Dialogando Sobre Independentismos Parte I y II 1890-1980. (First Draft, Please Do Not Quote
Without Authorization. Comments, Suggestions?
rodrigvm@cox.net)
Directed and edited by
Mariel C. Marrero and Freddie Rodriguez. San
Juan: Producciones Zaranda, DVD 2010, 3 hours and 48 minutes.
Víctor M. Rodríguez Domínguez, Ph.D.
Department of Chicano and Latino Studies
California State University, Long Beach
Documentary
and film making in Puerto Rico is always a tortuous enterprise. In addition to the inherent artistic
challenges filmmakers face of presenting a visual narrative of a complex
historical era they also lack a supportive infrastructure for documentary or non-commercial
creative film productions in Puerto Rico. So to be able to produce, finance and
research a voluminous historical and political documentary (four DVD’s) that is
countercultural to the main political narratives that are dominant in Puerto
Rican society is quite an accomplishment.
Dialogando Sobre Independentismos, parte I y II takes
us through 90 years of the complex development of the pro-independence movements
in Puerto Rico from 1890 through 1980. Its title, suggests there are more than
one pro-independence movements in Puerto Rico is appropriate and challenges the
monolithic view that some historians and the United States intelligence
agencies have had about the independentista
movement. This documentary is designed in segments that correspond to the
various stages of the development of the independentista
movements in the island. This film could
be a great resource for courses in Puerto Rican political science and history. One
limitation for its use in the U.S. is that the interviews and the films are in
Spanish. There are no English sub-titles in this version.
Such
a massive project with 17 documentaries organized in four DVDs cannot be
summarized in a brief film review. What this review will attempt to do is focus
on some of the highlights of the hours of film and interviews and will focus on
some aspects of Puerto Rican political history that while known to specialists
are not popularly understood.
The
documentary is divided in two main segments, Part I covers Puerto Rico’s independentista political history from
1890 through 1959 and Part II from 1960 through 1980. Part one is titled
“Between votes, slogan and trenches” it shows in seven documentaries the shift
in tactics and ideologies that have influenced independence supporters as social,
political and economic conditions
changed in Puerto Rico and how United States’ geopolitics shifted in the early
years of U.S. domination. Part II which
is titled “The New Struggle” captures the period following the Cuban Revolution
and the intensification of demands for the decolonization of Puerto Rico, the
rise of new tactics, ideologies and organizations which gave a new dynamic to
the anti-colonial struggle in the island. This is the most extensive part of the project
and the one that reveals the most intriguing information about internecine independentista political struggles and
details about the underground armed struggle which had not been revealed
publicly before. This is also a period of intensification of federal
surveillance and repression of pro-independence organizations and individuals. During
this time, 1960-80, important grassroots struggles developed in Puerto Rican
communities in the continental United States. The growth of Puerto Rican
communities in the Northeast and Midwest of the United States as a result of
the large scale emigration of islanders after World War II, provided another
fertile soil for the pro-independence movement.
The experiences of racism, ghettoization provided concrete experiences
of oppression to the immigrants that lent credence to the anti-imperialist discourse
of the independentistas. It also
provided a space for the expansion of pro-independence organizations which
participated in community struggles, anti-war efforts, feminist and labor
struggles, and armed activities against corporate and government targets. The diasporic experience will be the focus of
another forthcoming project Part III by the producers of Dialogando.
What
is unique of this effort and which separates it from others efforts that have
attempted to provide a narrower glimpse of chapters and events of the history
of the anti-colonial political struggles in Puerto Rico are the impressive
array of interviews of leading scholars, activists. More than 100 oral and
video interviews are included with some of the main participants of these
social movements. We are able to get insights from people who were in the
frontlines of many of these crucial political events. In addition, some of the leading scholars
whose work has focused on the politics and history of the movement provide
insights that provide a framework to the archival materials from the various
historical events and the political figures. The quality of the contextualizing
provided by the interviews provides more nuanced interpretations of the
politics that shaped Puerto Rican society throughout that period. Also, the music chosen as background indicates
some familiarity with the way culture, and its expressive forms was intricately
related to the social movements and the politics of the various periods.
