-DATE- 19670519 -YEAR- 1967 -DOCUMENT_TYPE- SPEECH -AUTHOR- F. CASTRO -HEADLINE- CASTRO SPEECH TO THIRD ANAP CONGRESS -PLACE- RUBEN MARTINEZ VILLENA TECHNICAL INSTITUTE -SOURCE- HAVANA DOMESTIC RADIO -REPORT_NBR- FBIS -REPORT_DATE- 19670519 -TEXT- FIDEL CASTRO SPEECH TO THIRD ANAP CONGRESS Havana Domestic Radio and Television Services in Spanish 0233 GMT 19 May 1967--F/E (Speech by Prime Minister Castro at ceremony concluding the Third Congress of the National Association of Small Farmers /ANAP/ at the Ruben Martinez Villena Technical Institute, Rancho Boyeros--live) (Text) Comrade delegates to the Third ANAP Congress, the Yankees must be hit hard in many things, (shouting) but we must also hit them hard in agriculture. (shouting, cheering) To hit the Yankees hard in agriculture is to defeat the main weapon, or one of the main weapons, they have been using against our revolution, and that is the weapon of economic blockade, the weapon of hunger. That is why, since our Central Committee has already expressed in the statement published today its opinion on international political problems, tonight we are going to speak here of agricultural problems. (applause) It is a magnificent way of hitting the Yankees hard. Just a little more than eight years have passed since the victory of our revolution, and we believe that after eight years you the peasants, as much as we the leaders of the revolution, are in a better condition than ever to speak and understand each other. The peasants now know much more about revolution than they knew eight years ago, and the leaders of the revolution know a little more about agriculture than we did eight years ago. If you know much more about policy and we know a little more about agriculture, it is truly easy for us to understand each other. This does not mean that we also knew about policy at the beginning of the revolution. We must say that we have also had to learn much during this period of eight years. Was it perhaps easy to understand each other during those early days? No, it was not easy. You knew little about policy. We also knew little. When I speak of policy, I refer to revolutionary policy. We did not know about agriculture, but you knew more than we did, but you also knew very little about agriculture. After all, I hope you do not get angry when I say this. (shouts of "no, no") But this is so even now. We know little. I know that someone will rise up and say "I am an expert in this," and another one stands up and says "I am an expert in something else." There are some experts, this cannot be doubted. There are some very good farmers, some of whom know about tobacco. Good. There are others who know about cane. Good. There are others who know about citrus fruit. There are others who know about livestock. But when we speak of knowing, we refer in general to the knowledge of the great mass of farmers, we refer to the knowledge of the immense majority. But I am not going to speak about those problems at this time. Rather, I want to refer to the problems that made it difficult for us to understand each other well. Among the peasants there was always, from the beginning, a great confidence in the revolution. That is, faith in revolution was never lacking among the peasants. But what was not known--the problem which had not even been resolved in a completely satisfactory manner in the world--was the problem of agrarian reform. What is an agrarian reform? Much is still said in the world about agrarian reform. Everybody has a different concept of agrarian reform. It is a fact that our young revolution was faced with one of the most difficult tasks in the problem of agriculture: how to carry out an agrarian reform. There were those who said: "It is very easy. Distribute all the land." At that time, the most general idea in the country of how to carry out an agrarian reform was the idea of distributing all the land. And, truly, today we see with all clarity that that idea was an idea which would have been perfectly suited to a capitalist society. In that capitalist society, it was impossible from any point of view to do with the land, from a technical and productive point of view, what can be done when all the resources of the nation are used for that purpose. It would have also been, at the beginning, the easiest of all the agrarian reforms. So many thousands of caballerias, so many peasants or agricultural workers who have no land--how can it be distributed? One caballeria per man? There is not enough land. There were hundreds of thousands of people who lived or worked in rural areas who wanted land. Half a caballeria? There was not enough to go around. A quarter of a caballeria? An eighth of a caballeria? We refer, of course, to agricultural caballerias. It did not come to distributing Turquino Peak, or Cayo Romano, or Cayo Largo, or the Zapata Swamp. It was agricultural land, an eighth of a caballeria. If we had distributed land on the basis of an eighth of a caballeria--today we can say it, but five or six years ago we could not make such a categorical statement--had we distributed land on the basis of an eighth of a caballeria, this revolution would have gone down the drain. And of course, since we were not going to go down the drain, then the contrary would take place: the need to begin to gather all the eights of caballerias again. When the time came to use a machine, a combine, apply a complete hydraulic system, or a plane for fumigation or fertilization, it would otherwise have been impossible from any viewpoint. Naturally, we know this now when we cultivate the land. When we increase the area of arable land, when the number of cows to be milked increases, when the number of arrobas of cane to be cut increases, when the quintals of coffee to be picked increase, there are insufficient hands. Then the need for machinery arises. Of course we would not have been able to use the machine. The need to apply technology would itself have forced us to reverse our course had we begun by distributing the land. What solution did our revolution seek? The peasant, who for years had been working the land, who had been used to this type of work and this types of production, who had been paying rent, or who had been paying for third party rights, or who had been paying 50 percent--all those forms of exploitation existing against the peasant--this peasant was already used to that type of work. This peasant liked that type of work. This peasant's whole mentality was adapted to it. Let us leave this peasant there. Let us free this peasant from paying rent, that is to say, from exploitation. Let us begin to give this peasant all possible services: educational, medical, credit, communications, in short, all the things which we can make available to him. But why convert a farm worker, why convert a worker who one day can be a farm worker using big machines and technology, into a minifundist landowner? We must make a distinction. There is the peasant who had 10 hectares, or 20 hectares, and who can grow a crop. There is an infinity of workers who have a little plot here and others who have a little plot there, and these are really self-sufficient plots. This is why the revolution decided not to distribute the large latifundia. This was not an easy task. This was not an easy task to understand. The bourgeois would say: look, the state has taken over the land; look, now they are going to be wage workers of the state. Since there were peasants with all sizes of plots, every time an agrarian reform was made they tried to sow fear. Naturally, it was essential to make a second reform. Why was it essential? Because a large part of the landowners who still had 20, 25, 30, or 40 caballerias, the great majority of these landowners practically had an attitude of sabotage to production. It was necessary to make another agrarian reform. Then it was proposed. What did they do then? They began to say: no, it will be your turn later. Then the revolution declared, this revolution has been declared, (Castro rephrases) has been characterized by living up to everything it has ever said. It has been characterized by its seriousness and by its word. It said: there will be no more agrarian reforms. (applause) And simply, the process of laws and agrarian reforms lasted only until that moment. The bourgeois and the landlords used many things and many arguments. In general they would tell the peasant: this is socialism. Since it is socialism, they are going to socialize your land. We would come and tell the peasants: this is socialism and because it is socialism we are not going to socialize your land. (applause) Socialism is a realistic, scientific conception of society. Because the poor and exploited peasantry is precisely an ally of the working class--and since the poor and exploited peasantry is an ally of the working class--the peasant has to be treated like a revolutionary, like a comrade, like a friend, with all the political consideration he deserves. (applause) Because, what is a revolution? A social revolution is the close union of all the exploited against the exploiters. A peasant who was working his land and was paying rent and for lots of things was an exploited man. That peasant exploited no one. That peasant worked the land with his hands and he was exploited. That peasant, perforce, had to be an ally of the revolution, and in our revolution the peasantry played a very important role because the first guerrilla groups began to form in the mountains among the peasants. (applause) The arguments of the reactionaries trying to sow fear and confusion may have influenced some of them, but I believe that at this time there is no longer a single peasant who will let himself be deceived by any of those fairy tales. That is why we can speak in this language in which we understand each other perfectly well, with all frankness. (applause) We believe the solution of the revolution was a very good one, when it adopted the decision not to distribute the lands of the large estates, as well as when it adopted the decision to respect the methods of production of the poor peasants--to let them continue in the ways that they were using--and to make no attempt ever to socialize the small peasant. (applause) In particular, we recommended that cooperatives not be promoted. Why? Because if the cooperatives had been promoted, there would have spread--I do not refer to the credits and services cooperatives which you all know and have organized, but to the problem of joining the land holdings--there would have spread the campaign, the lie, that we wanted to socialize the peasants' land. Of course, it is unquestionable that a large area of land facilities production and productivity much more, but we said: "It does not matter. There are enough lands in the large estates filled with marabu and brush producing nothing. Therefore production can be increased extraordinarily even though productivity cannot be increased in the same manner among the small farmers due to the parceling of the land." Today we see with all clarify that this was the most correct policy that could have been employed. Does this perhaps mean that we believe in the system of small farms? No, we do not believe in it. Does this perhaps mean that we believe that maximum yield and productivity can be achieved through small parcels? No, it does not mean that. It means that the revolution follows a truly realistic policy, that the revolution follows a correct policy. And when a revolution follows a realistic policy, it shares the realities that exist in a country, it shares the situations that exist in a country. I--and this is something that happens to me a lot each time I tour the mountains--I suffer extraordinarily, I suffer extraordinarily because I have seen the colossal destruction wrought by man in the mountains. When I tour the Sierra Maestra, El Escambray, the mountains of the second front, many of the regions of the country, I cannot but feel sorrow to see how man has been destroying nature. And that nature is the nature from which other generations will have to live in 20, 50, or 100 years. That is the nature from which double, triple, four times, five times, ten times more people will have to live than are living today. One even asks himself: does it have the right to leave bare rocks for the future generations? And the answer, naturally, is that it does not have the right. One also asks: Does that Cuban, that peasant, bear the blame for having been forced to commit that crime against nature? No. No. Who was it, what was it that forced that human being, that man to climb to the top of a hill to fell the forest, to burn the timber, to plant anything for one year, two years, until the rain came and washed away the topsoil? What forced him to do this? Was he there because he wanted to be? Did he go there knowingly? No, he was forced by an inhuman social regime. He was forced by a social regime of exploitation. He was forced by a selfish social regime. That man, if he knocked on any door to beg for bread for himself or his children, no one gave him bread or work. That society condemned man to live any way he could, to die of hunger if he could not make a living. This was what forced great masses of men to take refuge in the mountainous regions as the population grew, and to begin there without any resources whatsoever, without roads, without credit, without anything, to plant anything in order to live. Of course, the population continued to grow, and when we traveled through the mountains during the war and we arrived in some truly inaccessible places and we saw a man working up there at 800 meters at an incline of 70 or 80 degrees, and we saw that man making that effort, we would way to ourselves: how many times have our peasants been slandered--they were called loafers, lazy. And to see that man almost in the clouds, almost tied down there so as to be able to plant anything. We would also say to ourselves: what will happen in this country when these few hills remaining (words indistinct) will all be occupied, all denuded, all eroded? Then all we will have left is the sea for refuge. When the revolution triumphed, there was practically not a single place where lands were not occupied. Those men were forced due to that social system to destroy a good part of the wilderness. Naturally, the forests had disappeared and, for example, we see that one of the most serious problems in our countryside is the problem of housing. It is a difficult problem that we will resolve because the new cement plants are being built for that purpose. But a board to make a door, to make a table, even on occasion to bury someone, is unavailable. How can it be available? To explain the lack of lumber in this country we have to tour the mountains, not to mention the plains. For a long time now not a single tree has stood in the plains. Such denuded lands in the mountains! Such denuded forests lands! There, where lands were unsuitable for farming, such as the pine forests, where the peasants therefore had not gone, there the land eaters came, there the lumber exploiters came planted not a single tree. Surely there are peasants here from the (?Alcarrasa), Pico Verde, Pino del Agua, and Pinalito areas who surely know the lands about which I am talking. These lands are generally literate lands, red lands where only pine trees grow. At present we have even learned to make these lands produce, as in the case of Pinares de Mayari. But naturally, these lands were denuded and nobody used them. However, this is unbelievable, on occasion we have seen some peasants who were so optimistic that they have planted vegetable plants and bananas in such pine forest hills. Of course, such banana trees which grow one meter, two meters long and bear no fruit and the vegetable plants no vegetables. In such lands, really, the most reasonable thing, the only reasonable thing, to do is to plant forests. And this is just what we are doing. I was saying that it is not that we created the small plots method as the ideal production methods, I was saying that the society compelled an undue use of the land. Many times it compelled a criminal use of the land. In the plains, it is not that the land is always used in the most correct way, it is that the effects of erosion in the plains are much more gradual, and, naturally, the same thing does not happen as in the mountains with many step sides from which in a short time the vegetation layer completely disappears. There are many lands with some erosion, but in general the effects of erosion do not occur in the same way as in the plains. (Words indistinct) that the most rational way, the most productive way, both for the land and work, is not the parcel way. However, our policy was to maintain the parcels, our policy was not to encourage the association of such lands. Our policy was to be patient, to fight to introduce technology even though it still is not sufficiently introduced within this production method, and to respect the will of the peasant to produce in the way that the peasant is used to, in the way that the peasant like to produce. The peasant has his mentality, many times he does not even want to have a neighbor near him. He is horrified at the idea of being made to live in a house that is next door to another. There are many peasants who (?feel) this way. They do not want to have any trouble with neighbors. They do not want trouble between the families of a neighbor and another neighbor. They do not want arguments. They feel utterly happy living alone, living isolated. Of course, this is not the ideal way to live, and often when one passes by one of these solitary places, one notes above all, the two classes of human beings who suffer most from this. They are the human beings who live in the great isolation that peasant families usually live in. Even we--one day we were touring--we, the comrade president and other comrades, were touring