-DATE- 19700423 -YEAR- 1970 -DOCUMENT_TYPE- SPEECH -AUTHOR- F. CASTRO -HEADLINE- LENIN CENTENNIAL CEREMONY -PLACE- CHARLIE CHAPLIN THEATER IN HAVANA -SOURCE- HAVANA DOMESTIC SVC -REPORT_NBR- FBIS -REPORT_DATE- 19700423 -TEXT- Castro Address Havana Domestic Radio and Television Services in Spanish 0333 GMT 23 Apr 70 F [Text] Comrade diplomatic representatives of the Soviet Union, comrades of the Cuban-Soviet Friendship Society, comrade guests, comrade Soviets present here, comrade Cubans: The name of Lenin is something utterly familiar to all of us. We are not doing to eulogize Lenin. We dare not do so for feat that ideas would be unable to express everything which admiration really encompasses. I want to point out the sentiments that inspire our people's attitude toward Lenin. Let me begin be saying that in the first place the homage, the interest, the multiplicity of ways in which the sympathy, the recognition, the admiration, and the affection of our people toward Lenin that have been expressed have been extraordinarily spontaneous. It was not only the interest of our party, of the revolutionary leadership, of official institutions, but also the spontaneous interest of all our people. Therefore, these expressions of sympathy toward Lenin differ from what may traditionally and usually characterize many historic dates that at times become something traditional, something conventional. On this occasion, we commemorate an event which is without a doubt a historic date of extraordinary importance, because on a day like today one of the most extraordinary men of history was born. It was extraordinary not only because of his human attributed, because of hits extraordinary revolutionary attributes, but also, or better yet, basically because of the extraordinary repercussions which his life and activities have had and will have in the world. In other words, we are observing an event of profound significance and are marking it as we really could only commemorate it--with feeling, from the heart. Lenin is one of those really exceptional cases. A simple reading of his life and his work, the most objective analysis of the way his thought and activity unfolded throughout his life really shows him to be a really, I repeat, exceptional man in the eyes of all human beings. He had a teacher who was founder of Marxism. Two teachers, it would be better to say, Karl Marx and Freidrich Engels. No one else has been able to interest all the depth, all the essence, and all the value of the Marxist theory. No one else was able to interpret that theory and carry it forward to its ultimate consequences. No one else was able to develop that theory and enrich it the way be did. When Lenin was barely a child, there were already many shining philosophical and political figures in the history of revolutionary doctrine and in the history of Marxism, a number of very famous interpreters of the doctrine of Marx. Practically no one had heard of the name of Lenin. Many of those shining examples who tried in one way or another to explain, disseminates, develop, and apply the theories of Marx throughout the years were almost completely obscured by the figure and personality of Lenin. Lenin from the very outset was not only political theoretician, a political philosopher, but a man of action, a constant and incessant revolutionary. It fell upon him to develop a doctrine and apply it under such difficult conditions that it is really impossible to imagine worse ones. Lenin comes from the bosom of a nation which was very far behind in comparison with the industrial, political, and social development of the rest of Europe-- England, Germany, and France. He appeared in the heart of a nation where the majority of the people were peasants, where the prevailing conditions were absolutely feudal, where even a dogmatic Marxist would have considered it the last nation in Europe to carry out the Marxist revolution. It is precisely in the heart of that nation. In that bosom of the czarist empire, where this genius of a man appears, truly a genius, and develops and applies there, with extraordinary creative wisdom, the Marxist doctrine. When the brilliant revolutionary minds in Europe were not taking into account the Russian revolutionaries, when they even observed those revolutionaries with scorn, when many of then were not even taking into account Lenin's thoughts and a Marxist revolution is czarist Russia. Lenin was starting his long journey, his long delayed struggle to carry out the Marxist revolution according to the conditions of that nation. Lenin is the founder of the so-called Russian social democracy of those days, which later was the Bolshevik, Party, and later the CPSU. Lenin practically laid the first stone of that organization, of that movement. It is not a case of there being no predecessors or preachers of Marx's thoughts. It is that Lenin's political and revolutionary development was affected to such a degree by Lenin's creative activity that we must say he was truly the soul of that revolutionary thought, of that movement, and of that party. Rarely in any process, perhaps never in a political process, has a thought, a mind, an intellect been able to make such a large contribution. Lenin was a tireless investigator and worker. It can be said that after acquiring political awareness, he did not rest a single moment during his lifetime. He did not cease to investigate, to study, and to work on the revolution's course. There has been no gladiator who fought more ideological combats that Lenin. It is surprising how many battles he fought in the ideological arena. His history cannot be compared to that of other men who accomplished extraordinary feats for personal merit. In our ancient history, in world history, we were told, above all, about great conquerors from ancient days to more recent centuries. We were told about their feats and their victories. In reality, when humanity is able to better evaluate, to reason, when it is able to appreciate in a superior manner the events of humanity's history, those personalities will be obscured when compared to the one who was a gladiator and fighter in another arena, the one who was not a conqueror, the one who fought in the arena to create, the one who fought and won hundreds of difficult battles in the the area of ideas to liberate humanity. When a better and superior evaluation is made history's personalities, Lenin, together with Marx, will excel among the most outstanding [Unreadable text] thinkers, and intellects in the history of mankind, because, as Marx himself said, with the birth of a society free of exploiters and exploited, with the birth of a communist society, mankind will have emerged from prehistory. That looks like only a phrase, but, when we think about it, when we try to figure out what Marx was trying to say; when we observe today's world, when we recall the recent barbaric actions when fascism reached out with its paws in Europe; when we look at barbaric actions being carried out today against Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia, those being carried out in Asia, Africa, or any other place, the most modern equipment used against man to destroy man and his work, to destroy his right to life and a minimum degree of happiness; when we see what is taking place in today's world, which is what has been going on for thousands of years, as humanity has not known anything better than tragedy and drama through plundering wars between peoples, wars bred from the moment the meaning of property developed in the heart of man; when classes emerged in the heart of human society, leaving behind that drama as the balance of thousands of years and until today [Castro does not finish sentence] Those crimes and wrongdoings are bred--this can be easily understood today by anyone, even if he has been blindfolded--by the class spirit, by the exploiting spirit, by the possessive spirit, by production methods, by natural resources, and by the men that control those mediums and exploit those resources. Therefore, when humanity surpasses this stage and the terrors generated by the society of exploiters and exploited, then it can be said in all truth that