Last October, when The New Yorker magazine and The New York Times brought to light allegations by several women who claimed to have been sexually harassed by the producer, the Hollywood panorama shuddered.
By Luis Autié Cantón
Translated and edited by Walter Lippmann for CubaNews.
Harvey Weinstein has a crazy look about him and an ogre’s face. If we framed his face in a “Wanted” poster, typical of 1920s America, nobody would question his links to the Mob. Until only a month ago, from his perch at the top of the Weinstein Company, his opinion could elevate or bury the career of anyone who throws himself into the choppy sea that the world of cinema is. Like the ancient Roman emperors. Thumbs up or thumbs down. Pollice verse or pollice convert. Success. Failure. Imperator Harvey. But Weinstein is, first of all, a predator, a womanizer.
Last October, when the New Yorker magazine and the New York Times brought to light the complaints of several women who claimed to have been sexually harassed by the producer, the Hollywood scene shuddered. The strangest thing of all is to see how the investigation of the case provides evidence that, apparently, Weinstein’s “odd habits” were not recent or new whims. Reports indicate that, since 1980, he had his way with actresses, almost always, on the rise in their careers. Or he tried, at least.
Hollywood is a complex ecosystem of relationships, handshakes, winks, smiles, favors and pats on the back. And the insolence of Harvey Weinstein shows that, in addition to the rottenness and moral pustules that are now visible, collusion is rampant in that great cinematographic industry.
Nobody paid any attention when, in 2013, in front of the audience gathered at the Dolby Theater in Los Angeles, actor Seth MacFarlane joked while announcing the candidates for the Best Supporting Actress award. MacFarlane, after pronouncing the names of the lucky ones, said something that, although it raised a laugh in the audience at the time, today it produces a bitter sensation of guilt and regret: “Congratulations to you five, for you won’t have to pretend that you feel attracted to Weinstein any more». Spooky.
Italian actress and director Asia Argento made public, on her personal Twitter account, a list that includes herself along with 81 other women who were victims of harassment and sexual abuse by perhaps the most influential producer in what is considered the Mecca of cinema.
Among the most recognized names are Gwyneth Paltrow, Ashley Judd, Cara Delevigne, Kate Beckingsdale, Angelina Jolie, Heather Graham, Lupita Nyongo and Lena Headey. The latter enjoys a notable reputation today, thanks to her role as Cersei Lannister in the famous television series Game of Thrones.
This sinister vox populi reveals a deplorable connivance as it is induced by fear. The fact is that, in a high percentage of the women involved, fear of failing professionally if they denounced the producer prevailed over the determination to put an end to such annoyance at the time.
Weinstein was born in Queens, New York, in the winter of 1952, within a Jewish family. Since 1970, he leaned toward film sets more as a business than for artistic reasons, when he produced a series of rock concerts in Buffalo. With the money raised, he founded, together with his brother Bob, a small film distribution company that they called Miramax. The name comes from the union of Miriam and Max, their parents. And so, with their new company, the brothers continued along the line of making films about concerts. Eventually, in 1980, they adapted a British film to fit the tastes of the American public. The result? The Secret Policeman’s Other Ball, the company’s first great success.
During the rest of that decade, Harvey and Bob kept reaping fame in the cinema world until 1989, when director Steven Soderberg’s award-winning film Sex, lies and Videotape turned Miramax, overnight, into the main independent producer in the United States.
In 1996, Miramax won its first Oscar with The English Patient, a prize that consolidated his fame, later increased with titles like Shakespeare in Love or Good Will Hunting.
Almost ten years later, in 2005, the brothers left Miramax to found the Weinstein Company, along with Quentin Tarantino, Robert Rodríguez and Colin Vaines. From The Weinstein Company, Harvey’s own company, he was fired by his own brother Bob, after the scandals. It’s like that. Thumbs up. Thumbs down.
