The National Museum of African American History and Culture

A review, as well as: The half that isn’t being told

Recently Judi and I had the opportunity of visiting the National Museum of African American History and Culture in Washington D.C. With all of its many limitations, I highly recommend visiting this museum.

When we think of African American culture and history, I think there could be several compelling museums dedicated to these topics. There could be museums of African American history, music, dancing, art, sports, literature, as well as the connections of these topics to nations throughout the world. So, limiting all these topics to one museum poses problems. However, the curators of this museum have made an effort to combine all these topics in one building.

Another question we might ask is: Why is it necessary to have a museum dedicated to Black people in this country? Another related question is: Why have the school systems throughout this country purchased history textbooks that ignore most African American history?

We can begin to answer these questions with James Loewen’s book, Lies My Teacher Told Me. Loewen looked at the United States history books most students read in high school. He found that those books are loaded with outright falsifications.

Loewen argued that the reason for these falsifications has to do with the need of the government in this country to glorify that history. If people actually believe that this is a nation with, “liberty and justice for all,” people might be less likely to protest against the government.

When we look at the history of Black people in this country, we see a history of momentous struggles carried out against oppressive policies of the government. I believe that this is the reason why people have struggled just to have African American history included in the schools of this country. Many of the advances Black people have made were not because of government initiatives, but because of the struggles against unimaginably oppressive conditions supported by the government.

So, now that we see why there is a need for the study of Black history and culture, we can look at the strengths and weaknesses of this museum.

The Washington Monument

As we arrived at the museum, I noticed that it is located next to the Washington Monument. George Washington represents a good starting point when we talk about the dilemma of studying the history of this country. Washington was the military commander of the revolutionary army as well as the first President of this country.

On the one hand, Washington was one of the leaders of the movement to free this country from the oppressive British monarchy. That monarchy judged people, not by their contributions, but as a result of their birth. Before the revolution, people who were not born into the Gentleman class could never hope to be treated with equality. The United States was the first nation in the world that made a clean break from the monarchies or feudal societies of the past.

However, Washington was also a slave owner. He didn’t see the profound contradiction of supporting individual liberties, while at the same time supporting the horrors of chattel slavery. We see this dilemma throughout the history of this country. While advances have taken place, there always appears to be a backlash that attempts to reverse those gains. I will attempt to explain why this backlash unfolds at the end of this blog.

Columbus

There is a short reference to Christopher Columbus, who was the leader of the first Spanish expedition to sail to the Americas. In this reference the museum argues that his voyage “transformed” the world. The museum also argued that his expeditions didn’t treat the indigenous population very well.

We can say that the voyage of Columbus did, in a sense, transform the world. Bartolomé de las Casas was a Dominican friar who lived at the time of Columbus. He wrote extensively about how the Spanish routinely committed genocide against the native people of this part of the world. This was the beginning of the worst holocaust in history. Close to one-hundred million indigenous people might have lost their lives due to contact with Europeans. Las Casas initially felt that importing African slaves would be more humane than enslaving Indians. Later in his life, Las Casas argued that all slavery was wrong.

While the museum made mention of Columbus, I saw no mention of Bartolomé de las Casas.

The revolution of the thirteen colonies

In the schools of this country, teachers taught us about the American Revolution. Clearly America consists of North, South, and Central America. This is why I call the revolution that gave birth to this country, the revolution of the thirteen colonies.

After the revolution six states abolished slavery, but in the other states slavery was the law. This reflected the fact that the revolutionary government was made up of two factions. These were the federalists and the anti-federalists. The anti-federalists supported slavery and they ran the government in this country from the election of Thomas Jefferson until the election of Abraham Lincoln.

The museum did mention the fact that the British offered freedom to those slaves who joined their army. The museum neglected to tell this entire story.

The facts are that most Black people, as well as most Native Americans supported the British during the Revolution. They understood that the revolutionary government would be more aggressive with respect to slavery and the theft of Indian lands.

During the treaty negotiations with the British, the revolutionary government demanded that the Black soldiers in the British army be returned to slavery. The revolutionary government didn’t view these soldiers as human beings, but as valuable commodities that could be used to produce immense amounts of wealth.

The British showed their duplicity by granting the demand that the Black soldiers be returned to slavery. However, the British commander Sir Guy Carleton refused to carry out this order. He supervised the transport of Black British soldiers to Nova Scotia. This chapter of the history of this country was left out of the museum narrative.

