Haitian, Mexican, and Cuban Unrest

The Old Regimes in Haiti, Mexico and Cuba shared many similar social, political, and economic hardships in the years leading up to their revolutions. Although the revolutions happened centuries or decades apart, the causes that ultimately incited people to fight for their rights are timeless: oppressive social constructs, unstable political regimes, and a disregard for human equality.

Ideas that simultaneously created unity and encouraged separation.

The Enlightenment brought about various aspects of social change. As a colony of France, the Haitian Revolution was eventually influenced by the same Enlightenment ideas that prompted the French Revolution. However, before Enlightenment ideas about social change and general equality were able to infiltrate Haitian politics, ideas about the necessity racial hierarchies persisted. Certain activity working towards revolution was spurred by the heinous mistreatment slaves, combined with the decreasing rights for free people of color on the island. Racism was the reigning social construct in Haiti, and the colonists in both France and Haiti were willing to go to great lengths to uphold that structure above any other, regardless if Enlightenment ideas were being accepted in France.

As the colonists in Haiti received news of the social changes that were being pushed in France, for example the breakdown of the current hierarchy based on race, the colonists panic increased; they wanted to keep the slave system intact in Haiti. The Declaration of the Rights of Man abolished serfdom and manorial dues in France. After the colonists in Haiti found out about the Declaration of the Rights of Man their want to keep the racial hierarchy that allowed for prosperous plantation systems and abhorrent treatment of slaves intensified. The racial structure of the colony was a crucial component that justified the continuation of slavery and the plantation system. In an anonymous letter written by a colonist in Haiti, he highlights how ideas of European Enlightenment threatened Haitian social structure and was important to keep from spreading to the island, “Be suspicious of those who arrive from Europe” (Colonist, 1789). Continuing he writes, “You must not neglect any precaution, any effort, to maintain peace and subordination among you,” (Colonist, 1789).

Although both Haitian and Mexican societies were divided based on race and class, a fundamental part of the Cuban Revolution were ideas founded in unity and nationalism. Afro-cubanism and Son prompted a positive reaction for those in Cuba to unite under anti-imperialist ideas. Fulgencio Batista was a president turned dictator in Cuba from 1940-1959. While Batista’s Euro-Cuban elites wanted to keep the power imbalance prominent in order to maintain their power and status, Batista followers found an effective tool to be the discouragement of race-based organization under the guise that it was a threat to national unity. However, in a stark opposition to the Batista regime, the Independent Party of Color placed culture at the center of Cuban identity and spread ideas about an independent republic void of racial divisions and social antagonisms.

However, the people’s ability to unite and fight against imperialism went hand in hand with these ideas that placed Afro-Cuban culture at the center of Cuban identity instead of Euro-Cuban. At the start of the twentieth century many Cubans were displaced by land sold to foreigners, poverty, or from soldiers being purposefully stationed far away from family. This separation from community combined with poverty and little education led to the start of Son music. Although at first feared and rejected by Euro-Cubans and elites, by 1940 Son was accepted throughout society and even influenced jazz and ball room. Political party's programs throughout the start of the 20th century highlight on paper what was happening in the larger community, "We seek to maintain a balance among all Cuban interests, spread love for the Fatherland, develop cordial relations, and interest everybody in the conservation of Cuban nationality," (Independent Party of Color, 1908). The collective unity brought about by Afro-cubanism and Son music created a social organization in the context of race, however, different from the other countries, this movement came from those being oppressed rather than those oppressing.

The rulers of the area, whether it be colonists or dictators, favored foreign involvement.

While Haiti was being directly controlled by a different country externally, Mexico’s leader Porfirio Diaz, was purposefully inviting in and prioritizing foreign involvement. Diaz claimed foreign investment was necessary for Mexico’s stability, however, as Diaz increasingly favored foreign over domestic institutions, tensions between domestic entities and the Mexican government increased. Diaz authorized confiscatory land survey schemes that allowed large landowners to take village land and adopt high tariffs and restrictive labor policies. A specific consequence from Diaz's policies was issues raised by one of the wealthiest Mexican families, the Madero’s. In 1895, The government granted the Tlahualilo Company, a British owned agro-industrial complex, unlimited amounts of water, no government tax on imported machinery, as well as an exemption from various government taxes for ten years. The Madero’s were one of Mexico's biggest rubber producers and therefore Tlahualilo was their biggest competitor with their multiple product corporation. During this time period the U.S. also owned the Continental Rubber Company and worked to corner the market on rubber production ultimately merging with the United States Rubber Company. This expansion of the rubber market ultimately over-saturated the market and created financial difficulty for the Madero’s.

