will speak to you on other occasions, I would like to take this opportunity to single out as an inseparable feature of the communist style of life and work, the existence of the healthiest and most fraternal environment in relations among comrades, a factor which is critical to undertaking harmonious and productive work.

As you know, when we talk about fraternal relations, basing ourselves on the principle expressed by our First Secretary concerning ,ombatting defects and not the person, we Communists do not accept coexistence with or tolerance of defects, deficiencies and errors due to the lack of moral courage or to insufficiently communist Party members as Lenin would say.

Never do you assume a more fraternal attitude with a comrade or a healthier stance in response to the fulfillment of our duties, as when you assert a criticism within the Party organizations in a constructive and correct way when the method of first addressing the comrades in an individual way has not been effective. Comrades are first addressed individually but, however, if on repeated occasions they make the same error or if very serious questions of principle are involved it becomes vital to bring the problem to the Party organizations.

Let's strive to develop our work in a fully communist environment, creating an active Party life based on the principles of democratic centralism.

Let's respect the ability and decisions of the higher levels; let's observe the strictest Party discipline but, at the same time, let's practice the broadest internal democracy in such a way that every member within the Party organization, observant of the rules of place, time and manner, that is, at the indicated place, at the opportune time and in the correct manner, can put forward with full and total freedom his opinion regarding any issue and regarding any comrade. In more concrete terms: in the Party everyone has the right to criticize and within the same no one is exempt from criticism.

The best way of struggling against liberalism, cowardice against the harmful and inadmissible practice of passing judgment in the corridors, of issuing criteria and making criticisms outside the Party, is that of developing a regular and full Party life based on the principles of democratic centralism. We all have the maximum interest in defending these principles in all their magnitude and depth in the same way that we will be severely critical of all those who through liberalism, instead of courageously offering their opinions where they should and where they are assured of being able to give them, set about doing so in inadequate places and to people to whom the criticism does not correspond.

Using as an organic base this Central Committee structure approved by the Political Bureau and the Marxist-Leninist principles of organization, functioning and interrelationship of the Party, the state and the mass organizations and the fulfillment of the directives and instructions of our Political Bureau and of comrade Fidel and taking into account the principles of the communist work style to which I have referred, let's fully take charge of the task of turning our Party and, in first place, our Central Committee apparatus, into a functional and efficient instrument capable of fully playing the part required of it in the construction of socialism. With the help of the Party we must work with the passion of an artist who sculpts out of rock a work that lasts centuries. What we are doing is not a simple thing; we are not taking any simple steps. We are going to forge the leader of our Revolution for dozens of years to come and for coming centuries until, who knows when, communism is being built here as in the rest of the world and the state and the Party are no longer needed, although I do think that some norms which rule society ought to exist and that someone should approve them; probably in that phase it would be all the citizens.

For the historical leaders of the Revolution time is taking its inexorable toll minute by minute and it is shortening our life. With this work we are developing with your participation, the great leader of our Revolution for today, tomorrow and always will be our Communist Party. The Party is everything.

These are the meanings we attribute to certain terms.

To direct: Its meaning generally does not give rise to confusion. It relates to the action of guiding, leading, issuing directives and rules for activity. This action can be effected in a more general or a more limited sense. It may be a sovereign action which is neither subordinate to nor limited by any other higher leadership, or it may be subordinate to or restricted by such leadership. In turn, the degree of subordination may be greater or lesser; the place occupied be the individual exercising the faculty of directing in the hierarchy may be higher or lower, etc. And, on the other hand, the line of leadership may be vertical or horizontal. Moreover, the action of directing will be differentiated by the ways and means which are used in exercising it.

In a country in which the Communist Party is in power, the Party is the highest leadership body. The Party directs the state and the mass organizations.

But, in turn, the state directs the activities which correspond to it: legislative, administrative, etc. The state is a complex mechanism made up -of diverse organs and multiple hierarchical levels, each one directing within certain frameworks while, at the same time, being directed.

The Prime Minister directs the deputy prime ministers and through them the several central administrative organs of the country. Each deputy prime minister directs several central organization heads. Each central organization head directs his subordinates and so on down to the work center which is directed by an administrator.

Similarly, through a given apparatus and organic structure, the mass organizations direct all their members and the higher levels of this structure direct the lower levels.

Similarly the Party is a complex of organizations through which it directs its members; lower level organizations are directed by higher level ones.

The Party Congress is the supreme organ of the Party; it does not receive directives from any other organ and its directives must be taken into account by all the other organizations within the Party, as well as by the organizations of the state and the masses. It is, therefore, the highest leadership organ of the country and this is why Lenin described it as "the most important, decisive and responsible meeting of the Party and of the Revolution."

It is followed in order by the Central Committee and its plenary meetings whose directives are valid for all the remaining organizations. However, they do not have the Congress' unlimited sovereignty given that the Central Committee must attend to and observe the Congress' directives.

After the Central Committee comes the Political Bureau of the Party which directs the activity of the Party, the state and the mass organizations, but is obligated to do so within the frameworks established by the directives of the Congress and of the Central Committee's plenary meetings.

These three organs (the Congress, the Central Committee and the Political Bureau) are those which possess the maximum leadership power in general in the country and those which issue the operational directives and rules for all the country's remaining organizations and all their corresponding activities.

The activities which are particular to the state are directed by the diverse state organs, but these bodies must comply with the directives issued by the higher Party organs. In this way they direct legislative, administrative executive, judicial and military activity, etc.