Thomas Jefferson and Toussaint l’ Overture

Thomas Jefferson has been revered in this country for writing the Declaration of Independence as well as serving as President of the United States. The Jefferson Memorial in Washington D.C. is located in close proximity to the memorial of Dr. Martin Luther King.

Ned and Constance Sublette wrote a book titled: The American Slave Coast – A history of the slave breading industry where they documented the history of Thomas Jefferson to this insidious industry. Jefferson opposed the trans-Atlantic slave trade. Most historians neglect to mention why Jefferson, an owner of over 600 slaves, held this position.

The facts are that Jefferson supported the so-called lucrative business of raising slaves in Virginia, so they could be sold in the western states at the port of New Orleans. While most slaves reached New Orleans through shipping routes, many took overland routes of thousands of miles, while they were chained together in coffles. By opposing the trans-Atlantic slave trade, Jefferson and his fellow slave owners in Virginia controlled a monopoly on the slave trade.

After the revolution in the thirteen colonies, the revolution in Haiti erupted. That revolution not only declared independence from France, but also abolished slavery.

President John Adams maintained relations with the Haitian revolutionary government. However, President Jefferson hated that revolution with a passion. He lived with the fear that the slaves who worked for him would rise up, as they did in Haiti, and relieve him of his wealth and possibly his life.

For this reason Jefferson joined in the boycott of Haiti that the British, French, and Spanish governments had been enforcing. Haiti happened to be the only nation at that time that had abolished slavery until the French Revolution. None of the powerful governments at that time wanted the Haitian example to spread.

Toussaint l’ Overture had different ideas. He was the leader of the Haitian Revolution and hated the idea of slavery everywhere. He imagined arming the slaves of the United States to free themselves from bondage.

So Jefferson and l’ Overture had priorities that were completely opposed.  While the National Museum acknowledged that Jefferson supported slavery, they failed to mention his hatred of the Haitian Revolution.

The irony is that after the Haitian defeat of the French, Napoleon’s army needed money. They obtained millions of dollars by selling their Louisiana Territory to the United States. This sale doubled the size of this country and expanded slavery. The irony is that a revolution that abolished slavery also set in motion forces that expanded slavery in this country.

The National Museum has statues of Jefferson and Toussaint next to one another without mentioning this history.

Slavery

The National Museum does give a considerable amount of information about the years when slavery was the law in this country. This is a positive aspect to the museum. By looking at history from the perspective of the slaves, we see a history that is difficult to glorify.

One problem with the museum narrative of slavery is that it doesn’t take into account a book written by Edward E. Baptist titled: The Half Has Never Been Told – Slavery and the Making of American Capitalism.

Baptist argued that slave owners were driven to coerce slaves to increase the amount of cotton they produced. They did this by routinely using every method of torture that was known in those days. Baptist showed the production figures showing how slaves did indeed significantly increase production during those years.

The horrendous conditions these slaves faced was one of the foundations of the industrial revolution. Cotton produced by slaves was transported to Britain and France where it was used in the mass production of clothing. In other words, the chattel slavery of this country paved the way for the enormous wealth that exists in the world today.

For the past 40 years worker productivity has increased while the standard of living for workers has deteriorated. So, while workers today are not physically tortured, we continue to be driven to increase productivity so a tiny minority can live in opulence.

Jim Crow segregation

The National Museum also gave a considerable amount of information about Jim Crow segregation and this is also a positive aspect of their narrative. When we think of the history of this country, most people are unaware of the fact that Black people who were born here did not have citizenship rights for decades after the abolition of slavery. While the museum gives us these basic facts, it’s explanation of why Black people were denied basic rights, in my opinion was incomplete.

We can begin the actual history of these events with the defeat of the confederacy in the Civil War. The federal government then adopted the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments to the Constitution. These Amendments outlawed slavery, gave full citizenship rights to all citizens of this country, as well as voting rights.

The Supreme Court then made it’s Plessey v. Ferguson decision. The so-called job of the Supreme Court is to interpret the Constitution. However, with their Plessey v. Ferguson decision the court actually reversed the 14^th Amendment to the Constitution. This was one of several Supreme Court decisions where the court violated the law by supporting Jim Crow segregation.

