thumbnail of Cc
Hide -
If this transcript has significant errors that should be corrected, let us know, so we can add it to FIX IT+
Tonight is the third session of the 1960 annual kitching conference. Two hundred people from all parts of this American continent are gathered here at Geneva park on the shores of Lake Ontario to talk about the problems of the Latin Americas. A glance at today's newspapers shows us that these problems are urgent indeed this urgency has been reflected in the meetings we've had since Saturday evening. Our speakers from the various Latin American countries have expressed themselves in passionately. They have said that the Iron Curtain is closing down on this very hemisphere. They have added that many politicians and economists and others in Canada in the United States are still making the same errors of judgment in dealing with the Latin Americas as they have made in the past. The title of tonight's program sums up the situation we've called it simply revolution. And appropriately enough The main speaker has just fled from his country to exile because of revolution.
But the chairman will introduce it more fully. Here is Gordon Hawkins. I have frequently presided over panel discussions that look like an AK but I've never before been chairman of the revolution. This is my role for tonight. We propose to analyze it to some extent in a Latin American setting and to descend to part of this lively subject of revolution. And if this odd metal conjures up a vision of blood in your mind this is not entirely out of place. Presentation will be given by Dr Patel who spoke from this platform last night. The fame from his writings in Cuban and U.S. history and relations and as director of the Cuban American Cultural Institute of Ana has been all commented this week by the story of his self-imposed exile while his Rome was burning.
He would not stay and I nearly said she doubted. Whatever our view was we must recognize that to put one's courage in one's philosophy to the sticking point and to put one's future in jeopardy in this way is a distinguished act. We salute you sir. I welcome you as our main speaker and invite you not to address us. Dr. Patel. Mr. Chairman ladies and gentleman. When I first was approach by the dead Canadian group all the night in these discussions every year they asked me to write a paper. I'm pollution and to send it to him to them at 25 days ahead of time so that they could have it the script
in deposition while three maybe four weeks ahead of time. That was dead simple for them to ask that from Toronto all. I was in Cuba. And a man suspected that and I had to write that paper and I had to send the paper to them by mail and mail it has been tampered with in Cuba. So they were inviting me to hide my the sentence to sign it and so on and so on. So I couldn't do that. And 25 days ahead of time I send them the script which I entitle revolutions in our times. It was a sort of a scholarly paper about of revolutions in our times. There was a catch in about
six or seven paragraphs in which I could add something if I could get out of Cuba. And what I was going to at then had to do with the Cuban revolution the Cuban count or her pollution because what we have in Cuba revolution being a snatch by a group of people from the real revolution. Therefore this was sent through three different channels only two of them were able to get through and I was able to keep a copy with the protection of the Brazilian ambassador in Havana I was able to leave her then. And here is the script and therefore what I want to do is to comment upon the script. With their remarks. Paul for after I am on this side of the strait of Florida although the state of Florida is proper in Toronto but
I'm safely on this side so now I can do what I couldn't do. Run have Anna. When I was there. I wanted to say that Canada is clearly an ideal country to talk about revolutions because you haven't had any for nearly three quarters of a century. So there is a sort of proper atmosphere of objectivity tranquility and so on and then it's possible that you will have the peace of mind that is necessary to contemplate the problem and the process of revolutions taken place a many different countries in the world. And although there is much force to be made I guess today and today about the existence or nonexistence of Latin America the fact is that the program for this meeting is talking about the
Latin America. So the people who organize this conference where all of them taken into consideration that there are several Latin America just so I was not the one therefore who invented that yesterday. I'm just following the line. Given to me by the people who organized this conference and therefore when it is being said why have those Latin Americans out all the time having the revolutions that seem nice. Well that is just an I just true fact that I have been in Africa now heavily in Asia. There have been about pollution in Europe and not so far away one into power through a high pollution muscling it is the same thing that Russians get got into power was a revolution. People had a
hub illusion to get into power and so on and so on. And nearly two years ago friends had to have to put the gold in power. So we are not the only ones in the word afflicted with this disease which you don't have here you haven't had it seems eighteen hundred and seventy or seventy five. Allow that time. Moderate what is of evolution then. For you people. Whose only revolution had been the one taken place this afternoon at the Estate of. What do you serve abolition. Revolution is an upheaval a say a violent change of political institutions of social organization. Our economic institutions Ysaye and country have been at a certain moment through violent measures a different outlook
different attitude different conduct revolution has to be something that destroys. But the high pollution has to build tool if it doesn't then it is not a revolution and just plain destruction. A revolution to be respectable has to be able to put down what is what it what is something. What he said Injustice what he said gangs say human rights. But that revolution cannot destroy freedom. Cannot as laypeople revolution cannot suppress human rights. If it does if there is not a high valuation elect in America the Latin America us we have had a number of publications and in recent times we are having more than we usually had.