a place known as (Puriales--phonetic), (El Purio--phonetic), between Mayari and Moa. We saw very steep mountains, some pine tree forests. We were making some plans, and we went by one of those forest trails. After an hour and a half in the most inaccessible, remote place we found a mud dugout. And from that mud dugout, one and one-half meters high, there emerged a man, a women, and (?10) children. (laughter) It looked like those little circus cars that you have seen where half a dozen people emerge. And this happened there. A doctor was with us and began to inspect the children. They were yellow, rachitic. They began to explain the problem of the children: that they had parasites, that they spit out worms. Of course, the comrade doctor saw the problem, that it was a problem of parasites arising from the place where they lived. I told them--no vehicle ever passes by there--to take the children to the hospital. There was a hospital 15 kilometers away. (Words indistinct) but the doctor said: "Well, anyway, within a few weeks these children will be the same again." Those children were amazed when they saw a vehicle. Imagine--in the midst of the forest--it was a charcoal burner. Obviously not all situations are so extreme. But we always notice children. That is the problem of the children, that they have no place to play and that they live in isolation, and also the problems of women, the problem of washing, stoves, water which often has to be carried a long way, and in the mountains it is a tremendous problem. It is true that isolated life is the life the peasant prefers. The ones who suffer primarily are the children and the women of the peasants. I mean that this is not an ideal situation. But, of course, there is always a solution because there are schools, school plans, medical services, communications, mountain boarding schools. All in all there are a number of plans which can, even under these circumstances, improve the situation of the family and the children extraordinarily. However, our policy has always been and will always be one of absolute respect, absolute respect for the desire of that peasant to work in the manner which be believes best all the time that he believes it best. We ask: "Will there be small farmers within 40 years?" We say: "If within 40 years there are still peasants who wish to be alone, isolated, working with a yoke of oxen, with very low production, and he wishes to remain that way, we will leave him alone, even though it be 40, 50, or 100 years hence." (applause) Does this mean that they will remain forever? No, this will not remain forever. It will not remain forever, not because of any law of any type but because of the incredible, enormous development of agriculture in this country, the development of the Cuban society, the enormous development of technology, the enormous development of social programs and education programs. Already we see many cases of peasants who lived in the mountains with two sons in the army, two girls studying here on scholarships, another a nurse there, another a teacher over here, and they have been left alone. And they say: "Listen, I am very well. Everybody has left us and, really, we would like to move. We would like to sell." In the Sierra Maestra, since we did not want any illegal transactions, we decided to authorize the ANAP and we gave them the resources to buy and to make legal some illegal cases that were some years old. There were some who left their land and others took it over. We had many illegal cases. We legalized those cases all at once--some sales were made illegally. Then those who want to leave the mountains can sell to us, because if they do not, the same thing will continue to these mountains and we will always have the same problem of one leaving and another taking over, each time leaving less topsoil and the mountain barer. We will buy from those who want to sell. Now, who could have sold 10 years ago? Naturally, however, many peasants have their children studying technology. Do they have many chances to work on the plains? Not enough facilities. When they were authorized to sell, in a few weeks 4,000 peasants sold out. We had to ask the comrades of Havana: "Hold on. Hold on, hold on because you are going to leave the mountains unpopulated." Then the problem was something else: that all of a sudden the land was going to be uninhabited. And not only this. We said: "Buy from those who are alone, those who are very old, those who cannot work. If a peasant is young and he can work and he wants to sell, say 'No' that he must stay up there,that he is needed there, that the coffee must be cared for, that all that must be cared for." Well, some of them sold out and then they would set up some little fried food stand on some highway. Gentlemen, this is going backward. We are in fine shape if that peasant who is up there--even is he is producing little on a hillside, and truly we prefer to have him up there even if the hill deteriorates--becomes a fried food salesman and instead of the hill deteriorating the peasant deteriorates. Whoever ceases to be a producer with his work to become a salesman of fried food ceases to be a worker and becomes a businessman. But how easy that is to do any place here, with all the money the people have. It is something like what happens with the little taxicabs. In some places those jeep drivers--who know them better than you (laughter)--how much do they charge? How much do they charge? (shouting) Those who have a jeep? Unfortunately there is not enough transportation yet. Anybody with a jeep can get rich. Then an individual with a little car (laughter), with a jeep, can make 40 or 50 pesos a day. He can make three times more during the year. What am I saying--three times more? About 10 times more than a peasant who works half a caballeria of cane and works hard to do that. Then this man is privileged. Anybody who sets up a fried food stand--and he can do it with some of those caritas beans (laughter) and with a little bit of black market lard (laughter)--he says: "I get that little pig, I render some lard, I set up the fried food stand, and I make 50 pesos." Obviously, if everybody starts selling fried food nobody will make even 50 centavos. But for us it is going backward if a peasant comes down from the mountain and starts selling fried food. It is going backward. Another problem: they did not have housing. Then they built a ramshackle hut, a mud hut. We still do not have the means to say: "Look now, if you want to have a house for yourself, a boarding house, we can give you all this." That is why we tell the comrades of ANAP: "Hold on, hold on. This cannot be done in a hurry under any circumstances." If somebody was able to do it, it was because he was old, or because he wanted to retire, or because his children were in school and he wanted to live in the city or go to a farm or get a little house someplace and live on retirement income, closer to his children. It has to be done in an orderly way. It has to be done when it can be done. Comrade Pepe insisted to me: There are still many old peasants in the mountains. We must have authorization to resolve these problems, Comrade Pepe was saying to me a moment ago. Let us study the problem well. Make a list of all those concerned. What does this mean? That none of these historic problems that have been created, such as emigration from the mountains, the denuding of the mountains, can be resolved in one day. We have plans to reforest the mountains. We think that some day all the mountains will be reforested. Will there be a shortage of coffee plants in the mountains? No. Coffee will be a byproduct of the forests in the mountains. The forest will be the main thing. We are aspiring to the day when we can take to the peasant in the mountain--and the day is not distant--all he needs, even his vegetables. We will tell him, in other words: You do not have to plant banana trees there on the side of that hill. We will take bananas to him every day. The stores will have vegetables available, as well as all the grain, everything he needs. You will produce coffee and rare wood. You will care for the trees. In short, we are thinking about a long process to rebuild our mountains. The most necessary cases, as I was telling Comrade Pepe Ramirez, have to be studied, but they should not come down if they do not have a house to live in, because we cannot resolve anything, we cannot resolve any problem in this way. Therefore we have proposed that a very careful study be made of all the cases of peasants who want to leave the mountains. What does this mean? The development itself of the revolution, the new living conditions that are being created will progressively turn those lands in the mountains into forest lands, and in turn the lands will be turned over to the natural land fund. This explains why we, in cases where a peasant wants to sell in the plains, propose the option, on the part of the revolutionary government, of buying. We do not want to increase the number of small farmers. When somebody wants to sell, let him sell to the nation. Let the lands become state lands. What does this mean? That in a period of 30, 40, 50, 100 years, whatever number, the day will come when the ANAP will cease to exist. Does this worry you. (shouts: "No!") Who expects to live over 100 years? (laughter) You do understand what the policy is. Later we will talk a little about agriculture. Now we are talking about the revolution's policy regarding agriculture and agrarian reform. In other words, someday the result of the process--an evolutionary process--we expect, will be completely fulfilled as one of the most serious promises of the revolution without any further agrarian laws ever, and that through the process in which the sons of the peasants will become technicians and acquire other customs, another mentality, another conception. And this is happening now. We have had to send many youths to agriculture, while many sons of peasants are studying; and the son of a peasant who spoke here is no longer interested in small plots. It is not that he is not interested in small plots because he scorns that life. No, it is because he detests having to live again in the hut with the dirt floor; it is because he understands that he cannot grab a team of oxen to begin to produce food for the people, because with that team of oxen he is going to produce food only for himself, his family, and a few others. But how can you supply a population that doubles and triples in number unless machines are used? Of course, we are introducing machines, tractors, but are you going to use the planes? He already has that headache. Right now we are spreading urea on the sugarcane. This is a formidable procedure. A plane applies urea to 100 caballerias in one day. Do you know how many men are need to apply the same amount on the ground by hand? At least 2,000 men--2,000 men. And you need about 50 trucks to carry the 2,000 men. You need to set up 20 fertilizer dumps, 20 different locations. You have to ship the bags of fertilizer to all the fields. Besides, if it rains, the fertilizer has to be applied immediately because nitrogen has to be applied while the ground is wet. What happens? It rained this afternoon, but three days later that rain is lost because it is impossible to find tens of thousands of men to apply nitrogen right after it rains. With a plan, one man, a helper from the airfield, a single nitrogen dump, urea in this camp, one man piloting the plane, transport in a trailer to the airfield--in one day, and at the most opportune moment, when the soil is wet, the urea is applied to 100 caballerias. Last year, when urea began to be used, a pilot fertilized 160 caballerias in one day. Three thousand men could not have done that work. (applause) Of course, if the son of a peasant enters a technical institute, acquires all the modern techniques, reaches a conclusion and says: Gentlemen, when even the oxen have been or are getting liberated from work, how can a man keep on working like an ox? (laughter) And what does a man produce working like an ox? He produces slightly more than an ox, (laughter) for himself, for his family, working extremely hard. Peasants who now have had the opportunity, for example, of becoming familiar with the sugarcane loader--and if they are sugarcane men--will recall the time when they had to get up at two in the morning, yoke up the oxen, go to the field, load the cane, take it to the crane, return to the field, and cut cane all day so that they could take a load to the crane. The peasant had to work 15, 16, 17 hours. Did he become rich? No, he did not become rich. And he had to do work that the human body cannot take. Did the peasant die? No, he did not die, but how long did he live? The question is not "did he die?" but rather "how long did that man live who had to do such hard, brutal work?" Before, in the sugar harvest, the canecutters had to work 15 and 16 hours because the cane had to be cut and loaded canestalk by canestalk onto a cart. Can the people become rich cutting cane by hand by loading it canestalk by canestalk on a cart, working 15 and 16 hours? It also happened that there were so many people without work that they were not even allowed to work the 15 hours because the work was not enough to go around for so many people. Then they worked less. When they had the change they worked the 16 or 17 hours. A total or 40 million tons of sugarcane--40 million tons--yes, more of less, 40 million tons were loaded by the agricultural workers of this country, canestalk by canestalk onto the carts. Now more than half of the sugarcane is loaded by loaders, and this year the small farmers will have new loaders for the coming harvest. (applause) This means that the working conditions for men are being eased. Sugarcane is being loaded with machines. The day will come, the day will come, when all the cane will be cut by machinery because this is a problem that has to be solved. We have no other remedy but to solve it. We have to solve it and we will solve it. However, right now, all the sugarcane in Las Villas, Camaguey, and Oriente is going to be sprayed with foliar urea three times from an airplane. The peasants from the northern part of Oriente have perhaps seen the good results that urea has on sugarcane, how even our estimates of the amount of cane were short, how that sugarcane turned green, how it grew. However, now that the problem has arisen, we are going to spray urea. And are we going to spray the small farmers' cane from the airplanes also? Then the problem arises: It is impossible because the airplane has to become a cricket hopping from field to field. What are we going to do? We are going to give them ammonium nitrate. With one ton of urea sprayed from a plane we calculate that we increase production by the same amount as would result from four tons of ammonium nitrate spread in the rows. This means that by applying it by hand we have to use four times more fertilizer. Of course, the airplane--supposing that it sprays 50 caballerias per day on the average--does the work of 1,000 workers per day. That is where we have problems. There is a technique which could save us an enormous amount of work and it cannot be used. Man has to do it, the small farmer has to work like an ox, spreading fertilizer along each row, and a machine as formidable as an airplane cannot be used to do the same work with one one-thousandth of the effort that that man is putting out. I explain all of this to you so that you will understand why the son of a peasant who comes here and enters a technical institute, graduates from the institute, has the change to continue studying in a university, says: "No, I am not going to work like an ox." And he does not return to the small farm. That is unquestionable. He does not return and his attitude is proper. What does this mean? It means that the time will come when there will not be a single peasant's son who is not a technician. The best proof of this is the fact that the technical institutes this year will receive 40,000 students, and in 1970--and this is a plan that has been expanded--there will be 100,000 students in the technical institutes. In 10 more years, (applause) in 10 more years there will not be a single youth from the rural areas in this country who does not have a junior high school education and a technical qualification. Do you understand that this is the road? Do you understand why we must wait 10, 20 and 30 years? Do you understand that a realistic revolution has to understand the realities of today's reality if our peasants and tomorrow's reality will be your children? The reality of tomorrow will be technicians like this one who will graduate from our technical institutes and will take university courses. They are going to be richer than you, of course, because they will produce 8, 10, 15, 20 times more than you with one-tenth the work you do. They will use the airplane in large numbers, machinery, modern techniques; the rural areas will be completely electrified. The ox will no longer work. Horses will work, that is, horsepower in tractors, in electrical machinery. (applause) If all the water from a deep well pumped for irrigation had to be carried bucket by bucket we would be in terrible shape. Would we produce everything we needed? Would there be enough food for all these people? Today a motor works with fuel. It can work with electricity. But we will have to put all machines, all technology, all electricity, all power, everything to produce for man. That time is far away, but not too far. The day will come when there will not be any miserable huts in our country. There are many still, many miserable huts in our country. And in the same way as when we see our eroded mountains, we suffer when we see so many mud huts in the rural areas. Sometimes there is not even enough thatch, and there is not enough thatch