Educational and mass mobilization activities, etc. are directed in the concrete by the mass organizations which function in fulfillment of the directives of the higher Party organs serving as "transmission belts" in Lenin's words, between the Party and the masses.

The activities specific to the Party apparatus are directed on the national level in the concrete by the Secretariat of the Central Committee in compliance with the directives issued by the higher Party organs and are directed, in the different provinces, regions, municipalities and work centers, by the corresponding intermediate and base Party organizations.

Thus we see that the Party directs, the state directs and the mass organizations direct. But the term direct, in referring to the Party, the state and the mass organizations does not have exactly the same meaning or the same connotation. And it doesn't even have the same meaning within the Party itself when we refer to its higher organs in comparison to its remaining organizations.

The higher Party organs (the Congress, the Central Committee and the Political Bureau) direct the Party apparatus, the state and the mass organizations and their leadership functions refer to the issuing of general directives and to the solving of problems in principle, but not to the most concrete directives of each activity or to the solution of details.

The Secretariat of the Central Committee and intermediate Party levels also direct, but their leadership does not refer to general directives, but rather to the most concrete ones aimed at the implementation of the former in practice. They basically refer to the activity of the Party apparatus within which they have an obligatory character. But their leadership powers in issuing direct directives through their own initiative to state and mass organizations are more limited. The means by which the Party directs the activities of the state and of the mass organizations on the intermediate and base levels of their apparatus are indirect means and were explained in the first part of this presentation.

The state organs direct the diverse state activities but their directives do not have such a general character as those of the higher Party organs and, moreover, they do not direct the Party and the mass organizations.

The mass organizations direct their own activities, but their directives are also not general and do not constitute a basis for Party or state activity. The directives of a given mass organization need not be followed by another mass organization.

Moreover, the leadership ways and means are very different. Whereas those of the state organs are primarily administrative, the means of the Party and mass organizations are basically those of persuasion and convincing, based on a high political authority.

To control: This term can be used in the sense of governing, managing, ruling, controlling (anglicism) or in the sense of verifying, reviewing, examining, inspecting (gallicism). It is the latter meaning which is employed in this presentation.

The Party directs and verifies that its directives are being duly implemented by those to whom they correspond: the state, mass organizations, etc. But, additionally, the Party checks on whether the directives issued by the state organs themselves which concretize the more general Party directives are being implemented. It follows the work of the mass organizations in a similar way.

The Party follows the work by way of its entire apparatus and membership. Now, the organ which directs does not have to be the one which directly follows the work. The Congress, the Central Committee and the Political Bureau do not check on the work directly, but rather they do so by way of all the remaining Party apparatus, from the Secretariat to the base organizations (nuclei). Moreover, the Party has at its disposal a special control body.

Work is reviewed within the Party on a top-down basis (the higher organizations follow the work of the lower ones) and on a bottom-up basis (in checkup meetings members and/or representatives elected by them review the work of the different intermediate and higher Party levels).

A review of the activity of the different state agencies also takes place: the higher agencies control the lower ones.

Mass organizations also have a control process consisting in the higher organs reviewing the work of the lower ones and in the masses reviewing that of those organs, for their members are elected. Moreover, the mass organizations, basically the trade unions, review the work of the state Organs, primarily the work centers.

Thus the Party exercises its control (the same as its leadership) over all the country's activities. The state does so only within the framework of state activities, and the mass organizations within the framework of their internal activities and partly over the state apparatus.

So we see, a single activity - let's say a state activity - can be subjected to different reviews simultaneously. The work of the administration of a production center, for example, will be subjected to the review of the higher administrative level of the Ministry to which it belongs, to the financial control of the Bank, to the review of the Party municipal committee and to the Party nucleus of the work center, to the review of the trade union leadership of the municipality and to the trade union organization of the center, etc. Nevertheless, this administration will only be under the direct leadership of the higher administrative level. The Party and the trade union review the work of the work center's administration, but they do not direct the administrative process. Here the principle of collective discussion should rule, but decision-making power and responsibility rest with the administration. If the Party nucleus does not agree with the administration's decisions and, after having discussed its opinions with the administration it does not obtain results, it will go to the Party municipal committee which also cannot dictate to the administration what it must do. Instead it will refer the issue to the higher Party level which will discuss the problem with the corresponding higher administrative level. If this level also disagrees with the Party's opinion, then it goes to its higher level and so on, in the hypothetical event that this would be necessary, up to the national Party level (the Secretariat) which would discuss the issue with the corresponding minister and deputy minister. If the matter is still not resolved at this level, the Secretariat will raise the issue to the Political Bureau for its resolution. This is the order and the way to transmit a hypothetical issue in which there is disagreement between the Party and the administration. The. Party should never supplant or impose its will on the administration, violating its power.

To guide: Can be understood as direct or rule, but also can be used in the sense of informing someone who is not familiar with the state of a question so that he can address it. This last meaning can be used, for example, to refer to the relationship between a Central Committee department and its counterpart in the province or region or the Party committee of a ministry whose sphere of attention includes the matter at hand.

The Central Committee departments do not direct the analogous departments of the province and the region or the Party organization of a ministry, but they can guide them, that is, inform them, share experience with them, advise them, give them suggestions, etc.

from HEIRS TO HISTORY
Jose Marti Publishing House
1987, pp.107-126