A - I n f o s
a multi-lingual news service by, for, and about anarchists **

News in all languages
Last 40 posts (Homepage) Last two weeks' posts

The last 100 posts, according to language
Castellano_ Català_ Deutsch_ Nederlands_ English_ Français_ Italiano_ Polski_ Português_ Russkyi_ Suomi_ Svenska_ Türkçe_ The.Supplement
First few lines of all posts of last 24 hours || of past 30 days | of 2002 | of 2003 | of 2004

Syndication Of A-Infos - including RDF | How to Syndicate A-Infos
Subscribe to the a-infos newsgroups
{Info on A-Infos}

(en) Cuban anarchism: the history of a movement by Frank Fernandez - Chapter 5 : Exile and Shadows (1962-2001) II. (2/2)

From Worker <a-infos-en@ainfos.ca>(http://www.illegalvoices.org/apoc/books/cuban/front.html)
Date Mon, 23 Feb 2004 09:18:09 +0100 (CET)


________________________________________________
A - I N F O S N E W S S E R V I C E
News about and of interest to anarchists
http://ainfos.ca/ http://ainfos.ca/index24.html
________________________________________________

Following his return, Dellinger wrote a pro-Castro piece which was
published in the “anarcho-pacifist” magazine, Liberation,
edited by David Wieck. Members of the Libertarian League and
some Cuban anarchists publicly protested in front of
Liberation’s editorial offices, accusing Dellinger and Wieck of
being “apologists for the Castro regime.” Long-time
American anarchist Mike Hargis recalls, “While most of the left
in the U.S., including some erstwhile anarchists, like the pacifists
David Thoreau Wieck and David Dellinger, joined in denunciation
of the MLCE (Cuban Libertarian Movement in Exile) as CIA
stooges, the Libertarian League and the IWW* came to their defense
publishing the statements and manifestos of the MLCE in Views &
Comments and publicly challenging Castro’s leftist apologists
for their willful blindness.”

That blindness allowed Castro’s persecution of Cuba’s
anarchists to go unchallenged by foreign leftists, including
anarchists. The persecution of the anarchists was intense in the
1961-1972 period. It’s difficult to know exactly how many
libertarians were jailed, for as little as a few days or over 20 years, as
in the case of Cuco Sánchez, a baker from the city of Holguin in
Oriente Province, who was imprisoned for many long years in the
Cárcel de Boniato in Santiago de Cuba. Another who suffered was
the already elderly Jesús Iglesias (no relation to Abelardo) who
was sentenced to 20 years and served time on the Isle of Pines and
in the Combinado del Este prison near Havana. When he was
released he had no family and no place to live. He eventually moved
to Guanabacoa, where he died in poverty. At present - because
the anarchist movement was relatively weak when Castro came to
power, and because a great many Cuban anarchists fled into
exile - there are no more than 400 anarchists left in Cuba, of
whom perhaps 100 were political prisoners at one time or another.

At any rate, at the beginning of 1965 at a congress of the
Federación Anarquista Uruguaya (FAU) celebrated in
Montevideo, the growing fractionalization of the Southern Cone
anarchists in regard to Cuba became clear. A majority of the
members of the FAU, with some exceptions such as Luce Fabbri,
didn’t hide their sympathies for the Castro regime. For their
part the Argentine delegation, invited to represent the Federación
Libertaria Argentina, opposed this position. This polemic ended by
splitting the FAU into pro- and anti-Castro factions, with the
pro-Castro majority - according to the article “Living My
Life,” by Luce Fabbri, published years later in the Italian
anarchist review, Rivista Anarchica - ending up either in exile in
Sweden or in the ranks of the urban guerrilla group, the Tupamaros.
This group achieved nothing positive. It provoked the downfall of
Uruguay’s democratic government and its replacement by a
military regime, while at the same time providing that regime with
the perfect pretext for the institution of massive repression,
extrajudicial executions, and routine torture of political prisoners.