because it is needed in the poultry farms, the dairies, and many other things. As you know, the coffee plans are gigantic and the quantity of thatch that has been taken to the coffee nurseries is gigantic. There is not enough thatch from the royal palms. If too many fronds are cut off, then there are no royal palm nuts. There is not enough thatch from the palms. And, naturally, the number of houses in very poor condition is great. Some day our rural areas will be electrified. Some day all our areas will be filled with towns where they have running water, electricity, gas stoves, in which the children will not have to walk two kilometers. They will go to school. In the morning, they will have their breakfast there, their lunch, and their dinner. They will spend the day at school and will return home at night. There will be no more need for the wooden bowl. There will be no more need to carry water. (applause) The little candle and the lantern will be things of the past. The children's life will become a thousand times better. The women's living conditions will be incomparably better. However, who are the ones to enjoy this? You? Your own children. It will be your own children because they will be the ones who will adapt themselves. They will understand all the advantages of a different way of producing things. What of the present day farmers? The peasants will continue to live as they are. They are not having a bad life, of course. Living conditions will improve for the farmers. They will have improved communications. There will be many more schools and many more of everything. I have pictured for you two eras, a distant one and a current one. I have tried to give you an idea of how, in my opinion, the rural areas of the future will look within 20 years, when new generations will apply technology and will work and produce differently than we produce today. There are many farmers who own a very small piece of land. Some farms are semiproletarian. When (?the farm gets populated), many farmers immediately leave for town. If living conditions are bad, living conditions are worse still in the huts. There are still tens of thousands of workers in the sugarcane farms living in rustic huts with their families. There are tens of thousands of workers living in barns. Our construction efforts should logically be directed toward creating improved living conditions for these workers. It is true that the farmers are still housed poorly, but the farmer has resolved many problems which the workers in the sugarcane farms have not solved. Moreover, they are helping the economy considerably with their work. It is logical for the mass of material to be invested currently--and I believe that you recognize this to by very fair--in improving in living conditions of workers who are toiling on farms. (applause) You might now say: Well, these are problems of the future. What about today's problems? In today's picture, what is expected of us? What is required of us? How are we to produce? How are we going to get the most from our efforts, the utmost? How are we going to make our lands yield the most for our families as well as for the country? These are today's problems which concern us the most--what we want, what we expect from the small farmers how we believe farming will develop. Some years ago, farms looked shameful. A bunch of people with no experience--and we have explained this on several other occasions--without experience, sometimes merely with a good disposition--maintained the farm in deficient production. They were poor farms. The farms have, of course, received the most resources. The farmers have been given greater resources because we want to grant the farms privileges over and above what we have given the peasants. We had the largest tracts of nonproducing land on the farms, covered with manigua and marabu. Speaking quite frankly, the food that was being produced on the farm was much more certain than the food produced among the farmers. We will explain. There are many kinds of farmers. There are farmers who are extremely honest, who work tenaciously, and who do not want to get rich by selling their goods at three or four times their value. There are farmers, especially those living near the cities, who would sell an egg for 30 centavos. If they raised a hen, they would sell it for five pesos-or perhaps 10, as the case might be. Witness the policy of the revolution: The revolution has not even prohibited the peasants from doing this. Any peasant who wants to, can stand on the highway and start selling guarapo, a hen, or anything he wishes. No one will interfere. Sometimes, things sell for five times their value. There are many little carts near the large cities carrying their little jugs. This is (?done freely). (Their owners--ed.) buy 5 or 10--3 or 4--liters of milk (words indistinct), and is sold four times higher. Gentlemen, you understand perfectly that the (word indistinct) can pay one peso for a liter of milk, but the (word indistinct) costs him more--if he steals it. We might as well be frank. (applause) Anyone who sells lollypops anywhere can get 50 pesos. He can make 50 pesos. These people buy a liter of milk. They can buy this, that, or the other. Not all peasants have this concept of their social obligations. Some speculate calmly, and their conscience does not bother them. What is our policy with speculators? To be calm. Will we imprison anyone for practicing this form of robbery, which is speculation? No! No, this is not our way of handling things. Anyone who wants to stand on the highway and ask 100 pesos for a glass of guarapo, let him do it. Let him sell his guarapo for 100 pesos. Anyone who wants to stand on the highway and sell a liter of milk for a peso, it matters not that he sells the liter of milk for one peso. I will explain to you the way to solve this problem. It is simple; it is easy. The day will come when this individual will run after the milk truck as it goes by and shout: "Say, do not leave me the milk here!" (applause) You know why? I will tell you. The day will come when fruit, vegetables, and even milk will be distributed free of charge to all of the people. (applause) We know--we know what we are going. we know the future levels of production in this country within a few years. We know how many cows are being artificially bred. We know how many calves are being born. We know how much milk is produced by the first cross of the Holstein with the Zebu cattle, and we can estimate--we can estimate--and we know the quality of milk that can be produced, as well as the quantities of fruit. We know how many coffee plants we are planting. The time will come, gentlemen--the time will come when we will be able to give the people a choice of coffee in the marketplace, free of charge. (applause) Why? Gentlemen, the plans for coffee that we are making are so serious that it is enough to say that we will plant more than 200 million plants (words indistinct). Between now and 1970, we will plant over one billion coffee plants. (applause) (words indistinct) And when we reach the point where we are producing millions and millions of coffee bags, then no one will have to board a bus, resort to 20 tricks to get the bus driver to allow that individual to put (coffee-ed.) up on top by bribing him with a small pound of coffee, bring it down, and speculate with it. We will not have the peasant of old. Today we take the farmer fertilizer, we hand him credit, we build roads for him, and offer him free medical service--everything free. Many times we have to plead with him--listen (?leave us) a small sack of coffee because the (words indistinct) men must also drink coffee. Sometimes we find some peasants in the mountains who say: These shoes are old. (words indistinct) but you drink coffee seven times a day. You drink coffee seven times a day, and the worker who makes shoes--poor thing--would like you to send him a little bit more coffee. Each person has his task to do. (applause) I simply want to explain clearly to the peasant comrades all these things which are true. Hypocrisy would be rampant if we did not understand each other--if we came here to bring out only the good, all of the virtues, all of the merits, all of the patriotism of our peasants without bringing out at least some of the defects of some of the peasants. (words indistinct) (applause) Very well, the day will come when the peasants from Victoril, or from Matias, or from Bernardo in the Paleneque area, or from (?Bayaste) in the Guantanamo area will witness the speed with which the brigades are building roads and highways. Be August, we plan to have 40 brigades building roads in the mountains and in the fields--40 brigades. Therefore, our fields will be crisscrossed by roads. Trucks will travel over these roads, and the peasants will then be able to put up a sign that will read "Please stop here to pick up so many coffee bags." Why? Because there will be surplus coffee. Suffice it to say that we will plant 100,000 hectares of citrus fruit--with irrigation. We are already starting to plant them. Among those 100,000 hectares of citrus fruit, we will plant coffee. Suffice it to say that in the enormous (?areas of) reforestation in many places where the soil is favorable, we will plant coffee also. Therefore, when the citrus fruit trees grow (words indistinct), forest coffee plants will produce (words indistinct). I believe it is a very wise idea to eliminate the (?paperwork). The people are not going to be educated (?through paperwork), gentlemen, in their duties and their obligations by turning them into petty lawyers. (applause) "You signed here. I have one more liter of milk here. I have a liter less here." We have been patient. We believe that this is good. This gives us a moral authority. This gives us the right to speak out frankly, in all sincerity. We know the path whereby all of these problems of speculation will disappear. The egg is a good example. What has happened to the egg will happen to everything else, even with poultry. We will someday produce a hen which will amaze this country. We are not doing it now because we (?are concentrating) first on the egg, which is more easily distributed. However, we are in the process of increasing production. With all the exportable surplus this country will have in the years ahead, we shall be able to produce chickens--as we are producing eggs today--in astronomical quantities. Then the sale of chickens on the roadside will disappear. The sale of chickens will disappear because when a citizen is given the products he needs--and in many cases these products will be in enormous quantities--an end will be put to (words indistinct) he will not buy. He will be given it. Already this year, when there was a surplus of white cabbage, it was distributed free. If this year we have a citrus fruit surplus--for we are fertilizing 4 million citrus fruit plants--when there is a surplus of citrus fruit, it will be distributed free. The policy which will be followed in distribution is that whenever a surplus of one of these products is produced it is to be distributed free to the population. (applause) We are socialists (applause) We are not capitalists. There you will begin to see the great difference. When capitalism had a surplus, because the people had no money, it was dumped. So things were being dumped, on the one hand, and people were dying of hunger on the other hand. Here, the path of communism is the path in which not only is education given free, as it is being given today; medical care, which is already being given free today; housing, for which most of the people already do not pay, but also, little by little, gradually, as production is increased through the use of technology, through the work of all the people (leaves sentence unfinished--ed.) Some people are going to ask how coffee will be harvested (words indistinct) it is going to be harvested through schools in the fields, through the thousands of secondary schools we are going to have throughout the country, where the students will combine work with study--because there is no better way to educate a man than to teach him very young to work. Someone has said: Won't we invent a machine to harvest coffee? We answer: We would do damage to education. We cannot mechanize everything. If we mechanize everything, how are we going to give a young man an idea of what work is? We shall have to leave many things (unmechanized--ed.), but not the most difficult--canecutting, road construction. This is hard work. But the work of picking oranges, harvesting coffee--these little tasks, particularly with these coffee plants which are going to be among the citrus plants on completely level ground, this work can be done by boys without any trouble. So what will this coffee cost? Well, it will require fertilizer. We shall export part of the coffee and we shall import the fertilizer. Irrigation of the citrus plants will require some fuel. We shall import some fuel with what we get for exports. What else? To pick it is part of a boy's education, so that they will not become--imagine, from proletarians they would become aristocrats. (laughter) They would now know what it is (?to pick coffee.) Really, although man aspires to increase production, to use machines, we must also wish man not to lose contact with nature. So all the youth in our country, all of them, will receive an education in which work will be combined with study. Therefore, we can do all this kind of cultivation. The capitalists cannot do it because they have no way to do it. They would have to pay. They have the marketing problem. We will have no marketing problem. How much coffee will we produce? Enough for the free consumption of the people, let us say. (words indistinct) We who are responsible for the health of this people, we think that it is consuming a great deal of coffee. (laughter) The people are very nervous. There is much insomnia among the population--health standards, average age, and so forth and so forth (laughter). There is much marital discord, because marriages are disturbed by the excessive use of coffee (laughter, applause). (Words indistinct) We shall argue, who not a great campaign advising people not to consume coffee? We are going to (words indistinct) to distribute coffee (words indistinct). The day will come, gentlemen, when as the result of increased production, money will be worth nothing. (applause) Of course, since we were born we have been taught to value money. You find yourself anywhere, in any field, in any little town, (words indistinct). There is almost no one who does not value money, who does not want money, because money buys everything. (shouting) This is how everyone will live in the future, here, right here. (applause) Man is taught very early to value this thing called money. It is an intermediary between man and what man produces. Man works. One produces potatoes here. He is given money so that with the money given him for the potatoes he may buy milk, coffee, sugar, clothing, tobacco, everything else. This one produces coffee. He must be given money so that with the money given him for the coffee he may buy potatoes, milk, and so forth--less coffee if he drinks (?too much) and sometimes (words indistinct--laughter). Another produces clothing, and with the money for the clothing he produces, he then buys potatoes, milk, coffee, everything else. The money is an intermediary. We should have more scornful term for it. We should say that while intermediary between man and the products that man creates. The day will come when a man will produce and turn in his potato crop and get nothing for it. Then he will go and get in return for it coffee, rice, sugar, clothes, shoes, and everything he needs. Then we shall suppress that vile intermediary which is money. That is communism. (applause) Thus, in explaining this to you small farmers, there might be some one among you who say: "Well, although I am 80 years old, I feel young." That is even better. (laughter) You may have a better life at 80. He may ask: "I am a small farmer, what do I do? Can I be a small farmer under communism? We tell him: "yes, if you want to, but how do you want to live?" He replies: "Well, let them pay me for what I produce." We ask: "What are you going to do with the money? This would mean placing lists in all the markets with the names of those who cannot get things free because they get money for their goos. We cannot do that. We cannot indicate on that list that mister so and so, of such and such address is deprived of all rights and has to pay for everything he gets. We ask him: "Look here, you want to sit down all day?" He replies in the negative. We ask him: "Why?" And he replies: "Well, because I have spent my entire life working, getting up at five in the morning, and I cannot live without working." This is what many peasant say; they say they cannot live sitting down. We tell him: "Listen, you have to go to the doctor, see if you have to g to a hospital." He replies: "No, I do not want to go to the hospital. Every day of my life, I get up at a certain hour and I am not dying. Why should I go to a hospital?" We reply: "Well then, if you cannot sit down, then keep on working. Turn in all your products, and when you go to the store you will not have to pay for anything you need." What am I trying to tell you? I am trying to say that the day will come when man will work out of habit. You must understand that we are not going to create a millionaire mentality in all these children, or a lazy man mentality, or the mentality of a parasite. Naturally, you and I are discussing here a matter affecting the small private farmers amid a socialist revolution. We are discussing the subject of communism. I want you to know that this subject of communism is very complex. It is complex because it frightens? No, because many people are not afraid of anything. It is complex because