mankind; has emerged from prehistory to enter into history. Marx and Lenin are in fact the two human personalities who will have blazed the trail from prehistory to the history of mankind. [applause] Alongside them the previous personalities will not be historical personalities but rather prehistorical personalities. It fell upon Lenin not only to develop theory but to find concrete field of action and the opportunity to carry it out. He struggled, as we said, under extremely difficult circumstances. He fought hundreds of times in defense of the doctrine, not as an apostle defending a mystical thought but rather as a scientific defending a scientific interpretation. He defended the Marx doctrine against all mystification, distortions, and deformations. He defended it and demonstrated how correct Marx was. Historic facts demonstrated how all the currents which Lenin fought led, in various European nations, to the crisis of the revolutionary movement, the failure of the revolutionary movement, the betrayal of the revolutionary movement. What clear vision he used to fight the economist currents, the so-called Legal Marxists, the opportunities, the revisionists. Here we see Lenin in those extremely difficult moments of the revolutionary movement, perhaps the most critical of all, when World War I took place and most of social democracy--with Lenin's movement being practically the only exception--under the spell of chauvinism in each one of its countries and, betraying the first internationalist duty and the first internationalist principle, threw in the lot with an enlisted as cannonfodder at the service of the capitalists and the imperialists. It was precisely at that moment when Lenin became, in practice, the only leader remaining in the bosom of the revolutionary movement, the only one remaining faithful together with his followers to those principles. From then on he waged an ideological battle, one of the many, against those who had virtually betrayed Marxism and abandoned the principles of proletarian internationalism. It was in those difficult years that he was once again an incomparable defender of those principles and of that doctrine. Lenin has to develop his work underground, in prison, in exile, as an emigre, carrying out his political and ideological battle, surmounting immense obstacles of every kind to be able to publish a handbill, a pamphlet, to be able to circulate it throughout the vast areas of that nation, to be able to vanquish the huge difficulties stemming from having to work and move amid nations with social systems that he in fact proposed to change. Perhaps there is not a more splendid chapter than Lenin's battle in defense of revolutionary thought. But it is also equally impressive to note how Lenin was able to realize that the juncture of the imperialist war of 1914 was a moment of crisis for imperialism, and that in czarist Russia, where the workers movement was growing, and, above all, where that movement had been arming itself with a revolutionary mind, a socialist revolution could be carried out. If one were to ask whether it is possible to conceive of a more optimistic man, one would have to answer no. A more tenacious man, a more audacious man? On would have to say no. Because when the historic juncture arrived, the moment to take over power, the moment to carry out the revolution. Lenin had to wage very hard battles within his own party. He had to struggle staunchly even against the views of many who had been his disciples for years. If one were to ask whether there was a man as misunderstood at Lenin, one would have to say "no." On the other hand, one would have to say that no man was better understood by the common man, better understood by the worker, better understood by the masses than Lenin. The paradox between the great misunderstanding that surrounded him and the great understanding that he always found in the masses in astonishing and was a decisive factor in each of the most critical and difficult moments of that revolutionary process. Such were the conditions in which Lenin defended the thesis of assuming power and the opportunity of doing to supported by the masses of the party he forged during a period of nearly 20 years and by a handful of the men, the disciples who were able to understand him. It is logical that there were many uncertainties because of the judgement of taking power under those circumstances, when there were many weak points in the movement, when the Bolshevik Party did not even hold a majority among the peasants, who were the majority of the population in old Russia. When the nation was completely bankrupt as a result of war, and when it would later have to confront the imperialist nations which would logically try to crush the victorious revolution. There were so many accumulated difficulties that it would be logical for many to waver. Nevertheless, this is proof of Lenin's greatness, of his will of steel, of his belief in the masses, of his faith in the scientific principles of the Marxist doctrine; he never hesitated in confronting all those difficulties and risks. Someday it will have to be said that no man ever accomplished a more difficult feat than that accomplished by Lenin as head of the Bolshevik Party under the conditions in which the first socialist revolution was fulfilled. We sincerely believe that the study of those events, of that epic.... If the days before taking power were difficult, the days following it were to be more difficult, more difficult in comparison; definitely most difficult. The nation was experiencing severe domestic problems and was being invaded at scores of placed. The territory of the new socialist state was gradually reduced. It appeared that it would be rather difficult to survive the situation. Nevertheless, that nation led by a thought, a doctrine, and a revolutionary party, found the necessary will, the strength, and the means of successfully overcome that situation. It must be mentioned that not only was Lenin the most creative, the greatest fighter, and the greatest genius, but also the most courageous, morally courageous. He proved to be courageous in the most daring tests and in the most difficult decisions during his lifetime and during the revolutionary process. We honestly believe that to study Lenin's life, to study Lenin's thoughts, to study Lenin's doctrines and example, is not to pay reverence, but it is an advantage, a benefit for the peoples. We honor Lenin with emotion, but when his work and life are studied, when his thoughts and doctrines are studied, the peoples will acquire a true treasure from the political point of view. We believe that this wonderful movement during the Lenin centennial anniversary should continue with the study of Lenin's life, works, and doctrine. The writings and works are many. Some are more circumstantial, others are of the perpetual value, of lasting value, of eternal value. Practically not one of Lenin's words or writings does not have value. We believe that we should make an effort to continue to preach, print, and study Lenin's works. This will allow us to better understand the social processes, the political processes, the revolutionary processes, and the international processes. After reading any of Lenin's works once and finding it to be profound and interesting, after a few years--especially while living through a revolutionary process--we can find new things, new concepts, and always with renewed interest. It must be said that Lenin's thoughts have greatly influenced the Cuban revolutionary process. At the end of the October Revolution Lenin's ideas were spread profusely throughout the world, and in our country they found a nation ready for them. They found followers who were inspired by those thoughts, and in the revolutionary struggle of 1930 to 1933 the Cuban revolutionaries were profoundly impressed by Lenin's thoughts. To some of us, some of his works were a guide, a doctrine, a means of understanding, without which we would have been benefit of absolute truths, absolutely essential truths in a revolutionary process. We recall how in the months preceding 26 July 1953 most of the small group of comrades who were