The Madero’s filed multiple lawsuits in an attempt to limit Tlahualilo’s water supply however it proved ultimately unsuccessful. Following this debacle, the Guggenheim-owned American Smelting and Refining Company received governmental support in the form of tax emption and other incentives to encourage the building of bigger and better smelters in Mexico. This initiative was orchestrated by Diaz and ultimately impacted the Madero’s smelting process. Diaz's clear preference for foreign involvement created political, economic, and social strife from Mexican citizens, who felt abandoned by the Mexican government. Diaz's preference for foreign investment was not mentioned in his initial political statements, at first, he was even advocating for the opposite, "the ineptitude of some men, the favoritism shown towards others, and the corruption shared by all has crippled these bountiful sources of public prosperity," (Porfirio Diaz, 1871). The Madero's are just one example of how seemingly small decisions can culminate into larger representations of inequality and instability as well as how governmental deceit can work to incite a unified backlash from the public.

The Madero’s are just one example of how the foreign favoritism demonstrated by Diaz made Mexican citizens feel ostracized and unsupported by the government. As these tensions intensified and nationalistic beliefs united citizens against the regime, Diaz went on to experience the consequences of creating such an unstable dynamic where he needs Mexican citizens to contribute their labor to the corporations the regime favors while simultaneously disregarding the rights of the citizens.

The ruling class relied on hierarchies in order to retain power, and the People noticed.

While the social constructs of the time influenced the overall makeup of the society, the details about the day-to-day treatment of those subjugated groups by the ruling colonial population bring light to the emotionally driven need for change. In Haiti extreme violence against slaves was an expected and embraced practice by the colonists. The Lejeune Atrocity Case exemplifies the sentiments of the colonists as well as the positions of the slaves. Lejeune was a plantation owner whose slaves died in quick intervals. Under a Haitian law that allowed slaves to report abuse, Lejeune’s slaves told the judiciary of his actions, “Lejeune had a man and a woman slave burned and last Friday two slave women had their legs and thighs burned and they were still on the plantation in a dungeon,” (Administrative Report, 1788).

The administration reports state that “the courts have never at any time…punished the inhumanity of masters” (Administrative Report, 1788). This case gave hope to slaves that their concerns could be validated, and action might finally be taken against their master. However, to the slave's horror, a petition from prominent colonists stated that, “good policy and the peace of the colony demand that atrocities committed by whites against slaves should be covered up,” (Administrative Report, 1788). To go even further the planters asked, “that fifty lashes… be given to Lejeune’s slaves,” (Administrative Report, 1788). The public successfully intimidated and influenced the court and the charges against Lejeune were dropped. This case particularly stands out because all the proof necessary by law to file charges was present, yet the court did not act. This atrocious case increased the anger and determination of the slaves to advocate for their rights since the law demonstrated that it would always side in favor of the colonist.

Mexico’s indigenous population was forced into slave labor as attempts for economic modernization spread throughout the country. Debt peonage was a tool used by elites to entrap workers with labor contracts that implied good wages but instead forced laborers into debt. Mexican peasants harvesting henequen fell victim to these contracts as well as the Maya harvesting coffee. Extreme poverty forced laborers to comply with harsh conditions and debt because there was no other option for survival. Maya who were fighting for basic survival would accept corn, water and a few cents in exchange for their tireless labor. The idea of the oppressors was that as long as they did not perish and did not have enough sustenance to fight, they would not rebel.

Poor conditions persisted for decades with no relief from the government, as the elites in government were benefitting economically and politically by having a subjugated class help production. Representatives were not even attempting to hide their hands off approach, instead trying to defend the government's position, "the Government can only contribute to improving labor conditions by indirect means such as keeping the peace, the promotion of industry and the investment of both national and foreign capital in native elements of the country's wealth, and thus ensure national credit," (Matias Romero Avendano, 1892). This communicated to the enslaved and struggling classes that their poor conditions were not something the government would change because the "promotion of industry" and "foreign capital" were the real incentives.

This dichotomy between wealthy planters and impoverished peasants outlines the brewing motivations on the part of the workers to change the societal hierarchy. Porfirio Diaz exacerbated the situation with decisions such as appointing Pablo Escandon as a governor in 1908 in an area he was not local to, nor lived, where he increased property taxes of small famers and reduced taxes of the larger plantations where debt peonage was common. In that same year a journalist wrote of Diaz, "For twenty-seven years he [Diaz] has governed the Mexican Republic with such power that national elections have become mere formalities," (James Creelman, 1908). Such a statement demonstrates how strong his dictatorship had become and that beyond the group benefitting from Diaz's rule, a larger community was forming in his opposition. Decisions like these helped to highlight the abuse of power by Diaz and not only his disregard for those struggling, but his purposeful encouragement to uphold inequalities.

Cuba’s legacy of Spanish colonialism prior to 1868 provides an outline for the hierarchical structures engrained into their society. However, from 1868-1898 the function of these hierarchical categories became clear. During the 10 years’ war from 1868-78 there were various revolts that were ultimately unsuccessful in uniting the nation for change. Although there was not a united cause or group in charge during this period, the initial leaders stated that they would not attack property, which included slaves and wealth. That position alienated many populations that were suffering from slave labor and oppression from the wealthy elite. In 1891, José Martí's Our America influenced ideas about nationalism and unity. Martí writes that it is, “imperative to make common cause with the oppressed, in order to secure a new system opposed to the ambitions and governing habits of the oppressors,” (José Martí, 1891).