there are many people who have heard many lies about communism and who have many doubts about how to attain communism? We have no doubts about it. In a recent tour of our rural areas, we have seen our youths. What is the news from Oriente, Camaguey, Guane, Las Villas, and everywhere? What was being said at Guane? The girls helping the technicians were working there at different tasks with great joy. We said to ourselves that it is impressing and admirable. To give you an idea of what 2,000 of those girls did in Guane, suffice it to say that every one of you has five citrus trees growing in Guane--each one of you. (applause) You may ask: "Are you going to have those girls sow cane?" We reply: "No, because they have cane there, and (?they) will send you the oranges, the refreshments, the things you need." Everyone of you has five trees growing there. There are about 40 million trees there. When we saw this, we said to ourselves: "Well, these comrades come from humble origins, generally speaking, and they have a certain maturity." However, when we went to Banao, we found out that the university girls had been just as successful. When we arrived in Camaguey, the party comrades and those in charge of agriculture told us what impressive things the students were doing. (Words indistinct) these girls have left the party leaders and those in charge of agriculture impressed with their attitude toward work. The joy and enthusiasm they have shown for work is incredible. No one has paid them. They have not received a single penny. This means that a new generation is arising--a generation that looks at work with different concepts. Those who are sowing citrus trees or coffee plants there, or who are fertilizing a banana grove or cane, know that they are creating wealth. Wealth for whom? Wealth for (?themselves). On some occasions, we met a group of girls in a citrus grove, and we asked them: "What are we going to do with so many citrus trees?" They replied: "Export the fruit, give it to the people." In other words, their reply to the question of what are we going to do with all this or that was "give it to the people." They are already beginning to understand that the people are the only ones to benefit from everything that is done, built, created. They are beginning to understand it with great clarity. The new generation will grow up with very different concepts. This new generation will grow up having a very different concept of vile money. Capitalism thinks of money in terms of bill but for different reasons. It is crazy about money. We consider it vile (vil) and the Americans also consider it bill. (There is a play on words here: Castro contrasts the meaning of the Spanish word "vil" to that of the English word "bill"--ed.) (laughter) That is, bill with a capital "B". We call it vil with decorum. Money is the intermediary between man and man's products. This new generation grows up with different concepts, and the production figures will permit us to do that. Therefore, can there be small framers under communism? Yes. If anyone should ask himself that question and wonder how he can live under communism, we say that he can live as he does not with one difference. He will not pay for anything he needs. Such a man might ask: "Well, if I do not have to pay for anything, what am I going to do with this paper?" Well, (?you can turn those bits of paper in) and get what you need. You can get cigarettes, matches, clothes, or cigars. Someone will ask: "Is there enough clothing for everyone?" The answer is that there is enough of what you need. At most, the comrade in charge of production may tell you: "Listen here, no more free clothing is being distributed because every women is purchasing 25 dresses." (words indistinct) Recently, we were able to see several different high quality items of clothes made of synthetic fiber produced from cane bagasse. Just think how much bagasse in this country can be converted into fiber. Imagine the amount of clothes that can be made. You may say: "All right. However, I want to wear a woolen skirt, and we have no sheep here." Well, sir, we can send synthetic fiber to where they have wool and get it, because if they have sheep there they do not have bagasse. (applause) This is an example, because wool is not of much use here. It is usually a warm country. However, I do want to say that the technical possibilities are incredible--really incredible. The production possibilities are limitless. What is needed to achieve them? What we need is for the people to work, for everybody to work. Many women are joining the labor ranks as the day nurseries are built and as new activities that they can do well are opened. In the future, the entire population will work. Of course, the old folks, the ill, and the very small children will not be working. The entire population will be like a huge anthill--a huge beehive which, helped by know-how, will be capable of producing everything that man needs and more. For example, beginning in 1970, our country expects to build 70,000 or 100,000 houses a year. (applause) Will these houses be sold? No. Who will get these houses? Those who need them. Will they have to pay a penny for it? No. Even if it is worth 5,000 pesos? No! Even now, as a new (?settlement) is built on a ranch, the people pay nothing for the house. Almost all of them pay for water, and I think they are now going to decide not to collect for water anywhere. Someday there will not be a charge for electricity, either. One hundred thousand homes a year! Before, if one wanted a house, one had to win it in a lottery. Perhaps, one could win a soap contest, which gave away one house a month. One would have to win the singing soap contest to win. How many people dreamed of having a little house, a roof over the head, "a roof for my happiness," and so forth and so on! Ladies and gentlemen, the revolution has been creating these "roofs," not many of them, unfortunately, because only some 7, 8, or 10 thousand houses have been distributed. These are not many, but no one had to win them in a raffle. Beginning in 1970, 100,000 families will receive a "roof" every year. In 10 years, this will amount to 1 million houses. A house is a bit of wealth that man creates with his labor, that is built by those who produce the cement, those who produce the (?frames), and those who transport the materials. You might ask who is going to build all these houses--the construction workers and the machines. Prefabrication methods will be used to a great extent. We will have prefabricated homes which will be produced on a mass-production scale. If we had to build each of these houses brick upon brick, (?it would be impossible). The solution of the problems lies exactly in the use of machines and know-how. Thus, our country will be solving all these problems with the help of the entire laboring population and with the help of know-how. Comrade peasants, I decided to use some of the time of this third congress to talk to you about these matters which I suppose are of interest to all of you. (applause) However, we still have today's problems. What do we want from you, and what are we doing to achieve what we hope to get from you? It is necessary that the land which you own must yield maximum production--the maximum production. (applause) What are we doing about this--so that the land can yield maximum production and so that you, with the use of machinery, as far as is possible, and with the use of technology, can obtain the maximum production for the work done and the maximum production from the land? We have some illustrative examples. Practically all of the mountain coffee plantations are already producing from 50 to 60 quintals per caballeria. Over a year ago the plan for applying technological processes to coffee production was begun--the massive application of fertilizers, the pruning of coffee trees, the replanting of coffee trees, the use of more productive varieties of coffee trees, and, in conclusion, intense work with coffee production was begun. Now, 27,000 coffee growing small farmers from Oriente Province are presently using the method, and coffee production is growing fast, not as a result of new plantings but from the old coffee plants of which we have between 11,000 and 12,000 caballerias. It is a shame to produce 60 or 70 quintals per caballeria. It is perfectly easy and possible to produce 200 quintals of coffee per caballeria which do not amount to more than 20 quintals of coffee per caro, as the peasants call them. Of course, since fertilizer has begun to be used, the peasants have only one phrase to explain this--the coffee trees are like new, the coffee trees are like new. We have talked to hundreds of peasants and have asked them about the effect of fertilization on the coffee trees. They say: "Look, these coffee trees were old. They are 15 years old. They were dead and now they are like new." If the peasants, with the use of fertilizer, have seen the rejuvenation of their coffee plantations,and a peasant that lives around San Lorenzo de Cespedes whom we met on the last tour that we took around Oriente Province in the Sierra Maestra heights, told me--he is a peasant farmer, a good farmer, who uses the methods well--he told me: "Listen, you said that we were going to reach the 2 million quintals in 1970." I said, "yes." He said: "But we are going to reach them in 1969. We are going to reach them in 1969." Yes. How come? "Look, I was only producing 300 quintals, by 1967 (words indistinct), by 1968 so much, and by 1969 I will be producing 800 quintals." Yes. He had seen the results of fertilization in the coffee plantations, the increase in production, the blooming of the trees, how the flowers stuck on the trees, how the bean stuck, and how everything stuck. And this peasant was telling the truth. This peasant was saying the truth. The goal of 2 million quintals in 1970 will be amply overfulfilled. It is with the old coffee plantations, with the old coffee plantations alone, that we will achieve the 2 million quintals. Some peasants have found this out and above all there is something interesting--practically 100 percent of the peasants are applying fertilization. Everytime that some of these methods are introduced, there are some peasants who are more advanced and they begin to test. There are other peasants more weary who wait to see that happens. And of course, the effects have been so unbelievable that 100 percent of the peasants (words indistinct) are fertilizing the coffee trees. Well now, a similar thing is being done with the tobacco. There is a series of principles which must be applied to the peasant agriculture. First, it is necessary that peasants everywhere be producers of everything. Let me explain this. One of the worst thing that can be seen when one tours the countryside is the lack of specialization in the peasants. The peasants should specialize themselves in one, two, or three products, but mainly in one product. What does this mean? Some peasants should basically be tobacco growers. These are the peasants who have grown tobacco most of their lives in the valley of Pinar del Rio, Santa Clara, and in different places. Other peasants should basically be coffee growers, others should be livestock raisers, others should be vegetable growers, others should be fruit growers. In other words, we must try to see that the peasant should not have a variety of products, all that mixture and that each one has a specialty. Sometimes the peasant is not to blame for the lack of specialization that can be seen. We are partly to blame. It is true that there are regions where coffee has been produced and they still continue to produce coffee. But there was a region, for example in Oriente, where the peasants produced beans. These were the peasants of Velasco, a region with the best climatic conditions for the production of beans. All of a sudden, there was a lack of papayas and the price of papayas went up. All of a sudden the supply (department--ed.) sets such and such a price for papayas and the peasants of Velasco started to add things up. Beans take so much work, bring such problems. If I plant papayas, I will earn ten times more. And the Velasco peasants began to quite growing beans and started growing papayas. What king of business could the country have with this? We had to spend foreign currency to import beans because, instead of planting beans, papayas were being grown. Gentlemen, the papayas are a type of crop so easy to grow that with a little fertilizer, irrigation, and a good variety of papaya, more papayas can be produced in 100 caballerias than can be produced by 10,000 peasants planting small plots of papayas. In addition, in order to gather these papayas, the trailers must be converted to trolleys. They will have to look for a quintal of papayas here, there, and there. We will have sent a man with a piece of paper from supply, contract, what have you--all these things. (applause and laughter) We have produced to a few groups that they produce all that papaya because there are a few crops that have incorrectly been assigned to the peasants, some crops which have been stimulated by some sky-high prices. There was a shortage of placero tomatoes and up went the price of placero tomatoes. Of course, there are some peasants who have always grown placero tomatoes. Very well, those who have grown these, give them the right to continue growing placero tomatoes. But all of a sudden some peasants who grew sugar cane saw that their neighbors, in two or three cordeles and with a lot less work, earned much more money than they did with 50 cordeles of sugar cane. It did not matter that a sugar mill was being built or expanded there, that all the necessary things were there, all of a sudden the peasant would say no, no, I will plow under the sugar cane which costs a lot of headaches and will start growing placero tomatoes. Of course, if everybody started growing placero tomatoes there would be an oversupply of placero tomatoes and they would not be worth a half cent. These are capitalistic methods. How did one work during the capitalistic times? There is a surplus of this, so I will not grow this. I am going to grow that in which there is a shortage. Everybody goes crazy growing this, and then this becomes surplus so they quite growing it and start growing something else. We cannot start to grow thing under the conditions in which the capitalist produced things. We must say that supply, we cannot blame supply for everything, but the price policy which was followed was incorrect. (applause) There is a lack of carrots, we discuss it with two or three groups and all the carrots needed to build a mountain of carrots are produced. We cannot start to stimulate the growing of carrots here, the placero tomatoes there, the beets over there, and the papayas here, because gentlemen, this involves infinite confusion, problems, and headaches. The peasant who traditionally has grown something which he knows, that to which he is used to, it is understandable that he may become disenchanted with what he is doing or that he believes that he is working more and is earning much less than that other. Actually, the peasant who has traditionally grown tobacco, let him continue to plant tobacco, improving his methods and raising production. The one who has grown hay, that has livestock, let him continue to develop his livestock. The one who has grown vegetables, let him continue to grow vegetables, the one who has grown rice, let him continue to grow rice. The one who has grown potatoes, let him continue to grow potatoes. The one who has grown sugar cane, this is a different problem. There is one problem with the sugarcane and that is why I had not included it here, not that I had forgotten about it. (word indistinct) I have been giving you all these examples (words indistinct). The peasants of Velasco have done very well. We talked with them, they have been given opportunities, and all continue growing beans. They are all enthused with the bean production and the task to raise production per caballeria. Of course, it is not enough simply to set a policy, to establish a correct policy on prices, and have some lectures. It is not enough to tell the peasants that they should not produce papayas, start growing beans again. No, this is not enough. We must go there to talk to them, ask them what they need, how many machines? Do you have fertilizer? How to apply fertilizer. Irrigation can be used to that they can produce during a drought too. How to use a formula here? Where to get irrigation equipment? We must have the resources. We believe that what the tobacco growers must do is to work to apply organic material, fertilizer, irrigation. There is a whole program for tobacco involving the construction of small hydraulic works to increase the production of tobacco considerably, doubling or tripling its yield through the use of organic matter, fertilizer, and irrigation. There is a whole plan for tobacco as there is for coffee and we must make these the principal products of the country. Of course, the peasant wants to produce something else for his own consumption. Fine! That a peasant who is a coffee producer, should also want to produce for his own consumption is fine. I assure you, from what I have been able to ascertain, to see in all the fields, that with a few well-tended cordeles, with the use of fertilizers, any peasant can produce all he needs for his family, everything he needs. In other words, each peasant can have a principal crop--tobacco, coffee, cattle, fruits and vegetables--and, at the same time, have a portion of his land, if he wants, devoted to producing what he needs for his own consumption. With a commercial crop as his principal crop and then crops for his own consumption, often the peasant uses too large an area for the cultivation of produce for his own consumption with a very low yield. Often