Log in

View Full Version : Anarchists Repressed In Cuba



AlwaysAnarchy
22nd February 2007, 18:57
This is a partial list of anarchists imprisoned because they refused to serve the Castro totalitarian regime, just as they fought its predecessor the Batista tyrannt, remaining always faithful to their ideals.. (Froom Boletin Informacion Libertaria--Movimiento Libertaria Libertario de Cuba En Exillioo: Miami, July-August 1962) [S.D.]

Pláacido Mendez: Bus driver, delegate for routes 16, 17, and 18. For many years, fought against the Batista tyranny and at various times imprisoned and brutally tortured. In 193X he was forced to go into exile, returning secretly to Cuba to fight in the Cuban underground movement against Batista in the Sierra Escambray. With the downfall of Batista, he resumed his union activities refusing to accept the totalitarian decrees of the so-called revolutionary government. Comrade Mendez is serving his sentence in the National Prison on the Island of Pines, built by the bloody dictator Machado. Mendez has been condemned by ( Castro's Revolutionary Tribunal to twelve years at hard labor. His family is in desperate economic difficulties.

Antonio Degas: Militant member of the glorious National Confederation of Labor of Spain (CNT): living in Cuba since the termination of the Spanish Civil War, working in the motion picture industry. This comrade conspired against the Batista tyranny and with the triumph of the Revolution, unconditionally placed himself at the service of the new Castro regime. Because of his activities against the communist usurpers of the Revolution, he was imprisoned by the lackeys of Castro without trial. Antonio Degas is imprisoned in the dungeons of Cabana Fortress and subjected to inhuman treatment. His wife and children, under conditions of at-owing poverty, must also find ways of helping him in prison where he is under medical treatment.

Alberto Miguel Linsuain: Comrade Linsuain is the son of a well-known Spanish Revolutionist, who died in Alicante towards the end of the Spanish Civil War. Linsuain was extremely active against the Batista dictatorship and joined the rebel forces in the Sierra Cristal, under the command of Castro s brother, Raúl Castro. For his bravery in battle he was promoted to Lieutenant in the Rebel Army. With the end of the armed struggle, he left the army and dedicated himself to the union movement of his industry. He was elected by his fellow workers as General Secretary of the Federation of Food, Hotel and Restaurant Workers of the Province of Oriente. When the communists subtly began to infiltrate and take over the organized labor movement, Comrade Linsuain fought the communist connivers. This aroused the hatred of the communist leaders in general and Rau'l Castro, in particular he had violent quarrels with Raúl Castro even when he had first met him in the Sierra Cristal while fighting against Batista. Comrade Linsuain has been in jail for over a year without trial. His family has not heard from him for months and fears for his life. (A later Bulletin reported that Linsuain was either murdered or died in jail.)

SondalioTorres: Young sympathizer of libertarian ideas, who, inspired by our comrades, fought bravely in his native Cuba, against Batista. With the triumph of the Revolution, Torres threw himself, body and soul, into the consolidation and constructive work of the Revolution, moving to Havana on government construction projects. On the job, he openly voiced his fears that the Castro government was gradually, but surely, becoming a ferocious dictatorship. For this, the stool-pigeon members of the local Committee for the Defense of the Revolution (CDR) accused him of counter-revolutionary activities. Sondalio was sentenced to ten years imprisonment. To force him to falsely accuse other fellow-workers of counter-revolutionary acts, Sondalio was subjected to barbarous torture. Four times he was dragged out to face the firing squad and four times he was retrieved just as he was about to be shot. Torres is serving his sentence in the Provincial prison of Pinar del Kito.

José Acena: Veteran libertarian militant; employed in the La Polar brewery; Professor (at one time) at the Instituto de la Vibora. For thirty years Acena carried on an uninterrupted struggle against all dictatorships, including the first as well as the second periods of Batista s tyrannical regimes. For his bravery in the underground revolutionary struggles of the 26th of July Movement, he was made treasurer of the Province of Havana. With the triumph of the Revolution, Acena collaborated fully with the new Castro regime, particularly in the labor and political movements. Acena soon realized that a totalitarian Marxist-Leninist system was being established in Cuba and quarreled violently with the new rulers, denouncing Castro personally and telling him plainly why he hated his regime. From that time on, he was hounded and persecuted by Castro s henchmen and imprisoned various times. Finally, after a year without trial, he was accused of counter-revolutionary acts and sentenced to twenty years imprisonment. This, in spite of the fact that he still bears on his body the scars of wounds inflicted on him by Batista s jailers. He is desperately ill and in need of surgery.

Alberto Garcia: Comrade Alberto Garcia, like so many other militants of our movement, fought against Batista in the ranks of Castro's 26th of July Movement. Because of his well-earned prestige earned in the course of hard underground struggles, Garcia, after the fall of Batista, was elected by the workers of his industry to be Secretary of the Federation of Medical Workers. For his uncompromising opposition to the super-authoritarian conduct of the communists, he was arrested and sentenced to thirty years at hard labor, flasely accused of 'counter-revolutionary' activitiees. Comrade Garcia is one of the most valiant young militants in the Cuban Liberation Movement.

manic expression
22nd February 2007, 19:15
Do you have a point to this or are you just being thick?

AlwaysAnarchy
22nd February 2007, 19:22
Someone asked me to give proof and names of anarchists imprisoned and repressed in Cuba. I found such information but felt it was too large to be included in a reply and also since it was going in a different direction I made a thread about it.

Besides complaining about its existence, care to offer a rebuttal (or alas) some kind of concession that your "socialist" Cuba is hardly that?

manic expression
22nd February 2007, 19:25
Originally posted by [email protected] 22, 2007 07:22 pm
Someone asked me to give proof and names of anarchists imprisoned and repressed in Cuba. I found such information but felt it was too large to be included in a reply and also since it was going in a different direction I made a thread about it.

Besides complaining about its existence, care to offer a rebuttal (or alas) some kind of concession that your "socialist" Cuba is hardly that?
I asked you for evidence on another thread, and that's where this belongs. You could've easily provided a link.

This doesn't deserve a separate thread and, in effect, is a continuation of another discussion.

Go back to the thread on Cuba if you want to show off how little you know about the subject, this is not the place for that.