And when people look at that day usually all the look that we have going ahead at times tumbling down. But now we are going ahead. We have virgin a future for our countries. It's very easy to say why don't you do it through evolution when it is possible to do it through evolution. We don't who sought to have allusions there but it is not a very easy task to do that through evolution. I said at the beginning that we were going to talk about a revolution that was a natural way. Somebody told us have illusion and that this this story of this so-called Cuban revolution of people passed. 1952 only 80 days before we were going
to have an orderly election in Cuba for president of the republic. A man told power through a qubit dad bought these. And then he'll remain in power for nearly seven years. In those seven years now the Jayco abroad the one which we had in Cuba had international blessings international blessings is very easy to say why didn't you put him down sooner. How we've learned to do it up to March the 1st 1958. But the stock would buy in the United States all the arms he wanted. And after March the 1st 1958 Great Britain was sending in two but all the weapons he wanted. And
continue to do so in such a way that airplanes see if you're a I'm having Cuba after the downfall of but the same from Great Britain. So he was a man aseptic everywhere. His regime had international blessings. We had to fight not only about this but practically the whole word to put him down. It was a better difficulty. After a number of years the people in my country opposing and they the tape where getting together I'm finally at a meeting held in Caracas although the foreign Cuban groups opposed them but these sign a compact pact of the caucus back to the caucus was the union of all the forces opposing the Teesta. To put him down and then where wrecked. I knew national
organization that was going to be progressive. That was going to adjust to low that was going to be democratic that was going to put that country forward economically socially culturally and so on. That was signed there among the signers. There was a man very well known novel called Peter Castro. He was the head of a movement called the 26 of July because on the 26 of July one thousand one hundred fifty three acting as we say in a Spanish por la liberté. That is of his own accord. He try to enter a fortress against all the advice given to him. He was defeated and there was a tremendous amount of bloodshed among his followers. He escaped with his life. His brother escaped with Ace
because the Archbishop of Santiago the months in your para sent us in to see that in his way and their behalf. So he saved their life. NaMo señor Perez said Aunt This is insulting. At that the nuns by the same people whose lives he's saving one thousand one hundred and fifty. That is the reason for that name of 26 of July. That's what they are trying to remember with that name. And he had that done organization and you're going to say shell was made up of workers and students professors professional men as small businessmen are not times very wealthy people in Cuba who wanted to bring about a change in what we want to have in death. And he s cept it all of that he never had a few should he ask for that support he promised that he was going to abide
by the pact of conduct us. He was backed by all the people who wanted the change in Cuba and the change took place. The symbol the thirty first nineteen hundred and fifty eight that peace nine months after the United States had refused to sell arms to ship arms to butt the stuff because by that time they had bought this the Army a mercenary army had come to the realisation if the United States is not willing to sell arms is that they don't approve about the stuff therefore about these things done for. Let's not fight for him. And therefore they've even put up a fight. It was better difficult to get there in time. As it turned out to be the weapons solo by Norway the Belgian those are small countries where they have good government good democratic
government serving as the title of their weapons so by Great Britain by Italy too. And the weapons are have been have and after parties had fallen and those weapons went through the hands of the the US so the first airplanes he had were the 17 Sifu or is delivering Genma in 1959 one who was already in power. Same from Great Britain and a few days before his downfall. The famous Malecon will have bene was practically destroyed by the tanks. Tiger tanks send from Great Britain to help but they stand to be in power so that you see if they're easy for us to put down but this they took seven years but we were not fighting but they still own we were fighting but the staff and those who were supporting him. Well when the first government was organized in January there was