In 1895 when the cause was taken over by men of color and modest origins, their ability to unite expanded beyond the previous groups. This movement encompassed social transformation, not just independence from colonialism. Because this group came from the suffering groups and were not protecting the property of the wealthy, they were supported by the Pacifico’s that lived throughout the mountainous regions which the previous rebel group could not physically pass through. With aid from the Pacifico’s, the insurgent army was able to successfully spread its message. These attempts at insurgency demonstrate how ideas about equality were not understood or responded to by the classes above those who were enduring the oppressive treatment. The first attempt at revolt in 1868 is able to be understood as a fight “independence;” by which they meant independence for their elite group. Social hierarchy incongruences became catalysts for revolution.

The culmination of the social constructs present, the unstable political regimes that favored foreign powers and the blatant disregard for equality invited ideas and movements based on rebellion and revolt to form.

As tensions in the old regimes of each area mounted, the stage was set for revolution. Haiti, Mexico, and Cuba experienced distinct revolutionary courses, however the overall fight for equal rights, whatever that meant to each country and each individual, remained at the core.

When France started to adopt radical new ideas about equality, the colonists occupying Haiti responded with harsh resistance. The Declaration of the Rights of Man was accepted in 1789 in France; this document declared all men to be equal, regardless of race. The White planter elite in Saint Domingue relied on racial inequality to uphold the slave economy, so it was in the colonist’s best interest to reject the Declaration. However, the population of free people of color in Saint Domingue were growing increasingly impatient with the disrespect and oppression they faced. In 1791 free people of color rebelled against the White planter elite in an attempt to get their attention and force them to accept the Declaration of the Rights of Man. The rebellion worked and the Treaty of Damiens was adopted in Haiti that same year; it granted citizenship for all, there would be no more “people of color,” and they would have rights in the assembly. However, the treaty did not address the plight of slaves. The White planter elite continued to reject equality with people of color and so the revolt continued. At the end of the year, Port-au-Prince was largely set on fire by the free people of color because the colonists ultimately could not uphold ideas that differed from white supremacy. The free people of color kept fighting for freedom, “our brothers are marching in arms to the defense of their violated rights and to avenge the broken trust of their treaties,” (Juste Chanlatte, 1791).

As the slaves began to see the free people of color fight for their rights, their expectations for their own rights began to rise. In 1793 an important vodou ceremony took place. The Bois Caiman ceremony brought together many slaves and solidified their commitment to fight for freedom. This ceremony is thought to be the official beginning of the slave revolt against oppression. The slaves went on to brutally fight their way to freedom. By using any tactics they could, they violently rejected colonial oppression.

Throughout the slave rebellions, France was in the midst of the French Revolution which meant they were fighting with surrounding European countries. France was in a fragile position and eventually could not continue to extend money and fighters to suppress slave rebellions in Haiti. However, the slave economy was a large source of revenue for the French economy and France could not afford to lose this income or have the slaves completely turn against them and fight alongside a different European country. This encouraged France to send General Sonthonax to Haiti where he declared emancipation of 1793 in an attempt to keep insurgents from abandoning the economy France was relying on. The “emancipation” was essentially legalized slavery. The document banned heinous actions that were previously taking place against slaves; however, it ultimately upheld the plantation economy, “all men who do not own land, are not soldiers and are not attached to agriculture or employed in domestic service … will be arrested” (Lèget-Fèlicitè Sonthonax, 1793). Rebels ultimately accepted this doctrine and “allied” with France because France had freed the slaves in Europe and were slowly promising freedom to Haiti.

By 1802 however, Haiti began to experience the reign of Napoleon Bonaparte and his attempts to reinstate the policies that Haiti had been working against for the previous decade. Bonaparte announced that slavery would be maintained in the colonies where it had never been abolished and reinstated a legal slave trade. Although the colonial islands of Haiti and Guadeloupe were not specifically mentioned, two months after Bonaparte’s announcement, Guadeloupe saw black people being forced back into slavery. Correspondence reveal that French officials in Haiti were working with Bonaparte to assure that at the right time slavery would return to Haiti as well, “after the innumerable proclamations that I have issued here assuring the blacks of their freedom, I do not want to have to contradict myself… however… my successor will find everything in place,” (General Leclerc, 1802).

During the summer of Bonaparte’s announcement, Toussaint was captured and deported to France. He ultimately died in captivity at the begging of 1803. In the fall of 1802 however, Jean-Jacques Dessalines led a final rebellion to expel all French troops from the island to secure safety from Bonaparte’s unpredictable declarations and finally solidify Haitian freedom. After gruesome battles, the Haitian Declaration of Independence was issued on January 1 ^st , 1804.