The Grey Blur
22nd February 2007, 19:48
I see the word "Miami".

My brain thinks "counter-revolutionary scum".

My eyes "stop reading".

AlwaysAnarchy
23rd February 2007, 20:06
Originally posted by Permanent [email protected] 22, 2007 07:48 pm
I see the word "Miami".

My brain thinks "counter-revolutionary scum".

My eyes "stop reading".
Yes real intelligent... :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

If it comes from Miami, it must be bad, so I don't believe it.
If it comes from Havana, it must be good, so I do believe it.

I mean, the fact that Miami is the closest big city to Cuba, the most logical place for Cubans who want to leave Cuba to go to, already has a big network of Cubans of ALL political ideologies and the fact that most emigrants like to be around other emigrants from the same country for a variety of reasons couldn't possibly have anything to do with it right???? :wacko:

The fact is anarchists have been repressed in Cuba, here is the evidence. If you want to ignore it cause it ruins your Stalinist "paradise" then so be it. It exists for all to see.

The Grey Blur
23rd February 2007, 21:58
Miami is where the reactionaries go to chill.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Username: Permanent Revolution

Possible Insults: "TrotsKKKyist", "Paper-seller", etc etc

Insults that make you look stupid: "Stalinist"

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You can think you're revolutionary all you want but when you begin work against a revolution of the oppressed you are automatically reactionary.

Karl Marx's Camel
23rd February 2007, 22:09
Discrimination.

We have leftists on this board that live in Miami.

Fawkes
23rd February 2007, 22:17
Though this may make those in the Cuban government look like assholes, it does not prove that Cuba is in any way not socialist. I think this is an acceptable separate thread because this is an issue that has been discussed a number of times on this board.

Raúl Duke
23rd February 2007, 22:51
Discrimination.

We have leftists on this board that live in Miami.

Yeah, Like me.

but true, Miami is a reactionary hellhole, yet I have some communist friends here who are Cuban and like Fidel's Cuba.

So not everyone is a reactionary; and not every cuban here either.

Fawkes
23rd February 2007, 22:54
Saying "Miami is where reactionaries go to chill" does not imply that all Miamians (however you say it) are reactionaries.

Rawthentic
24th February 2007, 02:39
Instead of insulting AlwaysAnarchy, maybe you "Fidelistas" should respond to the repression and murder of anarchists in "socialist Cuba".

Not to say that I am anti-Fidelista, but please, if you're going to attack something, do it to the thread.

black magick hustla
24th February 2007, 03:03
Originally posted by Permanent [email protected] 22, 2007 07:48 pm
I see the word "Miami".

My brain thinks "counter-revolutionary scum".

My eyes "stop reading".
you are just stupid.

of course a new, fresh state is going to repress groups that advocate its demise, the question not if this is true or not, but if such repression is desirable.

Guerrilla22
24th February 2007, 07:44
This is stupid. Anarchyalways post something written up by some asshole exile in Miamai, who hasn't been in the country for 50 years and presents it as evidence of oppression against anarchist. Someone please trash this.

Vargha Poralli
24th February 2007, 07:48
Originally posted by [email protected] 24, 2007 01:14 pm
This is stupid. Anarchyalways post something written up by some asshole exile in Miamai, who hasn't been in the country for 50 years and presents it as evidence of oppression against anarchist. Someone please trash this.
He called for us to Vote for Democrats too. Regardless of his name he is an Liberal at heart .Anarchists of this Board cannot see past some ones name.


Instead of insulting AlwaysAnarchy, maybe you "Fidelistas" should respond to the repression and murder of anarchists in "socialist Cuba".

So you are in League with Liberals ????

RGacky3
24th February 2007, 08:22
So you are in League with Liberals ????

You can think you're revolutionary all you want but when you begin work against a revolution of the oppressed you are automatically reactionary.

The first quote, by agreeing that Anarchists from Cuba are being repressed and should not be, that makes one in league with Liberals? Strange, does that mean also by thinking Sadam Hussaine probably should not have Gassed the Kurds that I'm in League with Liberals also?

Second Quote, this ties in with the first one, that if your not with us you MUST be with the Enemy, if you don't support a Socialist revolution no matter how oppressive it is, not matter how against the ethics of Socialism it goes, if you don't support it your the same as the Maimi Anti-Communist Batistas, I'm sorry to use the term Stalinist, but it stinks of it, Marxists use Counter-Revolutionary and Liberal, the same way the Bush administration uses Terrorist.

[/QUOTE]He called for us to Vote for Democrats too. Regardless of his name he is an Liberal at heart .Anarchists of this Board cannot see past some ones name. [QUOTE]

Who cares who he is? He could be Buffets Butt Buddy, who cares, why not look at what he whote about? About the repression of Anarchists? So far almost every attack has been on his person, and not about Cuban Repression of Anarchists.

Wanted Man
24th February 2007, 08:41
Originally posted by [email protected] 23, 2007 11:09 pm
Discrimination.

We have leftists on this board that live in Miami.
Yes, they are pro-Castro.

AlwaysAnarchy
24th February 2007, 16:34
Originally posted by RGacky3+February 24, 2007 08:22 am--> (RGacky3 @ February 24, 2007 08:22 am)
So you are in League with Liberals ????

You can think you're revolutionary all you want but when you begin work against a revolution of the oppressed you are automatically reactionary.

The first quote, by agreeing that Anarchists from Cuba are being repressed and should not be, that makes one in league with Liberals? Strange, does that mean also by thinking Sadam Hussaine probably should not have Gassed the Kurds that I'm in League with Liberals also?

Second Quote, this ties in with the first one, that if your not with us you MUST be with the Enemy, if you don't support a Socialist revolution no matter how oppressive it is, not matter how against the ethics of Socialism it goes, if you don't support it your the same as the Maimi Anti-Communist Batistas, I'm sorry to use the term Stalinist, but it stinks of it, Marxists use Counter-Revolutionary and Liberal, the same way the Bush administration uses Terrorist.

Who cares who he is? He could be Buffets Butt Buddy, who cares, why not look at what he whote about? About the repression of Anarchists? So far almost every attack has been on his person, and not about Cuban Repression of Anarchists. [/b]

Right on RGacky!!