a certain regard on the part of the cost of for that. Back to that compact of Caracas and the government was integrated. Taken into consideration the deepening groups Democratic groups and his own group the 26 of July the one that he has destroyed by now no longer exist as he was. He has deserted that group because he has done to the Communists for support and that the organisation of the fighting groups. Lasted. About three months at the end of three months he had been discarding this group here. This other group over there and so on and keeping the semblance of the 26 of July later on even the last remnants of the 26 of July were thrown overboard. While he has around now a communist group
so he has betrayed I believe. Well be that super man. Our Times praised by the international press no longer so much praise as he was before was a man who was snatch away. And what has been happening there. Economically he has destroyed Cuba not only for a few years but for one generation at least. On June 3rd is this year the deficit was four hundred million dollars. They have printed money more than 300 million units not only in the United States. The money is printed not only in the United States but also in Yugoslavia. And so we are having a tremendous amount of paper. And
the Cuban currency once the pride of my country the other day I this that you our money has a premium upon the American dollar. There was a time in which our money had a premium upon the American dollars. Now we have four to five Cuban pesos to a dollar and he will go lower. He has destroyed it economically culturally socially in all the specs and what will be the outcome that we shall have to fight for the cost to put him down that we are doing that now. We have to do it. If not we are going to have Cuba by satellite state of the Soviet Union. The first communist nation in this part of the world that we shall never excepting Cuba and we are trying to do our best to prevent Cuba being tun into a
communist nation. To make comment on the presentation that Dr Patel has just made we have two speakers on the platform with us. The first two I'm asked us to speak now is Mr. okey a Mexican who began his education at the London School of Economics in the University of London and completed it by acquiring an American wife. He is a very distinguished economist renowned particularly for the work that he has done with the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America. He is currently a lecturer at the University of Mexico and is very active in public economic affairs in his country.
Like Europe with the German. I notice that you have mentioned the London School of Economics that so-called revolutionary institution. I assure you that I have arrived at my own ideals on the subject quite independently. Three countries in Latin America Mexico half a century ago Bolivia almost a decade ago and Cuba today have experienced a major social upheaval that can be described as a revolution with a capital R.. This is the really important kind of revolution. It consists essentially in the wholesale transfer of economic and political power from agrarian or industrial oligarchy to the people at large to the underdog to some extent. Argentina under their own went through a similar process. The other kind of revolution where the small are the short term process of upsetting a government by force or threat of force is hardly ever a
cause of deep concern to anybody outside as has often been said. Maybe that is our normal and lively way in Latin America of expressing a vote of no confidence in the government of the day. Doctor in his original paper. Which I read two weeks ago focused attention on the sources and characteristics of modern social and economic revolution in Latin America he made it clear indeed that this is the worldwide phenomenon that revolution today is inevitably placed. However in the context of the Cold War and he expressed concern as to where all this may be leading to in Latin America. It may be asked then if any past experience in Latin America can tell us anything if in particular knowledge of the origins of development of the Mexican Revolution as a historical process which now encompasses almost two
generations can reveal the likely past present and future social revolutions in Latin America. The Mexican Revolution is viewed in our time as something quite respectable. It has a redeeming attained the respectability that goes with age. More than that it combines today political maturity with an undoubtedly Brisa dented measure of social and economic advancement for the Mexican people. Foreigners however did not have such confidence in Mexico between 1910 and 1921 the 11 years of our fighting period nor from 1934 to 1940 when the government the government of President got of the US bushed land reform very actively explored created petroleum companies owned by foreigners and implemented many basic social provisions of our Constitution.