dedicated to those tasks were always going around with the works of Marx and Lenin, and we remember how some of Lenin's books, because they were Lenin's books, fell into the hands of the police during searched made after the Moncada attack. We remember how in the Moncada action a politically dominated prosecutor included among his most serious accusations against us, among his most captious questions, whether it was true that we had books by Lenin and whether we owned them. Naturally, due to the great amount of prejudice, of lies, of mental conditioning they produced in broad sectors of the populace, they wanted to brand the 26 July movement a communist movement. And it could not be said that it was a communist movement. What could be said was that a group of those of us who organized that movement was heavily impregnated with Marxist-Leninist thought. [applause] Perhaps they were interested in establishing a connection, and they would be interested first because of the great prejudice, the large dose of anticommunist toxin they injected into the populace in order to ingratiate the imperialists and receive more support from them. One of the most usual accusations was that someone was a communist, and often they were among the most destructive accusations from the political standpoint because that was the existing climate. We remember that at the time we could not restrain our indignation over the inbecility of bringing up the Lenin book and we angrily rose to say: Yes, these books are ours and whoever does not read Lenin is an ignoramus. [applause] It was practically a crime, a crime, gentlemen, to study Lenin. It was not too long ago when the prevailing atmosphere inculcated through long years of slanderous and lying propaganda was against Marxist and against communism, and unfortunately this propaganda went deeply. Remember the first days of the revolution? Sometimes out of curiosity we would ask even a worker: Are you in favor of the agrarian reform law, are you in favor of the housing law, are you in favor of the nationalization of the banks? One by one I asked him about all those laws. Do no you agree that the banks where the people's money is kept should be in the hand of the state and that the funds can be used for the development of the economy, at the service of the nation, and not for whatever pleases some private individuals who are owners of the banks? Do you think that all those mines should belong to the people of Cuba and not to some foreign companies, to some types who live in New York. Yes and yes to everything. Yes to everything and to each one of the revolutionary laws. And then I would ask, then you are in favor of socialism? Oh, no, no, no! Absolutely no! It was incredible how they had conditioned minds to the extent that a word was taboo, and idea was taboo. Hence a man could agree in essence with everything but could not agree with the word. I remember this because we drew decisive conclusions from Lenin's works. Of course, when I talked about Leninism, I am talking about Marxism, about the essential ideas of Marx developed by Lenin, and one very specific idea of Lenin, the state and the revolution, which clarified so many concepts for us, which enlightened us so much when the time came to work out the revolutionary strategy, the struggle for the conquest of revolutionary power. It was very decisive to the preparation of the strategy. It did not fit the mold, no political process, none fits the mold exactly, and it may be said that in politics molds do not exist. The Marxian theory was never a mold, it was a conception, it was a method, an interpretation, a science, and science is applied to each concrete case and there are not two exact concrete cases. Conditions were also peculiar to our country and Marxist ideas were fully applicable to our country. I must say that the development of revolutionary thought was strongly influenced by the traditions of our country, by the history of our country, by the liberation struggles of our country. It can be said that concept that inspired the revolutionary strategy which led to the triumph in 1959 was, in fact, the union, the hybridization of a tradition, of an experience peculiar to our nation with the essential ideas of Marxism and Leninism. A nation without Cuba's traditions and without Cuba's history would not have been able to reach a victory of this nature, an advance of this nature. But, a nation with Cuba's traditions without the essential Marxist-Leninism concepts, above all in a number of fundamental matters, would not have been able to reach such as advanced stage. That is why when we observe the many processes that are taking place in many parts of the world in a lesser or higher degree, we always think that ignoring Marxism and Leninism is a disadvantage for any revolutionary. It might seem paradoxical to call a man who is not a Marxist-Leninist a revolutionary. There is no paradox. Let us cite the case of the man who is not satisfied with the society in which he lives, with the injustices that prevail everywhere. He wants to change, he has the instinct and the profession of the fighter, the instinct and the profession of the revolutionary. When do we become revolutionaries? We being by being revolutionaries on a particular day, and we never cease to be revolutionaries. Every day we gain more knowledge, we enrich our thoughts, the spirit. Nobody can say that yesterday he was more revolutionary than he is today and that tomorrow he will be less revolutionary than today. There are men who want to change, who have many qualities that make a revolutionary, such as a revolutionary will. There are men who understand today's problems, such as misery underdevelopment, and technological backwardness. Some men begin to understand the problem and take into consideration the imperialist economic exploitation. They have revolutionary fiber and behave like revolutionaries. Nevertheless those not familiar with Marxism-Leninism will be a great disadvantage. What can be ascertained--and we have the right to do so because we have lived through this unique experience and we have tried to get something out of that experience daily--is that there is only one revolutionary science, only one political science, just that revolutionary and political science is Marxism-Leninism [applause] and that there is no other political and revolutionary science. There is no other. There is no other theory. Everything else is superficial, trivial, and hodgepodge. Even in the universal language today--of the bourgeoisie, of the capitalists--Marxist terminology is used frequently. The division of society into classes is something that no one disputes, no bourgeois politician, no bourgeois newspaper, no bourgeois theoretician. The division into classes is universally accepted. Other ideas, other phrases are accepted, and many of these phrases and ideas of Marxist-Leninist. This means that the Marxist-Leninist ideas are spreading throughout the world much more than before. I would not say that are applied as much as they spread. I would not say they are used as much as they are cited. It is odd to see that all over the world in student sectors, in intellectual and progressive sectors, as a rule the terminology, the phrases, the ideas that are heard, the Marxist terminology, phrases, and ideas. What we stated before is today almost universally acknowledged--that without Marxist-Leninism there is neither theory nor science, be it revolutionary or political. We have not doubt that this process will continue. We must not forget that Marx was the most attacked and most defamed man of his era. Lenin was defamed and attacked to a much greater degree. They made use of the worst infamies within the revolutionary movement. Outside the revolutionary movement they try to picture Lenin as the incarnation of the devil himself. The bourgeoisie and reactionaries from all over the world were trying to check the spread of revolutionary ideas with those ideas and stories. But something else must be said: After the October Revolution there appeared a whole series of individuals who denied Lenin. One of the weapons used by the capitalists against the communists