This decision was made in an atmosphere where the Republican President Rutherford B. Hayes withdrew federal troops from the former confederate states. This action allowed the Ku Klux Klan to mobilize and to militarily overthrow the progressive reconstruction governments. Jim Crow segregation became the law in spite of the fact that these laws violated the 14^th Amendment. So, while slavery was outlawed, Black people lost all citizenship rights.

Today there is a new memorial to 4,000 victims of lynchings in Montgomery, Alabama. The federal government rarely, if ever, made an attempt to prosecute the murderers of those who were lynched.

In fact, not only the government, but the academic community made few protests against these clear violations of the Constitution. Hollywood even produced the film Birth of a Nation that openly supported Jim Crow. Only when the civil rights movement erupted did people with power begin to come to grips with the fact that Black people had no citizenship rights in this country.

In the mid 1960s the government passed the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act. The government was effectively forced to pass these laws because of the mass protests of the Civil Rights movement.

However, from a legal point of view, adopting these laws was not necessary. All the government needed to do was to enforce the 14^th and 15^th Amendments. This would also have made Jim Crow illegal. However, carrying out that action would have meant that all the Presidents since the 19^th century had violated their oath of office and refused to enforce the Constitution. This would have meant that there was clear evidence that many of the Presidents of this country could have been impeached.

The National Museum only gave a partial history of these events. Clearly, there was no mention, that I know of, that it was the Democratic Party that is on record of running the systems of both slavery and Jim Crow segregation. While the Republican Party was initially opposed to slavery, it openly supported the Jim Crow laws. 

Mass incarceration

Even with the passage of the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights act, discrimination against Black people continued. Routine police brutality was the issue that sparked open rebellions in cities throughout the country. On a positive note, the National Museum labeled the uprisings in hundreds of cities during the 1960s as rebellions. The newspapers of those days routinely labeled those uprisings riots.  

The National Museum doesn’t mention the continued discrimination after Jim Crow segregation was outlawed. It attributes the rebellions in the cities to the deterioration of living conditions, and not racial discrimination. However, when we look at the continued institutionalized discrimination throughout this country after Jim Crow was outlawed, we see that there was a legitimate reason for masses of people to rebel.

When I visited the gift shop of the museum I saw that Michelle Alexander’s book The New Jim Crow – Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. However, while I walked through the museum, I didn’t find any exhibits documenting continued racial discrimination in the so-called justice system of this country.

Alexander gives the facts in her book about how ninety percent of those admitted to prison on drug offenses were Black or Latino. Yet most drug users in this country are caucasian.

The Supreme Court found that obvious racial discrimination is perfectly legal in their McCleskey v. Kemp decision. Warren McCleskey was a Black man accused of murdering a police officer. He was convicted and given a death sentence.

Lawyers defending McCleskey gave the Court evidence that Georgia prosecutors sought the death penalty in 70% of the cases involving Black defendants. However, they sought the death penalty in 19% of the cases involving caucasian defendants.

The Court accepted those statistics, but argued that there was no evidence that the individual prosecutor was guilty of racial discrimination. The Supreme Court was well aware that to prove a prosecutor was guilty of racial discrimination is almost impossible. So, here again we see how the Supreme Court continues to violate the basic tenets of the 14^th Amendment. These ideas are not part of the National Museum narrative.

Along these lines I didn’t see any mention in the National Museum of prominent Black people who where framed up and have spent decades in the dungeons of this country. These men would include Geronimo Pratt who won release from prison and a multi-million dollar settlement. I didn’t see mention of Ruben “Hurricane” Carter who served 20 in prison and then found to be not guilty. Denzel Washington starred in the movie about Ruben Carter’s life. I didn’t see any mention of Mumia Abu Jamal, who has won support from all over the world for a new trial. Nor did I see mention of the bombing of the organization MOVE in Philadelphia that destroyed three blocks of homes in the city.

In my opinion the lack of mention of racist police brutality in this country is a big problem with the National Museum.

Venus, Serena, Richard, and Oracine Williams

In the sports section of the museum there are references to many of the Black tennis stars of this country. These include: Althea Gibson, Arthur Ash, Venus and Serena Williams. While all these stars are worthy of mention, when we speak of Venus and Serena Williams we are looking at something truly exceptional.