If the Mexican revolution now meets with the approval of the outside world I suppose it is because of its extraordinary achievements in converting what was a feudalistic backward country into a land of widespread opportunity for its people and brought industrial progress. Revolutions are frequently judged not on their merits but by the extent to which they affect vested interests foreign interests and Mexico were seriously affected from the early stages and Mexico therefore earned a bad reputation. This does not seem to have occurred with a Bolivian revolution of eight years ago. It's nationalization of tin mines and its land reform did not affect foreign interests it affected Bolivian interests. So that rather than to draw opprobrium from public opinion abroad
the Bolivian movement has a vote. Great sympathy and insofar as people have learned about it has gained a great deal of moral support. I need one of practical assistance especially from the United States. But the Cuban revolution has raised again the issue of foreign investments and much much more than that. It is clear that the Cuban revolution can only be seen in the light of the Cold War. Although we do not have enough information on what is going on in Cuba I do think that there is very little resemblance with the Mexican pattern and that one would have to look to the observation movements as Dr. Burke Denby implied in his original Baber that are occurring in other parts of the world. But I agree with him again referring to his original paper on the relationship between nationalism the need for social change and
industrialization. And I stress this last point as a prime moving force in modern revolutions. Mexico is well on the way to industrialization but this was not an issue in 1910. The Mexican Revolution was essentially agrarian and agrarian nationalistic movement based on the people's urge for social justice. It was agrarian in its origins and in its objectives. I think that this is quite clear and historically not well-known and I think too that it stands out quite clearly that these conditions are quite different in all of Latin America today from what they were in Mexico's time. What I mean is that in all this period social welfare and labor of just lation are on the books everywhere. In fact in some countries there has been a silent revolution that has
achieved in practice even more than Mexico has achieved in its legislation. Another characteristic of Mexican Revolution was that there was a direct attack on a large rural private property and there was a nationalization or a provision for nationalization of our basic resources both on the surface and below it. And these are permanent feature of the day of the Mexican process. On the other hand the initial animosity the foreign capital has declined as we have industrialized. Now I think that the need for land reform is still a latent or an open cause for revolution in Latin America and most countries and at the anti-foreign feeling is prevalent and acts as a very strong stimulus. But I do think that the question of land reform is capable of a peaceful
solution. As recent developments have shown in Venezuela and Colombia and even in Ecuador you must be a very diehard conservative and blind to oppose the elimination of the wasteful and unjust law to fund you to condone the semi enslavement of the peasant to object to a more efficient use of land or to stand against giving peasants at least a small individual plot. The present political atmosphere in Latin America and most countries does not favor these intransigent positions. What I'm suggesting is that the desire for land can be met. But I would say even more that the hunger for land is not enough today to set off a full fledged social revolution. I think it is a much more complex question. The new factor to be reckoned with
is the extraordinary economic progress that in some countries has been attained not only in Latin America but elsewhere through industrialization. Industrial Development has shown the way to higher standards of living and to more generalized welfare and justice. The gap between the living standards of the business and the urban dweller within each country is much greater than it used to be. Revolutions can take place today even in countries with a fairly high standard of living and much industrial progress. So long as agriculture is backward. This is a quite different situation from that which prevailed in Mexico in 1910 that was a period of economic retrogression and of widespread hunger. I think the answer to this question of why a prosperous country can have a revolution is to be found in the very nature of the process of economic development industrialization.
On the one hand needs vastly increased food supplies in most countries. This has met with a rigid agrarian structure. Food has had to be imported. But the people who live in agriculture. As they improve and as they meet the challenge of the rest of the economy begin to realize that the only way to improve. On a permanent basis your standard of living is to become an urban worker an urban inhabitant and that he has to obtain the obvious advantages to him of the machine age of the industrial society of today even the faraway Indian in the mountains I think who can travel much more easily than he used to is just to improve his condition. He knows it can be done. He sees it year after year in all his contacts with the rest of society. He wants a better life for himself
for his children. He is for a radical change a change that will benefit him and not anybody else. I wonder if I could just go to that point as you have at this stage when comparing the urban and rural situation. If we could just tell. Then get the third commentary and then reintroduce this main This main issue into a general argument okay this third formal commentary is going to come from Mr. DuBois who is the Latin American correspondent for The Chicago Tribune. Mr. DuBois has been in his professional capacity for many years chairman of the freedom of the press Committee of the Inter-American Press Association. He has written among other things a book called Fidel Castro rebel liberate a dictator and another book called Freedom is my beat. Mr. DuBois I hope you will regard as part of your beat and feel free to give us your comment now. Thank you Bob.