It was then that Harvey tried to cling to his boat to ride out the swell, but the water was already up to his neck. Through his spokeswoman, he has tried, albeit unsuccessfully, to ease the tension, but no one is likely to believe his words. “(…) The way I’ve behaved with colleagues in the past has caused a lot of pain, and I sincerely apologize for it”, he said. But what would have happened if his predatory adventures had never been disclosed?
Around those days, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences of Hollywood held an extraordinary meeting to discuss the producer’s future. Logic prevailed: Harvey Weinstein is no longer a member of the famous cinema institution, at least in the United States.
But there is still some doubt: how far can the moral cover-ups go within Hollywood? Harvey’s is by no means an isolated, ephemeral case. Let us bear in mind that two stars of the cinema firmament like Roman Polanski and Bill Cosby were also in the eye of the storm for similar behavior. Even more recently, House of Cards star Kevin Spacey fell from grace following a pedophilia scandal.
In view of these facts, and knowing the conduct inside that industry, it is very probable that Weinstein’s sexual setback will become a ghastly box-office hit. It has all the sleazy ingredients of Hollywood’s formula for success. And the theaters will be full. Do not doubt it.
In the print edition the day this article appeard on page 6, it was referenced on the front page with a photo of Gwyneth Paltrow.
NOTE FROM FLUENT SPANISH-SPEAKING
CUBAN TRANSLATOR i CONSULTED:
|Now, regarding the expression: I had never heard of it, so I went to Wikipedia and found this:
Pollice verso or verso pollice is a Latin phrase, meaning “with a turned thumb”, that is used in the context of gladiatorial combat. It refers to the hand gesture or thumbs signal used by Ancient Roman crowds to pass judgment on a defeated gladiator.
But what I consider an extremely interesting thing about it is, and I quote:
Homeland or Death,
By: Juan Pablo Carreras
Translated and edited by Walter Lippmann for CubaNews.
With the presence of researchers, specialists and defenders of body-art, the second edition of the Tatuarte body art project was developed. It was held at the House of the Young Creator of the Hermanos Saíz Association (AHS), in the city of Holguín.
Gilberto González Carcacés (Yiki), founder and organizer of the event, said that this edition was attended by plastic artists, young creators and more than a dozen developers of this art in the country.
He said one of the distinctive features of the gathering is seen in the stimulation of the tattooed crutch, a technique that has disappeared today. It goes back to the origins of this artistic manifestation, consisting of a stick and two needles to achieve the desired drawing by hand.
The defense of the aesthetic and artistic values of the tattooed as a mode of expression within the plastic arts. This was the main objective of the discussions after the presentation in theoretical workshops of presentations on the ritualistic tattoo and the policies of the written body, by Vladimir Hechavarría and Danilo Guerrero, respectively.
Yudith Figueredo Domínguez, a young assistant, who offered the possibility of being tattooed at no cost, saod that the approach to this practice means assuming in the body a manifestation of the art that one will carry for life.
At the same time, Enrique Hernández Castellón, an artist from the province of Matanzas, said he was pleased by the reception of the AHS in the territory. He commented on the rise of this culture in Cuba which is experiencing an advance along with technological development, because every day better equipment, inks, and all kinds of materials become available.
During the closing day, a children’s workshop for screen printing and recycled paper was developed’ This theoretical event on muleta tattooing, in addition to the jam session by of the troubadours Raulito Prieto, Manuel Leandro and Leiner Verdecia.
The tattoo in the Cuban society of the 21st century still has as many detractors as followers and, although its origins go back to the emergence of the main civilizations, it is still subject to taboos and prejudices.
Hundreds of women and men came out on short notice today to protest sexual abuse and rape. Called by local organizations and a group of female farmworkers, an estimated 500 people assembled in the heart of the Hollywood tourist district. They marched to the headquarters of CNN where a militant rally was held, then marched back to the starting point.