was the attempt at diminishing Lenin's power in the revolutionary process by distorting history. Hundreds of these hack historians, supposedly leftists such as we have even now--a method of technique used by the reactionaries--these were the historians, who supposedly belonged to the left, who distorted the history of the Leninist revolutionary process. But a truly objective study of history does not leave room for any comparison. No, no comparison whatsoever, leaves room next to Lenin for any other way of thinking, because Lenin's way of thinking excels, from the very beginning to the very end, and is the very center of its existence, the soul of this process. [applause] It was in this way that the apologists of other personalities in that process appeared. We are not dealing here with an attempt at demeaning anyone, for there were many herds, many men of great worth, but there is no doubt of that tendency toward pseudo, hack writers of the left from which appeared the currents which tended to belittle Lenin's role in the revolutionary process. Of course, as time goes by, we will not be the only ones. The socialist nations will not be the only ones. The day will come when all nations will join in this homage to Lenin; the day will come when all states will join in this tribute to Lenin; the day will come when the whole of humanity will join in praising Lenin. [applause]. We do not have the smallest doubt of this. Suffice if to remember that 12 years ago, we could have paid homage to Lenin a only under the blows of the police. Just 12 short years ago, these people who are rendering such a beautiful homage, such a sincere and profound homage to Lenin, just 12 years ago, only in a part and under the blows of the nightsticks could we have paid tribute to Lenin, but today millions of Cubans express their affection and admiration for Lenin. In the same way, someday millions of today's illiterates will be familiar with Lenin, his work, his story, and his life; and homage will be, I repeat, universal, which ennobles his role--that of the man who encountered so many difficulties and so little understanding in order to one day be understood and admired by thousands of millions of human beings. I have expressed some ideas, some feelings, about Lenin, about his influence in our ideological progress, but there has been another fundamental influence: the influence of Lenin's revolution, the influence that the party and the state created by Lenin had on our country's revolutionary process. Because, as we were saying earlier, that without our country's traditions and without the essence of Marxist thought, our people would not have been able to take the enormous step forward that they took. Out people would not have been able to become the first socialist country in Latin America, the last to free itself from the Spanish colonial period and the first to free itself completely from Yankee imperialism. [applause] We would not have been able to say this if in October...of 1917, there would not... is it 17 or 18? I always have trouble remembering. I am asking you because you are the one who has studied this the most. [applause] Yes, I remember that, when I was studying psychology, it was called a mental lapse--on a date. But let us come back to the idea that without the October Revolution of 1917, Cuba could not have become the first socialist country in Latin America. [applause] We would have been just as revolutionary, our country would have gone to its final conclusions, undoubtedly, but the greatest sacrifices and the most heroic determinations could have prevailed over the consequences of imperialism's might which is 90 miles from our coast. It would have prevailed over the consequences of its criminal economic, political, and military blows. There are unfortunates in the world; this is known in certain intellectual circles; sometimes these miserable creatures abound. Unfortunately, imperialism has managed to create in some circles what we may call a deep anti-Soviet feeling. These circles are related to this imperialist technique that has tried to reduce the importance of Lenin's role. Today, as everybody knows, there are supertheoretical revolutionaries, superleftists, real supermen, who are capable of smashing imperialism in 2 seconds with their tongue. There are many superrevolutionaries who do not even know the realities, the problems, the difficulties of a revolution. Encouraged by such feeling, which is well nourished by imperialism, they have a ferocious hate, they seem unwilling to pardon the fact that the Soviet Union exists--and this is from the leftist positions. They would like to have a Soviet Union after their own perfect image, after their own ridiculous ideals. Because a country is, before anything else, a reality, and a reality which must be formed from many other realities. Those circles are forgetting the incredible initial difficulties of the revolutionary process in the Soviet Union, the difficulties to which we were referring earlier, the incredible problems arising from the blockade, the isolation, the fascist aggression. They are trying to ignore all this, and they almost consider it a sort of crime that the Soviet Union exists, and this from leftist positions. Complete dishonesty. They forget about the problems of Cuba, Vietnam, and Arab world, that is, wherever imperialism is dealing its blow. They are there, a country, a state, that supplies the necessary arms so that the peoples may defend themselves against that imperialism. Our case: 1.5 billion pesos in arms from the Soviet Union. [applause] Under no condition should we believe that we have received the most help; we do not say this in the form of protest or claim. Other parties have had greater needs, such as the Middle East, where many more arms have been supplied because of the situation there. I want to say that the value of arms freely received by countries amounts to billions of pesos. In our case, what would we have done without these arms--we will not mention oil and some other items that were decisive and basic at specific moments--perhaps the oxen, cart, horse, mule, living somewhat like backward people. But it is always preferable to live backwardly than to have to fight without arms. We are commemorating the Giron event these days, and we can well remember: antiaircraft guns, tanks, cannon, arms, mortars with which we were able to pulverize the mercenaries. The existence of the Soviet state is objectively, objectively, one of the greatest privileges of the revolutionary movement. [applause] What do I mean by this? I mean that it is possible to have diverse opinions on different problems, that a revolutionary movement may interpret or face up to a specific problem in one way and others in another way. It is not necessary that each party think exactly like others. No; do not be confused. We believe that within the large diversity and complexity of the problems, there will always be many different points of view. We refer to the existence of a plague of pseudorevolutionaries, of writers who are paid by imperialism, who with an unbelievable fury write against the Soviet Union and, practically, do not want to pardon the existence of the Soviet state. This is a matter that can only interest, feelings that can emanate only from a reactionary and imperialistic hate. These matters, these objectives truths, cannot ever be forgotten by men with an elementary sense of historic truth, or reality, of justice. Neither can they ever deny them. Today's world is very complex, a world that offers nothing that is easy, and very difficult world. There are no easy solutions to problems. The problems are many and complex. These circumstances are used to slander, intrigue; there are some who do not want to pardon this country because of the position it adopted in the Czechoslovakia case. I refer to those pseudowriters of the left, and some day it will be necessary to discuss, some day it will be necessary to have an extensive debate anywhere. There are many who write about the Cuban revolution, except in Cuba. Some of them do not observe even a rejoinder because they are obvious agents of imperialism, obvious agents of