Since
the 19th century, anti-colonial activists used diverse electoral
strategies, diplomatic strategies, armed
struggle, student and labor union strategies, community organizing strategies
and became, much like the Cuban struggle for independence a transnational
movement. Since Puerto Ricans and other anti-colonial activists were
challenging the United States as a rising empire in the late 19th
century and a more aggressive imperial nemesis in the 20th century their
struggle straddled Puerto Rican communities abroad, including within the United
States.
The
lineup of interviewees is quite impressive, from the radical socialist scholar Rafael
Bernabe (University of Puerto Rico) who recently authored with Cesar Ayala Puerto Rico in the American Century
(2007) an erudite political and cultural
history of Puerto Rico; Wilfredo Mattos Cintrón, physicist, socialist scholar
and activist; Fermín Arraiza hijo, attorney and whose father was a prominent political
leader of the now defunct Puerto Rican Socialist party; Doris Pizarro, social
work professor, one of the few Black women in the leadership of the Puerto
Rican Socialist Party and an activist in various anti-colonial political
organizations; Juan Mari Bras, Attorney and principal leader of the Puerto
Rican Socialist Party, in what was probably the last interview of one of the
leading political leaders of the period called the “Nueva Lucha.” What is
helpful of this work is the care in selecting how each interviewee provides a
glimpse into aspects of the political struggles that can’t always be captured
in an article or a book. The interviews
of scholars like Francisco Moscoso, one of the leading social historians in the
island; Maria Margarita Flores Collazo a
cultural historian; Juan Giusti, also an
activist historian; Antonio Fernós Lopez, recently deceased law professor
(2011); Attorney Ruben Berrios, a former senator and leader of the
Pro-Independence Party and a major protagonist in anti-colonial political
struggles since after World War II provide insights by scholars and political
activists who shaped and influenced the social movements. In addition, interviewees
like Rosa Meneses Albizu, the daughter of Pedro Albizu Campos provide
interesting insider perspectives of the life of the leading pro-independence
leader of the 20th century. The
diverse academic and political perspectives truly provide a comprehensive
perspective of a very complex array of movements and organizations.
Given the broad range
of events and perspectives this documentary provides, it is necessary to
provide some highlights from each section and a final summary of the
contributions this work makes to a deeper understanding of Puerto Rico’s
political history.
Part
1: 1890-1959
Given
the transnational nature of the struggle for the liberation of Puerto Rico the
first part of the series reveals the role of some of the leading Puerto Rican political
activists who did significant work in exile. Given the interrelationships of
Puerto Rican and other Caribbean nations, we are introduced to the ideas of
Eugenio Maria de Hostos, Ramon Emeterio Betances and Jose Marti to form a Confederacion Antillana, an alliance of
the Hispanic Caribbean nations.
The
idea of the alliance as a way to achieve their liberation, was concretized in
the many Cubans, Dominicans and Puerto Ricans who became involved in the
liberation struggles of Puerto Rico and Cuba. Juan Rius Rivera, a participant
in the first major pro-independence insurrection in Puerto Rico in 1868 the Grito de Lares, was later to become the
commanding general of the Cuban Liberation army in the second Cuban War of
Independence. Many other Puerto Ricans fought in the Dominican Republic’s revolutionary
efforts and the various Cuban wars of independence. Later, Puerto Ricans like Jose Julio Henna,
Roberto H. Todd who were members of the Puerto Rican section of the Cuban
Revolutionary Party’s struggle for independence, also shared annexationist
ideas as some other Cubans leaders did. Henna
and Todd perceived the United States as a federation of nations that could
accommodate Puerto Rico and Cuba in its midst. However, Puerto Rico and Cuba since
the 18th century had already developed a clear national identity
that would not fit within the U.S. national project. The territories conquered previously by the
United States from the Mexican American War, the Louisiana Purchase and the
Alaska purchase were sparsely populated with populations without a clear
national identity. This made their
integration and settlement by Anglos more practical. Cuba and Puerto Rico, with
larger populations and a sense of national identity made that integration
project more challenging. Since it became clearer the U.S. did not have plans
to integrate on an equal level these populations, ironically, some of these
proponents of annexation to the United States became disillusioned with the
imperial politics of the United States and were founders of the first
pro-independence party in Puerto Rico under U.S. colonial control. Rafael Bernabe’s interview provides an
interesting framework to make sense of this group of Puerto Ricans who
straddled what have been contrasting political aspirations of Puerto Ricans. The
complexity and fluidity of Puerto Rican anti-colonial politics are revealed in
the helpful analyses provided by the interviews.