It does amaze me how similar the language that Bush uses with terrorists (you're either for us (American Imperialism) or against us (al-Queda) is the same that Stalinists use:

"You're either with us (Stalinists) or with them (reactionaries)"

As for the personal attacks on me, I guess that is to be expected. When you can't attack the message (comrades and anarchists being repressed) attack the messenger, me, with ad-hominem attacks about things I said in the past. :rolleyes:

Another striking feature about the Stalinists and Fidelistas is that on crime and punishment, their appears to be no difference with them on the issue than that of Rush Limbaugh! Both they and Limbaugh support the death penalty, support harsh punishment and long prison sentences for even simple possession of marijuana...I wonder if the Fidelistas here will defend Cuba's repression of homosexuals too??

Compare their stance on crime and the death penalty with that of Marx and Engles, who, over 100 years ago mind you said the following:


Originally posted by [email protected]
Rather than punishing individuals for their cimres, we should destroy the social conditions which engender crime and give to each individual the scope which he needs in society in order to develop his life."


Marx
The reinstitution of the death penalty is not just another legal argument lost before an increasingly reactionary Supreme Court. It is one among many proofs of the failure of capitalism in its death agony to fulfill its promise of a decent life…. Only the victorious proletarian revolution that overthrows the bourgeois state will abolish the death penalty for good and smash the prisons, in the course of rooting out the whole vicious cycle of crime, punishment and repression caused by capitalism.”

This is what Marx said in the 19th century...compare this to what "revolutionaries" and Stalinists are staying in the 21st century. Some progress eh? :rolleyes:

RNK
24th February 2007, 17:04
I find it astonishing that you have such intimately clear and detailed information on Cuba's "state secrets". Please, do quote some sources and references.

Rawthentic
24th February 2007, 17:35
So you are in League with Liberals ????

That's the kind of crap that I speak of. Why can't you attack the topic on the thread, I mean seriously prove AlwaysAnarchy wrong here, instead of calling me a liberal?

You are completely naive comrade for calling anarchists liberals. I am no anarchist, but I also don't fall into the same trap that you do.


The first quote, by agreeing that Anarchists from Cuba are being repressed and should not be, that makes one in league with Liberals? Strange, does that mean also by thinking Sadam Hussaine probably should not have Gassed the Kurds that I'm in League with Liberals also?
Great way to put it comrade, couldn't have said it better myself.

Idola Mentis
24th February 2007, 17:39
I see a list of people which has suffered the violence that all states do to people. Doesn't surprise me in the least. I see no account of how this information was gathered, by whom, and if there is any more recent information. I'd really like to know more. Socialist states do this shit too. The difference lies in how and where the violence is channeled. If you think giving a state a socialist form authorizes it to perform such violence, fair enough. That I'd love to join in a discussion of.

Only idiōtēs throws labels at each other instead of actually talking. So far, this thread's a classic kneejerk-fest. Sad to watch.

AlwaysAnarchy
24th February 2007, 17:44
Originally posted by [email protected] 24, 2007 05:04 pm
I find it astonishing that you have such intimately clear and detailed information on Cuba's "state secrets". Please, do quote some sources and references.
:blink: :blink: What "state secrets" are you referring to? That Castro has repressed and jailed dissidents, including revolutionaries and anarchists that went against him isn't exactly "secret" but in most (all?) biographies and reports on Castro and the Cuban regime.

Sources have been listed in the first post. Anarchists were repressed in Cuba. I have given you the names, biography, dates and a source..what more do you want me to do via the internet? Pull them out from the computer and physically show them to you?

Guerrilla22
24th February 2007, 17:51
None of your so called sources can be verified. You post something written up by an exile, who fled the country before M26 even took power and then get upset when people question it. There are plenty of reports floating around all originating from US media sources or oppisition sources, none of which are credible, so please stop trying to assert that they are.

Idola Mentis
24th February 2007, 17:55
Yep, you have one source, and an extensive quote. But how was this information produced? Who is this source, and what is the sources' source? Without context, the info is closing in on useless.

(Just so it's clear - I'm trying to help you out, not demolish you.)

Rawthentic
24th February 2007, 17:55
Guerilla22, those sources do not come from the large bourgeois press.

If you disagree with AlwaysAnarchy's assertions, then prove him wrong on the repressed dissidents.

Guerrilla22
24th February 2007, 18:10
Originally posted by [email protected] 24, 2007 05:55 pm
Guerilla22, those sources do not come from the large bourgeois press.

If you disagree with AlwaysAnarchy's assertions, then prove him wrong on the repressed dissidents.
Its not my burden to prove him wrong. If you're going to make an assertion you should come with credible sources, as I've said about eight times now, something being claimed by an exile opposition group in Miami is not credible and cannot be verified by anyone, therefore presenting it as evidence is ridiculous. I could post some articles from the Granma and claim it as empirical evidence also, but the source would be equally biased.

Sugar Hill Kevis
24th February 2007, 18:21
exiles are always going to talk shit about wherever they've came from, I remember a few Iraqi exiles living in Britain who testified in bourgeoise newspapers that there were WMDs in Iraq...

Luís Henrique
25th February 2007, 00:32
Originally posted by hastalavictoria
If you disagree with AlwaysAnarchy's assertions, then prove him wrong on the repressed dissidents.

Do we know why the people referred in the OP were jailed? Was it just because they were anarchists, or was it because of their actions? And which actions? Just organising anarchist networks or anti-government protests, or planning or carrying on violent attacks on the Cuban State?

Luís Henrique

Rawthentic
25th February 2007, 00:54
Its not my burden to prove him wrong. If you're going to make an assertion you should come with credible sources, as I've said about eight times now, something being claimed by an exile opposition group in Miami is not credible and cannot be verified by anyone, therefore presenting it as evidence is ridiculous. I could post some articles from the Granma and claim it as empirical evidence also, but the source would be equally biased.

Can you point out which repressed dissident was claimed by Miami exiles?

Also, if it comes from such unreliable sources, isn't there more of a reason for you to prove it wrong?

