Ten years after the
Nicaraguan revolution
4. Proportion of GDP (source INIES, Bulletin socio-économique, Managua 1988.)
5. According to Vilas, Transicion desde el subdesarrolo, Nueva Sociedad,
International Viewpoint #169 • September 18, 1989
NICARAGUA IN characterizing the nature of the Sandinista regime, we speak of a workers' state or of the dictatorship of the proletariat supported by the peasants.1 This characterization does not imply that the working class constitutes the principal social base (in numerical terms) of the Sandinista regime, nor does it mean that the working class effectively exercises political power.
The situation is in fact much more complex. ARNOLD BERTHU
ODAY, as before the revolution, the working class is a minority within the Nicaraguan social formation. In 1978 and 1979 there were 40,000 industrial workers, concentrated mainly in small and medium enterprises, and around 60,000 waged permanent agricultural workers (a group of fairly recent origin). Today, the number of paid workers in agriculture has grown, and they have achieved a higher level of organisation. In contrast, the number of industrial workers has fallen (above all since 1987), to the extent that one could speak of a "declassed" industrial class, to use Lenin's expression characterizing the state of the Soviet working class in 1920-21.
The Nicaraguan working class has not only declined in numerical terms, but has also experienced a situation of rapid turnover of employees in the enterprises, as well as a great deal of coming-and-going between the formal and informal sectors. This could not but have a negative effect upon its class consciousness. Workers in the public sector, for their part, have grown and their degree of cohesion and class consciousness has been strengthened. Long and difficult transition towards socialism
In order to understand the current phase through which the Nicaraguan revolution is passing, it is necessary to analyze the objective conditions at the time of the seizure of power which have determined the long and difficult transition towards socialism of a small, backward and peripheral country.
In June-July 1979, an authentic social revolution took place: the Nicaraguan masses, under the leadership of the Sandinistas, destroyed the bourgeois state apparatus and in its place put a decisive instrument for bringing about revolutionary social transformations. This instrument was the dictatorship of the proletariat supported by the alliance of the workers and peasants. The birth of this new state, based in the full sense of the term on the people in arms, allowed the conquest of national sovereignty, the progressive realization of the tasks of the democratic revolution (agrarian reform, recognition of the rights of selforganization and self-expression for the masses, a national assembly elected for the first time by universal suffrage and so on), as well as incursions into the domain of private property (nationalization of the system of credit; expropriation of the Somoza clan, accounting for about 20% of the economy; establishment of a state monopoly of foreign trade and so on — see note 1).
The FSLN, which has led this process, has been able to show that the dictatorship of the proletariat is synonymous with a formidable extension of the rights of selforganization and expression of the masses. The new revolutionary state, whilst effectively excluding the bourgeoisie from political power, has simultaneously made concessions to the anti-Somozista bourgeoisie on the economic plane: the maintenance of a significant capitalist sector in agro-exports, industry and commerce (see box). These concessions were indubitably necessary (see the resolution of the Twelfth World Congress of the Fourth International on Nicaragua, passed in 1985). They were made from a position of strength, by a new state apparatus supported by an armed people. In the course of the first years of the revolution, the conquests of the masses were progressively consolidated and remained fundamentally intact. At the same time, the Sandinistas firmly maintained a multi-party system, as well as pluralism in the trade unions and in the media.
Ten years after the seizure of power, revolutionary Nicaragua constitutes the most advanced experience of the twentieth century, from the point of view of democracy. This can hardly be doubted, if we compare Nicaragua with the Soviet Union ten years after the revolution.
Comparisons with other workers' states
In the Soviet Union, in 1927-28, political life had been reduced to its most basic expression: a single party directed by a bureaucratic clique; the absence of any mass organizations independent of the
The mixed economy in Nicaragua
State or collective property
Agriculture2
25%
Industry4
40%
Internal trade
38%
Public services
Capitalist
Small and sector medium producers!
17%3
58%
30%
30%
12%
50% state; the disappearance of any effective political life in the soviets; the onset of massive internal repression within the Communist Party (and also the expulsion of its leaders such as Trotsky). On the economic plane, if the end of the imperialist aggression and the civil war had permitted a certain economic recovery, this was at the price of increased social inequality.
and credits
100%
Participation of all sectors in GDP5
45%
(1986 figures)
1. Includes most of the cooperative sector.
2. As calculated by Baumeister, Revista nueva Sociedad, no. 96, Caracas 1988.
3. Large properties of over 200 hectares.
26
25%
35%
The layer of rich peasants (the kulaks) and 1. The dictatorship of the proletariat supported by the alliance of the workers and peasants (and the urban semi-proletarianized masses) is necessary in order to conquer genuine national sovereignty, to realize the tasks of the revolution and to begin profound economic and social transformations. But, given the context of the relative isolation of the revolution, to which is added the backward and dependent character of the capitalist development of the country, it is insufficient for leading these transformations to their final goal, socialism.