The
role of U.S. colonial policies shaping Puerto Rico’s political economy serves as
the background for the shifting of political alliances among the various newly
formed political parties under U.S. colonial control. The archival photos and films give a
realistic portrayal of social conditions in the island. While General Nelson A.
Miles, who led the invading forces of the United States through Guanica, had
promised that the “We have not come to make war upon the people of a country
that for centuries has been oppressed, but, on the contrary, to bring you
protection, not only to yourselves, but to your property; to promote your
prosperity, and bestow upon you the immunities and blessings of the liberal
institutions of our government” his promise was not realized. On the contrary, the military govern and
their devaluation of the peso, the freezing of credit and other measures reaped
havoc in the fragile economy of the island. As disillusionment pervades the
island’s political elites about U.S. imperial designs over Puerto Rico, parties
shift alliances and begin to accommodate to the reality on the ground. The Partido Union de Puerto Rico, the
leading political organization of the first decades of U.S. domination at one
point favored statehood, independence and then all of them at the same time.
While
there are no new revelations in this first segment it provides a good
background to the rise of the principal force in liberation politics during the
first decades of the 20th century.
The role of nationalism in Puerto Rico is illustrated by focusing on the
historical figure of Pedro Albizu Campos. The rise of Pedro Albizu Campos as a
leader of the Partido Nacionalista de
Puerto Rico (PNPR) after his return from the United States where he
received a law degree from Harvard University, helped transform a party that was
more about rituals and cultural nationalism into a national liberation
movement. Pedro Albizu Campos becomes for many decades the leading force of the
pro-independence movement and the principal nemesis of U.S. colonial
governments. For a colonized people, habituated to passively obeying and whose
liberties were very limited the message of Albizu Campos directly challenging
the “Americanos” inspired both fear and admiration. The documentary pieces
together historical events that provide a helpful narrative that describes the
oppressive conditions that led to the armed struggle that nationalists carried
out against the colonial government. It also tells the story of the violent repression
carried out by the colonial government against broad sectors of the
pro-independence movement. This
repression, with different methods would continue into the late 20th
century under FBI programs such as COINTELPRO and the local intelligence office
of the Puerto Rican police.
This
segment highlights the role of political leaders that until recently have not
received attention by many students of the pro independence movement. The Partido de la Independencia founded by Rosendo
Matienzo Cintron, Llorens Torres and Zeno Gandia, hardly ever a major part of
the independentista historical
narrative, although short lived had a more progressive political platform than
the Nationalist Party. While founded by
former annexationists---usually depicted as conservative--- they proposed
progressive labor laws, women’s suffrage and the creation of public
corporations to lead the economic development of the island. In the meantime the
leading political party the Partido Union
is able to govern for 20 years while accommodating its policies to the colonial
status quo. Jose de Diego, an iconic
figure in the pro-independence movement and the Partido Union leads the struggle to preserve the use of Spanish as
official language of Puerto Rico while at the same time serving as a lawyer for
the sugar trusts who controlled the island’s economy. This contradiction placed
De Diego on a number of occasions against the rising labor movement.
Although
the United States did not have plans to incorporate Puerto Rico on equal terms,
given that its political and legal institutions were much more advanced than
the monarchical Spain its rule it provided a space where various groups were
able to organize, especially the labor movement. Under the leadership of Santiago Iglesias
Pantin, a Spanish citizen who had been involved in labor organizing in Puerto
Rico and who had been jailed under the Spanish regime, workers organized in
1915 the Partido Socialista. While some significant members and leaders supported
independence the party itself did not favor independence, the relationship
Iglesias Pantin developed particularly with U.S. pro-imperialist labor leaders
like Samuel Gompers moved the party gradually to a more annexationist position.