Venus and Serena Williams have dominated the sport of women’s tennis for about seventeen years. I don’t know of two other siblings that have dominated a sport for so long. We can also say that even today the game of tennis is dominated by caucasian players. So, when we speak of these sisters, I think we might also speak about their parents, Oracine Price and Richard Williams.

Richard Williams wrote an autobiography titled: Black and White – The way I see it. Reading this book I found a better history of this country than is contained in most traditional history books. Mainstream professional tennis has recognized Richard Williams contributions by making him the first inductee into the newly formed Tennis Hall of Fame.

Richard Williams was born in Shreveport, Louisiana. His mother, Julia, picked cotton and cleaned laundry for a living. From his early age, his mother nurtured Richard and taught him how to deal with the hostile environment where he lived.

Growing up Black in Shreveport meant that Richard had no rights. Three of his childhood friends were lynched. He learned to run fast to escape racist mobs.

Richard Williams was one of the millions of Black people who migrated out of the Jim Crow states and he eventually ended up in California. For a short time he worked with the civil rights movement. However, given his history, he could not abide by their methods of non-violent civil disobedience.

     

One day he was watching television and accidentally viewed a woman’s tennis tournament where the winner won $40,000 for four days work. Seeing this he was motivated to learn this game. Then, he wrote a 78 page proposal outlining how he would raise two daughters who he would train to become tennis champions. This was before Venus and Serena were born.

As they were growing up, Richard Williams attempted to nurture his children in the same way he was nurtured by his mother. By doing this they developed the discipline to make the most of their abilities. Both Venus and Serena represent a small minority of professional athletes who have learned to become fluent in foreign languages. Their mother Oracine also was a strong influence.

Before one of their most important matches, Richard Williams spoke to his daughters. He talked to them about the history of Black people from slavery to Jim Crow segregation. He explained that their opponents don’t have this kind of history. He concluded that if Black people have been able to overcome all the obstacles they have faced, Venus and Serena Williams clearly have the potential to win the most prestigious tennis tournaments.    

I don’t believe that Richard Williams was mentioned in the National Museum, but I believe his example helps us to understand our history. This example shows us that we can overcome whatever difficulties when we are raised in an environment that nurtures our growth.

A quotation of James Baldwin

“The great force of history comes from the fact that we carry it with us, are unconsciously controlled by it .  .  . History is literally present in all that we do.”

I happen to be an admirer of the late writer James Baldwin. So when I viewed the above bronze quotation from Baldwin featured in the National Museum, I took a photo of it. Then, I realized that this only a part of the entire quotation of Baldwin. By looking at this entire quotation, we see a different meaning in its message.

“White man, hear me! History, as nearly no one seems to know, is not merely something to be read. And it does not refer merely, or even principally, to the past. On the contrary, the great force of history comes from the fact that we carry it within us, are unconsciously controlled by it in many ways, and history is literally present in all we do. It could scarcely be otherwise, since it is to history that we owe our frames of reference, our identities, and our aspirations. And it is with great pain and terror that one begins to realize this. In great pain and terror one begins to assess the history which has placed one where one is and formed one’s point of view. In great pain and terror, because, therefore, one enters into a battle with that historical creation, Oneself, and attempts to create oneself according to a principle more humane and more liberating; one begins the attempt to achieve a level of personal maturity and freedom which robs history of its tyrannical power, and also changes history.”

In this quote I believe that Baldwin is arguing that racial discrimination had been central to the history of this country. He defines maturity as the ability to break from that history and challenge this discrimination in all of its forms. For Baldwin, this is the way to begin to go down the road to freedom and liberation.

The following quotation by Baldwin is one of my favorites. This is so relevant, it could have been written yesterday. These two quotations are contained in Baldwin’s book of nonfiction writings titled: The Price of the Ticket. I have been told that this book is currently out of print.

“Power, then, which can have no morality itself, is yet dependent on human energy, on the wills and desires of human beings.  When power translates itself into tyranny, it means that the principles on which that power depended, and which were its justification, are bankrupt.  When this happens, and it is happening now, power can only be defended by thugs and mediocrities––and seas of blood.  The representatives of the status quo are sickened and divided, and dread looking into the eyes of their young; while the excluded begin to realize, having endured everything, that they can endure everything.  They do not know the precise shape of the future, but they know that the future belongs to them.  They realize this––paradoxically––by the failure of the moral energy of their oppressors and begin, almost instinctively, to forge a new morality, to create the principals on which a new world will be built.”