Guerrilla22
25th February 2007, 01:33
Originally posted by [email protected] 25, 2007 12:54 am

Its not my burden to prove him wrong. If you're going to make an assertion you should come with credible sources, as I've said about eight times now, something being claimed by an exile opposition group in Miami is not credible and cannot be verified by anyone, therefore presenting it as evidence is ridiculous. I could post some articles from the Granma and claim it as empirical evidence also, but the source would be equally biased.

Can you point out which repressed dissident was claimed by Miami exiles?

Also, if it comes from such unreliable sources, isn't there more of a reason for you to prove it wrong?
The list Always Anarchy posted was put out by an exile organization.


From Boletin Informacion Libertaria--Movimiento Libertaria Libertario de Cuba En Exillioo: Miami,

I'm not going to go out of my way to refute something put out by an exile opposition group. As I've said about 10 times now, nothing they claim is credible or can be verified, because they're claims are based on their word, which is heavily biased.

Rawthentic
25th February 2007, 03:12
I understand. Now that you've pointed out that it comes from reactionary sources that must be lying, then, like I said, there should be no problem with you refuting the claims.

If they are lying, then you should be able to say why and how. That's all I'm saying, seems reasonable to me.

By the way, on that source that you give, it says "libertarian", which must mean in this case libertarian socialists or communists who were opposed to Castro's seizure of power. That's not reactionary.

Severian
25th February 2007, 03:44
Whoops, I accidentally responded to another of AlwaysAnarchy/PeacefulAnarchist's threads on this same subject. Hard to tell them apart, except for the dates. AA, if you keep starting almost identical threads on the same thing, I'm going to start just merging them. Saves the trouble of repeating rebuttals like this - about a book by a Cuban anarchist which names the same prisoners as AA does in this thread, plus some other:


Originally posted by [email protected] 03, 2006 09:40 am
I am enclosing some exerpts of a book written by Cuban anarchist Frank Fernandez entitled "Cuban Anarchism a History of a Movement" and also a general anarchist critique of Cuba and its M-L government.
....
spam spam spam
Actually Fernandez' book, if you read between the lines, undermines its own claims. It admits that many Cuban anarchists in fact supported the revolutionary government. And those who were shot - it admits were part of the armed counterrevolution.

Chapter 4 (http://www.ainfos.ca/04/feb/ainfos00387.html)
The methods included armed struggle. Moscú relates: “I participated in
efforts to support guerrilla insurgencies in different parts of the country.”
In particular, two important operations took place in the same zone, the
Sierra Occidental, in which operations were difficult because the mountains
aren’t very high, they’re narrow, and they’re near Havana: “There was
direct contact with the guerrilla band commanded by Captain Pedro Sánchez
in San Cristobal; since some of our compañeros participated actively in
this band . . . they were supplied with arms . . . We also did everything
we could to support the guerrilla band commanded by Francisco Robaina
(known as ‘Machete’) that operated in the same range.”

These armed groups were CIA-supported rightist ones. "Machete" was an especially notorious counter-revolutionary terrorist. (http://www.guerrillero.co.cu/prisioneros/ingles/elapollo3.html)

More about these groups (http://www.granma.cu/cubademanda/ingles/demanda4-i.html)

A few months after Fidel Castro declared himself a marxist-leninist, an
event without parallel in the history of Cuban anarchism occurred. Manuel
Gaona Sousa, an old railroad worker from the times of Enrique Varona and
the CNOC, a libertarian militant his entire life and a founder of the
ALC, and in the first years of Castroism the ALC’s Secretary of Relations-and
hence the person dealing with overseas anarchist media and organizations-betrayed
both his ideals and his comrades. In a document titled A Clarification
and a Declaration of the Cuban Libertarians, dated and signed in Marianao
on November 24, 1961, Gaona denounced the Cuban anarchists who didn’t
share his enthusiasm for the Castro revolution.

After the first confrontations with the most stalinist sectors of the
PCC, it was understood in the ALC that the regime, on its way to totalitarianism,
would not permit the existence of an anarchist organization, or even the
propagation of anarchist ideas. The PCC wanted to settle accounts with
the anarchists. For his part, Gaona preferred to save his own skin by
settling in the enemy camp, leaving his former comrades to fend for themselves.

In all lands and all latitudes there have always been those who have embraced
and then rejected libertarian ideas. In this, Gaona was not unusual. The
renunciation of anarchism by prominent anarchists was nothing new; persons
with equal or more responsibility than Gaona in Cuban anarchist organizations
had done it, exchanging their social opinions for Cuban electoral politics.
For example, Enrique Messonier crossed over to the Partido Liberal in
1901; Antonio Penichet to the Partido Auténtico at the beginning of the
1930s; and Helio Nardo to the Partido Ortodoxo at the end of the 1940s.
These acts were never considered traitorous by the majority of libertarian
militants. They simply believed that these ex-compañeros had the right
to choose their own political destiny, and those who switched allegiances
were never anathematized. Besides, they hadn’t drastically changed their
basic positions, and they hadn’t associated themselves with parties of
the extreme right or with other totalitarian or religious parties. This
wasn’t the case with Gaona. He not only allied himself with the reactionary
forces governing Cuba, but he also threatened to denounce as “agents of
imperialism” former comrades who didn’t share his pseudo-revolutionary
posture to the recently formed Committees for the Defense of the Revolution-which,
of course, would have meant prison or the firing squad for anyone he denounced.

Gaona went further and coerced several elderly anarchists, such as Rafael
Serra and Francisco Bretau, into being accomplices in his betrayal through
a document in which he attempted to “clarify” for overseas anarchists
“an insidious campaign being waged in the libertarian press of your country
. . . against the Cuban Revolution” with the purpose of “collecting money
for the Cuban libertarian prisoners . . . to deliver them and their families
out of the country.” The document railed against what Gaona labeled “a
hoax, irresponsibility, and bad faith” on the part of his ex-comrades
now in exile or taking refuge in some embassy. He then guaranteed in the
first paragraph that there did not exist on the entire island “a single
libertarian comrade who has been detained or persecuted for his ideas.”
And this when Gaona had expelled all the anarchists from the ALC and dissolved
the organization!