The crowd was lively, well-organized and very spirited. Local feminist and activist groups, as well as a leadership group of female farmworkers who drove 100 miles from Ventura county, made forceful statements, including speaking from personal experience. Speakers included figures in the Hollywood entertainment industry as well as local activists. The farmworkers carried signs in Spanish, and their leader spoke, in Spanish, to the assembled protesters. The event was very diverse ethnically.
One particularly striking aspect was that most of the signs were hand-made.
Police were present and well-mannered. Lots of media people were the and reports went out in the LA TIMES, LA OPINION (Los Angeles’ main Spanish-language daily) very quickly. I’ve been going to demonstrations since 1961, and except for that first march, this was the first time I have EVER been to a protest where I did not know one single individual.
Here are a series of photos I took at the demonstration.
By Abel González Santamaría
The main world economic power is going through a complex social situation, which causes levels of insecurity in the whole nation to increase year by year. Children’s gardens, schools, universities, churches, shopping centers, offices and recreational places have been the scene of bloody events.
It is estimated that, in the United States, 93 people die every day from gunshots, while another 222 survive after being shot, equivalent to 33,880 deaths per year. For every ten inhabitants there are nine firearms, being the highest proportion in the world.
These statistics are carefully recorded by the Brady Campaign, which is named after James Brady, who served as press secretary to President Ronald Reagan, when both of them were wounded in 1981 during an attack in Washington DC. Reagan recovered but Brady was left in a wheelchair. For the next three decades, he became a standard-bearer of arms control in the United States.
Only one month ago, the bloodiest shooting in the modern history of the United States occurred. On October 1, an American retiree killed 58 people and wounded 500 others during a country music concert in Las Vegas. Last Sunday, November 5, a new massacre occurred. An American ex-military man killed 26 people, including several children, and wounded 20 others during a Mass at a Texas Baptist church.
The worst killings, before beginning this year, occurred, in 2016, at a nightclub in Orlando, Florida, in which 49 people died and 53 were injured; in 2007, at Virginia Tech University, Virginia, where 32 people lost their lives, and the one that took place in 2012 at a primary school in Newtown, Connecticut, in which a total of 20 children and six adults died.
In spite of this harsh reality, the second amendment of the Constitution of the United States approved in 1791, which declares that “the right of the people to own and bear arms will not be violated, remains in force.” Since then, having guns is a right of American citizens and has become a big deal for the National Rifle Association (NRA).
There is no shortage of violent acts or massacres, nor the mobilization of public opinion to promote a real shift to the unsustainable regime of control of American arms. However, regrettably, the deliberate action of the NRA and other associated special interest groups, which “work” with generous contributions and threats of reprisals against each decision-making official on the issue within the Government and Congress, continues to be much more powerful.
The largest organization defending the possession of weapons of the United States, founded in 1871, is one of the most faithful donors of congressmen and presidential hopefuls, especially of the Republican Party. During the 2016 election campaign, that lobby allocated more than 30 million dollars in favor of the Republican candidate Donald Trump.
Once in the presidency, on April 28, 2017, Donald Trump participated in the convention of the National Rifle Association. He was the first US president to participate in this meeting since Ronald Reagan and grateful for their contributions, he said: “You have a true friend in the White House.”
(Taken from Granma)
He is a Cuban lawyer, Doctor in Political Science and Master in International Relations. Researcher of Inter-American Relations and National Security.
Translated and edited by Walter Lippmann for CubaNews.
By David Brooks
The massacre in Las Vegas was characterized as the worst case of a multiple mass shooting in the modern history of the United States, but it is a type of tragedy that has become increasingly common in recent years in this country.
According to a case count of mass shootings (defined in this calculation as one in which 4 or more people are injured or killed by an aggressor), this was number 273 of the year. It happened on the 273rd day of this year. As the policy journalist Matt Taibbi of Rolling Stone summed it up in a tweet: “a mass shooting per day: welcome to the United States of America”.
Only 16 months ago, until what happened yesterday the deadliest mass shooting in the country’s modern history, was when Omar Mateen killed 49 people at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando. Before that, the blood title and death of a mass shooting had been recorded at Virginia Tech University in 2007, where 32 were killed.