While
Puerto Rico began to experience the ravages of the 1930s depression workers
developed their labor organizations and the Partido
Socialista, in the meantime the nationalist party under the leadership of
Pedro Albizu Campos experienced a transformation. From 1930 until 1965 the
party left its formal aristocratic struggle for sovereignty (what Albizu
Campos, according to his daughter called nacionalismo
de carton ) and became a movement to directly resist U.S. colonial
authorities. This direct contestation of
U.S. colonial rule was admired by many although the fear of the power and
authority of the U.S regime did not lead many to join forces with the
nationalists. However, in 1934, sugar workers all across the island went on a
general strike and asked for the leadership of Pedro Albizu Campos. Historian
Felix Cordoba Iturregui, explains how Pedro Albizu Campos had gained the
respect of the workers. Workers felt he was an honest leader and they had been
recently betrayed in their collective bargaining by their union leadership.
This bold move by the sugar workers evidenced the respect that Albizu Campos
had among some broader sectors of the population. This also, according to historian Felix
Cordova Iturregui made the colonial authorities more concerned since the
economic and the political struggles could overlap and challenge the status
quo. This potential alliance between Nationalists and the laboring classes
would give the pro-independence movement a powerful social base.
In
response to these developments the colonial authorities began to use more
extreme measures to repress the nationalists. All the governors of the island
were appointed by the president; many of those named were southerners with
significant racial prejudices against Puerto Ricans. In 1934, President
Franklyn Delano Roosevelt appointed Gov. Blanton Winship , a Southerner who had
served in the U.S. Army who went on to name another former military officer
Col. Francis Riggs as chief of the Puerto Rico Police. Col. Riggs, as an
intelligence officer had served in Nicaragua where he was responsible for the
assassination of Nicaraguan patriot Cesar Sandino. Under Col. Riggs’ leadership
the police of Puerto Rico was militarized and went on to carry a more
aggressive repression against the nationalists. Rosa Meneses Albizu, says that
her father told her that Col. Riggs, in a meeting with her father, offered him
some economic benefits if he changed course, which he refused. Col. Riggs responded saying then “there is
going to be war” to which Albizu Campos responds, "yes there will be war
against the colony."
Historian
Ramon Bosque Perez, whose work has focused on the various means used by the
U.S. government to repress the independentistas,
explains how the fear the U.S. had that it might have a social insurrection in
the island led it to take even more repressive measures. At the same time, the
Nationalists had gradually been able to directly challenge the colonial
authorities in order to educate Puerto Ricans not to fear the U.S.
authorities.
The
colonial government immediately began the war. In 1935 four nationalists were
killed in Rio Piedras in what has been known as the Masacre de Rio Piedras. Juan
Mari Bras attributes the orders to teach the nationalists a lesson to Governor
Blanton Winship. The nationalists in turn responded to the killings by sending Hiram
Rosado and Elias Beauchamp members of
the Cadetes de la Republica , a
paramilitary organization of the Nationalist Party , to execute Col. Riggs.
Both nationalists were captured and later executed by the police in the Rio
Piedras police station. These events and those which followed only exacerbated
the nationalist sentiment of confronting the authority of the U.S. in Puerto
Rico. Juan Mari Bras explains how the figure of Pedro Albizu Campos had
influenced some sectors of the population, when in 1936 a number of leading
leaders of the Nationalist Party are arrested, including Pedro Albizu Campos,
the federal court had to conduct two trials against Albizu since in the first
one, the Puerto Rican jury did not vote to indict, it was only after another
jury, mostly made up of North Americans that finally the jury was able to indict
Albizu.