chronology
• July 19, 1979: The overthrow of the Somoza dictatorship and the destruction of the bourgeois state at the end of a prolonged popular insurrection, combined with a military offensive by the FSLN. Birth of a workers' state. A coalition government is constituted comprising the FSLN and the anti-Somozista bourgeoisie (with the latter in a minority). The FSLN is in full control of the new state
They expropriate the property of the Somoza clan (comprising some 20% of the economy), nationalize the system of credit, establish a state monopoly of foreign trade, and legalize and encourage the development of mass organiza-
• Spring 1980: Governmental crisis develops between FSLN and anti-
Somozista bourgeoisie: a reshuffle follows which benefits the former.
• From 1980 to 1984: Growth of social expenditure, enormous progress in terms of literacy (the rate of illiteracy falls from 62% to 13%), increased access to health care, eradication of diseases such as polio. Limited agrarian reform;
transformation of the Somoza properties into state enterprises (APP), followed by the development of co-operatives, but little redistribution of land to the landless peasants and squatters. Subsidy of basic necessities. Radical reduction in private merchants prepared to grab the regime by the throat with the threat of a grain strike. One could also mention the Chinese state at the end of the 1950s (not to speak of Eastern Europe at the same time, with the exception of Yugoslavia).
agro-export sector.
NICARAGUA
• November 1984: Elections. The FSLN is victorious. The masses have
Superficial resemblance to confirmed in the most striking manner their adhesion to the revolution and their perestroika
•1984-1985: Escalation of American aggression: mining of ports, develop-
In Nicaragua, in 1989, in this miniscule ment of the Contras, total economic blockade. The response of the FSLN: the country confronting the principal imperiextension of the arming of the masses, the development of civil defence, the alist power, the situation is fundamentally different and in favour of the masses
•1985-86: Radicalization of the agrarian reform to the benefit of the landless
(despite all the difficulties of everyday life peasants and squatters. 50% of the state budget must now be devoted to and certain errors in the area of the economy). If one compares the situation with
•1986-1987: Falling off in the activity of the Sandinista Defence Committees.
that of Cuba, 10 years after the revolution,
Development of an acute economic crisis.
the degree of socialization of the economy
• August 1987: Esquipulas II Accord.
was very much more advanced than in
• February 1988: A series of heterodox economic measures are taken. Dis-
Nicaragua, but the political system was location of the Contras following an EPS offensive in the north; followed by the becoming ossified (single party, stateopening of negotiations with the Contras, with the Sandinistas being in a posicontrolled trades unions), despite a very high degree of mass activity and support
• June 1988: Monetarist-type economic measures taken. Inflation reaches for the revolutionary regime.
Finally, how long will the concessions which the Sandinistas have made to the
•January 1989: New economic measures aimed at controlling inflation.
capitalist sector last? The confiscations of
•February 1989: As a result of Esquipulas II, the Costa del Sol accords are
June 1989 show that a new extension of signed by five Central American presidents. The Sandinistas announce that socialization should not necessarily be elections will be held in February 1990, in exchange for the disarmament of the ruled out. If the bear a consequences
Contras in Honduras. An end to land expropriations is announced. Economic superficial resemblance to perestroika, they have little in with common the reforms of the so-called "socialist' bloc
• April 1989: Agreement between US Republicans and Democrats on continued aid for the Contras, thus preventing the implementation of the Costa del
(as seen particularly in China, Poland,
Sol accords. A part of the capitalist sector begins to sabotage the new agricultu-
Hungary and the Soviet Union), for their starting point is totally different: the ral campaign. Daniel Ortega tours Europe seeking the renewal of foreign aid
• June 1989: Resumption of land confiscations in response to capitalist sabmaintenance of a capitalist sector in Nicaotage. Twenty parties register to participate in the elections. * ragua since 1979 and the terribly backward character of Nicaraguan economic development. 2*
2. The sectarians and ultra-leftists are incapable of understanding this. For example, the small Morenist party in Nicaragua (the Revolutionary Workers' Party
(PRT), a member of the
Intemational
Workers'
League) has maintained for ten years that the petit bourgeois FSLN is in the process of rebuilding a bourgeois state destroyed by the masses in 1979! "Since
1979, the FSLN has imposed on Nicaragua a left Bonapartist regime, that is a strong bourgeois regime which is based nonetheless on the mass movement against imperialism", claimed Correo Internacional, the journal of the International Workers' League, in
January 1989. Happily, despite its ultra-left sectarianism, the PRT (like the ex-Maoist Popular Action
Movement (MAP)), has not joined the so-called "bloc of 14" coalition of opposition parties, comprising the parties of the right together with the two Communist
Parties.
confidence in its leadership.
reinforcement of the army (EPS).
defence.
tion of strength.