In view of the confusion surrounding the Cuban situation among
the world’s anarchists, the Federazione Anarchica Italiana
organized a conference in Bologna to clarify things; this conference
was held from March 27 through March 29, 1965, and a delegate
from the MLCE was invited to present the position of the Cuban
libertarians. The Cubans collected funds and sent Abelardo Iglesias
as their representative, because Iglesias had experience with this
type of discussion and was well able to express the MLCE’s
viewpoint.

After visiting in Toulouse and Paris with other veterans of the
Spanish Revolution, Iglesias traveled to Bologna where he
successfully presented the MLCE’s arguments against Castro.
The Federazione Anarchica Italiana (FAIT) energetically
condemned Castroism - noting that Castro had substituted
vassalage to the Soviet Union in place of vassalage to the United
States - and offered the MLCE its full support in the struggle
against Castro-Communism. It also pledged to support the
campaign against the political executions taking place in Cuba. The
congress ended by calling for all of the Italian anarchist
periodicals - Umanita Nova, L’Agitazione del Sud, Semo
Anarchico, Volanta, and others - to publish its accords. In
addition to the FAIT, the Federación Libertaria Argentina, the
Federación Libertaria Mexicana, the Libertarian League (U.S.), the
Anarchist Federation of London, the Sveriges Arbetares
Central-Organisation (Swedish Central Workers’
Organization - SAC), and the Movimiento Libertario Español
signed the accords.

After the Bologna congress, Iglesias returned to Toulouse where he
presented the MLCE position at the congress of the French
Anarchist Federation. That congress condemned the
“marxist-leninist counterrevolution” that had subverted the
Cuban Revolution, denouncing the Castro regime as being as bad
as a fascist dictatorship or one in the pay of the U.S. The French
federation promised support for the anarchists in Cuban jails and to
let French working people know about the fate of their Cuban
brothers in the pages of the most important French anarchist paper,
Le Monde Libertaire.

Upon returning to the U.S., it appeared that Iglesias had not only
won the long and vitriolic debate with Castro’s sympathizers,
but had also managed to prod almost all of the federations and
libertarian groups in Europe and Latin America into condemning
the system imposed by Castro - a double victory. This wasn’t
the case. The Castroite penetration of anarchist milieus - or
better, the self-deception of a great many in those milieus - had
established the idea of the necessity of a “permanent
revolution” in Latin America and Africa. Any criticism of the
Castro regime was seen as a criticism of this new political adventure
emanating from Havana, which was bringing to a head the world
socialist revolution. To this totalitarian mindset, anyone who
wasn’t behind Castroism and third-worldism was an enemy of
the people and of humanity. Sadly, the majority of anarchist groups
in Europe and in Latin America (as in Uruguay, Peru, Chile, and
Venezuela) passed over into the camp of the Cuban
Revolution - now always capitalized - and forgot about the
MLCE and the Cuban anarchists.

The factionalism the marxists hoped to foment (through the DDG
document and other pieces of disinformation) had come to pass.
According to Alfredo Gómez, “The Cuban anarchists . . . have
lived in impressive solitude, abandoned . . . by the anarchists of the
rest of the world who identify themselves with the Cuban
Communist Party.” But despite all, the Cuban anarchists in the
MLCE continued their campaigns for the political prisoners in
Cuban jails and against the Castro regime.

In 1967, Marcelo Salinas, already in his late 70s and fatigued by his
sufferings on the island, arrived in Miami. Salinas could have signed
the DDG and thus ensured himself an honored place as a leading
intellectual in Castro’s Cuba. But he refused to sign, and
instead chose at his advanced age to go into exile, an exile among
rightist and conservative elements who had no appreciation of him
or his works. But once in exile he continued his libertarian efforts
by writing articles for the anarchist press and by speaking at
conferences.

He was already known abroad through his extensive personal
correspondence of 50 years, and through writing for Reconstruir in
Buenos Aires. Once in exile, his activities complemented those of
Ferro and Iglesias. He continued his work until his death in 1976 at
the age of 87. With the passing of Marcelo Salinas, the MLCE not
only lost a dedicated comrade who had been active in the anarchist
movement for 70 years, but Cuba lost in this thin figure one of the
most well-rounded intellectuals of his generation. He was a
dramatist, poet, novelist, essayist, and story teller; in sum, he was
an enlightened autodidact who was an intellectual force of the first
order both inside and outside of Cuba.