The
repression escalated with the Masacre de
Ponce on March 21, 1937. The nationalists had called for a peaceful march
to commemorate the abolition of slavery in the southern city of Ponce, although
the marchers were unarmed Governor Blanton Winship ordered the Puerto Rican
police to attack the marchers. 19
marchers were killed and 200 were wounded. This and other violent events
changed the dynamics of the Nationalist Party tactics against the colonial
authorities. The combination of the new leadership of Albizu Campos and the
intensification of repression confirmed for many that U.S. rule over Puerto
Rico would not lead to the expansion of democracy. In fact, Antonio Fernós, professor in
constitutional law, also recently deceased (2011), explains that despite the
fact that in late 1940s Puerto Rico had elected a majority of the members of the Puerto Rican colonial
legislature they were not able to exercise any measure of sovereignty. The
legislature had approved a locally managed plebiscite to decide the future
relationship with the United States, the U.S. government appointed governor
vetoed the law, the legislature overcame the veto with the support of
two-thirds of the legislature. President Truman then proceeded to veto the
legislature’s legislation. Truman explained that he did not want the people of
Puerto Rico to think that the U.S. would grant Puerto Rico’s right to choose
its future political destiny.
In
1950, frustration and feelings of powerlessness by the nationalists was
intensified as the principal political party, the Popular Democratic Party, led
by Luis Munoz Marin---who had at one point been an Independentista and a socialist--- led to the creation of the Estado Libre Asociado (in English translated
as the Commonwealth). This political
arrangement was seen by independentistas
as a farce and a ruse concocted by Munoz Marin to disguise the reality of
Puerto Rico’s colonial status. The
Nationalist Party had been preparing for an insurrection but had to begin the
effort earlier because their plans had been revealed by informants. The
insurrection called by the Nationalist party led to a number of skirmishes in a
number of towns where Nationalists led the insurrection, more than 25
nationalists were killed and thousands of other non-nationalists who supported
independence were jailed. Further, two
nationalists carried out an armed attack against Blair House in Washington D.C.,
the temporary residence of President Truman in 1950, one of the nationalists,
Griselio Torresola died in the attack and another Oscar Collazo survived and
was jailed. Later in 1954, after the Popular Democratic Party had been able to
get the United States to convince the United Nations to remove Puerto Rico from
the list of colonial territories, a commando of four nationalists entered the
gallery of the House of Representatives, unfurled a Puerto Rican flag, fired
shot at congress, shouted “Free Puerto Rico Now.” Five congressmen were
injured. This was the last major political action occurring under the
leadership of the Nationalist Party. Oscar Collazo and the four nationalists,
Lolita Lebrón, Irving Flores, Rafael Cancel Miranda and Andres Figueroa Cordero
were sentenced to lengthy jail terms in federal prisons. The documentary has
film, photos and interviews providing background for this event.
As
these events unfolded U.S. and Puerto Rican independentista
relations began to be shaped by the politics of the cold war. While the
nationalists were still the focus of attention now the focus was on the
communists. Another shift was the increasing role that the colonial government
now led by the Popular Democratic Party (PPD) had in the political repression
of independentistas and communists. A “Muffle Law” was approved by the PPD
controlled colonial legislature, similar to the Smith Act in the United States which
limited the political and civil rights of the pro-independence forces. The
political repression escalated while at a time the main pro-independence electoral
political party, the Partido Independentista Puertorriqueño (PIP), had declined
from being the main opposition party in 1952 with more than 19 per cent of the
vote to its precipitous decline to 12.1 per cent in 1956. Its rise according to
the scholars was not necessarily due to a increase in independentistas but to
its positioning as the main opposition party while the Republican pro-statehood
forces had been weakened by the electoral victories of its main contenders the
Popular Democratic Party and the Pro-Independence Party. Internal divisions continued
to develop within the PIP and were exacerbated when in 1959 a contending
organization, the Movimiento Pro Independencia
(MPI) was formed by former PIP members he left the party. The MPI was
strongly influenced by the Cuban
Revolution. Earlier, in 1956, the Federacion Universitaria Pro-Independencia
(FUPI) was formed, also influenced by
Nationalist and Marxist ideologies. This organization rose up to become
the most important student organization in the next decades. It also provided a
number of young activists to the more militant Movimiento Pro Independencia (MPI), which became the leading
catalyst for a more active, radical leftist pro-independence movement.