The second paragraph of Gaona’s document declared that there didn’t exist
any type of political or religious persecution in Cuba, and then attempted
to identify the Bay of Pigs prisoners with all of the opposition forces
in Cuba, including, of course, the anarchists. To combat this threat,
there existed an “extreme vigilance in the people through the Committees
for the Defense of the Revolution-one on every block-against the terrorists.”
Gaona thus justified the terrorism of the state against the people through
committees of informers that answered to the feared state security agency.
He also implied that any citizen that didn’t back this “revolutionary”
process, these intrusive committees, was a traitor who deserved to be
denounced.

Gaona then lied outright when he declared that “almost the totality of
libertarian militants in Cuba find themselves integrated into the distinct
‘Organisms of the Cuban Revolution’,” all of which he labeled “mass organizations.”
He then boasted that the “integration” of these militants was the “consequence
of the molding [into reality] . . . of all of the immediate objectives
of our program . . . and the reason for being of the international anarchist
movement and the international workers’ movement.” Here one can grasp
fully the intention and direction of this document. According to Gaona,
the anarchists “integrated” themselves spontaneously into Castro’s despotism
because it embodied the objective of all of their social struggles over
more than a century. He even goes beyond this and says that Castro’s despotism
embodies the true agenda and purpose of all of the world’s anarchists.

Gaona ends with an exhortation to non-Cuban anarchists “to not be surprised
by the bad intentions and false information that you’ll receive from those
. . . at the service, conscious or unconscious, of the Cuban counter-revolution,
who undertake to remain deaf and blind before the realities . . . of the
most progressive, democratic, and humanist Revolution of our continent.”
Finally, he states that it’s necessary to support Castroism and “to take
up arms” in its defense, declaring “traitors and cowards” those who “under
the pretext of differences or sectarian rancor” oppose this beautiful
dream.

This document is treated here at length because it will help the reader
better understand its sinister consequences in coming years. Gaona, at
the end of his life, had betrayed his comrades, but even worse, he coerced
five elderly members of the Cuban anarchist movement-some already infirm
octogenerians-into endorsing this monstrous declaration that precisely
negated all libertarian principles, both inside and outside Cuba. Vicente
Alea, Rafael Serra, Francisco Bretau, Andrés Pardo, and Francisco Calle
(“Mata”) signed this document along with 16 others who had little or nothing
to do with Cuban anarchism.

That account of the Gaono tendency is obviously biased - but Fernandez has to admit it existed.

And based on everything else in Fernandez' book, obviously Gaona was right to say his kind were "at the service, conscious or unconscious, of the Cuban counter-revolution". Today, they're Miami exile enemies of the revolution little different from the Cuban-American National Foundation and other openly rightist groups.
Originally posted in this thread. (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=58186&st=25)

***

Hasta, are you having trouble with the concept of "burden of proof"? If you're going to assert something, it's up to you to find good evidence for it. Not up to other people to refute assertions that lack serious support.

I can't prove that you're not a purple unicorn. I can't prove that God doesn't exist. I can't prove my own innocence of a crime - it's up to the prosecution to prove my guilt. Etc.

Your response below totally ignores the second half, and the overall point, making me think you're probably just trolling throughout this thread. I'd encourage you to stop trolling, and others to start ignoring your trollish posts.

Rawthentic
25th February 2007, 03:54
A state is just an instrument of class oppression - it can be used against the proletariat or against the bourgeoisie. In this case, it's used by the proletariat against the bourgeoisie. When class destinctions begin to fade, the state will begin to lose its purpose, and then "wither away".
This claim is used by Castro to justify his grip on power. That is not to say that the Cuban people don't enjoy a great deal of power and decision-making, it just isn't direct.


Hasta, are you having trouble with the concept of "burden of proof"? If you're going to assert something, it's up to you to find good evidence for it. Not up to other people to refute assertions that lack serious support.
Agreed.

I say this to those who claim others are wrong or say that others are lying, even if the sources are unreliable. Isn't it easier to disprove something if the source is shaky? If you said that I was lying about Cuba being socialist shouldn't you then prove me wrong?

metalero
25th February 2007, 08:30
This "report" is dated 1962, most of these people who suposely fought Batista and even Machado's dictatorship must be by now over 80, if not dead. So, what is the point of bringing some 40 year old report made by some sect of "libertarians" amid the worst attack Cuba was suffering by then, and when the revolution had its peak of support? I've never heard of this movement outside the net, and it's up to you to provide some credible source for these allegations. I've read some good critical analisys on Cuba economical system by anarquists, but is this all you come up to prove the "tyranny" in Cuba?

Guerrilla22
25th February 2007, 08:58
By the way, on that source that you give, it says "libertarian", which must mean in this case libertarian socialists or communists who were opposed to Castro's seizure of power. That's not reactionary.

You're assuming that they are Marxist. In all likelyhood they're libertarains of the US politcal definition, in which case they'd be capitalist. At any rate, they're an exile opposition group, which gives them no credibility.

Since you seem to be so adament about sources refuting these claims here you go:

http://www.freepeoplesmovement.org/cuba/qanda.html

Idola Mentis
25th February 2007, 13:44
Originally posted by [email protected] 25, 2007 03:54 am

Hasta, are you having trouble with the concept of "burden of proof"? If you're going to assert something, it's up to you to find good evidence for it. Not up to other people to refute assertions that lack serious support.
Agreed.

I say this to those who claim others are wrong or say that others are lying, even if the sources are unreliable. Isn't it easier to disprove something if the source is shaky? If you said that I was lying about Cuba being socialist shouldn't you then prove me wrong?
No it's not easier to disprove this kind of source. With the kind of source presented here, it's impossible to say anything either way. I don't know about you, but without further info I have no way of verifying or discrediting this source. I can't dismiss it, but I certainly can't use it. So I've asked for the source's context, and further sources. Doesn't seem to be forthcoming.

Severian's source doesn't tell me much either, though at least it tells us these people probably aren't completely fictional. I don't see how the book undermines it's own claim; anarchists fight oppression, and oppression reveals itself when it is provoked to strike them down. What value system they were guilty or deserving of opression under seems secondary to me. Feel free to correct any error on my part.

Rawthentic
25th February 2007, 20:10
You're assuming that they are Marxist. In all likelyhood they're libertarains of the US politcal definition, in which case they'd be capitalist. At any rate, they're an exile opposition group, which gives them no credibility.

