Social upheavals in Iran and Cuba underline the centrality of “Bread”

In Iran and Cuba the people are both angry and hungry and they are thrusting their fingers at their rulers as being primarily responsible for their desperate situation. People are taking to the streets currently in these countries which were hitherto considered secure in many respects and, among other things, they are claiming in no uncertain terms that they are deprived of bread and other primary needs.

Economic compulsions are proving a decisive factor in these unprecedented struggles by the people and the respective ruling strata ought to be having ‘much food for thought’ on viewing the theaters of unrest unveiling before their apparently not so sharp eyes. The rulers of communist Cuba in particular need to delve deep into how their 70 years or so long communist experiment went wrong. They would be erring in seeing the struggle on the streets of Havana and some other cities as a one-off happening. Apparently, the patience of the people is wearing thin and this message must be understood clearly if Cuba is to be stable in future. Modern history is repetitious with the lesson that a hungry public is no respecter of regimes, mighty or otherwise.

There is no question that socialism on paper has exceptional and even unique merits but the rulers of socialist and communist states have over the past 100 or more years made the highly damaging mistake of considering their class a law unto itself. For example, this, among other factors, accounted for the unravelling of communism in the USSR at the beginning of the nineties. Sadly, most ruling strata of socialist and communist countries had over the years degenerated into oppressive as well as parasitic social formations. Rather than serving their publics selflessly they had turned repressive and self-serving. This sums up the degeneration that had been taking hold in these states.

If Cuba’s rulers are listening to their angry youth in particular they would know where they have gone wrong. Young protesters were shown in TV footages pointing their fingers at grandiose state buildings in Havana and berating their rulers for having “the best things in life” while they were deprived of essentials. The pandemic is taking its toll on Cuba as well and it has compounded the country’s economic worries but besides asking for “bread” the average Cuban is also demanding more democratic freedoms.

Cuba’s economy shrank by some 11 per cent last year but the country’s rulers would be erring tragically if they calculate that some economic security alone from now on would keep their populace quiet. More political freedoms with a measure of economic security would go some distance in bringing a degree of social peace to the country. “Bread” and freedom, apparently, constitute the answer. However, the country’s ruling stratum would need to prove to the people that it is with them in their material travails. Cuba’s rulers would need to guard against being seen by the people as self-serving.

One-time Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev placed his finger correctly on what had gone seriously wrong in the USSR in the late eighties. As pointed out by some commentators, he opted for social democracy as one of the means of keeping the USSR stable. He had taken note of the fact that the Soviet ruling strata had turned oppressive and parasitic and that a degree of democracy combined with economic equity provided a way out for the USSR. Perhaps, Cuba could study Gorbachev’s thinking on the crises of his times for possible ways of containing its current problems.

The social turmoil in some parts of Iran over what seems to be a severe scarcity of water and other essentials for living comes as a surprise, as in the case of Cuba, when the degree of central control traditionally exercised by Iran’s theocratic administration over the affairs of the state is considered. There have been sections in Iran that have voiced for democratic freedoms over the years but the present upheaval is notable for its scale and ferocity. Besides, the protest for adequate water in southwestern Khuzestan province has escalated into a dissenting and violent protest against the government and Iran’s Supreme Leader and spiritual head Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. This is an unprecedented development in the history of Islamic Iran that signals that the theocratic state could no longer take willing compliance on the part of all its citizens with its diktat for granted.

What should be considered of note in Iran is that the public protests are focusing on the country’s rulers and not on the Islam-centred theocratic nature of the state. There is a sharp questioning of the political elite’s suitability to govern. It seems to be dawning on the people that the ruling class does not have their best interests at heart. The mere mouthing of religious doctrines and rhetoric by the country’s political class is being seen as a deceptive front for self-serving conduct.

The above realizations on the part of a public could be considered as constituting a measure of its political maturity. In fact, this yard stick could be seen as applicable and relevant to popular upheavals anywhere that have their roots in public disillusionment with political or ruling classes. Whether it be Cuba, Iran or other states of the South or North, it is the demand for accountable and democratic governance that marks off a people’s attainment of a qualitatively high degree of political awareness and acumen.

How the Cuban and Iranian authorities intend to manage their respective popular upheavals is left to be seen. In all probability they would be increasingly resorting to an iron fist to put down the unrest. In that event, they could be accused of being repressive, anti-people and of lacking the required intellectual acumen to guide their countries with ability and foresight. On the other hand, it ought to be abundantly clear to the respective administrations that these social upheavals are all about a glaring lack of people’s participation in governance. A failure on the part of these states to advance increasing public participation in governance, in accordance with commonly accepted democratic principles, would be clinching proof that the ruling classes in question are indeed self-serving.