The cases of mass murder multiply with alarming frequency. Among the most remembered, in addition to the three “worst”, include the hate crime of the young Dylan Roof in an Afro-American church in Charleston, South Carolina, killing 9, in 2015, the same year in which there was a massive shooting in San Bernardino California, where 14 died; the movie theater in Aurora, Colorado where a man killed 12 in 2012, the same year that a man shot 20 primary school children and their teachers at Sandy Hook School in Newtown, Connecticut and the 13 students killed at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado (subject of the famous documentary “Bowling for Columbine” by Michael Moore), among others in an increasingly long list.
Since 1970, more Americans have died from guns (including suicides, accidents and homicides) than the total of all Americans who lost their lives in all the wars in the country’s history, since Independence (1776). Every day, about 92 lose their lives by firearms, recalled Nicholas Kristof, New York Times columnist.
The incident in Las Vegas already triggered another cycle of debate over the control of private weapons in this country. But this, just as it is so often, already has a familiar script and nothing indicates that this time it will be very different. Trump and the Republicans expressed their condolences Monday and cited biblical phrases, while some – not all – Democrats insist again that more control of arms has to be promoted. The National Rifle Association and its allies will be silent for a while, while as always after these tragedies, the stocks of the gun makers rose on Wall Street.
The president, his team and a good part of the Republican Party, defend the “constitutional right” to arms, and argue that with more armed citizens there will be less violence and greater security.
But in an evaluation of diverse investigations published by Scientific American shows the opposite – that more weapons in private hands lead to more crimes, and comparisons with other developed countries indicate that this is, by far, the one that suffers most from gun violence, with more than 36 thousand fatalities in 2015.
According to the Gun Violence Archive, so far in 2017, there have been 46,595 incidents of violence with firearms, resulting in 11,652 deaths and 23,516 injured (this does not include the approximately 22,000 suicides per year).
In this country, there are approximately 300 million firearms in private hands – almost enough to give one to every adult and child in this country, and a little more than a third of the households in the country report having a gun at home.
But the tragedy in Las Vegas has already generated unexpected changes: the guitarist of one of the bands at the festival declared that the experience has changed his opinion. By declaring that he had been a promoter of the right of citizens to have arms all their lives, “until the events of last night. I can not express how wrong I was, “wrote Caleb Keeter of the country band Josh Abbott Band on his Twitter account “Enough is enough … We need gun control right now. “
But the White House spokeswoman said Monday was not the time to have a political discussion on gun control. “There is a time and place for a political debate. But this is a time to unite as a country,” said Sarah Sanders.
David Brooks is the US correspondent for the Mexican daily LA JORNADA.
Translated and edited by Walter Lippmann for CubaNews.
By Manuel E. Yepe
Exclusive for the daily POR ESTO! of Merida, Mexico
Translated and edited by Walter Lippmann.
Every American not anesthetized by anti-Russian hysteria should read Robert Parry’s essay “The Rise of the New McCarthyism” that highlights the similarities between the current overheated political pranks of Trumpism and the earlier manifestation of the shameful phenomenon in US history that is identified with the name of Senator Joseph McCarthy.
Parry recalls in that, during and after the First World War, the Bolshevik revolution terrorized the American ruling class. It, in turn, reacted with its first “red scare,” an orgy of patriotism induced by war and fear, infused by frantic means inflamed by the mythical red barbarism that led to a feast of deportations and mass arrests.
The victory of the Soviet Union, the expansion of socialism, the intensification of struggles for national liberation and a challenge to the hegemony of the two parties stimulated the occurrence of a second “red scare” in the US ruling class.
With such a base of support, a critical mass of consensus was achieved that persisted throughout the cold war. It was driven by the Republicans and the right against a large part of the left and other sectors and individuals (democrats, liberals and progressives) attacked by Senator McCarthy as “anti-American” or “fellow travelers” of the communists.