You're right, maybe they aren't, but his source does say that they are anarchist.

Severian
26th February 2007, 00:57
Originally posted by Idola [email protected] 25, 2007 07:44 am
Severian's source doesn't tell me much either, though at least it tells us these people probably aren't completely fictional. I don't see how the book undermines it's own claim; anarchists fight oppression, and oppression reveals itself when it is provoked to strike them down.
What? You don't see anything wrong with joining the CIA-supported counterrevolutionary armed groups? It's "oppression" for the Cuban government to defend itself, and the Cuban people, from these groups?

These people may call themselves anarchists, or Satanists, or Venusians, or anything else they want, but they're not different from any other Miami ultrarightist.

Idola Mentis
26th February 2007, 02:31
Originally posted by [email protected] 26, 2007 12:57 am
What? You don't see anything wrong with joining the CIA-supported counterrevolutionary armed groups? It's "oppression" for the Cuban government to defend itself, and the Cuban people, from these groups?

These people may call themselves anarchists, or Satanists, or Venusians, or anything else they want, but they're not different from any other Miami ultrarightist.
Where did I say that I don't see anything wrong with joining a counterrevolution? I see a lot of wrong with joining CIA-sponsored counterrevolutionary groups. But I also see a lot of wrong with joining a revolution which has gone bad.

Would you join the bastards who's shooting you in the name of capitalism, or the bastards who's shooting you in the name of socialism? It seems like a ***** of a choice. But I wasn't on the ground, and I have no reliable sources. Thus I have no idea how the choice might have looked to them, or would have looked to me.

Combat causalites is defence. A state killing the people it pretends to protect is murder.

Are you saying it is preferable to be executed in the name of socialism? I doubt the people in front of the firing squad would appreciate having the nuance pointed out to them.

Severian
26th February 2007, 03:28
Originally posted by Idola [email protected] 25, 2007 08:31 pm
Where did I say that I don't see anything wrong with joining a counterrevolution? I see a lot of wrong with joining CIA-sponsored counterrevolutionary groups.
Good. So why do you have a problem with shooting CIA-supported counterrevolutionary terrorists?


Would you join the bastards who's shooting you in the name of capitalism, or the bastards who's shooting you in the name of socialism?

If you hadn't joined the CIA-supported groups, the Cuban revolutionary government wouldn't be shooting you. Gaona wasn't shot, was he?

So what is it that makes the Cuban communists "bastards" to start with?

Idola Mentis
26th February 2007, 03:52
Originally posted by [email protected] 26, 2007 03:28 am
If you hadn't joined the CIA-supported groups, the Cuban revolutionary government wouldn't be shooting you. Gaona wasn't shot, was he?
And if you hadn't joined the Fidelistas, the CIA wouldn't be assassinating you. Does the fact that someone wants to shoot you for doing something make doing it wrong?

I guess I'll just stop opposing fascism, then. They might hurt me or the ones I love. That proves it's wrong to oppose them.

I'll try to write this a little cleare. It don't think it's possible to have a revolution without killing people. But no one deserves to be executed for fighting for what they believe in. It's not a sign of a healthy state, if such a thing can be said to exist. The fact that a state is executing prisoners is reason enough to oppose it. These "anarchists" might have done it for the wrong reasons or the right reasons - how am I supposed to know? I can't defend or condemn them. It surprises me that you can. Maybe you've got better intel, maybe not. Maybe they didn't know what they were joining, maybe they did. Maybe they didn't do it at all - how are we to know, when no sources are reliable?

Ian
26th February 2007, 05:54
Anarchists in the third world?

Severian
26th February 2007, 08:17
Originally posted by Idola [email protected] 25, 2007 09:52 pm
The fact that a state is executing prisoners is reason enough to oppose it.
Oh. I was wondering what made the Cuban government "bastards" in your view before some anarchists took up arms against it.

Apparently it's that they executed prisoners. Specifically, before these anarchists joined the armed counterrevolution - before there was a CIA-supported armed counterrevolution to join - the new Cuban government executed quite a few of Batista's hired murderers and torturers.

If you want to regard that as some kind of hideous crime against humanity, whatever. I'll just point out that the Nicaraguan revolutionary government, which did not execute Somocistas, had a much larger problem than Cuba with armed counterrevolution - years of contra warfare.

We've cleared up any factual dispute over who the Cuban government executed and why, clearly.

Guerrilla22
26th February 2007, 09:46
And if you hadn't joined the Fidelistas, the CIA wouldn't be assassinating you. Does the fact that someone wants to shoot you for doing something make doing it wrong?

Well, I tend to think that when an agency that is part of the US government assassinates people simply because they stand opposed to US politcal and economic interest, then it is in fact wrong.

Soviet Stanimir
27th February 2007, 15:51
Originally posted by [email protected] 22, 2007 06:57 pm
This is a partial list of anarchists imprisoned because they refused to serve the Castro totalitarian regime, just as they fought its predecessor the Batista tyrannt, remaining always faithful to their ideals.. (Froom Boletin Informacion Libertaria--Movimiento Libertaria Libertario de Cuba En Exillioo: Miami, July-August 1962) [S.D.]

Pláacido Mendez: Bus driver, delegate for routes 16, 17, and 18. For many years, fought against the Batista tyranny and at various times imprisoned and brutally tortured. In 193X he was forced to go into exile, returning secretly to Cuba to fight in the Cuban underground movement against Batista in the Sierra Escambray. With the downfall of Batista, he resumed his union activities refusing to accept the totalitarian decrees of the so-called revolutionary government. Comrade Mendez is serving his sentence in the National Prison on the Island of Pines, built by the bloody dictator Machado. Mendez has been condemned by ( Castro's Revolutionary Tribunal to twelve years at hard labor. His family is in desperate economic difficulties.

Antonio Degas: Militant member of the glorious National Confederation of Labor of Spain (CNT): living in Cuba since the termination of the Spanish Civil War, working in the motion picture industry. This comrade conspired against the Batista tyranny and with the triumph of the Revolution, unconditionally placed himself at the service of the new Castro regime. Because of his activities against the communist usurpers of the Revolution, he was imprisoned by the lackeys of Castro without trial. Antonio Degas is imprisoned in the dungeons of Cabana Fortress and subjected to inhuman treatment. His wife and children, under conditions of at-owing poverty, must also find ways of helping him in prison where he is under medical treatment.