Malcolm X and Martin Luther King

Clearly there were many references in the museum of Malcolm X and Martin Luther King. However, while I was viewing the items in the gift shop, I saw a poster of Malcolm and Martin. Included in that poster was information about the lives of both leaders. One of the opinions expressed in that poster was that Martin Luther King was a more effective organizer than Malcolm X.  This opinion was shared by Manning Marable, who wrote a biography of Malcolm X (Malcolm X – A life of reinvention). I do not agree with that opinion.

I own books on the writings and speeches of both Martin Luther King and Malcolm X. Clearly much can be learned from studying the life of MLK. He was a selfless defender of the rights of Black people. One year before his assassination he gave a speech against the war in Vietnam. In that speech he labeled the United States government as the “greatest purveyor of violence in the world.” He also argued that the United States would appear to be “strange liberators” to the Vietnamese people.

However, a big problem with MLK’s perspective is that it was dedicated to the concept of non-violent civil disobedience. We can see the problem with this perspective by looking at the history of the struggle against apartheid in South Africa.

The African National Congress had a long history of nonviolent resistance to the apartheid government. Even the Indian revolutionary Mahatma Gandhi learned the theory of non-violence from the time when he lived in South Africa.

Then, in the year 1960 there was a demonstration in Sharpeville, South Africa at a police station. The police opened fire and murdered sixty-nine of the demonstrators. The African National Congress then abandoned their non-violent methods of resistance.

It took thirty more years, but the South African people freed themselves from the apartheid government. Nelson Mandela came out of prison to become the President of the new South Africa.

This history shows that non-violence can only be effective when a government respects this kind of protest. Malcolm X argued that the rights of Black people need to be defended “By any means necessary.” In my opinion, today young people will find the speeches of Malcolm X more relevant to their experiences than the speeches and writings of Martin Luther King.

Malcolm X gave the following reason for why Black people needed to study their history. He was asked if he wanted to wake people up to their exploitation. He answered that he was about waking people up to their history, their humanity, and their worth as human beings. He argued that when you do this, you will get action.

Lonnie G. Bunch III

Lonnie G. Bunch III is the curator and administrator of the National Museum of African American History and Culture. At the end of my visit to the museum I viewed a film that attempted to show what this museum is trying to do.

Lonnie Bunch was on this film and he argued that the museum is attempting to show the horrors of the past so that this country can be improved. This is my recollection of his remarks.

When we read newspapers in this country, we oftentimes see an entire section dedicated to business interests. All media outlets are funded by advertising used to promote products that form the basis of corporate profits. Many papers show the stock market prices of many corporations. They report on whether those prices are going up or down.

While the Pledge of Allegiance argued that this is a nation with “liberty and justice for all,” the business section tells a different story. That story is how the number one priority in this country has been the drive to maximize corporate profits on investments. The government makes no secret of the fact that it wholeheartedly supports corporate interests.

So, understanding these facts, we can ask the question: What does it mean to improve this country as it is? Since the drive for profits is the priority, improving the country would increase the profits of corporations.

We can also ask the question as to why has the discrimination against Black people been so pervasive throughout the history of this country? When we see that the priority is profits, then we can also see that corporations are continually obsessed with cutting costs. Racial discrimination has always been about using the labor of Black people at the lowest price possible.

James Baldwin argued that racism doesn’t come from the mob, but from the boardroom. Richard Williams argued that in Shreveport, Louisiana he saw evidence of millions of dollars produced by Black people. He argued that he just wasn’t receiving his share.

In my opinion, the struggle to end all forms of discrimination must be linked to the struggle to put in place a completely different kind of government. In this kind of government human needs would be seen as more important than profits. This wouldn’t be about improving this country, but what is needed is a complete transformation of the political and economic priorities.

While I have listed many problems with this museum, I feel it is well worth seeing. Even with all of its problems, I believe the museum gives a substantial amount of evidence that supports the idea that Black people deserve reparations in this country for literally centuries of slavery and discrimination. For this alone the museum is well worth seeing.         