the peasants use 40 cordeles to supply themselves with what they need at home when they could get along with 10 cordeles by using fertilizer. Naturally, this must be accompanied by a policy on the part of the revolution. The revolution is distributing fertilizers, pushing the use of fertilizer in all crops. Sometimes there is a banana growing region. There are 500 caballerias of bananas, (words indistinct) this is a small farmer, or we find a mixture of crops, a malanga here, corn there, a banana there, a pig here, a cow there. Why does this peasant not cultivate bananas since the whole region is a banana growing area? Then he could leave part of the area for his own consumption, the planting of malanga if he wants to, corn, if he wants, (words indistinct) whatever he wants, planting bananas (?over most of the land) so that if the planes pass over and fumigate and fertilize his banana crop (words indistinct) take care of it, because this piece of land is abandoned, either because he has no resources or because he makes his living mainly from other work and similar (words indistinct). This means that we must seek to have the peasants specialize in certain crops, as they have not done up to now. In some crops they have made much progress, as in the case of coffee. In the mountains, our policy will be different. We want to bring to the peasants through the communications network which is being built, everything they need from the plains, so that they will not have to cultivate in the mountains bananas, corn, and 20 more such items. Now how do they plant in the mountains? Is is an infallible thing. They plant with the slope. I have not yet seen in the mountains a single peasant who (?does otherwise). I have seen just one in the mountains. Bananas they plant (?from below). I asked why. One said it is easier to walk. Another said water comes if I plant this way and carries the seed, or because (words indistinct) for whatever reason, there is not a single peasant in the mountains who does not plant with the slope. Collection centers have been established in some of the mountains. We came (words indistinct) and we saw the banana plants here and there. What is this crop, a commercial crop? Yes. To whom is it sold? To the collection centers. Is it right, in these mountains where Hurricane Flora left scarcely any top soil, to plant bananas when we are planting hundreds of caballerias of bananas with irrigation in the plains. There are more than 500 caballerias of banana land planted in the Cauco Valley. By next year there will be 2,000 caballerias of banana growing land. (applause) There will be 2,000 caballerias of banana plantings in the Cauco Valley. (more applause) It will be every easy to bring to the peasants in the mountains all the bananas they need, and if they don't grow bananas they can grow coffee. The policy has been wrong. The planting of bananas has been encouraged up there. We have been talking with the communities, asking that they choose land to produce malanga because there is a theory that malanga can be produced in the mountains and malanga can be produced perfectly well in the plains. We are looking for land in order not to ask the peasants to plant malanga in the mountains. In other words, in the mountains we are going to follow the policy of supplying the peasant with everything he needs, including fruits and vegetables, so that the peasant will produce coffee in the mountains. Now that coffee is being planted as (?vine-stock) we have been recommending (?the planting) of gandul between the coffee plants. Gandul is not a crop. It is a plant. It protects the soil from erosion. It produces a grain which serves for human consumption or for livestock. (Castro appears to be talking with bystanders--he continues) We have been recommending (words indistinct) which feed chickens. If it is planted among the new coffee plantations on a curve with three meters between (?plants) gandul beans can be planted there, fertilized, and it serves to feed pigs and chickens, and for direct consumption when it is fresh. Many peasants eat it with rice. It is correct not to plant corn in the mountains. Another type of crop must be planted which makes work easier and does not destroy nature. Finally, I said at the beginning that very little is known about agriculture. I want to add, with the exception of--a few peasants, there are some very curious peasants (leaves sentence incomplete--ed.) We on the border of Camaguey and Las Villas, on the border of the Jatibonico, met a peasant who impressed us. He had a small citrus fruit plantation. He had planted everything. He had done everything. He had a magnificent production. (Castro apparently talks to the crowd) This peasant who planted cedars, citrus fruit plants, and (?pasture-land) there, was making a turbine there with great labor, he was (words indistinct) a motor. He sought fertilizer (words indistinct) he was applying technology there with admirable tenacity. This was a real farmer, this peasant. On entering the La Monteria in the Sierra Maestra, we found the rare example of a peasant who had had the (?initiative) to plant a mahogany tree, a "baria," a cedar, various fine wood trees, (words indistinct) (applause) This peasant had planted several dozen trees. He had done something very rewarding. To see so many forests destroyed without anyone planting (words indistinct). The peasant was declared exemplary peasant of the region. (passage indistinct) A passion for planting fine wood trees has developed, so that the comrades in the Manzanillo area (passage indistinct). It is not enthusiasm which is lacking. There is abundant enthusiasm, but proper guidance is missing. Proper guidance is what is missing. (applause) The lack of guidance is not lack of good faith. It is the result of all the accumulated ignorance in this country. I want to give you an example. Today I was talking with a group of comrades who are promoting the cultivation of pines. (?We asked) about seed because the development of pines is limited by the quantity of seed. They told us a new technique has been found for planting pines. The trunk of the plant is cut and crossed and at least 12 (?sprouts) come out from the trunk. I asked how. They showed (?me some samples). But no one knew about this here. In a technical magazine which arrived (words indistinct) I said, is it possible, in this country where there are at least (?some) people who claim to be agronomists, and no one knew this? No one knew it. It is as simple as Columbus' famous egg. (laughter) From the cutting of the pine, it could be reproduced and no one knew it. It is incredible the number of things we did not know and even what we do not know yet. This is why correct guidance does not exist. Correct instructions often have not been given because of ignorance. But, as I was telling you, in the Jibaro and (?La Monteria) area we had to say to the comrades: "patience." Why did we say this? We were thinking of bringing a great forestry development plan to the Sierra Maestra in 1969. We were thinking of creating nurseries throughout the Sierra of from 200 to 300 million seedlings of fine wood trees so that the peasants who wished to plant them might take them. But now, in 1967 and 1968, we are working on coffee. We are applying technology to the production of coffee, replanting the coffee plantations, developing the coffee plantations. If into this coffee plan which we are carrying out in 1967 and 1968, we introduce at this time a forestry plan, one thing will interfere with another. I say no. It will continue in this region as a pilot plan while (words indistinct). It is our intention to take transplanted trees to the peasants free and to give them fertilizer free, since forest trees require 10 or 12 years before they produce, not more. We believe that a mahogany tree, a "baria," a cedar--any of these trees--can be cut perfectly well in 12 years if we fertilize them. However, we intend to carry out a plan in the Sierra Maestra. We are also going to undertake a plan in the mountains area of Escambray beginning in 1969. We cannot do so sooner because we are now working of coffee. In other words, there are some peasants who like to worry about methods, who are interested in improving the land, and who care to plant a tree. There are peasants of this type. It is really very stimulating to us every time that we meet this type of peasant. In addition, I am going to tell you something else, that is, that the level of agricultural know-how among the small farmers is the same as it was when Diego Velazquez began the colonialization of this country. Our agriculture--the agriculture of our small farmers--has the same technical level that it had four centuries ago. However, there were always a few crops in which irrigation and fertilization were used in certain areas, such as potatoes, tobacco, and rice. But with the exception of these, livestock raising, cane growing in general, vegetable growing, and the rest of our agriculture are anachronistic, anachronistic. No one ever thought about fertilizing a single banana tree. In Oriente there are banana groves that are 20, 30 years old and that have never received a pound of fertilizer. When I say this, I am not blaming you. I am not blaming you, I am simply referring to a fact, facts about our agricultural conditions in the past. There was no technical fertilizer, market, or credit knowledge. There was nothing. I want to tell you that our agriculture is very backward. Our small agriculture is very backward. Tell me something. It there a banana growing peasant here? There should be several here. Is there a banana growing peasant from Holguin, from Banes? I want to ask you something. How much do you have planted in bananas? Three rozas, six rozas? (Someone shouts from the crowd: "Sixteen Rozas.") Oh! Sixteen rozas. And how many quintals have you gotten a year, the year in which you got the most production? How many? How much? 1,700. Bananas or plantains? Of bananas, how much do you think can be obtained from one caballeria? Somebody who has grown bananas, speak up. Three thousand stalks? How many bunches? How many quintals of bananas will that make? 2,000? Can 2,000 quintals of bananas be produced on one caballeria? Two thousand quintals? Will that be possible? It can be done? Can that amount be produced, more or less? Two thousand quintals? On two rozas of land. Do you know, for example, according to our calculations based on the results from some little experimental plantings, it is possible to produce up to 20,000 quintals of bananas on one caballeria? If we had not been very busy these past days we could have suggested that the comrades of the congress should visit some experiments being conducted. (applause) These banana trees began bearing at five months, and before the end of a year were producing bunches weighing from 70 to 85 pounds. It will be possible to produce as many as 40,000 bunches on a caballeria, with the plants at proper intervals. I will give you one crop as an example: coffee. Some 50 or 60 quintals per caballeria were being picked. We are preparing plantations, from some of which we expect to gather up to 1,000 quintals per caballeria. Some crops in Cuba were grown with the aid of some technical skill. And where this appears it is not so easy to double production. But most crops in Cuba can be tripled, quadrupled, quintrupled, and in some cases the yield can be raised 10-fold. That is precisely the goal. We intend, since the revolution is in a position now to do so, to provide farmers with maximum resources so they will boost productivity, double it, triple it, quadruple it. (applause) For instance, at present fertilizer for banana trees is already being distributed to all small farmers. (applause) Fertilizer for coffee is being distributed to all small farmers. The quantity of four tons a caballeria has been distributed to all cane growers, and they will be given from one and a half to two tons of ammonium nitrate a caballeria in addition. (applause) All tobacco plantings are to be fertilized, and an effort will be made to irrigate to the greatest possible extent with the construction of small dams. Fertilizer has been distributed for growing root crops, for growing beans, for all crops, for orchards, and for all small farmers who are growing citrus fruit. This is to say that work is going forward now to apply technical know-how. Artificial insemination of small farmers' livestock is beginning to be introduced. Stockraising is one of the sectors of agriculture under the ANAP in which some of the most extensive work must be done. Already, as I was saying, insemination is being introduced. Wherever you go in this country, you see thin cows; some poor little thin cow, from which they are getting--I do not know what they are getting out of that cow; they are drawing the life out of her. Everywhere, a cow tied here, a cow in a lot without anything to eat. When one has some knowledge of the care that should be given animals, he suffers on seeing this. Very few peasants have specially planted pastures. Almost all that they have is natural pasture. In general, the small farmers' pastures have never been fertilized. There are tens upon tens of thousands of caballerias devoted to stock. We propose to give the same boost to stockraising that we are giving to coffee, tobacco, root crops, and all the other crops. What livestock policy do we expect to pursue? In areas close to the capital and big cities, we are going to promote dairying. But as a general thing, in the provinces of Las Villas, Camaguey, and Oriente, we are going to make two proposals to the peasants, or three. First, plant special pastures, including legumes together with grasses. Second, fertilize the pastures. Third, orient the small producer not toward milk production but toward breeding stock. Why is this? Except in the western areas, where milk production is a tradition with the peasants, where there is a heavy concentration of population, in the rest of the island it is much easier for a peasant to have a herd of breeding stock than a dairy herd. Diary cattle cause a great deal of work, many headaches, daily milking. It is much easier for a peasant to have a caballeria in pasture for cattle, pasture specially planted for the purpose and fertilized; to keep from 30 to 40 cattle on it; and produce from 25 to 30 calves a year, with a minimum of work involved in shifting them from one field to the next. Almost just watching them--a peasant can take care of a herd of 30 to 40 cows almost just by watching. That would mean a good income for the peasant, and it would be an income without many problems. Milk, which causes more problems, can be produced on the state farms. Take the Bayamo area, for example. When the complete program for the Bayamo area has been executed, these farms in that region will produce 1.5 million liters of milk daily. It is easy to pick up that milk, because it will be concentrated at a few hundred dairies. The same amount of milk, if produced by the small farmers, would require a trip to 10,000 places every day to pick up 10 liters here, 15 there, 20 over yonder. And this milk would be produced in 10,000 different ways, under 10,000 different conditions of hygiene. And, after all, it is something that can perfectly well be produced on the state farms. This does not mean that if a peasant of Bayamo is a dairyman and wants to go on being one we will not help him, we will provide insemination for him, we will see that he has resources, we will make everything available to him. We merely . . . . (apparently some one in audience speaks; Fidel begins a conversation--ed) You already have (F-1--phonetic). Where are you from? (?Outside) Las Villas. What district? Next to the town? How much pasturage do you have? How many cows? How many do you think you can run there? A caballeria and a half? Then you have specially planted pasturage? You already have a caballeria in pangola grass? Do you have it divided into fields? How many? Have you ever used fertilizer? How much? You have to be a (?modern) peasant, (laughter, applause) (words indistinct) what I am talking about. Are you going to have (F-1) of Brown Swiss or Holstein? Holstein. Do you want to be a dairyman or what? (words indistinct) And how many cows can you milk a day? You have to be milking 25 cows a day. It is hard work. For you, for example, if instead of milk cows there--I am not telling you to give up milk cows; I do not know the exact situation of the people of (?Taguasco), but what I want to tell you is this--on that caballeria and a half you can run from 40 to 50 head. If instead of inseminating that stock with Holstein, you inseminate with Charolais or Santa Gertrudis, when you have (F-2), when you have (F-3), then you will have find quality beef cattle. On the half caballeria, divided into 10 fields and fertilized, you just have to move the cattle from one field to another every four or five days, and you would produce--do you want me to tell you?