Alberto Miguel Linsuain: Comrade Linsuain is the son of a well-known Spanish Revolutionist, who died in Alicante towards the end of the Spanish Civil War. Linsuain was extremely active against the Batista dictatorship and joined the rebel forces in the Sierra Cristal, under the command of Castro s brother, Raúl Castro. For his bravery in battle he was promoted to Lieutenant in the Rebel Army. With the end of the armed struggle, he left the army and dedicated himself to the union movement of his industry. He was elected by his fellow workers as General Secretary of the Federation of Food, Hotel and Restaurant Workers of the Province of Oriente. When the communists subtly began to infiltrate and take over the organized labor movement, Comrade Linsuain fought the communist connivers. This aroused the hatred of the communist leaders in general and Rau'l Castro, in particular he had violent quarrels with Raúl Castro even when he had first met him in the Sierra Cristal while fighting against Batista. Comrade Linsuain has been in jail for over a year without trial. His family has not heard from him for months and fears for his life. (A later Bulletin reported that Linsuain was either murdered or died in jail.)

SondalioTorres: Young sympathizer of libertarian ideas, who, inspired by our comrades, fought bravely in his native Cuba, against Batista. With the triumph of the Revolution, Torres threw himself, body and soul, into the consolidation and constructive work of the Revolution, moving to Havana on government construction projects. On the job, he openly voiced his fears that the Castro government was gradually, but surely, becoming a ferocious dictatorship. For this, the stool-pigeon members of the local Committee for the Defense of the Revolution (CDR) accused him of counter-revolutionary activities. Sondalio was sentenced to ten years imprisonment. To force him to falsely accuse other fellow-workers of counter-revolutionary acts, Sondalio was subjected to barbarous torture. Four times he was dragged out to face the firing squad and four times he was retrieved just as he was about to be shot. Torres is serving his sentence in the Provincial prison of Pinar del Kito.

José Acena: Veteran libertarian militant; employed in the La Polar brewery; Professor (at one time) at the Instituto de la Vibora. For thirty years Acena carried on an uninterrupted struggle against all dictatorships, including the first as well as the second periods of Batista s tyrannical regimes. For his bravery in the underground revolutionary struggles of the 26th of July Movement, he was made treasurer of the Province of Havana. With the triumph of the Revolution, Acena collaborated fully with the new Castro regime, particularly in the labor and political movements. Acena soon realized that a totalitarian Marxist-Leninist system was being established in Cuba and quarreled violently with the new rulers, denouncing Castro personally and telling him plainly why he hated his regime. From that time on, he was hounded and persecuted by Castro s henchmen and imprisoned various times. Finally, after a year without trial, he was accused of counter-revolutionary acts and sentenced to twenty years imprisonment. This, in spite of the fact that he still bears on his body the scars of wounds inflicted on him by Batista s jailers. He is desperately ill and in need of surgery.

Alberto Garcia: Comrade Alberto Garcia, like so many other militants of our movement, fought against Batista in the ranks of Castro's 26th of July Movement. Because of his well-earned prestige earned in the course of hard underground struggles, Garcia, after the fall of Batista, was elected by the workers of his industry to be Secretary of the Federation of Medical Workers. For his uncompromising opposition to the super-authoritarian conduct of the communists, he was arrested and sentenced to thirty years at hard labor, flasely accused of 'counter-revolutionary' activitiees. Comrade Garcia is one of the most valiant young militants in the Cuban Liberation Movement.
To be honest with you?

Stop complaining about attempted socialist states when 600,000 people are dead in iraq. Unless you have a list of 600,000 imprisoned anarchists its really of no relvance to me.


Granted, this is wrong. Freedom of speech is the lifeblood of a revolutionary movement.

But we have much more to focus on in the coming months.

I just think about it as we should not apologize or even attempt to before the capitalist apologize for africa, world war, aids, poverty and starvation.

Floyce White
28th February 2007, 04:10
The issue of the non-existence of anarchism has come up in other threads and on other message boards. Anarchists just ignore the numbers. It is completely possible that a few hundred anarchists existed in Cuba during the heyday of anti-Batista radicalism. It is completely possible that a few dozen were organized and took actions against the new socialist government. That is, a few dozen out of a population of several million. Anarchism was virtually non-existent in Cuba for generations--as it was and continues to be everywhere else in the world.

black magick hustla
28th February 2007, 04:57
Originally posted by Floyce [email protected] 28, 2007 04:10 am
The issue of the non-existence of anarchism has come up in other threads and on other message boards. Anarchists just ignore the numbers. It is completely possible that a few hundred anarchists existed in Cuba during the heyday of anti-Batista radicalism. It is completely possible that a few dozen were organized and took actions against the new socialist government. That is, a few dozen out of a population of several million. Anarchism was virtually non-existent in Cuba for generations--as it was and continues to be everywhere else in the world.
you need to take a history book and read it sometime

anarchism was the dominant ideology of the radical labor movement before the bolsheviks. all the huge riots and strikes in the late 19th century were lead by anarchists. anarchist uprisings would lead later to the mexican revolution in the early 20th century. And still, I would argue that anarchist tendencies are more dominant in some parts of mexico than marxism itself.

you try to sound smarter than you are

Kropotkin Has a Posse
28th February 2007, 06:42
Ever wonder which group helped tirelessly in the fight for the eight-hour day? Yes, it was the anarchists.

Floyce White
28th February 2007, 06:55
Marmot, your point is non sequitur. We are discussing the generations before and after the 1960s--not the 1860s.

Ad hominem fallacy. The discussion of personality of posters has no bearing on the subject. Next time, try to avoid personal comments such as "you're trying to sound smart." Such distractions never fail to make their makers sound dumb. Which, by the way, you do when you tell someone 28 years older than you to "read a book."

I couldn't care less whether the dogma of "Marx-ism" seems more or less "dominant" than the dogma of anarchism among Mexican petty-bourgeois sectarianism. Both are mostly ignored by the tens of millions of lower-class people in Mexico.