To Change The World – My Years in Cuba

By Margaret Randall

2009

Rutgers University Press

A review

Margaret Randall has written a unique book about the eleven years she lived in Cuba. She wrote this book from the perspective of a feminist, a mother of four children, someone who is critical of the capitalist system in the United States, as well as someone who was given political asylum in Cuba. While Randall has many good things to say about Cuba, her overall perspective has a few problems.

Randall, who today lives in Albuquerque, New Mexico was raised in the Southwest and lived in New York City before she moved to Mexico. In 1968 there were uprisings in Mexico protesting the government’s funding for the Olympics of that year. These demonstrations objected to this funding rather than the dire needs of the people.

The government responded by murdering hundreds of demonstrators. Margaret Randall protested this repression and the government responded by confiscating her passport. She lived in hiding for a while, expecting further government repression.

Cuba offered Randall, her husband, and four children asylum. However, without a passport Randall needed to surreptitiously travel to Czechoslovakia, and then to Cuba. In Cuba her family was waiting for her, but she was in poor health and needed an operation to remove her kidney.

Randall eventually obtained a job as a writer, as well as an apartment. Her children all had a public school education in Cuba.

Randall credits Cuba for transforming her attitudes about politics. She is proud of her children and appreciated the education as well as the care they received in Cuba. Randall also makes several criticisms of Cuba. I believe that the core of these criticisms is that she argues that the revolutionary process in Cuba hasn’t gone far enough.

Randall is also the author of two books of interviews with women in Cuba and Nicaragua, as well as a biography of Haydee Santamaria who was a leader of the Cuban Revolution. She is also an accomplished poet.

In order to gain a perspective to this book I think we need to look at a bit of Cuban history.

Cuba before the 1959 revolution

The revolution that created the United States in the 1780s had a profound impact throughout the Americas. By 1804 there was a revolution in Haiti that declared independence from France and abolished slavery. Haiti is the closest neighbor to Cuba and many French slave owners brought their slaves to the eastern part of Cuba in order to escape the revolution. The eastern part of Cuba was where the revolution began and also has the highest percentage of Afro-Cubans on the island.

Then, in the late 1800s a revolution broke out in Cuba demanding independence as well as an end to slavery. Antonio Maceo, who was Black became one of the central leaders of this revolution. The many Black soldiers who joined the ranks of the revolutionaries called themselves by the African name mambises. Thousands of Chinese Cubans also made up a strong contingent of the revolutionary army.

After about thirty years the revolution was on the verge of victory. At this point the United States invaded the country and accepted Spain’s surrender of Cuba, Puerto Rico, and the Philippines. In the Philippines, the United States then went to war against those who demanded independence of their homeland.

The United States then demanded that Cuba adopt the Platt Amendment into their constitution. This Amendment gave the U.S. government veto power against any decision made my Cuba. These actions led to a series of oppressive dictatorships on the island.

It is difficult to imagine what these dictatorships meant to the Cuban people. Hundreds of thousands of Cubans worked producing sugar cane. This backbreaking work under the hot sun lasted about three months per year. For the rest of the year Cubans needed to find a way of supporting themselves. They did this without any meaningful access to education or health care. While many activists in this country protest police brutality, the rural so-called guards in Cuba felt free to do whatever they wanted knowing they would never be prosecuted.

In this atmosphere, the U.S. Mafia owned several luxury hotels in the Cuban capital of Havana. In order to escape the grinding poverty of the countryside, many women became prostitutes. So, before the revolution Cuba looked like many nations in the world. Abject poverty existed side by side with obscene opulence.

I experienced this level of poverty in 1987 when I was a member of a construction brigade in Nicaragua. The people didn’t have any meaningful access to health care and three children died of easily preventable diseases in three weeks that I was there. About 30,000 children die of preventable diseases in the world every day.

Before the Nicaraguan revolution in that country the people didn’t have access to education or electricity. Wood needed to be collected every day just to make a fire to cook food. There were no bathrooms and we used outhouses that needed to be cleaned every week.

Issues facing Cuba today

Understanding this reality, we might begin to appreciate what the Cuban Revolution meant to the people of that island. A short time after the revolution, there was a mobilization to teach everyone on the island how to read. Then, women and men who never had any chance of advancement were encouraged to study and gain a profession. Many travelled to the Soviet Union or Eastern Europe for that education. In an underdeveloped nation the lines for bookstores were longer than the lines to buy bread.