--in money, you can produce 7,000 or 8,000 pesos in cash every year on your caballeria and a half in a very easy way. (Another question is apparently asked--ed.) That is right. Look. What I am proposing, we cannot begin doing it now. Why? Because it will be 1970 at least before the great increase in milk production as a result of all the work that has been undertaken. In 1967, 1968, and 1969 we still need milk produced by the private farming sector in Las Villas, Camaguey, and Oriente. In Matanzas and Havana provinces we will always need it, because much pasture land belonging to the small farmers is here, as well as a heavy population concentration. That is why we are going to suggest that the state farms produce the milk while the small farmers produce beef. The state farms too will produce beef, because, for instance, in a region like Camaguey, where there will be from 2.5-3 million cows in the future, 1 million will be used for milk production. Another million will be used for breeding, and the rest, from the private sector of agriculture, can be used for producing beef. Why are we suggesting that state farms should produce the milk? Because dairying requires hard work, it requires refrigeration, it requires equipment for keeping the milk. All that milk has to be picked up. It is easier to pick up the milk if there are 100 dairies supplying 1,000 liters each; the trucks go to 100 places. The milk is kept cold at 100 places. But the problem of keeping milk and picking it up is much greater at a place with only 50 liters or 70 or a 100. How many liters are you producing now, for example? No. Daily. Seventeen liters. Just think, to collect--and you are a good farmer--to collect 20,000 liters--100,000 liters--of milk, it would be necessary to go by the places of about 5,000 small farmers like you, every day. To keep that milk under sanitary conditions, refrigerated, while collections were being made, it is necessary to put 20,000 (words indistinct) there. This can be done perfectly well at 100 places. On the other hand, if you produce beef, then you hand over your product once a year, when the dry season begins, or any time. It is necessary to go there to pick it up just once. And you--what you have to do--and that is why it is much easier to produce beef than milk. What we expect to do in the future is help all peasants plant all their natural and special pastures, (?not to say brush plots), with special pastures. (Pangola and kudzu, that is what is needed on your farm. That half caballeria, (words indistinct) in kudzu and a strip of pangola grass, so nitrogen applications will not be needed, and you will have a much better feed. Is not Emilio there somewhere? That is a pity, because Emilio is getting 110 liters of milk from eight cows, eight young cows that are averaging 13 liters apiece. Pangola grass-Guinea grass with kudzu, rather, in this case. Emilio is a peasant from San Andres. If a peasant wants to produce milk, let him produce milk. In general, we will propose that he produce beef. You do not need to worry, because next year your cows will be inseminated with the Charolais strain, or the Santa Gertrudis, the one you like best among the beef breeds. In Las Villas Province we may inseminate with the Santa Gertrudis or Charolais, beef animals. The (F-2) is three-quarters beef animal and one-fourth--what you have is Brahman. In four years you will have transformed your stock. We will possibly use the Charolais as one of the principal beef breeds, because it is an animal of fine quality, great value. And so the peasants who, for example, devote themselves to stock-raising from Las Villas to Oriente will have beef animals, of beef breeds. (Apparently some one addresses Fidel and he answers--ed.) What is it? Yes. Inseminating dairymen's cows? That is right. We must not change that now. This year we are going to inseminate from milk breeds, because that work has been begun, because that idea is relatively recent. Therefore, the insemination comrades will continue working in Sancti Spiritus, in Bayamo--but that does not matter. (applause) If next year you, or your region, have the (F-1) of Holstein and Brahman, that (F-1) of Holstein and Brahman is inseminated from a beef animal, and it will be raised much better than the Brahman, it is transformed, for a milk animal, if it has good pasture, rears a much better calf than a Brahman. This (F-1) can doubtless nurse a calf that will easily reach 700 or 800 pounds in a year, provided it has pasture. What I am explaining to you is a general orientation for the future: to ask the stockmen--and this is precisely what they like; stockmen prefer raising animals to producing milk--and we have thought that they like to raise beef, if is means less work for them, and if in addition collecting the milk is a much more difficult problem than collecting beef, why then we would suggest that the peasants should tend to raise beef animals while milk is produced on the state farms. That policy is for 1970 and beyond. By 1971 we can tell any peasant, from the boundary between Matanzas and Las Villas to Baracoa, we can tell him: If you wish, devote yourself 100 percent to producing beef. Of course, around Santiago de Buca, Cienfeugos, the city of Camaguey, right around the big cities, it is logical to go on producing milk. But even in places like Bayamo, which is an area of (word indistinct) importance,state production will be 1.5 million liters of milk. This means the peasants can be given the opportunity to raise beef instead of producing milk, letting them choose what they prefer; that is the orientation we wish, devote yourself 100 caballerias of pasture for the Bayamo stockmen. We will not carry this program on a big scale to the whole country this coming year; to Havana Province, yes, in this area. In 1969 we plan to give a tremendous boost to planting pastures among the private farmers. And this coming year we can begin inseminating with beef breeds, this coming year, already, because calves born in 1969 would not be in production until 1970--until 1971 or 1972, and by that time milk production will be tremendous, and it will be more important for the peasants to devote their pastures to growing beef. That is the general orientation. Some peasants are going to devote themselves basically to growing tobacco; others, starchy foods; others, beef; others, beans; others, rice. Rice growing, too, will be given a big boost in the areas of Manzanillo and Bayamo. A program involving the small farmers will be established in that region, for irrigation, fertilizing, everything. The policy that will be pursued is one of specialized production. This is nothing new. When I say specialized production, I am not saying anything new. It is what has occurred traditionally. I mean, not (?always) changing from one product to another. If a problem arises because some product is not satisfactory to a peasant, a solution can always be found for that product. There is the problem of cane, which I have not mentioned. The problem of sugar cane is more complicated. There are provinces, like Matanzas, Las Villas, Havana, where the small farmers' role in growing cane is a very big one. This means that we cannot tell them: Since growing cane causes problems and headaches, quite growing cane. We cannot tell them to stop growing cane, because there are the mills, the installations, everything. Why? Because they have hold of a large part of the cane-growing land. It is even necessary to keep insisting and striving, because there has been a policy that goes contrary to the national interest. What policy is that? It is preferable for us to seek any other solution rather than that of quitting cane growing. And in the provinces, where the small farmers grow a great deal of cane, we cannot look to any solution other than asking them to go on growing cane while we see--within the limits of that crop--what we can do so they can be compensated and feel satisfied with what they are doing. In some places like Camaguey, where very little cane is grown by small farmers, the comrades of the province proposed to me that, except for areas very near the mill, it would be possible in many places to plant on state land the cane of many of the private farmers and let the latter devote themselves to cattle raising. In Camaguey raising cattle is a tradition, the small farmers have very little land in cane, there is enough state land to which those plantations can be shifted, and a solution can be sought here for the cane problem. Still, in Las Villas and Camaguey--in Las Villas and Havana and Pinar del Rio and Matanzas--that cannot be done, because the land is not available, the mills are there; it is impossible to do without the cane growing. The thing that must be done is to mechanize, provide loading machines, attain maximum productivity. Here, routinely, something incredible has been happening. According to our ANAP comrades, the only farmers paying taxes in this country are the sugarcane farmers. This is incredible. The coffee farmers used to pay taxes--their taxes were abolished. The government has a draft law to abolish taxes among the sugarcane farmers. (applause) Sugarcane is, of course, very important to our economy. From it we derive sugar, syrup, (?bagasse), sugarcane tops which is good for cattle feed. Sugarcane is a very important product to our economy. (words indistinct) its cultivation is not as inexpensive as some other types of cultivation. It turns out that the only farmers paying taxes here are the sugarcane farmers. Let us put the blame on the ANAP. The blame must be placed somewhere, so let us blame the ANAP. (shouts among the audience) (words indistinct) then the sugarcane farmers are to blame. The sugarcane farmers! It turns out that if we are paying the (word indistinct) taxes and in practice (words indistinct) taxes have been abolished, they were paying taxes. It was a discount that was being made through the sugar mill (?as has been explained) (voices from audience) What happened to them? What happened to the small sugarcane farmers? (inaudible voices from audience) This year? do you mean this year? (more voices from audience) Oh, no! No taxes will be charged this year. (applause from audience) Well--tell me one thing--these taxes were in effect because it was the law. But if this problem had been posed before it would have been settled. Starting this year, we have been announcing that this tax has been suppressed. In other words, this year you will not have to pay any taxes on the sugarcane which has been cut. (applause) This is one of the things which I precisely was talking about concerning the inaccurate norms. It is one of the inaccurate things which has survived. We are interested in increasing sugarcane production, in reaping a harvest of 100 million (tons-ed.), an it turns out that the sugarcane farmers who produce approximately 25 percent of the sugarcane are paying taxes. Incredible, isn't it? Of course, the taxes were in effect. Why? What did the sugarcane farmer use to pay? Before, he paid rent in addition to the taxes. The rent was abolished, but the tax remained. (inaudible voiced from audience) Very well--(more voices from audience) how much do you pay, comrades? Tell me, how much money do you pay in taxes? Wait a minute--(more voices from audience) therein is contained social security in this (words indistinct) percent. (move voices from audience) Do tell me--you do not have any right to social security? (more voices from audience) How so? (Fidel speaks away from microphone, followed by loud laughter from audience) The problem consists that in accordance with the sugar (words indistinct) law, the so-called (word indistinct) had to be registered. (?Those who did not register) had no right under the law. However, (words indistinct) the revolution (words indistinct) we had been talking with comrade (words indistinct) to conduct a survey and seek a solution to this problem. Why are there some who pay it (words indistinct) and there are others who also pay without having (words indistinct) (audience laughter). (words indistinct) The small farmers who cultivate bananas, for instance, do they pay this (word indistinct) discount? No. No small farmer pays this discount. (audience shouting) which? Because look, there is a part which corresponds to the workers, right? (voices from audience) Look, gentlemen, I am going to tell you what I think about all of this problem. When I first started to speak here tonight, I explained to you the problems of money--all of these kinds of problems. I explained to you how money was going to become progressively less important. I explained to you about the problems of production. Do you want me to tell you what these taxes are all about? (words indistinct) do you know what really matters? Instead of producing 40,000 arrobas per caballeria, you should produce 80,000 per caballeria. This is what matters! (applause) What is the point in paying 100 pesos on the one hand if you must produce 1,000 on the other? What can those 100 pesos buy? (?The truth is that) the country is interested in producing 1,500 quintals of sugar more from one caballeria--that we might be able to export and bring back goods equivalent to the value of those 1,500 quintals per caballeria. What we are interested in is to (?increase) production because here we distribute what is produced. (words indistinct) to have breakfast with one peso in the morning. (audience laughter) Has anyone ever eaten a couple of fried eggs costing 10 pesos? (audience answers "no") Isn't this true? In (?Gran Terra), we recently discovered a peasant who had the habit of eating glass Well--(word indistinct) to the hospital, he was seriously ill. He had been eating glass. (words distinct) This 11 percent is not eaten. One east that sugar which is produced on this caballeria of land. The sugar that is produced on this caballeria of land is distributed. The fact is that all this is anachronistic. What do we believe? We believe that these anachronisms must disappear because they are of no importance to us. What we are interested in is cane. What we are interested in is that you produce double what you are now producing on each caballeria. Therefore, in any segment of small agriculture--were one a merchant, he would say "no"--it is better to raise the tax to 25 percent. However, a farmer who works his land is not interested in this, (?He is interested) in his social security. However, everything depends on one's view of things. If we not collect from each peasant 100 pesos or 200 pesos every year waiting until he gets old (few words indistinct) until he retires. As a matter of fact, what that peasant is going to consume 20 years from now he is not now producing. We believe that every worker should have the right to receive a pension, without exception. (applause) As far as the small farmers are concerned, what should interest them is to produce, and in order to produce they need technical know-how, machinery, fertilizers, financial help, and direction. They need direction. (?They are not) interested in the economy, not at all. At any rate, we are going to consider the problem of pension as a right of the small farmer. (voices from audience) Gentlemen, we have said the money will be of no interest to anyone. In the future, the pension, also, will be of no interest to anyone. In the future, the pension also will be of no interest. When one has everything he needs, will he need a pension to get it? (shout of "no" from audience) However, now there are farmers who need it and we are still not at that stage when one can get something at no cost. We believe the solution lies in giving every farmer a pension, as long as he has been a farmer, has worked, who can guarantee his (?products), who has not been involved in small illegal business affairs, speculation, or things like that. He will have the right to get a pension. (applause) (few words indistinct). Therefore, it is necessary that the anachronisms that still remain (?be overcome). Would the cane growers be satisfied if this were taken away from them? (shouts of "no" in audience) Would the cane growers be ready to make the maximum effort to apply fertilizers, technical know-how, and production? (shouts of "yes" from audience) By liquidating all that? (shouts of "no" from audience) Can we count on your maximum cooperation for the 10 million-ton sugar production plan in 1970? ("Yes" from audience, applause) That is good. I wanted to tell you, since we have touched on various kinds of crops tonight, that there might be a peasant (words indistinct) who produced tomatoes, beets. We are not talking about such cases, and we do not mean to say that we are going to reach the point of saying: Well, I am not going to plant any more beets--or whatever we are planting. We are not going to affect anybody. What we are saying is that we are not going to encourage the cultivation of such crops as beets, carrots, papaya, and produce of this kind which get very high prices and which have veritably raised hob with agriculture. Let each one cultivate the crop he is used to--his traditional crop, whatever it is, whether tobacco, sugarcane, pasturage, coffee, or vegetables--and let each one feel satisfied with what he is doing and get the maximum of help to increase the productivity of his land and his work. This is what we think. And to have a price policy, one that will not create (leaves sentence unfinished--ed.) It is a bad system. It runs counter to our ideas. It is against socialism when any old product is made so scarce that the prices become sky-high and people start producing it, especially when it is a product that can be cultivated in a few caballerias in a farm. That is what we intended to tell you--our wish that the peasants specialize, tend the crop they like--the principal product--and try to obtain a maximum production from their land and their work. In other words, we must introduce much more accurate guidance in private agriculture and above all, introduce technology. Technology has to be introduced. In coffee and tobacco, some have more than others, but in livestock above all, technology must be introduced. In our agriculture, livestock-raising under the latifundists was very backward. A few latifundists had a few very pretty little animals they would exhibit at the fair. Almost all of them had natural pasturage. Almost none of them had artificial pasturage. Practically none of them had introduced leguminous fodder; none of them introduced fertilization, insemination, or pasturing. In other words, it was a (?pathetic) livestock with a few pretty bulls. We have to put all this nation's (?energy) into the problem as if this country were a livestock fair from one end of the island to the other. (applause) And the problem of skinny cows and hungry