25,000%, recession.
• October 1988: Hurricane Joan.
dialogue.
----- pull-quotes on this page -----
VICTORIA!!
Tenth anniversary of the Nicaraguan
THE SANDINISTAS saw the commemoration of the revolution's tenth anniversary as an important means of verifying and measuring the degree of popular support. The result was conclusive: 300,000 people, or one-third of
Managua's population, participated in the rally held in the
International Viewpoint #169 • September 18, 1989
NICARAGUA
T HOUSANDS of internationalists,
who came from the four corners of the world to participate in work brigades and solidarity meetings, testified equally to the success, which did not make it onto the front pages of the bourgeois press.
A number of comrades from various sections of the Fourth International (FI) were present again this year in Nicaragua.
Over the last ten years 700-800 comrades and sympathizers of the Fourth International have participated in work brigades, usually organized by broad-based solidarity movements. This demonstrates the importance given to the solidarity work being carried out by sections of the International in their respective countries.
On the occasion of the tenth anniversary, the Sandinistas organized a number of big public activities. Outside of the July 19 event itself, which a number of representatives from FI sections were invited to, there was a two-day international meeting of solidarity committees where several hundred delegates discussed solidarity perspectives. An international book fair was also held with over 90 publishers participating, including the publishing house of the LCR (French section of the FI), La Brèche, Pathfinder Press from the USA, Spanish and French Inprecor and International Viewpoint. A number of Trotsky's works and Fl publications were sold. Symposium on "Democracy and Revolution"
But the main event of the anniversary celebrations was, without doubt, the symposium on "Democracy and Revolution" organized by the Sandinistas in Managua on July 17-18. Among the speakers were Rosario Ibarra, ex-presidential candidate for the Workers' Revolutionary Party (PRT, Mexican section of the FI); and Eric Toussaint, leader of the Socialist Workers' Party (POS/SAP, Belgian section of the Fourth International).
It was more than just an event. The symposium brought together a very broad 28 political spectrum: representatives from Latin American bourgeois governments
(the Mexican PRI, Guatemalan Christian Democracy and so on); spokespeople for the so-called socialist countries (USSR, Poland, Hungary, East Germany) and from some of the non-aligned countries (India and Libya); a number of socialist parties (Spanish state and Sweden); various progressive intellectuals and artists; as well as representatives of the Sandinista National Liberation Front (FSLN), the Cuban Communist Party, the El Salvadoran Democratic Revolutionary Front/ Farabundo Marti National Liberation Front (FDR/FMLN), the Chilean Revolutionary Left Movement (MIR), the African National Congress (ANC) and sections of the Fourth International from Mexico, France and Belgium. In all, nearly 2,000 people participated in the two days of discussions.
Sandinistas aim for real discussion
The political spectrum demonstrated that the Sandinistas' aim was not to try to win over those present such as the Mexican and Guatemalan government representatives, but to have a real discussion. Moreover, Daniel Ortega himself, in his opening speech, made a point of reaffirming his conception of democracy. He said that "the July 1979 armed insurrection was the most democratic act of the Nicaraguan people in its whole history", and he criticized the facades of the "democracies" in the rest of the continent.
The intervention of our comrade Eric Toussaint was along the same lines, denouncing the campaigns and pressures against Nicaragua today. "It is shameful that the European Community is also involved in this campaign".
Among other things he also stressed that "one of the key differences between Nicaragua and the so-called socialist countries - with some of them currently undergoing profound reforms, some of revolution centre of the capital. ARNOLD BERTHU which are opening up important areas of freedom - is that here the people are armed. The state, under attack from the Contras and in a situation of destabilization, has not however taken arms back from the masses. "Going beyond participatory democracy"
"On the contrary, it distributed more arms to them, and the right of citizens to rebel against any attempts to roll back their victories is inscribed in the Nicaraguan constitution. The consolidation of the transition to socialism implies gradually establishing the exercise of power by the masses themselves, going beyond the participatory democracy that exists today in Nicaragua."
For Rosario Ibarra, "the experience of Sandinism shows that it is possible, even in conditions of a blockade and aggression, to combat bourgeois ideas in the framework of multi-party democracy, and to defend the revolution with arms only against those who attack it guns in hand. It has to be understood, finally, that the famous formal freedoms are not restricted to bourgeois democracies. Above all, they are the conquests of humanity that we, as revolutionaries, must defend precisely when the bourgeoisie is trying to suppress many of them. Opposing these demands leads to opposing the democratic aspirations of the masses."