Margaret Randall explained one of the big differences in the Cuban educational system from the system of education in capitalist societies. Under capitalism competition is the rule and in Cuba a system of emulation is encouraged. This is how she described the difference:

“Emulation—which not only functioned in schools but in factories, offices, and even military units—meant that those involved decided collectively on their goals and then helped one another to achieve them. Thus, in the school setting, collective analysis was encouraged. A child good in math was expected to help one who had trouble in that subject but excelled in history, and she in turn would offer help in her area of expertise. This way everyone succeeded. Competition, it was felt, created individuals who tried to get ahead at the expense of others. Emulation produced mutual encouragement, collectivity, and social harmony.”       

As a result of this transformation, Cuba now has more doctors per-capita than any other nation in the world. Cuba’s infant mortality rate as well as their percentage of people who have AIDS is lower that those same percentages in the United States. Cuba has also sent thousands of its professionals to aid some of the poorest nations of the world.       

Given this history we might ask: Why has Margaret Randall made so many criticisms of Cuba? We can begin by answering this question by making two points.

1)   Karl Marx and Frederick Engels imagined that socialism would first advance in developed nations like the United States. In these nations, workers would be able to take control of the means of production and begin to transform the world.

Working people in this environment would be able to shorten the workweek, give more leisure time to women and men, and make education and work inspiring rather than alienating. They would be able to do this while eliminating poverty, racial and sexual discrimination, as well as war, and the destruction of the environment.

Cuba, for the most part, only had access to a one-crop economy of sugar, as well as the tourist business. These enterprises, in and of themselves did not give the Cuban workers the means of production that would allow Cubans to make many material gains in their lives.

For many years Cuba relied on the aid they received from the former Soviet Union. While this aid was appreciated, the Stalinist policies of the Soviet Union also had an adverse effect on Cuba.

It is difficult to summarize the effect that the United States embargo has had in Cuba. I will only say that while the U.S. government was attempting to murder Fidel Castro over 600 times, Cuba managed to carry out many of the goals of their revolution.

 

2)   There is a big difference between capitalism and true socialism. In capitalist societies all production is geared to enrich a tiny minority who own the largest corporations. Under a socialist government, control of all enterprises is transferred to the masses of workers who democratically control how and why goods and services are produced.

Thinking about this transformation, we can say that an extreme change in consciousness must take place on a whole range of issues. This change of consciousness will take some time and will evolve as workers begin to hold the reins of power. We can see how this change in consciousness in Cuba evolved over time after the revolution.

There are specific criticisms Randall makes of Cuba. She argued that when she first arrived in Cuba, government officials marginalized several artists. She argued that many people who were gay experienced some very difficult years. She argued that while women made many gains because of the revolution, there was government resistance against efforts aimed at giving women genuine liberation.

In order to present a view of how attitudes in Cuba were changing, I will quote at length from a Cuban who discussed this issue in a public meeting where ideas were presented on the 1974 Cuban Family Code:

“And consider what marriage means today? Certainly not the same as it meant in the old bourgeois order. That is, it means the same to some of us but not everyone. To many of us marriage is no longer a ritual through which we can try to save a girl’s honor—whatever that means. In the new society, where unmarried mothers have the same rights as married mothers, where children are recognized equally without regard to who their father is—the old bourgeois concept of illegitimacy is no longer valid—where women can work, where children are educated and cared for by the state, marriage can’t possibly have the same meaning as it once did.

“Marriage in the socialist state should be an equal partnership, entered into equally. Even if a young woman becomes pregnant she should be able to decide—based on what she believes is good for her child and for her own future—if she wants to marry her child’s father. To begin with she should be able to decide if she wants to have a child or not.”

In this passage we see an issue that was evolving in Cuba. We see how the attitudes towards marriage didn’t change the moment the revolutionary government took power. This was something that took time and today the Cuban Family Code views marriage as an equal partnership of men and women.

Mariela Castro is the daughter of Raul Castro who headed the Cuban government for several years. People in this country can view the HBO film: Mariela Castro’s March: Cuba’s LGBT Revolution. Clearly this film was approved by the Cuban government.

The film documents the fact that the Cuban government made many errors with respect to its treatment of gays. We also see how there continues to be some homophobic attitudes towards gays in Cuba today. However, this film also shows how Mariela Castro traveled throughout Cuba in an attempt to promote gay rights on the island. Her efforts are fully supported by the government. The film also interviewed someone who had a sex change operation paid for by the government.