imperialism, who can still inveigle more than our idiots. Nevertheless, we believe it is in situations such as this that the revolutionary criterion is defined. This position we hold and repeat. We were certainly not [applause] we were not going to act in the name of some bourgeois logic, of some bourgeois concept; of a bourgeois policy. What was important for us was the counterrevolutionary process occurring there, this process of betraying Marxism. We cannot forge the Czechoslovak news agency, which wrote about Che in terms worse then UPI and AP. There were numberless cases like this, slandering other countries including Cuba, for that was liberalism, yes indeed, liberalism. And I believe that that was the moment, under those circumstances, when one must know how to evaluate, how to react in the revolutionary fashion. Only the imperialists would have benefited if that had not been nipped in the bud, if that had not been cut at the root. Some said that how strange the Cuba, considering how it could be invaded by the Yankee imperialists. Very well, if the Yankee imperialists were to invade Cuba at any time, there would be still a reason here for dying, down to the last man. [applause] This is not a judicial reason; this is not a legal reason; it is a moral reason, and when people are defending a just cause they right and die. What can never be done is to lead a people to die for any unjust cause, what can never be done is to lead a people to die for the counterrevolution. This is the basic reason. In that instance there was a counterrevolutionary process in progress, while here we have a revolutionary process. In case there are some who still do not understand, we are not bourgeois liberals, we are Marxist-Leninists and antiliberals. [applause] For us all bourgeois philosophy and all bourgeois liberal ideas are somewhat akin to some old superstition, out of style for a long time. We were saying that when we speak about the positions taken and held by our country, how the objective facts are above all, how the truth is above all things, how we shall always keep in mind the objective importance, the objective value, and how Soviet aid has been for us a decisive factor. There are some who are not pleased that we recognize this: Filthy hack liberals prancing about the world, charlatans who never had to face one case, let alone the problems of a whole nation, who never had to see and suffer the poverty, the wretchedness of the whole nation. There are many from Rome and Paris who construct hypothetical and imaginary worlds. Some of them live very well--I do not mean all, but some--for some are simple agents of the CIA and the others are idiots, and they become indignant when the people proclaim these truths. These facts we shall always have before us, always present. These matters, these objectives truths, these objective facts will always prevail in our relations with the Soviet Union. This is a good occasion to explain these positions. Even more so because there is another topic we would like to touch upon in order to define our positions. Two topics 1) the mercenaries' affairs [applause]; 2) our position on the OAS [applause]. There are some things that need to be defined. This years has been a year of much work and few words. There are topics that have been rolling, making the rounds, on which opinions have not been given. What importance can this landing of the mercenary group have? What other plans must be take into considerations? What is our position, in general, in Latin America? And that our judgment is in the context of all our relations, of all our attitudes, of all our relations with the United States. I want, in the first place, to explain the strategic objective of this landing of mercenaries. They, the United States, have not yet said a word on the matter. However, this is part of a plan that they planned to carry out earlier--not in April--which consisted of being able to send a initial group to a rather inaccessible area, where it would be difficult to liquidate them, where they could remain for some time, and then later, send similar groups to different parts of the national territory while the harvest was going on. This group--and let us see if the U.S. Government can evade its responsibility--this group tried to land in January, and there is a dispatch here which says: "16 January, AP, Washington--The State Department revealed today that 14 Cuban exiles carried out an unsuccessful attempt to infiltrate Cuba late week and were rescued 1 mile from the coast of the communist island by an American Navy patrol boat. Robert McClockey, State Department spokesman, said that the Cubans were rescued from their craft, which was sinking, and taken back to Miami after a stop at the Gautanamo Naval Base." This group of mercenaries--a great part of them, quite a few of them-- were taken to the United States through Guantanamo when they left Cuba--one more rude violation of the statutes of that arbitrary base. Not only did they get to the United States through Guantanamo, but in January, when they tried to make the first landing, when they tried to begin the plan, they had problems with their boats and they took refuge and were helped and given refuge at the Yankee naval base, which returned them to the United States. And now that some group, equipped with AR-15's, AR-16's and AR-18's, the most modern U.S. automatic rifles, lands in the Baracoa area. How can the U. S. Government even insinuate that it has no responsibility in these events? And the plan, as I was saying, was--because when they left, it was with a cameraman and the whole words--films for movies for television. On 26 April, great publicity followed by the landing of new mercenary groups. That had a plan earlier, since January. The 26th they will make public the films taken by a well-known gentlemen, a mercenary of the press called "(Guayo)". If the State Department wants more information, I can ask the gentlemen for it. He can even show it the films. Of course, by the 26th there will no longer be any mercenaries left to publicize. Yesterday, in a new contract with our forces, two more mercenaries were killed and another two captured. [applause] There are only four mercenaries left and they are encircled. [applause] And of course, it is proven that it is very difficult for even a rodent to escape the units of the Baracoa territorial division--units of mountaineer militia. It will be very difficult, because when they get through one encirclement, they quickly find themselves in another. The militia have complete information, simply because in each peasant home there is a militiaman. [applause] So there are four mercenaries left and it is very difficult for them to escape the units of the Baracoa territorial division the comrades who are leading those operations who know much about operations than the mercenaries, a whole lot more, and the two main leaders are already out of the fighting. [applause] We have not set a deadline for the comrades to capture the rest. On the contrary, when we talked to them we told them: Don't hurry. Do not despair, because the area is very rugged, very tangled--that area is a very difficult area to operate in. Do not get impatient, I told them. Yes, it is going to last a few days more, a few days less, but I doubt very much that any one of these remaining can escape. So that is the current situation. If they have any other little group, they can send it. [applause] Another, although we doubt they will send them, because, with this example...if they do not take warnings, despite the warnings... the most modern automatic weapons of the U.S. Army, the pineapples--hand grenades like the ones they use in Vietnam--and each one of them [had] 600 bullets. But all right, the importance of this is even relative. In our opinion, the plans that, for a few months, this Mr. Nixon has been hatching, to which we are referring in Baracoa-- that is, they have still more serious plans than these obstructionist plans, and it can be seen that they are preparing a new, imminent adventure against our country. We know who is behind this adventure but--besides, the way in which they are doing it--but not much