Part II: 1959-1980
In
this section we are provided with analysis and documentary film about the
factors that shaped pro-independence politics in the island from the 1960s
until the late 1970s. This period was a time of increased political activism
and particularly because of the expansion of youth activism both at the
university level and middle and high school. While this was a period of an almost
global surge in youth activism in the Americas and Europe, in Puerto Rico there
were some endogenous factors that propelled the social movements. Puerto Rico
also had its generation gap after WWII with a new generation who had grown
under the colonial system that ironically in the 1950s-60s had experienced some
level of economic growth. This generation was not familiar with the depression
but was being challenged by the imperial demands to serve the United States as
cannon fodder in the wars brought about by the Cold war. For this generation of
the 60s and 70s it was not the Korean War that was the defining challenge for
Puerto Ricans it was the Vietnam War. While many Puerto Ricans resisted the
draft during the Korean War, during the Vietnam War the resistance to the draft
was sharper and more extensive than in the United States. It was so effective
that the draft in Puerto Rico, because of the thousands of Puerto Rican youth
who resisted induction, eventually collapsed and only a small number of people
were incarcerated. Also important is that access to an expanded public university
education had expanded while new political organizations developed after the
electoral collapse in 1960 and 1964 of traditional pro-independence parties
like the Pro-Independence Party (PIP). These new political organizations and
new actors infused the new stage of the movements with Marxist ideology and
tactics, non-violent civil disobedience, and armed struggle. The example of the
Cuban Revolution and its more national brand of Marxism made more palatable
Marxism among broad sectors of the movements. While Marxism had earlier influenced
sectors of the labor movement (giving rise to the Puerto Rican Communist Party
in 1934 and to the formation of a major industrial union the CGT) for the first
time the ideology also became pervasive among students and among non-industrial
workers.
One
of the most important political developments during these two decades was the
formation of the Movimiento
Pro-Independencia (MPI). We hear from some of the leading founders of the
MPI, like its former secretary general Juan Mari Bras, Providencia Trabal a
long time leading political activist and others who left the more conservative PIP
in order to create a more militant organization. Other informants like Felix
Ojeda Reyes, Antonio Gaztambide, Florencio Merced, Doris Pizarro, Manuel De J.
Gonzalez were part of the youth who gave the organization a youthful character
and led it to, in conjunction with the Federacion
de Universitario Pro-Independencia (FUPI) at the university level and the Federacion de Estudiantes Pro-Independencia
at the middle school and high school level, to a massive pro-independence
activism among the island’s youth. We
hear from Julio Muriente an MPI activist from Fajardo about the struggle against the military draft,
we also hear from Juan Giusti about the repression the MPI endured in the
1970s. In the early 1970s after a violent
conflict between pro-statehood activists and independentistas at the University of Puerto Rico many leaders and activists
of the MPI had sought refuge in the organization’s headquarters in downtown Rio
Piedras. The pro-statehood mob began to attack the building with rocks and
Molotov cocktails. We hear from Angel Agosto, who would later become Secretary
of Labor Affairs for the Puerto Rican Socialist Party, explaining how police
officers surrounding the headquarters at one point, instead of protecting the
building and the people under siege provided incendiary devices to them. The
events that day were an indication of how political dynamics would change from
the labor struggles of the 1930s, and away from the Nationalist’s tactics of
armed defense. The next decade, from
1970 through 1980 the influence of socialism became not only prevalent among
the MPI activists it also began to infuse the largest independentista organization in the island the PIP.