The true beneficiaries of the new McCarthyism today seem to be the neocons. They take advantage of Trump’s rejection of liberals and democrats to attract a part of the left to the hysteria unleashed by the controversy over the supposed “political interference” by Russia in the US presidential election.
The neocons and their allies have already exploited the frenzy against Russia to extract tens of millions of additional dollars from taxpayers for programs to “combat Russian propaganda,” that is, to fund non-governmental organizations and dissident US “scholars” for this new cold war.
The Washington Post (WP), which for years has served as the flagship of neocon propaganda, is charting the new political course of the United States. It had done the same to build the public support for the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and to promote support for Washington’s pressure to achieve “regime change” in Syria and Iran.
US taxpayers are bearing the cost of wars or military actions in the Middle East, South America, Africa, the Caribbean and Asia. Any country that does not show obedience to the global leadership of the United States becomes the target of In its attacks. the WP is leading a global campaign aimed at blaming Russia for everything that displeases Washington.
Putin has become the great black beast for the neocons, because he has frustrated Washington by a large variety of schemes. He helped to avoid a major US military attack against Syria in 2013; helped President Obama achieve the nuclear agreement with Iran in 2014-15; opposed the frustrated neocon support for the coup in Ukraine in 2014; and the support of the Russian air force that ultimately decided the recent defeat of the “rebels” supported by the US in Syria, at the hands of the local army, in 2017.
In an article, the WP reminds its readers that Moscow, historically, has relied on social inequalities in the United States to attack Washington, “which,” says Parry, “brings us back to the comparisons between old and new McCarthyism” .
Yes, it is true that the Soviet Union denounced the racial segregation of the United States. They cited that ugly characteristic of American society when expressing solidarity with the American civil rights movement and the national liberation struggles in Africa. It is also true that the communists of the United States collaborated with the national civil rights movement to promote racial integration, Parry explains.
That was a key reason why J. Edgar Hoover FBI had Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. watched and persecuted Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and other African-American leaders, because of his association with people known or suspected of being communists. Ronald Reagan’s administration, in the same way, was reluctant to support the global campaign for the release of Nelson Mandela because his party African National Congress accepted communist support for its struggle against the regime of white supremacy (apartheid) in South Africa.
Robert Parry warns that perhaps “new McCarthyism” is not the appropriate way to describe the situation that seems to be approaching in the United States, but that it should be a “new cold war.”
November 7, 2017.
By Manuel E. Yepe
Todo estadounidense no anestesiado por la histeria anti rusa debería leer el libro de Robert Parry “Auge del nuevo macartismo” que destaca las similitudes entre las recalentadas travesuras políticas actuales del trumpismo y la anterior manifestación del tan vergonzoso fenómeno en la historia de Estados Unidos que se identifica con el nombre del senador Joseph McCarthy.
Parry recuerda en su libro que, durante y luego de la Primera Guerra Mundial, la revolución bolchevique aterrorizó a la clase gobernante estadounidense que, a su vez, reaccionó con su primer “susto rojo”, orgía de patriotismo inducida por la guerra y el miedo infundido por frenéticos medios enardecidos por la mítica barbarie roja que llevó a un festín de deportaciones y detenciones en masa.
La victoria de la Unión Soviética, la expansión del socialismo, la intensificación de las luchas por la liberación nacional y un desafío a la hegemonía de los dos partidos estimularon la ocurrencia de un segundo “susto rojo” en la clase dominante estadounidense.
Con tal base de sustentación, se logró una masa crítica de consenso que persistió a todo lo largo de la guerra fría, impulsada por los republicanos y la derecha contra gran parte de la izquierda y otros sectores e individuos (demócratas, liberales y progresistas) afrentados por el senador McCarthy como “antiamericanos” o “fellow travelers” (compañeros de viaje) de los comunistas.