special information is needed for that, because many news reports of this nature can be read every day: UPI, 25 March 1970, New Orleans. Statements by Euologio Cantillo. Soon recruiting stations will open in Miami and other cities in order to form an army of anti-Castro exiles, announced former Cuban General Eulogio Cantillo. The project is part of the Torriente plan, a new anti-Castro movement launched during a gigantic exile demonstration 2 months ago by Jose de La Torriente, one of the leaders of the Cuban colony. This Jose de La Torriente is an active proprietor in Yankee businesses, who has been in the United States for 55 years and is Yankee citizen. We will have an army before the end of the year, promised Cantillo. We can have one almost any size we need. [faint laughter] Cantillo said there will be recruiting facilities in all cities with sizable Cuban colonies. In the United States there are large colonies in Miami, New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, cities in New Jersey, and many other in which Cubans, who arrive constantly as refugees by plane from Cuba live. After the volunteers sign up, we will chose those best prepared for military tasks, said the 56-year old general. Among the recruits will be veterans of the Bay of Pigs invasion; [faint laughter], former members of the constitutional Cuban Army, they call that constitutional [faint laughter], those thugs, a few individuals from Fidel Castro's rebel army, deserted who were never good for anything--with come exception--there might have been one that was good for something--of those who are the beginning of the revolution--that's what they call "from Fidel Castro's rebel army"--and Cubans who have fought in Vietnam--that was all that was lacking--in the U.S. army, he said. The training for fighting in Cuba can be arranged in some South American country, said Cantillo, and he added: Many kinds of training could also be carried out legally in the United States, for example target shooting, hikes, calisthenics--beside the training picked up there. If people who were at pigs [Bay of Pigs], pigs who were in Vietnam [loud laughter], "constitutional" thugs--a new name--and four miserable deserters, come, the only thing that could be said of this army would be that it had chosen the worst truth in the world [faint laughter]. In all this indecent such there are the Masferrers, the River Agueros, the Prio Socarras--some will remember--one did not have to be a prophet during that beginning when we said one day, together, all together, they put even the smallest scruple aside. And there they all are, all of them, seated at the same table and eating off the same plate. And here we have, for example, one of this gentlemen's allies--Mr. Masferrer, well-known leader of that band of murderers called "Los Tigres," which has nothing of the tiger's claws, who murdered hundreds of peasants and citizens--if not thousands--throughout the country. And speaking of this movement, he says: The fools are asking: what means will Torrientes use to accomplish the next miracle, now that he has accomplished the first of unity for war. This is no secret to me: With any army of patriots, with tanks, planes, and cannons, with money, with powerful allies. Torrientes has this also. They will not appear on the indiscreet pages of the Miami HERALD like those absurd reports on Gautemala; but shortly there will appear on the television screens of the four corners of the earth the heavy tanks that will smash the terrorized communist mob in each city. Many of our countrymen have seen these soldiers and tanks and have seen the planes flying that will sweep the bandits off the island. They are not yet marked with the emblem of the liberating army; but let no one despair because the wings and turrents will soon be marked. All this is taking place publicly in the United States; the recruiting of an army, and so forth. In a statement by this Yankee in the Miami NEWS on 10 February, in which he speaks about a meeting in Miami, he said: I cannot explain what I am doing. Neither can I reveal the plan at this time or the names of those who are helping and are ready to liberate Cuba. These are persons of a higher category than mine. I have brought up only a few samples regarding what we are saying about Mr Nixon--who is largely responsible for the Giron incident, and who said that he would give a free hand to the mercenaries, and that if he had been in the government the Giron invasion would have succeeded because we would have sent the planes--and the shameless way in which they are proclaiming, preparing, and creating the conditions for another adventure against our country. We are too well acquainted with those fellows, we know their idiosyncrasy much too well. The reason the Giron event did not take this country by surprise is that when the planes arrived on the 17th everybody was on the alert. We were in headquarters when we saw the B-26's go by at dawn. They surprised nobody because these past 10 years have taught us to block every move they make. We know that in future months or years these idiots, these cretins, these criminals, will continue their game or aggression against our country. This means that we will have to continue with out working implement in one hand and a rifle in the other. [applause] We must continue to invest large amounts of energy to develop and to defend the country. The imperialists do not accept Cuba's acts and position. It is good to mention that there have been some insolent statements to the effect that they would be willing to talk with Cuba if Cuba breaks its ties with the Soviet Union, its political and military ties. Referring to this some time ago, to this policy of cretins, this advice of cretins: Break with your friends if you want to be the friend of your enemies. This is not because of basic principles, but because of something greater, because of a deep revolutionary conviction. First, we would never accept any condition from the imperialists. Second, we will never break our political ties with the Soviet Union. [applause] Neither will we break what they call military ties. On the contrary, we shall always be ready to have closer military ties with the Soviet Union. With whom else can be have these ties? With Yankee imperialism? [someone in crowd shouts "no!"] Our political and military ties with the Soviet Union will never be broken. Military ties may be broken only when there is no more imperialism. Our counterproposal to the Yankee State Department is this! Cease to be an imperialist state and we will break our military ties with the Soviet Union. [applause] Therefore, this is the kind of statement they make. And,of course, they understand that all this noise, these new planes, all these things are the result of the very firm position of the Cuban revolution. It is evident that they are unwilling to leave the country in peace. Very well the, another fact comes into play. Some months ago there were press dispatches on arguments and more arguments in the different Latin American foreign ministries concerning Cuba's return to the OAS. The curious thing about all this is that there is no way of explaining or clarifying that Cuba had never requested this return; that Cuba will never request this return, and [applause] furthermore, so that there will be no doubts, that Cuba will never return to that indecent garbage heap called the OAS. [applause] There is no way of explaining or saying it. Very well, then, let us say it some other way! Cuba will return to the OAS on the day when it throws the United States out [applause] for genocide, for interventionism, for the numberless and repeated and unceasing interventions among the Latin American nations. [applause] And these interventions have ranged from the thousands of bandit excursions of all types against Cuba, the recent criminal invasion of Santo Domingo not long ago, and all their support of and participation in the reactionary and repressive regimes of Latin America. There are some who, when they discuss Cuba and relations with Cuba and the problems of the OAS, tend to use the argument of Cuban subversion. Well, the truth is that there is no