The chaotic decade of the 1960s was coming to its close. In 1968,
Herbert Marcuse in Berkeley preached a marxism close to
anarchism, and in Boston Noam Chomsky criticized all the horrors
of the North American state; in Paris, the new French philosophers
attacked Marx, and in the same city in May of that year a general
strike broke out in which students, using anarchist slogans and the
black flag, took part; American youths at this time dedicated
themselves to stopping the Vietnam War, avoiding the draft (not
necessarily in that order), and opening themselves to government
repression through the use of illegal drugs; the U.S. was caught up
in internal strife, both racial and political; the USSR invaded
Czechoslovakia to avoid the kind of marxism Marcuse was
preaching in Berkeley; simultaneously in Havana Castro applauded
this tragic, totalitarian maneuver; and in China, Mao instituted the
violent and despotic “cultural revolution.” It was in the latter
part of this year that the Federazione Anarchica Italiana called an
International Congress of Anarchist Federations.

Known as the Congress of Carrara, it was held from August 30 to
September 8, and was widely covered not only by the anarchist
media but by the world media. This conference included
representatives from virtually all of the Western European countries
as well as delegations of Mexicans and exiled Bulgarians. The
Swedish SAC, the Centre Internationale pour Recherches sur
L’Anarchisme (a Swiss anarchist research group) and the
Asociación Internacional de los Trabajadores (the
anarchosyndicalist international) participated as observers. This was
one of the largest anarchist conferences held in over half a century.

Due to lack of funds, the MLCE was unable to send a delegate, and
therefore asked Domingo Rojas, from Mexico, to represent the
Cuban anarchists at the conference. The congress hammered out
eight points of agreement, and the most discussed was point 3, on
the relationship of anarchism and marxism in the Russian, Spanish,
and Cuban revolutions.

The conferees didn’t have doubts about the sinister actions of
the marxists in Russia and Spain, but Cuba was a different matter.
With the backdrop of the libertarian disasters in Russia and Spain,
the conferees declared that the Castro system was indeed “a
dictatorship . . . a satellite of the USSR,” etc. But they then
concluded with a paragraph that was as out of place as it was
contradictory: “Cuba is a more permeable country to the
theories . . . of a type of libertarian communism unlike that of the
USSR and its satellite countries.” In other words, Cuban
“scientific socialism” was a different case - though they
didn’t explain why - and there was therefore hope of
penetrating the Castro regime in order to get it to modify its statist,
totalitarian policies, and to adopt in their place anarchist principles
in accord with liberty and justice.

Analyzing this accord 30 years later, it seems pathetic, even
considering the time in which it was written. The world’s
anarchists had lost their perspective on Cuba. The words of this
document are an indication of how the Castro regime was winning
the propaganda battle on the left with its false
“revolutionary” postulates and slogans; it also clearly
demonstrates the penetration of Castroite propaganda in the
anarchist world in regard to the MLCE. The anarchist media in
Europe and Latin America supported the Cuban regime more each
day as they abandoned their Cuban compañeros, the victims of
that regime. To this day, with almost no exceptions, they have
never publicly admitted this mistake.

It’s true that many anarchists in Europe and Latin America
were aware of the nature of Castro’s dictatorship over the
Cuban people and of Castro’s persecution of Cuba’s
anarchists. But it’s also true that, with the sole exception of
Umanita Nova’s publication of Ferro’s response to Borghi
(and that only under pressure), not a single anarchist periodical in
Europe, and very few in Latin America, published a single article
acknowledging - much less condemning - Castro’s
dictatorship and political persecutions.