Mexican citizens were increasingly unhappy with their dictator Porfirio Diaz. Fueled with enough determination and aided by his access to resources, Francisco Madero set out on a presidential campaign. Ultimately the campaign proved to be unsuccessful; Diaz arrested Madero and claimed election for himself. However, now having gained popularity from his campaign, and showcasing a prime example of the corruption of Diaz, Madero retreated to Texas and ultimately called for a rebellion in Mexico on November 20, 1910. After only being met with a handful of men with very few guns, Madero retreated back into Texas and began strategizing for a larger revolution, ultimately creating the Plan de San Luis Potosi.

The opening statement of the plan mirrors the excitement and determined attitude carried throughout, “People, in their constant efforts that the ideals of liberty and justice triumph, are forced, at certain historical moments, to make their greatest sacrifices,” (Francisco Madero, 1910). This plan focused on political reform by announcing the nullification of the recent elections, naming Madero provisional president, promising free elections and advocating for the no reelection principal. Although the plan gained support from some rebels, social and economic activists did not have their grievances addressed in Madero’s Plan de San Luis Potosi. Although Madero's call for an uprising in November of 1910 didn't happen, eventually revolts broke out in several areas of Mexico.  As the revolution gained momentum, Diaz resigned and was replaced by Madero. Madero's cautious approach to reform, however, gained him enemies and ultimately hindered his ability to be the sole leader of this revolution.

Due to Madero’s lack of revolutionary change once in power in 1911, grassroots rebels created their own plans. Emiliano Zapata was dedicated to land reform. The Plan de Ayala proposed massive land and resource reform that would help the peasants and struggling classes and dismantle the abusive power large landowners had retained. The Plan also specifically attacked Madero for lack of follow through, “Madero, through lack of integrity and utter weakness, did not bring about a satisfactory end to the revolution… he left standing most of the governing powers and corrupt oppressive forces,” (Emiliano Zapata, 1911). Pascual Orozco was loyal to Madero until Madero’s politics in office proved to be not radical enough. The Plan de Orozquista advocated for workers’ rights and called out Madero for not doing enough. Zapata and Orozco’s oppositional plans angered Madero and ultimately led him to order the General of the federal army, Victoriano C. Huerta to crush Orozco and drive Zapata into the mountains. Madero’s reliance on the federal army to protect his position made him vulnerable. General Huerta understood this and conspired a coup to overthrow Madero. Claiming his power at the beginning of 1913, Huerta attempted to create a counter-revolution. However, lacking popular acceptance he was unsuccessful, and the revolution broke into factions.

The Constitutionalist movement began with Venustiano Carranza. Carranza was very anti-Huerta and unsupportive of his unconstitutional actions. The U.S. President, Woodrow Wilson, did not recognize Huerta as the legitimate leader of Mexico. Huerta had demonstrated he would take violent action against opposition groups, and he viewed the elections as a ceremonial legitimization of his power as dictator rather than a democratic vote on who should be in power. President Wilson talked with Carranza about a potential U.S. military invasion into Mexico to oust Huerta. Carranza did not want to bring in foreign intervention and adamantly refused. However, by February of 1914 the U.S found a way to take action. After Mexican officials had detained U.S. sailors for two hours after they had docked in Veracruz to refuel, the U.S. demanded a 21-gun salute to the U.S. flag and a formal apology. Mexico, heated with anti-foreign attitudes and dedicated to their fight for nationalism, could not abide by these demands. Although the sailors had been released, the U.S. used this issue to gain congressional approval to invade Mexico. After gruesome and bloody battles, the U.S. withdrew from Mexico in July, leaving the Constitutionalist forces with U.S. arms.

As revolutionary leaders worked to officially be rid of the Huerta regime, the various political agendas of each leader became increasingly apparent. Poncho Villa was an asset on the battlefield and ultimately his views aligned with Zapata, the ardent land reformer. The two favored agrarian reform and regional autonomy with a loose national confederation. Carranza had found an alliance with Alvaro Obregon; both were from middle class upbringings and were dedicated to creating a strong central government that focused on economic modernization. Following the final demise of Huerta, the strong factionalist divide that had formed needed to be addressed.

The Convention of Aguascalientes was set up to establish a government independent of a singular revolutionary leader, since there were many leaders, however, the Convention only further divided and upset the revolutionaries. On November 19, 1914, Obregon officially announced a declaration of war against Villa.

Villa and Carranza represented social extremes and had radically different political backgrounds. Obregon and Carranza were ultimately successful on the battlefield against Villa and Zapata because of their political strategies that won over the workers, peasants, and middle-class people to support their cause. Villa was hyper focused on instilling land reform measures only for his army and his violent tactics on the battlefield often hurt civilians which did not entice them to support him.