The
transformation of the PIP from a traditional electoral conservative
organization is told by participants in this process like Luis Angel Torres,
and Carlos Gallisa. Luis Angel Torres
was a leader of the PIP university youth and was later elected with Carlos
Gallisa in 1972 to Puerto Rico’s House of Representatives as the first PIP
legislators in decades. This occurs at a
time when the PIP had chosen the motto of Independence, Socialism and Democracy
as their standard bearer. Luis Angel
Torres, who today is a leader of the Movimiento
Socialista de Trabajadores (MST), an organization that emerged after some
transformations from a group that defected from the PIP, provides interesting
insights. As a former legislator for the PIP and a leader of the radical youth
within the PIP he provides some nuanced information about the changes that took
place within the PIP. He also attests to the strong influence that Marxist
theory and practice had achieved among some sectors of the PIP, particularly
its youth. We learn of the strong reaction that the leadership of the organization
had to the activities of PIP youth, especially during a massive gathering they
had before the 1972 elections when a large contingent of young PIP militants
paraded with posters of Marx, Lenin, and Che Guevara in the Hiram Bithorn
stadium in 1972. The documentary provides a background to understand what was
happening in the island in the early 1970s, the internecine debates and the
unexpected outcomes of the organizing the PIP had in crucial struggles like the
efforts to bring to an end the use of the island of Culebra by the U.S. navy.
This rejuvenated and more radical organization also was involved in communities
of squatters who took over fallow land in order to establish their homes. The
use of direct action by the now socialist-influenced PIP led the leadership of
the party to engage in civil disobedience. The president of the party, Ruben
Berrios Martinez led a group of leaders and activists of the party in
trespassing into the Culebra target zone, building structures and stopping the
naval bombing they also provided support and political education in the new
squatter settlements.
This
was a period of some competition between the PIP/MPI for the role of leader of
the pro-independence movement. While the PIP’s socialism was social democratic,
the MPI was moving to a more Marxist Leninist ideology and practice. The fact
that the PIP moved closer to the MPI created a new dynamic that led these
organizations into actions to establish a clearer demarcation between them to
recruit followers. In terms of the
struggle in Culebra, we hear from the interview with Juan Mari Bras, of the
Movement Pro-Independence (MPI), that they sought to expand the activism
against the navy in Culebra with different tactics. Instead of planning civil disobedience activities
on the shore as the PIP they sought two boats that navigated through Flamingo
Bay where naval ships practiced their sea to shore bombardment. This risky
tactic was effective in getting some publicity as a more radical protest and
effectively led to the suspension of the bombing also. In the end, the Ruben Berrios and his
followers who had created an encampment in the target zone in Culebra would be
arrested and jailed in a local federal prison. This gave the PIP an
international projection thanks to the Social Democratic International the PIP
had joined earlier. But the efforts of Puerto Rican activists eventually led
the Secretary of Defense to close down military activities in Culebra in 1975.
Unfortunately, the military use of the larger neighboring island of Vieques
increased. This would lead to another
movement of resistance which developed in the 1980s until 2003 when the U.S. Navy
finally suspended its activities in Vieques.
We
also get to hear from Juan Mari Bras about the founding of the Puerto Rican
Socialist Party. Some dissidents of the PIP created the Movimiento Socialista Popular (MSP, today MST) while others joined
the Puerto Rican Socialist Party. Initially the PSP did not participate in the
electoral process and concentrated its efforts in organizing cells in labor
unions and working class communities. We hear from Pedro Grant, one of the most
important labor leaders during this period talk about how effective the PSP
organizing was during this time. Most of the principal labor leaders,
particularly in the public sectors were in some relationship with the PSP.
Party activists were present in labor struggles around the country providing a
public presence of the party among island workers. For example, the Newspaper
Guild who organized journalists, truck drivers and printers in the largest
newspapers in Puerto Rico had significant number of PSP militants. In the
newspaper El Mundo the Guild called
for a lengthy strike that garnered massive support from other unions and
students and which led to armed actions against helicopters used by the company
to transport scabs into the plant. We hear from Angel Agosto, Secretary of
Labor Affairs of the PSP providing some insights of how these armed actions
were carried out.
While
some have criticized the PSP for
overestimating its popular support, the party decided to register as a
political party and participate in the 1976 elections. We hear various perspectives, including Florencio
Merced, former leader of the Federacion
de Estudiantes Universitarios
Independentistas (FUPI) who had joined the PSP talking about the
decision of the new organization to participate in the electoral process of
1976. This electoral process provided the largest number of pro-independence
votes for the pro-independence movement since the 1952 elections when 19 per
cent of the voters chose the PIP. In these elections, while the PSP only
received 10,000 and the PIP 83,000 together they achieved a very impressive
showing. According to Merced, for a
Marxist Leninist organization to receive 10,000 votes in Puerto Rico under
surveillance and in very oppressive circumstances this was an important effort.