By 1970 the MLCE knew that it had lost the battle. Even though the
Cuban anarchists kept up the propaganda fight, they knew they
were speaking to the deaf. The bitter words of Abelardo Iglesias in
BIL in 1970 are explicit: “those who pick up the Communist
accusations don’t hesitate in accusing us of being in the service
of reaction. [These include] Adunata de Refrattari . . . F[ederación]
A[narquista] U[ruguaya] . . . Federazione Anarchica Italiana and its
periodical, Umanita Nova . . . Daniel Cohn-Bendit, etc.” Iglesias
recounted that at Carrara Cohn-Bendit “accused the MLCE of
being ‘financed by the CIA.’” In another article
published later, Alfredo Gómez mentioned that Le Monde
Libertaire, the publication of the Federacion Anarchiste Francaise,
had published a piece mentioning all current dictatorships
- except that of Cuba. This was “as if the French
comrades” considered Cuba an exception and also
“considered the Cuban anarchists second-class anarchists,
undeserving of their solidarity.”

Even in 1975 there still remained much mistrust of Cuba’s
libertarians in the anarchist world. At the end of that year, the
well-designed anarchist magazine Comunidad
(“Community”), published in Stockholm by refugees
(primarily Uruguayans) from the dictatorships in South
America’s Southern Cone, printed an article titled,
“Libertarian Presence in Latin America,” which was later
republished in the Spanish anarchist magazine, Bicicleta
(“Bicycle”) in a special edition dedicated to “Anarchism
Throughout the World.” In reference to the Cuban anarchists,
the article’s authors stated that the MLCE was composed of
“mere anti-Communists,” and that its positions were
“clearly regressive.” This charge was so ridiculous that the
MLCE sent Bicicleta a reply to it partially in jest. This response was
originally published in BIL and stated, in part: “In regard to our
‘clearly regressive positions,’ these have always consisted
of opposition to the tyrant of the day, be they in Cuba or anywhere
else, no matter what their stripe . . . [no matter] what religion they
profess or what political dogma they follow.” Curiously,
Bicliceta never published the MLCE reply despite the fact that its
special edition was headed by the statement that it was intended to
“stir up debate . . . to open up debate.”

The accusations in the Comunidad/Bicicleta article were typical.
The charge in those days was that the MLCE was a reactionary
organization with no program beyond anti-Communism. No
mention was ever made about why Cuba’s anarchists were in
exile, and this charge fit neatly with Castro’s propaganda which
ceaselessly repeated that all of the “counterrevolutionary sectors
in Miami” were owned by the capitalists and were engaging in
such things as drug trafficking and white slavery. Anyone familiar
with the situation would have known that these were outrageous
slanders against the MLCE, but anyone depending upon the
world’s anarchist press for information about Cuba
wouldn’t have known it.

It wasn’t until 1976 that the atmosphere of suspicion and
distrust of the MLCE began to dissipate, with the publication of The
Cuban Revolution: A Critical Perspective, by Sam Dolgoff. This
book was well distributed in the English-speaking world, from
London to Sydney, and had a demolishing impact among the left in
general and anarchists in particular. It was the must cutting critique
Castroism had received in these years of “revolutionary”
adventurism in Latin America, and was the decisive factor in the
change in attitude toward the MLCE within world anarchism. The
book succeeded beyond the hopes of its author, and was translated
into Spanish and later into Swedish. Dolgoff subsequently declared,
“I never received a cent for these printings, but I felt happy to be
able to propagate my opinions about the MLCE and its struggle
against Castro in this book.”

At the end of 1979, in the first post-Franco years in Spain, when the
anarchist Confederación Nacional del Trabajo/Asociación
Internacional de los Trabajadores (CNT/AIT) could again begin to
operate without being persecuted by the government, a celebratory
congress was called in Madrid. An MLCE delegate was invited to
participate, and he was recognized by a majority of those present,
including almost all of the foreign representatives. At this point the
MLCE, which at the time was primarily concerned with bettering
relations with other sectors of international anarchism, renewed its
fraternal ties with the AIT.