With Carranza now in power and Obregon given control of the army, Carranza worked to create a new constitution. Carranza pulled inspiration from the 1857 Mexican Constitution for the new 1917 Constitution. Zapata ultimately did not receive the land reform he fought for, “private property shall not be expropriated except for reasons of public use,” (Mexican Constitution, 1917). Labor laws experienced reform, “the minimum wage that each worker must enjoy will be sufficient… duration of one day of work shall be eight hours… night work shall be six hours..” and arguably the most progressive, “equal wages shall be paid for equal work, regardless of sex or nationality,” (Mexican Constitution, 1917). The new constitution also declared nationalization of subsoil rights, meaning that the U.S. owned oil companies that had been dominating the region for decades now had no claim to the oil they were mining. The document also angered religious groups with its explicitly anti clerical agenda, “the law does not recognize religious groups called churches as legal entities,” and “ministers… may never, in public or private…criticize the fundamental laws of the country,” (Mexican Constitution, 1917). Although the revolution had proved fruitful for some groups rights, other groups were purposefully oppressed.

Fulgencio Batista was an official military dictator in Cuba from 1952-1959 and during his time he accumulated an abundance of enemies. In an attempt to rebel and overthrow the dictatorship, Fidel Castro planned an attack against the Moncada Barracks in eastern Cuba in 1953. To their dismay, the group was not able to take the barracks, and many were killed. Castro was arrested for this attack and while in prisoned he planned his own defense. After being released from prison, Castro, with other revolutionaries, was sent to Mexico in exile. There, they were able to plan their next revolutionary move.

The Granma was a yacht that the revolutionaries took from Mexico to Cuba in 1956 in an attempt to return to Cuba at the same time an uprising in Santiago was planned. However, plans were foiled when government officials quickly apprehended the Granma and killed most of the rebels aboard. Important revolutionary figureheads escaped the killings and fled to the Sierra Maestra Mountains in eastern Cuba. Fidel Castro and Che Guevara worked hard to plan a successful insurgency from there and developed guerrilla war tactics.

The insurgency in the Sierra Maestra was named the Guerrilla movement because of the tactics and strategies they used. The Movement grew and solidified as the revolutionary forces stayed in the mountains. While in the Sierra Maestra, Che and Fidel worked to establish hospitals, leather workshops, forge and armory stations, and a newspaper and radio station. The Guerrilla movement was able to gain the support of the peasantry that lived in the mountains by working to address their health care needs and trying to work with them rather than order them. This peasantry proved to be crucial to the success of the revolution because of the physical and mental support they offered, “Little by little, as the peasants came to recognize the invincibility of the guerrillas and the long duration of the struggle, they began responding more logically joining our army as fighters,” (Che Guevara, 1957).

The July 26 ^th  movement was present in the Sierra Maestra mountains from 1958 until their ultimately triumph in 1959. However, during that time another revolutionary group formed in the Llano; although the word literally means “plains” in this case it was used to refer to the more urban resistance taking place in Havana and Santiago. The Llano worked to overthrow the Batista regime as well however with different tactics then those in the mountains. Che Guevara describes the Llano as being in a “more revolutionary position only in appearance,” (Che Guevara, 1957). Their plan revolved around an armed struggle that would lead into a large strike that would topple Batista so they could seize power. Whereas in the Sierras, their plan was to strangle and slowly reduce Batista’s power until they ultimately destroyed entire regime.

Although the Batista regime had easy access to an abundance of resources that the Llano nor Sierras did, they were not equipped to strategically plan combat. With the immense organization and coordination of the team in the Sierras, the rebels were ultimately successful in taking over Batista. As Castro and his team marched through Havana on January 1 ^st , 1959, they announced the defeat of Batista and the beginning of the Revolution. They had won the war, but now it was time to change their society.

Clearly, many of the causes of revolution mirror each other, but the similarities don’t stop there. In all three revolutions there is an abundance of overlap when it comes to the course of each revolution. Although details can differ, many tactics employed to resist oppression and domination while simultaneously rallying widespread support for liberation stay the same regardless of date or geographic location.

While an abundant of radical ideas were being born and spread throughout these revolutions, people became increasingly attached and committed to addressing their individual plight.

Factionalism naturally formed around an abundance of strong revolutionary leaders that had specific agendas. In Haiti, there were multiple different opinions on how the country should be run and what the laws should be. One clear example of this is Toussaint pushing to reinstate the plantation system; the former slaves and free people of color adamantly opposed because it was too similar to the slave system they were working to abolish. Toussaint was focused on the economy whereas the other groups saw the revolution as a way to stop the slave system, not reinforce it. This division of belief led to much tension and political pushback.

Mexico had the strongest form of factionalism because it had so many prominent leaders that differed widely on policy. Villa and Zapata were fighting for the peasants and indigenous communities that needed land reform. Although these two were fighting “together” there were differences in tactics, ability, and belief even among the two. Carranza and Obregon did not fight for the “little guy,” but instead focused on the larger picture. While Carranza was the face of the political agenda, Obregon was known for his military maneuvers. The two pairs differed greatly in their view of post-revolution Mexico, and ultimately each individual man represented a difference of opinion, and the people had the right to choose who they followed.