Thank you Mr. Chairman. From this northern anchor of my beat I would like to comment on what Dr. Patel Villa has said and I would like to make this observation. I do not think that any sensible human being had any or could have had any objection to the overthrow of dictator full Henschel but the stuff and the advent of a necessary social revolution in Cuba as Dr. Patel will our side. Fidel Castro the trade that revolution we have heard that there has been great animosity aroused against that revolution because vested interests have been affected. Perhaps that has been
a contributory factor. But I must be recall that it was Fidel Castro who personally dictated the text of that pact of Caracas which doctor of Portelli law mention. He dictated the entire text and subscribed to it together with the rest of the leaders of the revolutionary movement to oust but East and that text was the one on which many leaders of the liberating moment in Latin America supported Pradelle Castro. Based on that text many persons throughout the hemisphere including the United States and Canada supported Fidel Castro but was at the vested interests. I do not think so. I think that what began to turn public opinion
against Fidel Castro was the apparent trend towards total communist subjugation of Cuba because before all the vested interests were attacked by his agrarian reform and by their own by the nationalization which is nothing but outright plunder and theft. At the present time for Del Castro and the communist propagandists in Cuba began the most concerted concentrated brainwashing operation in contemporary Latin American history. They spearheaded a hate America campaign. They were even so rude as on March 24th 1959 to grab a microphone away from President Jose figuris while he was addressing a crowd at the
presidential palace and which was tantamount to an insult because President Jose figuris started to talk about the whole Cold War. This brainwashing operation was designed to create a state of mind among the Cuban people of hatred against the United States. And I wanted to condition the minds of the people towards the marriage with the Soviet Union and with Red China which was the goal to which those who were behind Fidel Castro pushing him and encouraging him to steal that revolution wanted the Cuban situation today. His pattern almost entirely on the red China the Communist China Iron Curtain. Pushed by Moscow with its present day missile
rattle rattling diplomacy which has been threatened by crew ship. And I repeat that was before there was any confiscation intervention or expropriation of lands. The Patton was building up. The rest was going to be an excuse of cos. Nobody likes anything taken away from him without repayment and the Cuban people who are a fine people who are a conscientious people who are an industrious people. They basically are not thieves although some of their politicians have been some of the worst thieves in the world. There have been revolutions in Latin America that have produced beneficial results. The.
Revolution in Argentina under Perowne did not produce beneficial results because it discombobulated the entire town economy of the country and they're still trying to recover from that strangulation inflicted by his policies in which the communists again played a good role. Nevertheless in other countries we have seen the advent of a shift towards from the extreme left further towards the center. There has been an unusual or not too unusual political phenomenon in Latin America. Why have the two extreme leftists have found that those policies are contrary to the best interests of their country and have shifted to not exactly evolution but Revolution through common sense. That is why. There is being
invoked and implemented in countries as Dr. Katie mentioned Colombia Venezuela Ecuador and others. A sound agrarian reform. I see my time is up. Thank you. We've had three different kinds of statement of personal insight one of academic survey and a third of rapport touch and I think we're necessarily in a state of mind where we're attracted on two different planes one by the precise crisp example of Cuba before us and the other the general problems of revolution in our times. And I wonder Dr. Patel whether you could marry these two by commenting on the thesis that Mr Wilkie was developing just now. Let me finish with my thesis because I didn't quite get to the last point. It's very short. One point
what I would like to end up with which I was interrupted on. Was that what I feel is that land reform today because of what I was saying is not the ultimate objective of revolution. It is a part of something much broader a participation in national life and opportunities for a higher living standard that only industrialization can bring about. And it is in this lie that I think that every revolution today in Latin America must be seen for any movement in that direction. What Cuba needs above all else is industrialization. Not only land reform but of course and industrialization of its own free will. This is the point that I really want to end with and that I want to emphasize. It is the need for industrialization that is the prime more being force of social ferment in Latin America today. And there is nothing to turn back to we just simply cannot turn back.