This evaluation is shared by former PIP leader Noel Colon Martinez and other
interviewees who agreed it was an important achievement.
While
some of the interviews provide reaffirmation of what is known about some
historical chapters of Puerto Rico’s political history, there is intriguing new
information about how divisions impacted political organizations in myriad
ways. We hear from Samuel Aponte, a
leader with the Puerto Rican Independence Party (PIP) and the director of its
newspaper La Hora who later abandoned
the party because of what they considered the authoritarian leadership of
Attorney Ruben Berrios. We are also able to hear Attorney Ruben Berrios provide
his own perspective about these political and historical events. We hear from
Carlos Gallisá, who represented the PIP in the Puerto Rican senate and later
resigned from the party and became a representative in the House of
Representatives for the Puerto Rican Socialist Party, a Marxist Leninist
organization.
Also
this is the first time that a public document like this documentary reveals
information from participants in the clandestine groups engaged in armed
struggle in Puerto Rico. Especially after the mid-1970s, there was an increase
in the number of organizations which participated in underground military
actions against military and other symbols of U.S. power in Puerto Rico. At one point in time at least 20 groups had
organized themselves to engage in clandestine military actions. Groups like the Movimiento
Independentista Revolucionario Armado (MIRA), Comandos Armados de Liberacion (CAL), Organizacion de Voluntarios Para la Revolucion Puertorriqueña (OVRP)
and the Partido Revolucionario de los
Trabajadores Puertorriqueños- Ejercito
Popular Boricua (PRTP-EPB) and others carried out bank robberies,
expropriation of explosives, weapons, ambushes of military units, bombings. We
hear from a leading organizer about how these organizations coalesced, how they
organized, what blunders were committed, in fact revelations that were only privy to
very few activists in the island.
These
revelations indicate the extent and depth of the underground military
resistance that Puerto Rican organizations were able to develop under the
pressure of naval, military, and other intelligence gathering agencies and
units of the United States’ government.
Also, it is interesting how this development occurred at times as a self
sustaining movement with a significant network of underground supporters. It
challenges the idea that these organizations operated in a vacuum or only with
external support. The Macheteros
(PRTP-EPB) was probably the largest and most effective organization who
achieved an almost legendary image among many in Puerto Rico. Most of its
actions as one of the interviewees explains were not merely military actions in
a vacuum but political agitation. When Angel
Rodriguez Cristobal was killed in a federal prison in Tallahassee, Florida, the
federal government alleged he committed suicide. Photographic evidence surfaced showing that
his body had traumas from beatings or torture which led many to believe he was
murdered by federal officials. In response the PRTP-EPB sent a squad of armed
militants to the Naval Base in Sábana Seca and machine gunned a bus carrying
naval personnel killing two sailors. They alleged this was a political attack
to challenge the sense of disempowerment Puerto Ricans felt when repressive
events took place against independentistas.
The
challenge of a project like this is that it is such a rich history that it is a
challenge to be inclusive of everything that has shaped the independentista movement for almost a
century. But in all fairness, this work covers the highlights and neuralgic
moments and leaders and movements in a way that very few books have been able
to achieve. What this project reveals is that despite the perception that the
pro-independence movement has been a rigid, inflexible political effort, this
documentary evidences that the movement has been able to transform itself at
different times and survive despite facing surveillance and repression from the
most powerful empire in human history.
It also highlights the intense surveillance and disruptive efforts
carried out by U.S. intelligence and police agencies to derail and eradicate
the efforts of Puerto Rican activists to gain sovereignty for one of the
“Oldest Colony” in the modern world. This retrospective also provides a new
perspective that can allow us to make sense of the future developments in
Puerto Rico’s journey to find its rightful place in the 21st
century.
Hopefully
the producer will be able to conclude the third part of this series.
Sponsored by Fundación Puertorriqueña de la Humanidades; Fundación
Manrique Cabrera; National Endowment of the Humanities, Carlos Delgado.