In Cuba there was the split between the Sierra and Llano groups. While the Sierra’s were more connected with the peasant class and wanted to address their struggles, the Llano group was focused on different social and political conceptions that limited their ability to gain more followers. Ultimately, the difference of fundamental tactics and overall group organization led to the success of the Sierra’s agenda.

The momentum of a cause is dictated by the people backing it.

In Haiti, the free people of color would not have been able to overcome the colonial rule without the support and fighting power of the slaves. Although the free people of color were the first group to initially receive legal recognition of their rights from France, their ability to ultimately team up with the slave population in order to jointly fight the French forces is what made their victory possible.

In Mexico because there were such strong leaders guiding groups defending specific causes, intense factionalism naturally formed. Due to the fact that there were multiple strong groups, the people supporting each group greatly mattered. Villa relied on his team to physically enforce their demands and make their cause be heard. Although Villa alienated the larger citizenry with his narrow focus on rights for his troops only, his ability to ultimate dominate the battlefield with his small group demonstrates how much “popular support” mattered.

In Cuba, the rebels stationed in the Sierra Maestra mountains found aid among the peasants living in the high mountains. By taking the time to understand the needs of the peasants, Castro was able to gain a large populations trust. “Hunger, misery, illness, epidemics, and death decimated the peasants resettled by the tyranny,” (Che Guevara, 1957) by working to address these issues for the peasants, Che was able to rally many supporters behind him that other groups such as the Llano did not receive.

With the strong presence of foreign involvement, it is not surprising that revolutionaries in each country also used foreign countries to their benefit.

Before the Revolution officially began, in 1790 a resistance organizer named Vincent Oge secretly traveled to Haiti to keep the slaves and free men of color informed on the politics of France and the level to which Enlightenment ideals were shaping their society. Oge’s news of the French Revolution worked to inspire Haiti’s resistance and keep the movement dedicated to equality reforms.

In Mexico it was crucial for Madero to be able to cross the U.S. and Mexico border often. Arguably, the revolution was only possible because Madero had the means to reside in Texas for long stretches in order to plan and gather allies. In Cuba, Castro’s exile to Mexico also allowed him to plan and rally troops with new energy to bring back to their movement.

How revolutionary transformation was received by the country itself and the rest of the world.

Following Haiti’s ultimately successful separation from France, the country faced many challenges in terms of being recognized as an independent nation in the larger global world. Dessalines was in power from 1805-1806 and was the first ruler to attempt to govern Haiti as a free nation. His main priority was finding outlets for Haiti’s agriculture in order to obtain capital that would help their defense strategy. Dessalines established a very militarized government and allowed for previously abandoned plantations to be run by the government. Encouraging anything that resembled the plantation economy was seen as a threat to all the people who had just fought to end slavery and the plantation system that relied on enslaved peoples. In the end, Dessalines was overthrown and killed in 1806.

From 1807-1820 there was much tension in Haiti. Although Dessalines did not do a great job in uniting Haiti or repairing the economy, Alexandre Petion and Henri Christophe worked to increasingly divide Haiti and work against each other. Petion worked in Southern Haiti and ruled his area from 1807-1818. Due to his belief that people would work harder if they were working for themselves, he worked toward replacing the plantation system with a share cropping system. He also valued education and even invited French teachers to establish the first prestigious secondary school in Haiti. Meanwhile, in Northern Haiti, Christophe took a different approach to rebuilding Haiti. Christophe expanded the plantation system in an attempt to expand agricultural exports to gain more capital. Different than Petion however, Christophe would not work with France to expand education, instead he looked to Britain to establish the first successful attempt at broad public education, even establishing teachers in the barracks. The need for capital to acquire proper defenses against the powerful countries that did not like Haiti as a free nation motivated these rulers to keep the plantation system. However, in doing so, these rulers worked to divide their people and decrease their own popularity.

Beyond the details of how each ruler attempted to rebuild Haiti, the global disapproval and neglect of a free black Haiti was the ultimate barrier to success. At the beginning of the 19 ^th  century, the United States, England and France all continued to recognize slavery or the owning of enslaved peoples as legitimate. Since Haiti had proved that these oppressed groups could overthrow a powerful country and gain their own power, Haiti’s independence was a threat to these powerful countries that relied on slavery and enslaved peoples to keep them in global control. The historical silence that is prevalent today in terms of the Haitian Revolution stands to represent the ongoing colonial punishment that is a response to any anti-colonial movement.

There are many similarities in the revolutionary change that both Mexico and Cuba attempted to or successfully implemented following the “end” of their revolutions. One result of both revolutions was the increase in attention and dedication to the arts. Art became an accessible for way for people to express their opinions and feelings. Allowing for larger participation of the arts created environments where people could feel heard or seen.

