In Cuba the socialist revolution happened in 1959, led by Fidel Castro, who introduced socialism from 1960 onwards. His first actions were to nationalise all large farms, or bring then under public ownership, and remove all foreign ownership of property, mostly US property. In 1991 Cuba had a GDP per capita of US$1580, which is has not yet surpassed, because of the decline in economic activity with other socialist countries. The effect of nationalising all large farms was to centralise production and to spread it equally amongst all Cubans. By doing so, Castro removed competition amongst farmers, who now had to farm to meet with formal political plans. Equally importantly according to Marx’s doctrine, was social policy, which led to Cuba developing better housing, health and educational policy than anywhere else in the Caribbean. Cuba now has more doctors per capita than nearly anywhere else in the world, a lower infant mortality rate than most countries and a lower student to teacher ratio than France, Germany, the United Kingdom or the United States.
Although officially still a socialist republic, Cubans are increasingly abandoning the strict Marxist doctrine of public ownership of the factors of production, in favour of a mix of public and private. President Castro maintains that Cuba is still ruled with socialist ideals, with the Central Planning Board he established in the 1960’s still running five year plans that set prices of all economic factors. Cuba relies on international prices for its exports, however, most particularly for its rich nickel resources. It might be argued that because it is an island, Cuba is more able to keep its doctrine pure, but because it is not economically self-sufficient, the nation must rely on international economics to produce factors on its land.
By contrast, Vietnam has land borders with other countries, with whom it engages in trade, most notably with China, the country perhaps most responsible for its socialist culture. Historically, Vietnam has been socialist since June 1976, when the communist north united with the south to become a one-party state. Prior to this, the north had been socialist since the defeat of the Japanese in the second world war, which occupied Vietnam and allowed the Vichy French to administrate. Full blown socialism was not possible until the end of the Vietnam War and the defeat of the American opponents to socialism.
Vietnam’s GDP per capita was US$435 in 2002. This compares unfavourably with Cuba, however Vietnam is a predominantly agrarian economy, and it is possible that its economy is more socialist as a result. The reason for this is that Vietnam’s land is publicly owned, like Cuba’s, but because Vietnam does not have Cuba’s natural resources independent of the land, socialist ownership is much more accepted by the Vietnamese populace. For instance, between 1997 and 2001 Vietnam’s production of pepper and coffee, whose growth relies on the land, developed by 338% and 100%.
Of Vietnam’s labour force, 65% is employed on the land, therefore Marx’s labour theory of value is clearly applicable; in this country, with so many people deriving their income from publicly owned land, there is unlikely to be much pressure for democratic elections, because people will understand their economic survival is guaranteed by socialism which values their labour independently of the land value. In developmental terms, Vietnam is much more a third world country than Cuba, because of this agrarian labour force
Phan van Khai, the Vietnamese Prime Minister, is no longer required to uphold socialism under the 2001 constitution. This most recent of the five constitutions requires the Vietnamese government to protect the rights of Vietnamese living abroad. As the leader of the government, Phan van Khai and his predecessors have not been required to build socialism since 1980, when socialism was dropped from the constitution.
In May 2004 the agriculture and rural development minister, Le Huy Ngo, was dismissed from the government for allowing corruption in his ministry. The parliament, elected since 1992, played a large role in his dismissal. The contrast with Cuba, which does not hold elections, is incomparable.
In conclusion, we can summarise by saying that the path to development in Cuba and Vietnam has greatly changed since the inception of socialism. Karl Marx’s socialist theories have been largely superseded by capitalist measures of development, if not capitalism itself, because of the democratic and international pressures which favour economic over socialist development. The nineteenth century that gave birth to socialism relied largely on agrarian labourers to carry out its socialist revolutions, which are antithetical to development, therefore probably there is no true socialist path to development.