A few months later, the Spanish periodical Bicicleta, which in those
years was printing anarchist materials, published part of the
previously quoted piece by Alfredo Gómez, “The Cuban
Anarchists, or the Bad Conscience of Anarchism.” This piece
was later reprinted by the exiled Bulgarian anarchists in their organ,
IZTOK, in Paris, and was still later reprinted by the new magazine
of the MLCE in Miami, Guángara Libertaria, in the summer 1981
issue. (See below.) Iglesias followed with an explicatory article in
the autumn issue, which further delineated the position of the
MLCE in regard to Castro, and above all addressed the anarchist
world of the period. He quoted Progreso Alfarache Arrabal (a
Spanish anarchist member of the CNT who had fled to Mexico and
was member of the editorial group producing Tierra y Libertad).
Alfarache commented on the actions and attitudes of many
anarchists: “In the Cuban case, the keen instinct for liberty,
which is the essence of anarchism, has failed lamentably.” One
can well regard this article by Iglesias as the termination of this long
and damaging affair.

But there were also changes in the world which were affecting the
anarchists. A new antiauthoritarian world view had begun to take
hold in the 1970s, and in the 1980s Castroism came to be seen by
anarchists as it really was (and is) - a self-aggrandizing
dictatorship that didn’t represent its people. Although a long but
sure repudiation of the Castro regime had begun among the
world’s anarchists, it was already very late. The Cuban
anarchists had been the victims of prejudice and defamation in the
anarchist world, in addition to being exiled, thrown in jail, and
being consigned to a shadowy solitude.

Despite everything, the Cuban anarchists launched their new
quarterly magazine, Guángara Libertaria, in November 1979. It
was published in Miami, and its first issue appeared in January
1980. An average issue consisted of 32 8.5"X11" pages printed in
black ink on newsprint. Guángara superseded the two existing
Cuban anarchist publications, the BIL and El Gastronómico,
which were modest bulletins with limited circulation. Guángara
was designed to have broader appeal to and wider circulation among
the Cuban exile community. This new publication was financed by
its staff, subscribers, and members of the MLCE.

The name had been suggested by Abelardo Iglesias, who noted that
“for Cubans, it means noise, disorder, and a rough joke.
Definitively, bronca (a coarse joke), bulla (a loud argument), and
guángara can be taken as synonyms for chaos and disorder.”
In keeping with this anarchistic spirit, the position of
“director” (in effect, managing editor) was abolished and
Guángara was collectively managed and edited. The editorial
collective included Santiago Cobo, Omar Dieguez, Luis Dulzaides,
Frank Fernández, and Casto Moscú. The administrative aspects
were handled by a collective including José R. Álvarez,
Agustín Castro, Manuel Gonzalez, and Aristides Vazquez.

The content at this time consisted of articles written by the editorial
staff as well as those submitted by readers (primarily Cuban and
Spanish anarchists) spread throughout the anarchist diaspora in the
Americas. Translations from English-language anarchist periodicals
also appeared. Guángara included a book review section (edited by
Manuel Ferro), portraits of historical anarchist figures, and news
and opinion about events in Cuba and in the exile community.
During these first years of its existence, Guángara had a press run
of 1000 copies and was distributed only in Miami, though it had
about 100 subscribers scattered around the globe.

Given the place where the magazine was published,
Miami - home base of the extreme right-wing Cuban exile
community - Guángara’s editors knew from the start that
they’d have to be careful about how the magazine presented
itself. There was a very real danger of physical violence from
right-wing elements, and both local and federal authorities were, of
course, keeping them under observation. So, for the first few years
Guángara was fairly muted in its advocacy of anarchism, billing
itself in its subtitle as “The Review of Eclectic Libertarian
Thought.” It also ran articles by nonanarchists, including social
democrats, though of course all such articles still fell in the broad
“progressive” vein. All of this led some purist types to
charge that Guángara was more “literary” than libertarian.

At about the time of Guángara’s appearance in early 1980,
Miami was shaken by demonstrations following the occupation of
the Peruvian embassy in Havana by Cubans seeking asylum. The
MLCE anarchists in Miami participated actively in these
demonstrations, while showing their colors, and they organized
some of these demonstrations against the Castro dictatorship.