Although Mexico has a long history with muralism, investment into art education and appreciation expanded during this period. There were two big waves of muralism following the revolution. The first took place in the 1920’s and was mostly done in educational settings. The murals created during this period most notably appeared on university walls and buildings. However, the second wave began in the 1930’s and expanded murals to cover government buildings as well. In these ways, art was used as an education tool and allowed for continuing revolutionary thought and expression. One very prominent and influential artist during this time was Gerardo Murillo Coronado, or more famously known as, Dr. Atl. His art focused on Mexican landscapes because he wanted to paint things that felt familiar to and were recognizable by Mexicans. Dr. Atl later influenced the works of Diego Rivera, David Alfaro Siqueiros, and Jose Clemente Orozco. These artists moved away from making God or the State the most central theme in their works, and instead prioritized reclaiming Mexico’s history and making it accessible to the masses.

Cuba adopted appreciation for muralism as well, however, Cuba more specifically invested in producing cinema. The Instituto Cubano del Arte e Industria Cinematograficos (ICAIC) was established in early 1959 and still produces films today. This institute is funded by the government and has distribution and censorship powers. The style of most Cuban films pushes the consumer to participate in the topics and messages being conveyed rather than a more Hollywood style that encourages a passive viewing. Although this cooptation of the film industry by the government does have its barriers in terms of what commentary and themes are allowed to be produced, it also provides substantial funds that allowed for a strong revolutionary culture to continue on. Cuban films communicate strong social commentary and expresses a wide range of critiques about Cuba and other countries around the globe. This film industry has contributed greatly to the social engagement and ongoing revolutionary thought of Cubans.

Educational reform was important in different ways to both Mexico and Cuba. While Cuba saw an expansive change as they reached many citizens with their literacy campaign, Mexico experienced a more radical change in their school systems in an attempt to incorporate scientific teachings.

When a man named Lazaro Cardenas was the president of Mexico from 1934-1940, he pushed for many educational reforms. His mindset was that “economic reforms alone would not free villagers from the clutches of hacendados and priests” (Gonzales, 239). Prior to Cardenas, the Church had been in charge of providing education and all schooling was heavily based on religion. Secular missionaries were sent out in an attempt to change the structure of education to include non-religious teachers. Strong pro-clerical traditions were difficult to overpower, and in many of the villages these secular attempts at education were met with extreme violence or the absence of children from school altogether. Despite intense backlash from the catholic church, the increasingly powerful anti-clerical government succeeded in raising attendance from 30% to 70% from 1910-1940.

Cuba focused much of their attention on education reform, starting with the literacy campaign. This campaign was seen as, “a profoundly political effort, one tied intimately to the revolutionary transformation of society and the economy” (Chomsky, 50). Social capital was important in order to restructure the Cuban economy, which meant that increasing skills and education was a top priority for the government. Without literacy many Cubans also thought marginalization and oppression would grow and undo any revolutionary progress. In the 1970’s high school students from urban areas that planned on attending university were sent to rural boarding schools that combined classroom work with manual labor. The expansion of education did not only include literacy, as mentioned above the arts were included, as well as institutions like museums, libraries, publishing houses, and theaters. In 1959 Cuba was publishing less than 1 million books per year and by 1980 they were publishing over 50 million books a year. Cuba’s contribution to the arts was not contained to just their citizens either; throughout 1975 the Cuban government sponsored art events that brought in 67 million spectators (four times the national population). Massive changes like these helped to mobilize Cuban citizens and engage the masses.

Call to Arms of the Free Men of Color (1791). In The Haitian Revolution:A Documentary History, edited by David Geggus, 70-71. Indianapols/Cambridge: Hackett Publishing, 2014.

The Emancipation Proclamation of 29 August (1793). In The Haitian Revolution:A Documentary History, edited by David Geggus, 107-109. Indianapols/Cambridge: Hackett Publishing, 2014.

The War of the South (1799). In The Haitian Revolution:A Documentary History, edited by David Geggus, 148-51. Indianapols/Cambridge: Hackett Publishing, 2014.

Toussaint Louverture’s Constitution (1801). In The Haitian Revolution:A Documentary History, edited by David Geggus, 160-64. Indianapols/Cambridge: Hackett Publishing, 2014.

General Leclerc and the Rewsotration of Slavery (1802). In The Haitian Revolution:A Documentary History, edited by David Geggus, 172-73. Indianapols/Cambridge: Hackett Publishing, 2014.

Plan de San Luis Potosi (1910). In Mexican History: A Primary Source Reader, Nora E. Jaffary, Edward W. Osowski, Susie S. Porter, 295-99. Oxford: Routledge, 2009.

Plan de Ayala (1911). In Mexican History: A Primary Source Reader, Nora E. Jaffary, Edward W. Osowski, Susie S. Porter, 300-04. Oxford: Routledge, 2009.

