ABSTRACT
Prior to 1959, all Cuban revolutions were inaugurated with great fanfare, but in the end resulted in little more than a continuation of the militarization, caudillismo and corruption of previous regimes. The revolutionaries of 1906 were primarily concerned with plundering the national treasury. The revolutionaries of 1917 were much the same. Even the chaotic, impassioned revolution against Machado in the early 1930s led only to deepening cycles of graft, corruption and political-gangster violence in the 1940s and 1950s. By the time Batista returned to power in his 1952 “revolution,” the term appeared to signify little more than an armed takeover of the public sector, including its gambling and smuggling rackets. Did the Castro revolutionaries reiterate this pattern? Or did 1959, unlike earlier Cuban revolutions, represent a truly radical break from the past? As long as political dissent in Cuba remains so heavily criminalized, and independent investigation of the Castro regime’s programs continues to be prohibited, a full accounting of the 1959 Revolution’s place in history cannot be made. Nonetheless, a casual appraisal does reveal a number of important continuities as well as some key divergences (especially with respect to health and disease) between the Castro revolutionaries and their predecessors.