Also, it's false to claim that all big strikes and riots in the 1800s to early 1900s were "led" by anarchists. First, it supports the theory and practice of "leaders" and "followers" that sees all workers as passive objects--commodities--to be used and thrown away. Second, it's historically false. Many strikes were initiated by anarchists. Many were initiated by socialists. But plenty of workplace struggles were initiated by workers who weren't leftists.

Idola Mentis
28th February 2007, 12:39
Originally posted by [email protected] 26, 2007 10:46 am



Well, I tend to think that when an agency that is part of the US government assassinates people simply because they stand opposed to US politcal and economic interest, then it is in fact wrong.

Definitely. But how is it less wrong when socialists do it?

The Grey Blur
28th February 2007, 14:40
Originally posted by Idola [email protected] 28, 2007 12:39 pm
Definitely. But how is it less wrong when socialists do it?
Because we are fighting for the Socialist revolution, to improve the lives of millions and liberate the working-class from capitalism.

The CIA on the other hand are the elite armed wing of the American capitalist who have been globally employed to murder thousands of well-intentioned people - Che Guevara being one.

We employ violence for progression, they employ violence for reaction. "Right" and "wrong" are simply abstract concepts that the bourgeois use to justify their crimes and critiscise our actions.

Guerrilla22
28th February 2007, 14:50
Originally posted by Idola Mentis+February 28, 2007 12:39 pm--> (Idola Mentis @ February 28, 2007 12:39 pm)
[email protected] 26, 2007 10:46 am



Well, I tend to think that when an agency that is part of the US government assassinates people simply because they stand opposed to US politcal and economic interest, then it is in fact wrong.

Definitely. But how is it less wrong when socialists do it? [/b]
Cuba isn't going around assassinating people on behalf of corporate interest.

LebaneseCommunistParty
1st March 2007, 21:03
Originally posted by AlwaysAnarchy+February 23, 2007 08:06 pm--> (AlwaysAnarchy @ February 23, 2007 08:06 pm)
Permanent [email protected] 22, 2007 07:48 pm
I see the word "Miami".

My brain thinks "counter-revolutionary scum".

My eyes "stop reading".
Yes real intelligent... :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

If it comes from Miami, it must be bad, so I don't believe it.
If it comes from Havana, it must be good, so I do believe it.

I mean, the fact that Miami is the closest big city to Cuba, the most logical place for Cubans who want to leave Cuba to go to, already has a big network of Cubans of ALL political ideologies and the fact that most emigrants like to be around other emigrants from the same country for a variety of reasons couldn't possibly have anything to do with it right???? :wacko:

The fact is anarchists have been repressed in Cuba, here is the evidence. If you want to ignore it cause it ruins your Stalinist "paradise" then so be it. It exists for all to see. [/b]
Wow what true anarchists they were...leave cuba and go to miami...

Ok Cuba isn't a perfect country, but it's a hell lot better than imperialist america

Anarchists and communists should stop fighting and join forces....

Louis Pio
1st March 2007, 22:07
Seriously in my oppinion anarchists and communists will only come together in a time of revolution. It's an event that tests people, some anarchists will join the revolution and other join the reaction, as happened in Cuba and Russia. Still we need to remeber the same happened in all political tendencies. However the traits of individual terrorism among others is a thing thaty make parts of the anarchist movement alienated from the masses so to speak

RGacky3
2nd March 2007, 01:18
Originally posted by [email protected] 01, 2007 09:03 pm
Wow what true anarchists they were...leave cuba and go to miami...

Ok Cuba isn't a perfect country, but it's a hell lot better than imperialist america

Anarchists and communists should stop fighting and join forces....
You won't get thrown in Prison for being an Anarchist in America.

PRC-UTE
2nd March 2007, 02:39
Originally posted by RGacky3+March 02, 2007 01:18 am--> (RGacky3 @ March 02, 2007 01:18 am)
[email protected] 01, 2007 09:03 pm
Wow what true anarchists they were...leave cuba and go to miami...

Ok Cuba isn't a perfect country, but it's a hell lot better than imperialist america

Anarchists and communists should stop fighting and join forces....
You won't get thrown in Prison for being an Anarchist in America. [/b]
There's comrades who are openly anarchists in Cuba not thrown in jail. Only those trying to overthrow the socialist govt were.

LebaneseCommunistParty
2nd March 2007, 07:36
Originally posted by PRC-UTE+March 02, 2007 02:39 am--> (PRC-UTE @ March 02, 2007 02:39 am)
Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 01:18 am

[email protected] 01, 2007 09:03 pm
Wow what true anarchists they were...leave cuba and go to miami...

Ok Cuba isn't a perfect country, but it's a hell lot better than imperialist america

Anarchists and communists should stop fighting and join forces....
You won't get thrown in Prison for being an Anarchist in America.
There's comrades who are openly anarchists in Cuba not thrown in jail. Only those trying to overthrow the socialist govt were. [/b]
what a bunch of idiots. They try to overthrow the socialist gov't in cuba? But they fail so they run away to america. These anarchists must be like american CIA agents helping them overthrow castro.

Why don't they try to overthrow the CAPITALIST gov't in america?

Vargha Poralli
2nd March 2007, 09:40
Originally posted by RGacky3+March 02, 2007 06:48 am--> (RGacky3 @ March 02, 2007 06:48 am)
[email protected] 01, 2007 09:03 pm
Wow what true anarchists they were...leave cuba and go to miami...

Ok Cuba isn't a perfect country, but it's a hell lot better than imperialist america

Anarchists and communists should stop fighting and join forces....
You won't get thrown in Prison for being an Anarchist in America. [/b]
Really ??? :wacko:

Then what is this ? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Scare) :unsure:

You were currently a Member of this organisation. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Workers_of_the_World#Government_repress ion) <_<

You should think and research before posting some this extremely stupid.

SmashCapitalism
5th March 2007, 01:13
Cuba has done many great things, but you can&#39;t say that it&#39;s perfect. I wouldn&#39;t have a hard time believing there were jailed anarchists in Cuba... I know several Cubans as well, one of whom is bourgeoise and two who are working class, and none were too fond of Cuba&#39;s politics, although working class people did approve of some social structures.