The Mexican Constitution (1917). In Mexican History: A Primary Source Reader, Nora E. Jaffary, Edward W. Osowski, Susie S. Porter, 305-11. Oxford: Routledge, 2009.

Castro, Fidel. “History Will Absolve Me.” In The Cuba Reader: History, Culture, Politics, edited by Aviva Chomsky, et al., 122-127. Durham: Duke University Press, 2004.

Guevara, Ernesto Che. Episodes of the Cuban Revolutionary War, 1956-1958. New York: Pathfinder, 1996.

Incendie du Cap. Révolte général des Nègres, Massacre des Blanca. Unknown. 1815.  https://digital.librarycompany.org/islandora/object/Islandora%3A2721 

A Reading of Voltaires Tragedy ‘L’Orpheline de la Chine’ in the Salon of Madam Geoffrin. Anicet Charles Gabriel Lemonnier. 1812.  https://lawliberty.org/book-review/the-enlightenments-how-of-happiness/ 

Andres Molina Enriquez. Unknown. 1905.  https://relatosehistorias.mx/nuestras-historias/los-grandes-problemas-nacionales-de-andres-molina-enriquez 

The Cuban “Son” as Form, Genre and Symbol. James Robbins. 1990. https://doi.org/10.2307/780124

Pétition du roi à l'Assemblée nationale le 28 avril 1791. Carl de Vinck and Michel Hennin. Paris, 1791.  https://exhibits.stanford.edu/frenchrevolution/catalog/st212xb1156 

Loading Bags of Wheat Onto Boxcars at Tlahualilo de Zaragoza. Unknown. Mexico, 1928. http://collections.lib.uwm.edu/cdm/ref/collection/agsnorth/id/5657

The Spring Medicine and the Sugar. Charles Lewis Bartholomew. 1901.  http://digitalcollections.hclib.org/cdm/ref/collection/Bart/id/4279 

Branding a Female Slave. Unknown. 1914.  https://digital.librarycompany.org/islandora/object/Islandora%3A2671 

Drawing Water in Maya Village. Unknown. Quintana Roo, Mexico, 1947.  https://doi.org/10.25549/impa-m64124 

Maya Woman and Child with Her Home in the Background. Unknown. Chichén Itzá, Mexico, 1940.  https://cdm17191.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/chc0126/id/424 

Schoolhouse of Maya Village. Unknown. Quintana Roo, Mexico,1947.  http://doi.org/10.25549/impa-m64323 

Miscellaneous Photos: Tomb of Jose Marti. Eduardo S. Romero. Cuba.  https://ufdc.ufl.edu/aa00011995/00001 

The Battle of Agua Prieta, Gen. Calles Trenches. Unknow. Sonora, Mexico, 1915.  https://digitalcollections.smu.edu/digital/collection/mex/id/1728 .

Side Lights on the French Revolution. Steward T.G.  https://www.dloc.com/AA00021657/00001/citation 

Leaders of the Mexican Revolution after the First Battle of Ciudad Juarez. E.O. Goldbeck. Chihuahua, Mexico, 1911  https://digitalcollections.smu.edu/digital/collection/mex/id/1079 .

Residence of F. I. Madero, Mexico, D. F. Manuel Ramos. Mexico City, Mexico, 1913.  https://digitalcollections.smu.edu/digital/collection/mex/id/552 .

Francisco I. Madero. D.W. Hoffman. Mexico, 1910-13.  https://digitalcollections.smu.edu/digital/collection/mex/id/3732 .

Madero [and] Pascual Orozco. Unknown. Chihuahua, Mexico, 1911.  https://digitalcollections.smu.edu/digital/collection/mex/id/1815 .

Che Guevara Mural on Wall. Kenneth Triester. 1997.  https://ufdc.ufl.edu/uf00089092/00092 .

Composite Map. William Faden, 1749-1839.  https://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~345986~90113477 

History of Mexico. Diego Rivera. Mexico City, 1929-1930.  https://smarthistory.org/mexico-diego-rivera-murals-national-palace/ 

Poster for the film Portrait of Teresa. Pastor Vega. Cuba, 1979.  https://cinereverso.org/donde-esta-teresa/ 

Country School Children. Unknown. Mexico, 1910/1920.  https://digitalcollections.smu.edu/digital/collection/pwl/id/1909/rec/1 

University of Havana Cuba. Roberts & Co. Havana, Cuba.  https://cdm17191.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/chc0359/id/4769 

Chomsky, Aviva. A History of the Cuban Revolution. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2014.

Geggus, David. The Haitian Revolution: A Documentary History. Indianapolis: Hackett, 2014.

Gonzales, Michael J. The Mexican Revolution 1910-1940. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 2002.

Pasztor, Suzanne B. The Spirit of Hidalgo: The Mexican Revolution in Coahuila. Calgary: University of Calgary Press, 2002.