Thank you for such a fine. I know that you all have very much more to say than you have time for on this I have to exercise this dictatorship of the Secretariat as it was. Dr. Patel would you comment please. I'm very glad to hear what the total key there has said because at last to the core of the problem we have been in Cuba. We shall have for many years to come. There hasn't been proper convenient land reform in Cuba while we are having is something else. We are not setting up as moral landholders while we are doing this. Taking away the land that was on the cultivation that was not I the land board was producing was making wealth
and then destroy in that world. That's a different thing altogether. And then they have invented what they call the cooperatives and they don't have the people who can train the workers. The farmers in the cooperatives and those people when they produce something they have to sell whatever they have they have previews to a single government agency fixing the price for everything they produce and they are not paid with money they are paid with script and the script of paper with which they are. Paid not to be used everywhere but only with that people store to buy from the people store belonging to the government. What they need for their for their livelihood. And when they buy from those stores they had to pay the prices. The government has put to the goods being sold there. So that is
not the real Eveready in HU form that has been promised and that we need in Cuba. We need to set up farmers who will be economically independent who will be prosperous. We don't have that this other question about the India's industrialisation he said very important when I shall tell you how they are going about to do that. Wages have been frozen by the government. Workers don't have a right to a strike. Unions are controlled by the minister of labor who is a major in the Cuban army and anybody who wants to set up an industry of any type in Cuba has to go to the government and the government will do that. At times enterprising men having capital wanted to develop the resources of the country have found themselves with them so they
had that plan of us it's very interesting. We are going to do that ourselves. And they don't have that technicians or the capital or the will. Or the ability to plan how to carry on that. Now they are telling everybody to all the wins that they will get factories from communist China Eastern Germany ship was full of Ikea and so hundreds of new industries who are going to operate those industries they are going to bring to Cuba when they will be brought even they are ever brought. Well the technicians STM by the communist countries to infiltrate Cuba. And therefore we are not going to have the necessary industrialization. The one that ought to take into consideration that we have it mainly in the US today. The sugar industry which has never been fully
used from which we could have a score of new industrious given employment to thousands and thousands of people while we are going to have if somebody Macon writes a blade which will be very expensive when we could be doing some things there are useful things with the byproducts of the sugar industry to sell them at the proper price and then to buy those blades may somewhere else at the prize that was going to be convenient for us. We are not doing this planning for industrialization. They lack the knowledge they lack the aptitude they lack this theory and they lack the will and they lack the honesty. Us to carry on a plan for industrialization in Cuba. It is true as Mr. Peter was saying
that Mexico had pollution is something very different from the so-called Cuban revolution under Fidel Castro. That's something that ought to tell her but Matthews of the New York Times because he's all the time presenting the thesis that in order to understand what is volume it is necessary to study what took place in Mexico because the two things are alike. And as this Mexican economist I just said know when very well what he's talking about that has nothing in common is to do on behalf of Chicago Tribune do want to make a comment on that last point. Before we go to the audience the questions well the Chicago Tribune stands on its record. I would like to say that I agree fully with Dr. Portelli law the Cuban situation today
is totally communistic. The revolution there in no way can be compared as analogous to the Mexican Revolution. Because they Mexicans when they started their revolution back in 1910 did not have communist advisors. The Communist Party did not take power and so on and Soviet Russia until some years later. There is no free democratic labor movement and no free elections and all the unions and federations in Cuba the Cuban confederation of Labor has operated today in the same manner in which her own made the leaders of the c d d in one side ace CGT and when a side dance to his tunes. Only recently Fidel Castro booted out the secretary general
of the CTC in Cuba without any press announcement and suddenly. Gave another man the job again without any announcement and without any elections. Still today I think you should have one brief comeback on that if you want to work only this time with a German I think that impression might be left in the audience here. That because the revolution in Cuba is not going the way many liberal liberal minded people would have liked it originally and I'm one of them. But revolutions are bad or they may not ever work out properly. I think the problem is that the conditions that created revolution exist in most countries that these things are bound to happen. They could be sort of prevented revolutions as a very difficult concept to manage but certainly if they're not prevented that they must explode. Then what we need is to create responsible statesmanship
in our countries in order that freedom can be strengthened. At the same time that privilege and injustice and bobber D are destroyed. And I think that is the main point to take into account. Thank you thank you. We're not ready I think for some uprising from the movie and I was on the sub. The revolution and I will take the first question from them please Mr Chairman sir. My question is directed to Article 2 of the distinguished visitor from Cuba and our distinguished newspaper man. Now first of all I'm going to break it into two parts. Would they be kind enough sir for my edification and if I may presume for the edification of this group. Tell us throughout history has there been any revolution that they know about that has made significant changes in that society that has met with the approval of a business community. The second part of the question is as I understand it following the Caracas pact.