animals has to disappear. The day has to come when we will feel as sorry when we see a skinny little cow as when we see a skinny child, since, after all, these cows are the ones providing the milk so the children will not be skinny. It should hurt us to see the livestock going hungry. (applause) Animals are not our enemy. (applause) They are our friends, and they help to nourish us. It is criminal to allow a cow to go hungry. It is criminal. It is not just, it is not revolutionary. If cows could protest, they would organize and they surely would have staged a big protest in this country. But I, at least, make myself the cow's advocate here. (crowd commotion) A question? (comment from a man in the crowd--ed.) With tobacco? You people pay taxes? Oh, my God! (laughter) Interest on loans? How much is being paid here as interest on loans? (voices from audience) It is true that (incomplete sentence--ed.) Well, gentlemen, I see you want to get rid of everything. Let us also get rid of private property once and for all. (laughter) I am saying that because the prices on many products have been increased, price improvement has been made on many products. We have tried to help small farmers to the utmost. Now, I do not know about the matter of taxes. But look, they tell me that tobacco men do not pay taxes. (shouts of "No!" from audience) Then what discounts are given to you? (voices from audience) Interest on loans. And do you want me to tell you something? It is double garbage in the double sense of the word. It is a great pile of garbage. It is garbage, ideologically speaking. We should not charge any interest tax because this is the capitalist's way, to tell the truth. It engenders bureaucracy, and it does not pay enough to take care of those who have to handle the paperwork. You are right. We are going to study this problem--that umpteen taxes have to be paid. Ten, eight, seven, we reduced it to almost nothing, but it continues to be interest. And this matter of interest is a capitalist thing, gentlemen. That is the truth. It is money earning money. What society is interested in when it gives a peasant a loan is to enable him to work and produce and not to go around trying to make a miserable amount from what he produces to pay it. This does not resolve and economic problem. This is an anachronism and a vestige of the past. The peasant is right. Speak. (voice from audience) They tell me that pertains to the credit cooperative and accounting expenses which the bank will carry. It will not change anything for it. Gentlemen, look, the truth is that what you are proposing (unfinished sentence--ed.) We have been very busy all these past days. This is why we were unable to make greater contact with the congress. Otherwise, all these questions would have been resolved in the light of the new ideas of the revolution. The revolution has grown, the revolution has evolved, the revolution has developed. The ideas of the revolution have progressed. In the light of those ideas, this little interest charge which engenders bureaucracy and resolves nothing--in light of these ideas, that discount of 11 percent, and all those things in a sector such as sugarcane, which is of such importance to the economy--in the light of ideas which are more revolutionary every day, a revolution which even aspires one day to do away with money by giving the people everything they need, just as now we given them education, hospitals, and all those other things; all of those things appear--all those remains of the past appear to be truly anachronistic. What interests us--what interests us in the light of our ideas is that a peasant, instead of producing 30,000 arrobas, produces 60,000 or 80,000 arrobas of sugarcane per caballeria. What interests us in the light of these new ideas--these truly revolutionary ideas--is that a peasant in his caballeria of land, instead of producing 300 quintals, produces 600 if possible; that instead of 2,000 quintals of plantains, he produces 4,000; 5,000; 6,000; 10,000; that instead of 10 skinny cows per caballeria, he raises 35 or 40 fat cows per caballeria; that if a citrus fruit tree produces 500 oranges, it produce 1,500. Comrade peasants, that is what is eaten, that is what is distributed. To take a peso here and not increase production over there is a deception. Let the peasants have a larger income by producing more, because by producing more the people will have more of all those things that the peasants can produce. Anybody understands that. (applause) If instead of the skinny cows--the 10 skinny cows which produce six skinny calves, which remain for three years in the pasture before reaching 1,000 pounds in weight--that peasant has 40 cows and produces 30 or 35 or he would even produce almost 40, but we are going to suppose 30 or 35 animals, which will weigh in one year or 18 months, 1,000 pounds--that peasant is producing six times more meat, and the people will be eating six times more meat, or the country will be exporting more meat to buy other things that the people need. I think this is very simple. Many old ideas cling to us. Many old ideas remain to influence the minds of people. We have to introduce new ideas in technology and eliminate old ideas. I believe that what I am explaining is understood by you perfectly well. It is clear--somebody wanted to say something? What is it? (shouting from crowd) Just a moment. There is confusion here; two people are talking at once. Let us see, which of you is the younger? (applause) Good, then you can wait to speak. (laughter) Let the one who is furthest away speak. No, I mean that one who is farther away and will have to shout louder. (someone shouts) No, not you, the other one. (shouting from crowd) Gentlemen, are we going to hold a second congress here tonight, this early in the morning? (laughter) No, you have already had your congress, and those problems have been discussed. The problems of loaders and all those have been discussed. What is of interest now is general orientation, general orientation, but let us give the second man who wants to say something a change so that he can have his turn. (talking from crowd) Very well. They say that agronomy no longer has to approve credit. They say the the peasant organization and the bank are the ones who negotiate the problem. (shouting) That is good. We must introduce the peasants organizations further into the operation of light machinery, the problem of credits and all those things. As the participation of the peasants' base organizations increases, they will help us resolve those problems extraordinarily. (applause) Speak up comrade. (voice from audience) Is this rice on dry or irrigated land? And how about Yaguazas (a type of duck): how many are shot down? Did you know that there is a company of hunters killing Yaguazas in Sancti Espiritus? Ah, you have nine hunters there? How many Yaguazas have you killed lately? One thousand two hundred Yaguazas? The Yaguazas are the number one enemy of rice, but this year the Yaguazas will be put out of action. (applause) (more shouting) And where is yours? I passed by there the other day. If you tell me how to get there, I will make a visit there to speak about rice. What is the name of the place? The Agricultural-Livestock Society. Well we also recommend to some tobacco-growers of Las Villas, with respect to technology, that after they gather the coffee crop, they spend the rest of the year cultivating. We proposed that they plant some carita beans in the spring so that the land will not be bare. Let us check it out. Those beans are fit for human consumption, as well as for animal consumption, and they protect the land and provide organic material. But precisely because of what I said previously, we are going to begin with a small farmer. Some small farmers will check them out so that they can see the results, so that they will see that--far from harming the land--they help it, and protect the land better in the spring when the bare soil is very subject to erosion. But all the peasants are accustomed to just planting and then scratching the land all year with the cultivator. We are going to try them. And about rice. Few of you produce 1,000 quintals. We must produce at least 1,500. Is that clear? (shouting) Good. And we are going to visit that agricultural-livestock association soon. Very good. It is getting late, huh? Has everybody had his turn? It is 0130. (laughter) Well then, we are in agreement that this last comrade may speak. Word of honor. Yes, speak up. No, no, no, you have no honor. You are already making (Castro laughs) You have given me your word of honor that nobody else will ask to speak. (shouting) Wait a minute. We had agreed with Milian that we are going to send some over here. Where are they? Ah, good. You brought four. Which are they? (voices from audience) Very good. We also got the pygmy gandul (a type of arbutus with edible seeds--ed.), which is the one we wanted to taste. Well, we are going to taste them. You brought them did you not? Say, you certainly brought enough of them. (laughter) Well, thanks a lot, thanks a lot. Let us see. (shouting) That is not difficult. We can send the shells, but I can tell you beforehand that there are 600 hunters who are organizing to go to all the ricefields. (laughter) In what area are you? In Aguada. Is there a lot of rice there? And a lot of Yaguazas? What do you need? Some shotgun shells? What do you prefer, the shells or somebody to go there and put an end to the Yaguazas? (shouting) No, do not leave. I am going to explain to these comrades that the hunters are workers who are sportsmen. We have given them the task as volunteer labor to go hunt over there. (laughter) They are enchanted with the idea, of course. (laughter) Speak up. How many shotguns shells do you need over there? How many, say it, (shouting) How many Yaguazas do you have there? (laughter) How many Yaguazas do you have there? What base peasant organization is that? What is the name? Van Troi. This takes in all the ricefields there? Very good. Day after tomorrow early in the morning you will have 1,000 shotgun shells in the ricefields so that you can kill the Yaguazas. You can cook up some fricassee of Yaguaza also. They are very good. (laughter) Now we have a little problem, comrades, one which you brought up here. It is a problem I have found prevalent throughout the island. About three years ago, I heard people complaining about the problem of people who have land and are not farmers. This is the truth. I go to the provinces and the party, the workers, the volunteer workers, the peasants--what do they say? Well, they say that there is a gentleman there for whom they have to cut the cane every year, they weed it and he never shows up there. He does not even furnish water for the people, nor help, nor anything. This problem has been brought up to us hundreds of times. It is very irritating to ask a worker to leave his family for three months and then find out that he is cutting cane for an absentee landowner who lives in town running a business. Sometimes they run a funeral parlor, an apartment, or a retail business. Something else--do not forget, either, that there were some urban bourgeois who went out and bought land like the ones we were speaking about. They did anything, some little stand of a jeep, and they gathered together some 8,000 or 10,000 pesos and they bought land. That is why we have established--and we ask for your cooperation so that no illegal sales of land will be made--that sales will not be recognized. We have clearly explained the policy that is going to be followed because of the existence of all these problems and because all these other things are created. The workers who have to cut the cane, the ones who leave their families for three months, we understand well that they will resent having to go over there to cut the cane for a gentleman who lives in town. This is unquestionable. Well now, we believe that we should seek a solution for this problem. Not a drastic solution or anything like that, that is my opinion, my opinion. I do not advocate interventions or anything like that, but that the owners be given the option that if they wish to really become farmers they move out there and dedicate themselves to really working. (cheers, applause) If they do not wish to become real farmers, they have the choice of selling the farm. I believe that is the most correct formula to avoid creating problems, fear and insecurity. Give the one who wants to become a farmer a chance to become one, and if he does not wish to dedicate himself to working, or he cannot, or he has some other reason, then let him sell the land. Of course this must be discussed with the peasant base organizations so that there will be no problems of interventions or things of that type. Do you believe that this is a correct solution? Do you believe that it is fair? (shouts of "Yes") I believe, comrades, that tonight has been characterized by a somewhat disordered manner of speaking of many things. On my part, I do not wish to say that you have been that way, but I believe that the man ideas that could be of interest are being discussed even if without much order. At least we have tried to be as clear as possible on a number of ideas which it is important that the peasants know about. We have great confidence in the peasants. We believe that we understand the psychology of the peasants. We know of the support of the peasants for the revolution, the loyalty of the peasants to the revolution. That is the same position that the revolution will always have toward the peasants. The revolution is educating the children of the peasants. The revolution is making technicians, engineers, agronomists, civil engineers, doctors, skilled workers out of the children of the peasants. The process, the social development of the revolution, the development of education, will continue to grow. As I told you, in the technical institutes along we are going to enroll 100,000 many of whom will be the children of peasants, between now and 1970. We are going to increase the number of schools in the rural areas also, in the areas of Las Villas, in Banes, in the Escambray. In all those districts we are going to establish a number of schools and increase their capacity. The number of students in the country who are being graduated from the sixth grade is more than 80,000, and the young people know what it is all about, the children know what it is about. It is incredible how the children have understood the things that are good for them, that are of interest for them. Not long ago we were in the Sierra Maestra, in the southern part, and we entered one of the valleys of the place. On our return--every time we go in they wait for us as we leave--some children with some papers--a boy approached me and said: "Read this letter." He lives there near the road. The letter said: "Mayor, we want you to help us, because we really need a little piece of land to produce food," and all that sort of thing. The boy wrote the letter. I asked the mother: "What does your husband do?" She said: "He works on a highway construction." He was a worker who was working at building the highway. I said: "But lady, do you think that you are going to resolve a problem for yourselves or the country with a little piece of land?" I said: "Would it not be better if we gave scholarships to your children?" Then the boy said: "Yes, yes, yes." The boy with the letter said: "Yes, yes, that is better." (laughter) Then I said: "Look, I cannot resolve this business about the land because that is not the policy that we follow. The little piece of land does not resolve anything. We are making great plans precisely to resolve the problem of provisions through building roads. If you have so many children, we will help you. Immediately, the others who were around all wanted scholarships. The other children, his brothers and sisters, all the children wanted the change to study. And they understood that for them it was a thousand times better to have a scholarship to study than if they received a little piece of land there to continue living under the conditions in which they live today. Truly, among the children there is awakening a consciousness, something impressive. We think of continuing to develop educational plans. We believe that there is practically no corner of the country that does not have a school. It seems to us that all the corners of the country have teachers. There are some places where the school installations are very bad, huts. We are also going to work in that direction, and we are going to continue to improve communications in the interior of the country, also. We are going to continue to develop our hospital programs in the interior of the country. That is, we are in a condition to bring progress to the rural areas much quicker than we have up to now. In the coming years, the increases in production are going to be considerable in all aspects. We have spoken here of coffee and plantains. We spoke of milk, and for example, with respect to milk, the results being achieved in the crossbreeding of milch cows with beef cattle--that is, the crossing of Holsteins with Zebu cattle--we are getting cows which at the age of 24 months are giving 18, 19, and 20 liters of milk per day, after their first calf. We believe that after the second calf of that crossbreeding, we can achieve as much as 25 liters of milk. The problems of milk are going to be resolved. Next year we will plant in state lands 20,000 caballerias of pastures. We will apply 100,000 tons more fertilizer to pastures next year. Therefore, production in general, not just sugarcane alone--you all know how the care of canefields is being carried out at this time, in spite of the fact that we have a bad drought. March, April and May have been dry, but we have no fear because the sugarcane has been taken care of. It has been fertilized. All