The first signs of an explosion occurred in the early morning hours
of April 4, 1980, when a small group of Cubans entered the
Peruvian embassy in Havana in search of political asylum. The
Peruvian government refused to hand the asylum seekers over to
the Cuban government, and in response the Cuban regime recalled
the guards watching over the embassy. Then, with the guards
withdrawn, a multitude of more than 10,000 people tried to seek
asylum at that same embassy.

Comprehending the danger involved in this type of protest, and that
it could quickly spread, the authorities decided, after a speech by the
maximum leader, to permit anyone who wanted to exit the island to
do so. Despite the oppressive omnipresence of the government and
the willingness of many government supporters to resort to
violence, in a few weeks an exodus of gigantic proportions took
form. More than a quarter of a million Cubans left their homeland
on boats supplied by Cuban exiles in Miami. This spectacle would
have international repercussions.

The communications media of the entire world witnessed the
largest human stampede in the history of the Americas, a stampede
of political (and economic) refugees. This spectacle was a public
relations disaster for the Castro regime, despite its skillful
disinformation efforts.

Following the Mariel “boatlift,” Guángara was reinforced
by a number of intellectuals who escaped Cuba via Mariel, among
them writers such as Benjamín Ferrera, Enrique G. Morató,
Miguel A. Sánchez, and the Afro-Cuban poet, Esteban Luis
Cárdenas. This helped to create what was in effect a new
Guángara collective, which included writers, essayists, historians,
and poets, individuals such as Pedro Leyva, Angel Aparicio
Laurencio, Benito García, Ricardo Pareja, and Sergio Magarolas,
among others.

At about the same time, and at Sam Dolgoff’s suggestion,
Guángara incorporated as a nonprofit under the name
International Society for Historical & Social Studies (ISHSS).
Various members of the MLCE served on the Society’s board.
The advantages of this set up were that it allowed Guángara to
receive tax-deductible donations and also allowed it to mail its
issues at minimal cost within the U.S. Following the ISHSS
incorporation, Guángara increased its press run to 3000 copies.
This made it one of the largest-circulation anarchist
periodicals - perhaps the largest - in the U.S.; and it was the
only one published in Spanish. During this period of growth,
Guángara began to publish translations from French and Italian
anarchist publications, and also began to be better received in
Miami.

Feeling more confident, Guángara’s collective started
publishing more explicitly anarchist materials, and moved beyond
attacking Castro; Guángara began to also publish attacks on the
reactionary exile community and upon the U.S. government. The
attacks on the far-right exile leadership focused upon its lack of
political imagination, its religious and/or pseudo-democratic
orientation, and its very mistaken political and social positions,
often based on disinformation planted by Castro’s propaganda
apparatus. (The purpose of this disinformation was to help ensure
that no viable - that is, democratic and
antiauthoritarian - opposition would emerge in Miami, and so
that Castro could thus continue to present the Cuban people with
the false choice of his regime or the extremely reactionary Cuban
exile leadership.)

By the autumn of 1985, Guángara had a number of new
international correspondents: Stephan Baciu in Hawaii, Ricardo
Mestre in Mexico, Cosme Paules in Chile, Abraham Guillén in
Spain, M.A. Sánchez in New York, and Victor García in
Caracas. Both García and Guillén were well known among the
Spanish anarchists, and their collaboration gave Guángara the
international dimension that the MLCE had always sought.

In 1986 the collective produced a large special edition, and by 1987
Guángara’s circulation had increased to 5000 copies, making
it the largest-circulation anarchist periodical in the U.S. The quality
of both its writing and its graphic presentation had improved; and
two new writers, Maria Teresa Fernández and Lucy Ibrahim,
contributed both translations and poems. Guángara changed its
subtitle that year to “A Cry of Liberty in Black & White”; in
1990, it changed it again to “From Liberty, for Liberty”

The downfall of the USSR and its long-overdue relegation to the
“dustbin of history” was received with jubilation by
Guángara’s collective and the rest of the MLCE, and
Guángara published an editorial predicting the swift downfall of
Castro. (Of course, Guángara was mistaken about this, but it was
hardly alone; such predictions were common in the days following
the fall of Castro’s patron, the USSR.)