Los verdaderos beneficiarios del nuevo macartismo actual parecen ser los neoconservadores (neocon), que aprovechan el rechazo a Trump de liberales y demócratas para atraer a una parte de la izquierda a la histeria desatada por la polémica sobre la supuesta “intromisión política” rusa en las elecciones presidenciales estadounidenses.
Ya los neocon y sus aliados han explotado el frenesí contra Rusia para extraer decenas de millones de dólares adicionales de los contribuyentes para los programas de “combate a la propaganda rusa,” es decir, a financiar organizaciones no gubernamentales y “eruditos” disidentes estadounidenses para esta nueva guerra fría.
El periódico Washington Post (WP), que por años ha servido como buque insignia de la propaganda neocon, está trazando el nuevo curso político de Estados Unidos, como lo hizo en los mítines de respaldo público a la invasión de Iraq en 2003 y para promover apoyo a las presiones de Washington por lograr el “cambio de régimen” en Siria y en Irán.
Mientras a costa de los contribuyentes Estados Unidos lleva a cabo guerras o acciones de guerra en el Medio Oriente, América del Sur, África, el Caribe y Asia, y cualquier país que no demuestre aceptar el liderazgo global de Estados Unidos se convierte en blanco de sus agresiones, el WP encabeza una campaña mundial encaminada a culpar a Rusia por cuanta cosa desagrade al público de EEUU.
Putin se ha convertido en la gran bestia negra para los neocon, porque les ha frustrado una gran variedad de esquemas. Ayudó a evitar un gran ataque militar de Estados Unidos contra Siria en 2013; ayudó al Presidente Obama a lograr el acuerdo nuclear con Irán en 2014-15; se opuso al frustrado apoyo neocon al golpe de estado en Ucrania en 2014; y el apoyo de la fuerza aérea rusa que en última instancia fue lo que decidió la reciente derrota de los “rebeldes” apoyados por EEUU en Siria, a manos del ejército local en 2017.
En un artículo, el WP recuerda a sus lectores que Moscú, históricamente, se ha basado en las desigualdades sociales en Estados Unidos para atacar a Washington, “lo que –dice Parry- nos retrotrae a las comparaciones entre el macartismo viejo y el nuevo”.
Sí, es cierto que la Unión Soviética denunció la segregación racial de Estados Unidos y citó esa fea característica de la sociedad norteamericana al expresar su solidaridad con el movimiento de los derechos civiles estadounidense y las luchas de liberación nacional en África. También es cierto que los comunistas de Estados Unidos colaboraron con el movimiento de derechos civiles nacional para promover la integración racial, admite Parry.
Fue esa una razón clave por la que el FBI de J. Edgar Hoover había vigilado y perseguido a Martin Luther King Jr. y otros líderes afroamericanos debido a su asociación con personas conocidas o sospechosas de ser comunistas, del mismo modo que el gobierno de Ronald Reagan se resistió a apoyar la campaña mundial por la liberación de Nelson Mandela porque su partido Congreso Nacional Africano aceptaba el apoyo comunista a su lucha contra el régimen de supremacía blanca (apartheid) en Sudáfrica.
Robert Parry advierte que quizás “nuevo macartismo” no sea la forma apropiada para calificar la situación que parece avecinarse en Estados Unidos sino que debía hablarse de una “nueva guerra fría”.
Noviembre 7 de 2017.
By: Dr. Néstor García Iturbe
Translated and edited by Walter Lippmann for CubaNews.
The Trump administration, at the head of the United States government, has just included Cuba on three new lists.
That is part of the policy change, which Trump announced when he met in the city of Miami, with a group of “rank Batistianos, annexationists and terrorists” as our Minister of Foreign Affairs, Bruno Rodríguez, described them in his recent speech before the General Assembly of the United Nations.
One of the lists, from the State Department, refers to different Cuban entities with which the US citizens will not be able to carry out financial transactions. This list is headed by the MINISTRY OF THE ARMED FORCES, THE MINISTRY OF THE INTERIOR, THE POLICE AND OTHERS ORGANS OF STATE SECURITY. They also include a series of hotels and other entities that supposedly belong to the security forces of the Cuban government.