the sugarcane in the country, nearly 90,000 caballerias, is receiving four tons of fertilizer, some of it six tons, per caballeria. All the sugarcane will receive at least two additional tons of ammonium nitrate or three sprayings with foliar urea by airplane per caballeria. At this time we have 60 airplanes ready for fertilizing, and although it appears that this is a dry year, we have much confidence in the effects of good care, the attention paid to sugarcane, and fertilization, that we are sure that we are going to have a considerably larger harvest next year than we have this year. We do not want to state any figures yet, but we are preparing for a very big harvest next year as the result mainly of the increases in yield per caballeria. In coming years, many of the types of problems that we have known up to the present will disappear. Many of the problems of supply--of supply of machetes, wire, and all those things; of provisions, shoes, clothing and in general, many of these problems, will disappear. Cotton growing is increasing. This year we will plant 1,000 caballerias of cotton. Next year we are thinking of planting at least 3,000 caballerias of cotton. Rice growing is also being increased considerably. This means that at this time there is not a single area in agricultural production that is not receiving a maximum impetus from the revolution. The quantity of machinery that we have available has increased considerably. The number of bulldozers for roads, for water projects, for clearing land has increased, and we are going to give more resources to the private farmers. In addition, it is believed that we are in a condition to move progressively, as you have asked, toward making the state farm groupings responsible for helping and supplying the small farmers. In the beginning, we thought that the best way to help the peasants of the ANAP would be through the state farm groupings, but two or three years ago there was not enough organization in the groupings for this. There was not enough control. Many times they were not even capable of achieving their own goals or completing their plans. We were worried about the possibility that if the groupings were given the resources for the development of agriculture in the ANAP, there would be problems. They might many times devote themselves to fulfilling their own farm plans to the detriment of the small farmers. That is no longer the case today. The control, resources, and the efficiency of the state farm groupings is much greater. The state farm groupings themselves have been told that they must count on the small farmers' production, and that it is not enough to talk about it. Many times, they forget the other production. They are asked: "How much cane do you have?" They say: "So much." "And how much do the small farmers have? This also goes into the economy and must be counted." At this time, many of the directors of state farm groupings have a true interest in helping the small farmers, a true interest for increasing the production of the small farmers. Therefore, we in the future will demand from the party secretary, from the leader of the state farm grouping, an accounting not only for the state production but also for the small farmers'. (applause) And let there be no talk about how much cane was produced by the state farm grouping but rather how much cane was produced by the region. (applause) How many vegetables were produced--not only by the state farm grouping--but how many vegetables were produced by the region. Therefore, we are not going to do this abruptly. We are going to do this according to the degrees of resources that each region has available, so that we do not do this overnight and run into difficulties later. For example, in the area of Manzanillo, the state farm grouping is already going to help increase the rice crops of all the small farmers of the region. It is going to help them to prepare the land, resolve the problems of irrigation, seeds, fertilizer, harvesting, everything. In Bayamo region, the state farm grouping is also going to make itself responsible for helping the small rice farmers. In Bayamo region also, the state farm grouping is going to be responsible for helping the livestock raisers of the region in the planting of pastures. I already told you that next year we are going to plant 1,000 caballerias there. In the Guane region, the state farm grouping is going to help the small farmers in the tobacco, citrus, and tomato plans. As each state farm grouping reaches a proper condition of organization and resources, we are going to make them responsible for assistance, help, and development of the agriculture of the small farmers. It appears to me that we must not do this in a hurry, that we must not do this overnight. We must do this over a period of from six to eight months, region by region, as soon as we have the assurance that the change is going to help agricultural development. Then all the fertilizer that is received will be consigned to the region for state agriculture and the small farmers. The same with wire, money, ropes, resources, everything. It will be much easier, because now everything is sent out there is two ways. Fertilizer goes there through one way and then through another. Such a thing through one way and such a thing through another. It appears that the suggestions you have made are very reasonable, and we will move in that direction, precisely to make things more dynamic, to facilitate everything much more. We believe that this separation of supply functions through one way and another is truly harmful. Comrades, we hope that by the next congress we will have more time to meet with you. During these past few years we have been trying to learn, to know, to understand, the problems of agriculture, of all agriculture. We have been making many contacts with the peasants. We have been acquiring much interesting knowledge of importance in our work. We think we will continue to apply that method. We think that we still have many things to learn. We still have many regions to visit. Every time we visit the provinces, we go to a new region. We know practically all the regions in Oriente, but for example, we still have not been to the region of Velasco, where the famous bean growers are located. We still have to visit part of the Puerto Padre region and Tunas. We still have a few regions to visit in Camaguey. We still have some regions to visit in Las Villas, but since we have always begun at the most mountainous and most remote regions, it will not be difficult for us to continue visiting various regions of the country. We always learn much. Really, one of the worst things, one of the most terrible things for all of us, is that we practically did not even know the geography of the country. How can one conceive that rice can be planted in the area of Guamo, Birama, and all those places if those places have never been visited? How can many of the plans be executed if we do not know the place? Agriculture is just like war. In war, battles cannot be won if the terrain is not known, and in agriculture, battles cannot be won if the terrain is not known. We propose to acquire a profound knowledge of all the regions of the country so that all projects, all plans, all solutions, will always be selected from among the best. We also believe that there is a need for the peasants to give attention to technology, to give attention to the methods of cultivation, fertilization, irrigation, and selection of seeds. I assure you, comrades, that the present production of the small farmers can be easily doubled. With an even effort, it can be tripled in sugarcane, coffee, tobacco, vegetables, cattle. We are executing a series of very concrete plans in the province of Havana, in various parts of the country, to show the peasants how it is possible through technology to double and triple production in a relatively easy manner. Why is this? Because our methods are very antiquated. Because our technology is very backward and, naturally, when for example, a person is used to traveling along a road on a burro and he takes an automobile, he covers the same road in one-tenth the time. We are supposing that this is a level road. However, if he takes an airplane he travels the distance 30 times faster. Or course, if a person changes from an automobile to an airplane, he only travels twice as fast. If he goes from the burro to the airplane, it can be 20 times faster. And we are on burro in our agriculture. It is not difficult, therefore, to double or triple and in some crops to quadruple and quintuple our production because we are riding a burro, something worse than a burro, we are on foot. (laughter) And it is possible for us today to take an airplane, to take an airplane, as far as technology is concerned. This means that it easy for us to multiply our production because, since we start from no technology, by using a little technology we can double and triple production. Our revolution truly intends to reach these objectives, not only in state agriculture, but also in your agriculture. We would accomplish nothing if we had enormous success in state agriculture, an enormous advance in state electricity, if we do not have a similar advance in your agriculture. And it is necessary that, as far as possible, agriculture of both sectors advance equally in technology for the best interests of the country. We will not be able to apply such technology as the airplane, for example, but as far as possible, mechanization in crops can be achieved. Tractors can be used, fertilization, seed, a series of methods, which even in spite of the disadvantage inherent in dealing with small parcels of land, can be applied. This is what we expect of you. This is what we expect of this congress, which has been a good, well-organized congress--that you will apply technology; that from this congress come the decision of the peasants to apply technology; that you will make it a technical agriculture; that you will technically revolutionize your agriculture. And let us not any longer have to undergo the suffering, the shame of traveling through those rural areas, along those roads, and see so much backwardness, from a technical point of view, in agriculture. I know that the canegrowers, well, they want to grow cane all their lives, and I have seen them here very enthusiastic because of the things that have been proposed. They like cane. The tobacco grower likes tobacco. The coffee grower likes his coffee. Each peasant loves the crops to which he is accustomed. Well, let us show all this love for our crops, and let us improve on them by increasing, doubling, tripling, and quadrupling production. All of you know perfectly how much satisfaction you feel when the cane is good, when the cane is tall, when coffee has many beans, when the cow gives much milk. It does not matter if many times work in the fields is hard. There are few activities which compensate man so much as activity in agriculture. There are few activities which compensate man so much and give him so much satisfaction as success in agriculture. What we expect from you--naturally with the help of the revolution, with the maximum help from your revolutionary government--is that we give a technical impetus to agriculture, that we do rational things, that we keep present the interests of the country, that we act as true revolutionaries, that we increase our consciousness, that we censure those who speculate, that we struggle against those who introduce vices and idleness and parasitism among the peasants. It is important to increase the revolutionary consciousness of the peasants, to abandon certain concepts which are not those of revolutionaries, to forget those little price lists, because, really, the man who goes around with his little price list to see what he is going to plant, does not kill cows. He does not starve his cows to death in order to plant some carrots to make more money. A man who loves his work, who lives his crops, does not go around with his little price list. The problems of prices are resolved. If a peasant of any sector understands that the crop he is planting takes a lot of effort and pays very little, there is always a way of helping him, encouraging him, or resolving his problem. Prices, in any case, must be established and a better price paid for those crops that are more difficult to raise and less remunerative, less encouraging for the peasant. But let us not introduce those opportunist prices to resolve a problem for a producer. That creates disorder. We expect from the peasants a sense of responsibility, a sense of duty toward the workers of the entire country, a sense of duty toward all the people. The country and the revolution have done their utmost for the peasants. The workers of our country have done their utmost for the peasants. We, knowing that the peasants are revolutionary, knowing that the peasants have always helped the revolution with much enthusiasm, expect that they will have this attitude in production, in work, toward the entire country. In the next congress, I promise you that we will meet for a longer time. I promise that we are going to discuss many of your problems one by one. Everything that is discussed will be analyzed. Everything that can be resolved will be resolved. But in the next congress we are going to speak more on technology. We are going to resolve all those problems about stores, or that other thing, whether there will be taxes, and all those problems. In the next congress, which will be held in 1969--you have two years to prepare--the basic subject will be technology. (applause) That is why the things that are going to be discussed will be: What methods are being applied? What are the most advanced methods? What are the greatest yields? Who are the peasants who care for their crops the best? Who are the vanguard peasants? We must have many more tables, much more fervor so that no one will be surprised when one finds a truly progressive peasant in technology. The most natural thing is that every peasant be progressive, that every peasant who cannot overcome the problems of technology in production should represent the peasants. (applause) The next congress is going to be an eminently technical congress. I really lament not having more time for this congress, because I was really interested in this congress in discussing many of these questions longer, but I expect to prepare myself for the next congress also. (laughter) I expect to have much more knowledge on all problems, and I expect to spend entire days talking with you. I expect to have better knowledge of the problems of the country, of the regions of the country, and of each of the crops. And sincerely, always, whenever I get the chance, I spend some time studying. I recommend to the comrade peasants that they do the same. There are some peasants who know plenty. There are also some who boast about knowing more than they really know. They exist. But in the next congress, come prepared to discuss the technical problems of agriculture. Come prepared, because it is going to be an examination, an examination. We are going to test all the peasants in the next congress on how they use fertilizers, what formula they use, what is meant by a formula. What does this mean? What does that mean? We must begin to study. Are we in agreement? (shouts of "yes") Good. Then in two years--I am not going to say that I am not going to see you before then, because I expect to see you again soon anyplace, in any field, look for me. I expect to go everywhere. However, in two years we are going to have a technical meeting here, and we will be interested in knowing if in these two years--in which, undoubtedly, there will be a great advance from the political point of view, a great advance from the point of view of revolutionary consciousness--how much we will advance from the technical point of view. You told me: "Hit the Yankees hard!" We are going to hit the Yankees hard by revolutionizing our agriculture, overcoming out backwardness, making our agriculture technical. The most painful blow that the Yankees are going to receive is when they learn that we are producing 10 million tons of sugar, when they learn that in spite of their blockade, in spite of their aggressions, we have overcome all our problems. We will abolish the ration book and resolve the problems of supplies, but not with respect to the supplies of long ago, not supplies on the level of what we had to eat before. One of the hardest blows that the Yankees are going to receive is when we manage, in spite of all the obstacles that they have tried to place in our path, within the next few years, in 1970, to abolish the ration book and all those problems, but on a level of consumption twice as great per capita as that the people knew before the revolution. (applause) Or course, we do not struggle in the field of economy moved only or basically by the idea of having a better standard of living, of being richer, no. For us the struggle to develop our economy and achieve economic successes is part of our ideology. We have our ideas on how socialism is constructed, on how communism is constructed, and facts will prove who is right. We are not only speaking of our capitalist adversaries who want the failure of the socialist revolution, but within the socialist camp itself there are different concepts on how socialism in constructed, on how communism is constructed. And we, at the same time that we develop the revolutionary consciousness of the people, at the same time that we strengthen our ideology, at the same time that we develop our internationalist consciousness, also have the desire and intention of showing that for developing an economy and for constructing socialism and communism, the path that we are following is the most correct path, it is the most revolutionary path. Fatherland or death! We will win! (applause) -END-