Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

redditmademeregister t1_ix57n1j wrote

Reply to comment by redditmademeregister in The trials of the Cuban revolution. Interesting facts about them as well as the roles of Fidel Castro, Raul Castro, Che Guevara and the historical forces that drove these events. by Anglicanpolitics123

>Both Fidel Castro and the Cuban revolutionaries were driven by the pressures of public opinion

This is a completely misleading narrative. The narrative here seems to suggest that the trials we only instituted because the public wanted them. The trials were started by the revolutionaries and then public opinion fed them:

>... the trials led by the new revolutionary authorities wove together legal and honorary justice in a way that garnered mass support and laid the foundations for the consolidation of the new regime.

From the same source (A Century of Revolution: Insurgent and Counterinsurgent Violence during Latin America’s Long Cold War (American Encounters/Global Interactions)):

>Perhaps solemn, "rational," privately conducted executions might have been acceptable to U.S. critics, but the Cuban newspapers' daily gloating over the Batistianos' comeuppance and the circus-like atmosphere of the trials (the "popcorn-munching atmosphere," as described by Time Magazine) seemed suffused with vengeful relish. As two journalists wrote, "To those accustomed to Anglo-Saxon justice, it was repulsive to see a defendant tried in a sports arena." Yet many Cubans insisted it was not revenge, it was simply justice. If Batista's men fell before firing squads, they had been condemned "without the spirit of revenge"

Jon Lee Anderson's book gives a little more context about this event:

>in late January Fidel had decided to hold some high-profile public trials—of Major Sosa Blanca and several other ranking officers accused of multiple acts of murder and torture—in Havana’s sports stadium. The plan backfired, however. Attending foreign reporters were nauseated by the spectacle of jeering crowds and hysterical cries for blood.

This is nearly identical to the public executions in England and Europe during Medieval or Early Modern time periods.

There seems to be a romanticization of the Cuban revolution and lionizing the main actors:

There are other lesser known people from that time like Huber Matos:

  • In January 1959, he rode into Havana atop a tank in a victory parade alongside Castro and other revolutionaries.
  • In July 1959, Matos denounced the direction the revolution was taking by giving openly anti-communist speeches in Camagüey.
  • In September 1959, Matos wrote: "Communist influence in the government has continued to grow. I have to leave power as soon as possible. I have to alert the Cuban people as to what is happening."
  • Convicted of treason and sedition by the revolutionary government, he spent 20 years in prison (1959–1979) before being released in 1979.

Much can be said about the revolution in Cuba and the events after that. This isn't something that happened over 200 years ago. People that were alive then are still alive now. Before we go lionizing these people from academic works we could simply ask them what their thoughts are. You'd be surprised what you hear.

Full sources:

1

Anglicanpolitics123 OP t1_ix5dpxj wrote

(i)If you continued reading my OP I do reference the fact that the revolutionaries themselves did want the trial. In fact the section on how historical memory influenced the trials of the Cuban revolution I explicitly speak about how Che Guevara himself did want the trials precisely to prevent a Guatemala like situation from happening. But here is something that you are not contending with in your response

  1. Fidel Castro explicitly in the Cuban revolutionary war made a holding those from the Batista era accountable as one of his promises when getting into power. So those trials in that context aren't a surprise
  2. You say that its a misleading narrative to say there was public pressure on the revolutionaries. No it isn't. The revolutionaries promised that they would bring trials for those a part of the Batista regime. But as the evidence I brought up demonstrated, there was debate as to whether there should be acquittals or prosecutions as well as whether life in prison vs capital punishment was a sufficient punishment. Now can you tell me precisely why it was that when Castro would halt the trials of the revolution that he faced a backlash from the public? Why were there protests and even riots in provinces in Cuba when the punishments weren't sufficiently harsh enough? Why did Castro have to send his own commanders to calm those disturbances? Those are the factors you aren't considering.

(ii)You seem to have gone into my post history and are saying I am romanticising the Cuban revolution. I'll be straight up. I am someone who admires the achievements of the Cuban revolution when it comes to advances in health care, women's rights, land reform, the abolition of segregation, driving the Mafia out, as well as their contributions to things like Medical Internationalism and the struggle against Apartheid. So yeah......those are things to definitely admire.

At time if you actually read those posts carefully you would know that while admiring the achievements of Castro and Che, I also give criticisms of their autocratic policies. I criticise Marxist Leninism's one party ideology. I criticise the lack of freedom of press. I criticise the banning of freedom of assembly, and I also criticise Castro's role in the Cuban Missile Crisis. So that sense Castro and Che are no different from other historical revolutionaries who have major achievements and flaws. George Washington was a slave owner who codified slavery into America's laws. And yet he was a man achieved the building of a new nation and the founding of a democracy. Simon Bolivar, predecessor to Castro and Che, was an autocrat in his rule of Venezuela and set the stage for Latin American military juntas. And yet he had achievements in terms of liberating Latin America from Spanish Imperialism and abolishing slavery. I see Castro and Che as being no different in that historical light.

Lastly what I also do is in terms of pointing out the problems and flaws of the Cuban revolution I provide historical and social context as to what were the factors that drove them to those decisions, even if it's bad ones. So why did Fidel Castro place Missiles in Cuba, even though that was a terrible decision? Because of the threat of an American invasion. Why did Che Guevara support the banning of independent media in Cuba? Because of his experiences in Guatemala and the Cold War of U.S tactics of engaging in information warfare when organising coups. What I am doing here with the trials are no different.

(iii)Sure. Include discussions of Huber Matos and other dissidents. I have no problem with that.

8