In 1992, Guángara published its 50th edition. It included an
inventory in which it noted that Guángara had published over
225,000 copies. But by this time Guángara’s all-volunteer,
entirely unpaid staff was growing weary, and the fall 1992 issue was
Guángara’s final edition.

It would be an exaggeration to say that Guángara convinced half
the world of the evil of Castro’s regime. It would equally be an
exaggeration to say that it destroyed the ideological base of
Castroism. But it would be fair to say that Guángara breached the
bulwarks of paid anti-Communism in the exile community, and
that it reclaimed the right to disagree. It would also be fair to say
that it opened the eyes of many who labored under the burden of
pro-Castro, stalinist suppositions.

In the end, one of the most telling indications of the success of
Guángara was that it published 54 issues over 13 years, without
ever having a cover price or being sold on the newsstand. It was
always free to anyone who asked for it, and it was supported solely
by the contributions of its collective, its subscribers, and its MLCE
supporters. Those who worked on Guángara continue to pursue
other projects, such as writing books and contributing to other
anarchist publications.


- - -
As one can appreciate, Cuba’s anarchists have survived all
types of persecutions from the state, instigated by the monied
classes and the Cuban Communist Party. It should be equally clear
that their ideas were for many years the majority viewpoint within
the Cuban workers’ movement; they resisted Spanish
colonialism, U.S. intervention, the sugar and tobacco magnates, the
hacendados and plantation owners, capitalist industrialists, and the
first and second republics - and finally the most despotic,
totalitarian regime Cuba has ever known.

In their long history spanning more than a century, Cuba’s
anarchists - those who had carried the banners, the writers, the
theoreticians, the orators, the union activists, the propagandists,
and even the last of the militants - made blunders and errors,
which we must admit and accept. But we can be sure that they
maintained the spirit of disinterested struggle for the good of Cuba
and its people. Those who survive today are the inheritors of a long
tradition of liberty and justice, united by the confidence that this
new century will bring the dawn of a better world, a world in which
their ideas will finally be put into practice.
================================================================
* Acronyms

AIT Asociación Internacional de los Trabajadores
ALC Asociación Libertaria de Cuba
ARS Alianza Revolucionaria Socialista
BIL Boletín de Información Libertaria
CDR Comités en Defensa de la Revolución
CGT Confederación General de Trabajadores
CNOC Confederación Nacional Obrera de Cuba
CNT Confederación Nacional del Trabajo
CO Comisiones Obreras
CONI Comité Obrero Nacional Independiente
CTC Confederación de Trabajadores de Cuba
CTCR Confederación de Trabajadores de Cuba Revolucionaria
DDG Documento de Gaona
FAI Federación Anarquista Ibérica
FAIT Federazione Anarchica Italiana
FAL Fundación Anselmo Lorenzo
FGAC Federación de Grupos Anarquistas de Cuba
FJLC Federación de Juventudes Libertarias de Cuba
FOH Federación Obrera de La Habana
FRE Federación Regional Española
FTC Federación de Trabajadores de Cuba
ISHSS International Society for Historical and Social Studies
IWA International Workingmen’s Association
IWW Industrial Workers of the World
MAS Movimiento de Acción Sindical
MLCE Movimiento Libertario Cubano en el Exilio
M26J Movimiento 26 de Julio
PCC Partido Comunista Cubano
PLA Partido Liberal Autonomista
PRC Partido Revolucionario Cubano
PRCA Partido Revolucionario Cubano Auténtico
PSP Partido Socialista Popular
SGT Sociedad General de Trabajadores
SIA Solidaridad Internacional Antifascista

*******
********
****** The A-Infos News Service ******
News about and of interest to anarchists
******
INFO: http://ainfos.ca/org http://ainfos.ca/org/faq.html
HELP: a-infos-org@ainfos.ca
SUBSCRIPTION: send mail to lists@ainfos.ca with command in
body of mail "subscribe (or unsubscribe) listname your@address".

Full list of list options at http://www.ainfos.ca/options.html


A-Infos Information Center