This measure has been shaped by the main interest of trying to affect the trips of US citizens to Cuba. But what it establishes is unconstitutional, within the so-called freedoms that American citizens have proclaimed, as well as being irrational.
For example, if a US citizen commits a traffic infraction, he has to pay a fine to the police, in doing so he is violating a regulation of the US government and could be incriminated for this.
It is irrational and ridiculous to include in the ban two brands of soft drinks made in Cuba. The so-called “individual freedoms” of the American are torn up again when the government regulates them up to the brand of soda pop that can be drunk.
To continue issuing regulations, the Trump administration will establish the type of toilet paper that Americans should use in Cuba. It is possible that even THAT will have to be regulated for people from the US. That is the so-called “democracy”, and a sample of the “freedom” that prevails in capitalist society.
The other lists, also regulating what the US citizen can do or not do, have the same goal, try to affect the relations between the Cuban people and the American people, the contacts that are established between visitor and visited, in order, to the greatest extent possible, to avoid these contacts.
In general, people from the US who have traveled to Cuba are kind, respectful and interested in knowing the truth of what is happening on the Island. That is the danger that the enemies of our country are considering.
Those who return from Cuba, speak with honesty of our people, of the advances of the revolution and of the situation in which we live, which is always much better than the image disclosed by the enemies and the Miami mafia.
What kind of regime is Trump creating?
It is not only trying to reverse the progress in relations with Cuba that was achieved during the Obama administration. The violations of the US Constitution and to the liberties proclaimed in that same document, are directed at creating a repressive, discriminatory, terror regime, comparable to the existing one at the time of peak of the McCarthyism.
Perhaps that is the true meaning of his motto “Make America great again”.
Compiled by ARIEL DACAL DÍAZ
2015 | Rebel Lives Collection |
“The name of Leon Trotsky is among the most controversial and irreplaceable figures in the history of the revolutionary movement.” -Ariel Dacal Díaz
Leon Trotsky has not lost, after death, the ability to arouse conflicting passions. His life and work attest to the tireless fighting spirit that always encouraged him, as well as his dedication to the revolutionary cause, founded on a sentiment that would never be able to abandon him: hope in the triumph of the oppressed.
Little more than seventy years have elapsed since his assassination, and yet the thought of Trotsky and the example of tenacity that constitutes his life still have much to say.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Ariel Dacal Díaz
REBEL LIVES COLLECTION
Vidas Rebeldes, a new series of books at affordable prices that rediscover relevant figures in the history of the world’s workers, socialist and feminist movements. It publishes essay selections about women and men whose thought and action acquire renewed validity in our days. Vidas Rebeldes does not pretend to ennoble its protagonists as perfect political models, but to make them known in their different ways to the new generations.
168 pages | ISBN 978-1-925019-72-8
New Leon Trotsky
Compiled by FERNANDO ROJAS
2015 | Marxist Library Collection |
The present selection has the first purpose of spreading the political ideology of Leon Trotsky, author of a considerably vast work and unavoidable personality of the history of the 20th century. Gathered in this volume, you can find some of his most significant and lucid writings.
An examination of the strategic and controversial debates originated in the heart of the revolutionary movement in the last century has to consider, by force, the figure of Trotsky. The chosen exts that Ocean Sur offers to the readers provide a valuable opportunity to revisit, or discover for the first time, the thought of this tireless theoretician and revolutionary, at the same time that they constitute an invitation to deepen, question and reflect.
He was a Russian politician and revolutionary of Jewish origin, and one of the key organizers of the October Revolution, which allowed the Bolsheviks to take power in November 1917 in Russia. During the ensuing civil war, he served as commissar of military affairs.
This collection brings together publications that address the origins, history and validity of Marxist thought.
472 pages | ISBN 978-1-921438-89-9
Translation by Walter Lippmann for CubaNews.