Castro made certain promises correction Fidel Castro had the promises of all sections of the community including the business sector as well as the professional sector. What consideration if any did he offer to these two sections of the business as well as the professional sections that are now very vocal in criticizing his regime. What consideration did he in turn offer for the promises of support. Secondly is it correct to say and in this way I'm not making a statement I'm seeking information and I stand subject to correction. Is the criticism now leveled against the regime primarily because he has managed to outmaneuver the business section as well as the professional section and directed the revolution to what the leftists often describe as a grassroots revolution rather than the typical characteristic
palace revolution that we know so well in South America. So to put the two questions are of great importance. But let me tell you about the first one that dippy people who are opposing what is going on in Cuba are not those professional and business people you are talking about is the people of Cuba. Because we think that we are entitled to keep our human rights no matter what is going to happen to the change of economic foundations or social institutions and so on and those human height had this appear in Cuba. And I was tellin a while a while and that has been confirmed by Mr. DuBois later on that labor unions have this appear as such in Cuba that the farmers don't have a right to organize themselves. Those are not business men or professional
people. Those are. Their real bad bone not the Cuban population. Middle class people and workers and those are the ones. Who have been treated this way. They don't have a right to do anything. They had to submit meekly to whatever they are requested to do. As to the second part of the second question Distin of the business and the professionals. You enter into an agreement with Fidel Castro. I never knew and I was there all the time. I never knew that there was such a consultation fee there Castro doesn't consult. He orders he commends and if you disagree. You go to jail. You go to exile or even worse you've got to what we were seeing in the dining room to the padded dome and that's all that there is to it. That is
no way that he will follow advice. He said Superman has had his most Olin there his principal. His learning his talent his Perowne is all but a much more you and Mr.. The question was also addressed to you. Thank you. With regard to the question about the businessman businessman anywhere do not take very kindly to any pressure for changes or even raises in pay which provoke strikes. Nevertheless the basic thing that must be understood that nobody here considers any revolution which tends to improve the lot of the common man as bad
as Adel Castro dictated that pact of correct us in that pact of correctness was the declaration of principles for the revolution which included an agrarian reform with Prahran dam an affectation for property expropriated in accordance with the 1940 Constitution for Del Castro repudiated that provision in May of 1959 when he went Che Guevara in a meeting in a hospital room and have bene imposed his will on Fidel Castro in a very serious debate in which the Minister of Agriculture at that time Dr. Limbert so remarrying participated in which Raul Castro was. And polls as well on Fidel Castro to accept the more radical agrarian reform
law. What just happened to confiscation of property. Next question please. I heard Mr.. Your kids say that their talk about the preventive revolution and my first question would be to Mr. DuBois to ask him. It seems that the United States used to have a sort of do it yourself kit for preventive revolutions which they've used in Guatemala a few years ago and I wonder if they've lost this kid because in the Cuban revolution we're talking now about a year and a half after the revolution there was a period of possible preventive revolution in Cuba as there was in Guatemala. The difference is that. In Guatemala there was a possibility
of communism in Cuba. There was no such question. In 1958. So is it only communism that prompts the United States to intervene in Latin America in some way or is it really. Some view on social reform and I do but let's just take that question if we please. Thank you very much I was in Guatemala for the revolution of 1954 and maybe I was so close to the words I couldn't see the trees. But as the interrogator has any information to document the United States and intervention in that revolution in Guatemala I would welcome it any further question please. Gentlemen the scent of astro a communist home the home of the wire addresses that particular one Dr. Patel. Would you
like to try that. You cannot say yes or no if you like. No knowledge is not so easy yes or no. It has to be ex. This has to be expounded a little. Castro has fallen into communism or in the last 16 months sings the historical trip of a nest of Guevara to the Far East. The fall of the time he was working along the lines that nationally. Well you know what. And here we leave the third session of the twenty ninth annual coaching conference arranged jointly by the Canadian Institute on public affairs and the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. Tonight you heard Dimino Patel founder and director of the Institute of cultural Bonnell an automatic gonna have on a coupe of. Victor Kedy economist Mexico and Jules Dubois Latin American correspondent Chicago Tribune.
Please note: This content is only available at GBH and the Library of Congress, either due to copyright restrictions or because this content has not yet been reviewed for copyright or privacy issues. For information about on location research, click here.
Contributing Organization
University of Maryland (College Park, Maryland)
If you have more information about this item than what is given here, or if you have concerns about this record, we want to know! Contact us, indicating the AAPB ID (cpb-aacip/500-m32nb072).
No description available
Public Affairs
Media type
AAPB Contributor Holdings
University of Maryland
Identifier: 60-sp5-3 (National Association of Educational Broadcasters)
Format: 1/4 inch audio tape
Duration: 00:30:00?
If you have a copy of this asset and would like us to add it to our catalog, please contact us.
Chicago: “Cc,” 1960-08-08, University of Maryland, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC, accessed August 9, 2022,
MLA: “Cc.” 1960-08-08. University of Maryland, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Web. August 9, 2022. <>.
APA: Cc. Boston, MA: University of Maryland, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Retrieved from