As with the discussion on marriage, we see how the Cubans work to advance the revolution by initiating discussions with the people. Because we live in a capitalist environment in this country, we rarely if ever see these kinds of discussion taking place.

Martin Niemoller

One section of this book that had me scratching my head was Randall’s view of Martin Niemoller. Niemoller was a German pastor who was late to break with the Nazi doctrine while they held power. The Nazis sent him to two concentration camps where he narrowly escaped execution. His words, after he emerged from prison are known all over the world.

“First they came for the Communists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn’t speak up because I was Protestant. Then they came for me, and by this time there was no one left to speak up.”

Because the Cuban government gave Randall asylum, she was reluctant to criticize that government when artists were being marginalized. Then, she was fired from her job, but continued to receive her salary and maintained her apartment. During that time when she didn’t have work, she felt ostracized and isolated. So, we see why Randall found Niemoller’s quotation compelling.

Eventually the Cuban government apologized for her termination and she was rehired to her job.

The problem with this analogy is that a workers government is clearly different from a capitalist or fascist government. In a fascist state, anyone who objected to the government was executed immediately or sent to a concentration camp. In capitalism anyone who attempts or organize a union can find themselves fired. Although this is technically illegal, employers have found numerous ways to get around the law, and most workers understand this reality.

In Cuba, the government ministers who marginalized artists were replaced with new leaders who had the support of the artistic community. I happened to be on an art-centered tour of Cuba and viewed contemporary artists who appeared to use every style of art. Some of these artists have won international acclaim. They were all educated in the Cuban educational system. This is just one example of how the Cuban consciousness had evolved.

However, in the capitalist system we see a trend that is completely opposed to the Cuban reality. We see how chattel slavery was replaced by Jim Crow segregation. When Jim Crow was outlawed, we see it replaced with mass incarceration. We see how unions improved the standard of living in this country. Then, we see how employers moved their factories to nations where wages are between two and ten dollars per day. We see how women won the right to legal abortions. Today we see how the government is working to reverse that gain.

The right to abortion has never been threatened in Cuba. Black people have made momentous gains since the revolution. In Cuba a workers government holds power.

An experiment in social change?

Margaret Randall views the Cuban reality as a “great experiment in social change.” In other words, she views socialism in Cuba today as an “experiment” that might be looked at in view of its positive or negative effects. 

Fidel Castro had a different view of what the socialist movement means to the world. These are his words in 1988:

“Socialism is and will continue to be the hope, the only hope, the only road for the peoples, the oppressed, the exploited, the plundered. Socialism is the only alternative! And today, when our enemies want to question it, we must defend it more than ever.”

Why did Fidel Castro say these words?

The standard of living in the United States has been deteriorating for the past 40 years.

About 12% of the U.S. population doesn’t have enough food to eat in a nation that has the potential to feed the world.

The United States has a greater percentage of its population in prison than any other nation. Even China, a nation with a population about four times greater than the U.S. has fewer prisoners.

About half of the world lives on about two dollars per day or less. About 30,000 children die every day of preventable diseases.

Yet, the amount of money invested in derivatives is equivalent to almost $160,000 for every man, woman, and child on the planet. Derivatives are merely bets on how well the stock market will perform.

All corporations depend on a continuous flow of oil for their profits. In about 50 years most of the oil in the world will be used up.

Capitalism has two fundamental priorities. One is to increase the sales of commodities. The other is to cut production costs. These two priorities explain why depressions unfold. Not because there is a shortage of goods, but because there are more goods on the market than are being sold. In other words, in the capitalist system overproduction creates crisis for workers.

As Fidel Castro explained, Cuba has made many mistakes. Unlike the reality of the Soviet Union and China, Cuba has done it’s best to correct those mistakes. Clearly this hasn’t been easy, but this process is unfolding.

My opinion is that while Margaret Randall gives us useful information about Cuba, she doesn’t fully appreciate this reality. With all of it’s problems, I attended the 2017 May Day demonstration in Havana, Cuba. Literally one-million people in that city participated. This was a mass demonstration in support of the government. One of the most popular slogans was “Yo soy Fidel” (I am Fidel Castro). This demonstration shows that with all of its problems, Cuba continues to have the mass support of the people.