argument with less validity, for the country which of more than half a century has followed a policy of unceasing intervention is the United States, the most criminal, the most shameless interventions. No man with any self-respect can invoke such an argument to justify the blockade against our country because it lacks moral, legal and any other kind of validity. For who in this continent could possibly have any morality if they maintain relations with the United States? Who would justify the criminal blockade of our country by claiming Cuban subversion? This argument we can classify in only one way: impudence. This now raises our position vis-a-vis the revolutionary movements. There will come a day for giving certain explanations that we do not wish to make now about real and feigned revolutionaries. Someday the story of these revolutionaries, some of them, will be known, of those who issued statements saying that Cuba was involved in its own economic development--a new crime in the annals of Marxism, a new crime to dedicate oneself to economic development! How about that! Such a degree of philosophical and ideological underdevelopment! A new crime to be blamed on our nation! A surprise! We had always thought that one of the basic duties of our country was to defeat the blockade. The imperialists must have had some reason for establishing their blockade and destroying the revolution. What is the difference between the imperialist philosophy and that of these pseudorevolutionaries who have discovered a new crime: that Cuba dedicated itself to its economic development? Cuba is engaged and it has every right to be engaged in its economic development. But Cuba has never nor will it ever deny support to a revolutionary movement. This is not to be confused with support of any impostor just because he is using the name of revolutionary. The sad thing is that we have occasionally believed the tale, and we have even met some of them. However, we promise that we shall soon publish the story of some of these phonies, with details. Meanwhile, let them talk; the papers are all there, and some of them who were revolucioncidas....See, I invented a new work: [laughter, applause] Assassins of revolutions, yes, because they had the opportunity to start and to conduct a revolutionary war; they did indeed have the opportunity, and they fumbled it. That type of pseudorevolutionary can expect no aid from Cuba. Of course, but revolutionaries like Che; revolutionaries like Che: [prolonged applause] Willing to struggle to the final consequences, willing to fight, willing to die--those will always be able to count on Cuba's help. This was a very necessary clarification because there are many interpreters, prophets, wizards, philosophers of each of Cuba's positions, and everybody talks with such ease--especially when one of those reports is highlighted in the mouth of some humbug. They are always echoed in Paris, in the liberal bourgeois press of Paris, in order to discredit the revolution, always. But one must not worry. Our position toward the revolutionary movement; As long as there is imperialism, as long as there are people struggling, willing to fight for their people's liberation from that imperialism, the Cuban revolution will support them. [applause] Let this be quite clear to those who have the impudence to doubt this revolution's integrity and who think that we would violate principles for economic reasons: This country would not have mentioned the intransigent and upright position vis-a-vis Yankee imperialism that it has maintained for a long time. I am sure that if many of those cheap philosophers and theoreticians had had to confront the formidable might of imperialism for a single month of these 10 years--political might, military might, economic might--they would have written 50 books to justify the coexistence with this imperialism, to justify the best relations with that imperialism, casting aside all principles. There are wretches who do not want to forgive this country for its stand, detractors whom we remember. This is not the first time; we all remember when we forcibly remained silent for so long as a result of Che's departure from Cuba. And the least many wretches said was that we had murdered Che, and such things. There are those who are serving the CIA with alleged leftist postures--hear this well--of alleged leftist positions, who do not want to forgive this country for the dignity and uprightness it has maintained vis-a-vis the United States--the dignity and uprightness, [applause] despite its size before U.S. military and technical might--who have refused to forgive this country for the uprightness with which at given moments the lives of all the people have been in jeopardy, without giving any one bit, as when the crisis of October occurred. [applause] We Cuban revolutionaries have gained a lot of experience over these years in knowing how to distinguish truth from lies, sincerity from hypocrisy--revolutionaries who have honest, though possibly erroneous anxieties--and the paid agents of imperialism. Because of this today, the anniversary of Lenin, we wanted to clear up these questions. On 26 July last year, the beginning of the harvest, we set forth what our position would be toward isolated cases of countries that sought to reestablish relations with us. And we said then, and reiterate this today, that a country that would be up to casting aside and rubbish of the immoral OAS sanctions, that would be up to acting independently and with utmost sovereignty; that would not be an accomplice to the economic blockade against out country and aggressions, the aggressions against our country; in that event we would accept the reestablishment of relations with such a country. In other words: That would be willing to show contempt for the immoral and repugnant agreement of the Organization of American States, that would not be an accomplice in the economic blockade and the aggressions against our country. Our position will be one of the reciprocity with any country willing to do this. The basis for these relations would be similar to the relations we have been maintaining with Mexico. [applause] Naturally, countries like this are very few-very few for the time being. For the time being! When referring to support of the revolutionary movement, we must say that it does not have to be exclusively for guerrilla movements. It can be for any government that sincerely adopts a policy of economic and social growth and is for liberating the country from the Yankee imperialist yoke. Regardless of how this government has come to power, Cuba will support it. [applause] I am saying this because, as we were saying, in the history of mankind there have never been two identical cases, not two circumstances exactly alike. Now will there be two revolutions that develop exactly the same? New possibilities and new ways are being born. An increase in the concern among church sectors and military institutions--two forces which were the most solid pillars of reaction, oligarchy, and imperialism--has been noted recently in Latin America. However, in church sectors and in military sectors, and, as a result of the growth of the awareness of the peoples' subjection to exploitation, as a result of the growth of the yoke--the awareness of the yoke, imposed by the imperialists--as a result of the heroic and revolutionary position of some priests, the most outstanding example of which is Camilo Torres in Colombia, [applause] and revolutionary unrest, the forerunners of which were the rebels of Carupano and Puerto Cabello in Venezuela some years ago, which found its most lofty expression in the group of courageous militarymen, who, led by Colonel Caamano, conducted the constitutionalist movement in Santo Domingo--a movement which was crushed by imperialism's criminal intervention--crushed but not conquered! Unrest is also being seen in other countries, as is the case of Peru, probably, the last thing the imperialists expected was that a movement with an awareness of underdevelopment would be born from the armed forces ranks and that the movement's goal was a plan for the country's growth. A consistent plan for