Democracy Might Have A Chance In Post-Castro Cuba

May 25, 2000

University Park, Pa. -- A democratic government and political freedom could be authentic possibilities for post-Castro Cuba, if pre-Castro history is any guide, a Penn State researcher says.

"Casual observers of Cuban history might see only two choices after Castro: the rule of entrenched wealth and military dictatorship a la Batista, or a continuation of Fidel Castro's socialist revolution," says Dr. Charles D. Ameringer, professor emeritus of Latin American history at Penn State. "However, a third option could be real democracy, which had a little remembered trial run in Cuba between 1944 and 1952."

Ameringer is the author of a new book, "The Cuban Democratic Experience: The Autentico Years, 1944-1952," published by the University Press of Florida.

"The Cuban Revolutionary Party-Autentico (PRC-A) administrations of Ramon Grau San Martin and Carlos Prio Socarras, though marred by serious flaws, together represented a unique era in Cuban history," Ameringer notes. "In two free elections (1944 and 1948), Cubans had their first chance to vote for a government committed to protecting civil liberties, promoting Cuban culture and achieving economic independence."

Unfortunately, the early promise of the Autentico government was tarnished by widespread corruption, nepotism, economic mismanagement and gangland violence, with the result that a golpe, or coup, launched by onetime stenographer sergeant Fulgencio Batista toppled Prio in 1952. At the beginning of 1959, Batista was himself overthrown by Fidel Castro.

The Autentico era began on June 1, 1944 when former medical school dean and Autentico candidate Grau San Martin - basing his campaign on "Cubanidad" or Cuban-ness -- won the Cuban presidential election with 1,041,822 votes to 839,220 for Carlos Saladrigas, representing the Batista-sponsored Democratic Socialist Coalition. Batista, in power since 1934, kept his word and did not resort to military intervention. Thus, Cuba's first experiment in democracy was launched, says Ameringer.

"Under the Autenticos, Cubans would enjoy freedoms they had never known before and would never know again, the greatest being freedom of expression," the College of the Liberal Arts researcher says. "Cuba had scores of newspapers, running the spectrum from the ultraconservative Diario de la Marina to the Communist Hoy. The weekly magazine, Bohemia, with its excellent political cartoonists and caricaturists, enjoyed one of the largest circulations in Latin America, even though it was an unrelenting critic of the Autenticos."

The Prio government, while hardly a paragon of honesty itself, attempted to reduce bureaucratic embezzlement through public budgets and standardized accounting procedures monitored by the Tribunal of Accounts, the National Bank and Agricultural and Industrial Development Bank.

"The Autenticos maintained a highly regulated economy to achieve broadly nationalistic and anti-imperialistic goals," notes the Penn State historian. "Through a system of production quotas and guaranteed market share, the Autenticos sought to eliminate the corporation-owned agroindustrial sugar combine called the latifundium, while fostering Cuban ownership of land and industry. They intended to liberate the Cuban economy from outside control and protect workers and small farmers, but, as many economists argued, their economic policies furthered inefficiency and stagnation. Neither did they succeed in reducing widespread illiteracy on the island."

"It is possible that a third free election (slated for June 1952) and a respected presidency might have given democracy the final nudge it needed to survive in Cuba," he adds. "Social injustice and economic disparity persisted, but the legal and political channels of redress would have stayed open under conditions of increasing confidence and opportunity."

The young Cuban democracy had produced leaders better suited than Prio to attack political corruption and violence and effect lasting economic reform. Unfortunately none of them had the opportunity to prove their worth, according to Ameringer.

"In hindsight, Cubans would have fought like demons to resist Batista's golpe in 1952, had they known the complete truth about him," Ameringer notes. "Few apparently regretted the departure of Prio, but few expected that democracy might be a permanent casualty as well."

Already prominent in Cuban politics was 26-year-old Fidel Castro, who, after gaining early experience as a revolutionary, had earned a law degree and started a practice, with much of his work offered pro bono in the slums of Havana.

Castro, in denouncing the Batista takeover, himself testified to the growth of democracy under the Autenticos: "We have been accustomed to living within the Constitution, we have done so for 12 years without serious obstacles in spite of the errors and outrages. The superior state of civic peace is achieved only after long effort. You, Batista, have just cast to the ground in a few hours that noble dream of the Cuban people."

"Many Cubans who left their homeland after the Castro revolution of 1959 were either born or had their formative years in the Autentico era," says the Penn State historian. "Their children might do well to recall Cuba's democratic experience for its successes as well as its errors."

***pab***

Contacts:

Paul Blaum (814) 865-9481 (o)

Vicki Fong (814) 865-9481 (o)/ (814) 238-1221 (h)

EDITORS: Dr. Ameringer can be reached at (814) 238-4196.