growth leads to a revolution. This is a new phenomenon, worthy of being noted, and worthy of the greatest interest, and we are watching closely this movement developing in Peru, very closely, because we have seen how the reactionary press, oligarchy and imperialism lately has been employing all their means, and have been carrying out a violent campaign against the Government of Peru--a reactionary campaign, promoting subversion. However, since we have been through all this already we know full well what imperialism's intentions are and the means it employs. All the reactionary organs have carried out a very violent campaign against the people of Peru. We already stated on 26 July our position concerning this and our interest and reason for being careful about any statement we make about Peru, to avoid by all means that Cuba's position be interpreted or used for ousting the Peruvian Government. We simply say, however, that any Latin American government the launches itself sincerely and consistently on the road leading to the country's economic and social growth and liberation from the imperialist yoke can count on the support of our people and revolution in any sense and under any ground. [applause] This is our position. We are not going to dogmatic and neither will we ever act in a way which favors imperialist interests. Never! Anything that may smell of being anti-imperialist will have our support. And we will repulse all that smells of being imperialist. This will be our stand, the one we previously talked about, on the conditions under which our country could establish unilateral relations with some Latin American countries. Of course, this statement will be used by the most reactionary elements; it will be used to fight some people with a stand different than that of the most reactionary and tougher elements. The most reactionary and tougher elements opposed everything that had to do with deals with Cuba. Very well, gentlemen, we agree. We fully agree. The Yankee imperialists are concerned, we are concerned, we are not interested in any deals with those gorillas; we are not interested in any deals with that imperialism; we are not interested in any deals with the Organization of American States, but we simply have the right to express our thoughts. Nevertheless, we must frankly state that we sincerely appreciate the statements of the Government of Trinidad and Tobago courageously condemning the economic blockade against Cuba. [applause] And by the same token, we sincerely appreciate the gesture of the Government of Chile authorizing the export of a certain food products to our country [applause] which we used to get from Chile, and as result of the imperialist blockade, could not get them for several years. Therefore, we can publicly say, aside from controversies and differences which we have publicly had with that government, that we sincerely appreciate the gesture. By the same token, we understand that that country's Foreign Ministry refrained from getting involved in arguments and stated its position against the blockade in a manner which was not unbecoming to our country. But those who dream of a repentant Cuba knocking on the doors of the Organization of American States are dreaming. They do not understand our spirit. Do they not realize that after 10 years they are the ones who are defeated and we are the victors? They do not realize that after 10 years [applause] all other formulas have failed, that no one talks about the Alliance for Progress, that the United States has a Nixon who is full-fledged imperialist and who does not talk about anything but private investments and who treats them with contempt. They do not realize that the anti-Cuban campaigns are no longer good business-the votes against Cuba, that business is not too good--that we are progressing, that we are moving forward, that there is no one who can say that the imperialist rule can be maintained in this contingent in the coming years. Who can believe that we could be such a bunch of idiots to incur something that has been in the Bible for quite sometime, of the one who traded his eldest son for a bowl of lentils? We are the first ones with the socialist revolution in this continent [applause] and that honor, which we have been able to defend during difficult times, we will never, renounce nor trade for one, or 100 or 1,000, or 1 million bowls of lentils or gold or anything. We, with our dignity, our decisiveness, will resist, we are emerging victorious. It is a prove fact that they cannot be anything to crush us. We have had a fine start and in the next few years the rhythm of development will be tremendous with the means and resources available to our country. So, the future is ours. Crises and defeats belong to imperialism. The revolutionary phenomena which has confronted the oligarchy is moving around the world like a ghost, especially in this continent, so there are no secure imperialist interests in this continent. It is foolish and stupid to think that a repentant Cuba may request admittance to that political house of prostitution, the Organization of American States. [applause] Will that be enough? Well, if the governments that are able to follow international policies are respectful toward our country, we will be respectful toward them. But the accomplices of the imperialist blockade and the aggression against our country better not expect any considerations from this country. They should stop arguing and remove that ridiculous olive branch when talking about subversion because what was truly subversion was the Giron incident, the hundreds of times that the imperialists dropped weapons in this country, the thousands of crimes and violations against our country, the shameless intervention in Santo Domingo, and other such events. We are not going to be intimidated with threats and we are not going to become confused by dialogs which lack force and validity. Therefore, we have said and reiterated and explained that all those who decide to fight against imperialism can have our support. [applause] And of course, the imperialists should not expect any consideration, any cooperation; we have not said a word on certain problems, but people have been saying that they have a lot of problems. The hijacking of planes; they created them. And no they have troubles with the planes, the abductions of ambassadors, All kinds of problems--and they created them. Now there is not way to solve this. Let them solve it. In respect to the planes, we enacted our law, and if they want to solve the matter of the planes, they must abide by the letter of the law, article by article, without removing a single comma from our law. [applause] They have created a rash of problems with their rascalities, with their piracies, with their misdemeanors, and now they are at a loss as to how to resolve them. And they face all those problems, not knowing what to do. Those governments are so discredited that they cannot even provide safeguards for the ambassadors there. We have no problem whatever. We guarantee the ambassadors that are here, in this country, and we give them security. [applause] If they cannot, it is their affair, but let them not count on any cooperation from Cuba in any sense. We say this as of now, for they are talking about asylum and about reaching an agreement--now they want to reach an agreement and Cuba is on the outside, no? Well let us see what they do to solve the problems they have created which are their problems, not Cuba's in any sense. This is how things stand, these are the realities, and they are crystal clear. We have spoken clearly to everyone. The imperialists are also speaking clearly--what they are thinking of doing, what they are planning. But we have wanted to speak in the clearest terms, and we think that there is no more opportune time than this splendid day, this extraordinary date, this centennial of the birth of Lenin. Let us likewise shout "viva" for, in the first place, an eternal "viva" for the immortal Lenin. [shout of "viva"] And an eternal "viva" for the friendship between the peoples of the Soviet Union and Cuba [loud applause]. Fatherland or death. We will win. [applause] -END-