What do you think?
Rate this book
Envisioning Cuba
The Origins of the Cuban Revolution Reconsidered
Analyzing the crucial period of the Cuban Revolution from 1959 to 1961, Samuel Farber challenges dominant scholarly and popular views of the revolution's sources, shape, and historical trajectory. Unlike many observers, who treat Cuba's revolutionary leaders as having merely reacted to U.S. policies or domestic socioeconomic conditions, Farber shows that revolutionary leaders, while acting under serious constraints, were nevertheless autonomous agents pursuing their own independent ideological visions, although not necessarily according to a master plan.
Exploring how historical conflicts between U.S. and Cuban interests colored the reactions of both nations' leaders after the overthrow of Fulgencio Batista, Farber argues that the structure of Cuba's economy and politics in the first half of the twentieth century made the island ripe for radical social and economic change, and the ascendant Soviet Union was on hand to provide early assistance. Taking advantage of recently declassified U.S. and Soviet documents as well as biographical and narrative literature from Cuba, Farber focuses on three key years to explain how the Cuban rebellion rapidly evolved from a multiclass, antidictatorial movement into a full-fledged social revolution.
Exploring how historical conflicts between U.S. and Cuban interests colored the reactions of both nations' leaders after the overthrow of Fulgencio Batista, Farber argues that the structure of Cuba's economy and politics in the first half of the twentieth century made the island ripe for radical social and economic change, and the ascendant Soviet Union was on hand to provide early assistance. Taking advantage of recently declassified U.S. and Soviet documents as well as biographical and narrative literature from Cuba, Farber focuses on three key years to explain how the Cuban rebellion rapidly evolved from a multiclass, antidictatorial movement into a full-fledged social revolution.
227 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2006
3 people are currently reading
105 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
January 6, 2026
a great classical marxist analysis of the cuban revolution. his application of combined and uneven development to pre-revolutionary cuba was really insightful. the exploration of the dynamics of US imperialism with respect to cuba really elucidate the marxist conception of the state as 'the committee for managing the common affairs of the whole bourgeoisie', as he lays out the different interests and strategies of different sections of US capital and the US state. would definitely reccommend if you already have introductory knowledge of the cuban revolution (as the book assumes at least some knowledge of it).
April 5, 2009
Farber's thesis is the the Cuban Revolution and Cuban communism are the product of a de-classed authoritarian populist movement. Counters ideas of both the left and right that argue Fidel was a conspiratorial communist all along, or that US imperialism pushed Cuba into the Soviet camp.
I agree with Farber's argument, but this is not a comprehensive picture or history of the Cuban revolution. And a lot of his assertions, especially when discussing Fidel, are not backed up with sources or facts. Little discussion of the accomplishments of the revolution, even in its first year.
I agree with Farber's argument, but this is not a comprehensive picture or history of the Cuban revolution. And a lot of his assertions, especially when discussing Fidel, are not backed up with sources or facts. Little discussion of the accomplishments of the revolution, even in its first year.
October 4, 2019
Certain realities are glossed over or sidestepped in Samuel Farber's recapitulation of the Cuban Revolution. A note to readers: this is a theoretical and policy-oriented narrative, not a review of the people or events of the Revolution as such.
Farber is a Cuban-born democratic socialist, the son of Jewish immigrants and a participant in the 1950s revolutionary movement. As such he is well-poised to both understand his subject and communicate its nuances to outsiders. As a democratic leftist he is torn, however, between condemning Castro's personal rule, and the Soviet-imitation bureaucratic repression of Cuban daily life; and the need and desirability of a social revolution to transform the island's backwardness, and defy US hegemony. There is no reason - in theory - why one is needed with the other. Yet. . . .
Farber does a great job in exploring the US' intrinsic hostility to social democracy and social revolution on principle. Thus it becomes irrelevant if Castro was a Communist in 1959 or not; and equally beside the point that the US could have been more understanding and tolerant. Castro was a revolutionary; the Cuban elite and the US demanded business as usual; and both sides believed in their own absolute moral virtue. The real "class conflict" lay between the new "revolutionary vanguard", as Che Guevara aptly put it, and those vested in the old order. Thus, as Farber explains well, there was little possibility of compromise on essentials.
Farber also explores the sui generis populist radicalism of the early Revolution, how its transformation into official Marxism-Leninism was not planned but an outgrowth of action and reactions in a cold war context. There is a world of revolutionary thought and practice between Washington and Moscow, and the Cuban Revolution was in its first days sincere in exploring these. Farber concludes with a belief that opening Cuba will give the democratic left the space necessary to resume its aborted vision in the interests of the Cuban people. Yet. . . .
The issues Farber leaves dangling tend to undermine his own case. Just how would the Revolution meet its security and economic needs against determined US opposition? In this sense, it really doesn't matter how democratic Fidel was, as his alleged Communism was also irrelevant. It was the process of change that produced the reaction, as witness Arbenz in Guatemala or Allende in Chile. Fidel congratulated himself on his survival precisely because he didn't trifle with democratic and legal nicities. How could the Revolution have survived without cold war realignment, just 90 miles from US waters, with a US government that had no more use for non-alignment in its sphere than the USSR? Hungary's revolution could not have survived in '56 as a neutral state; neither could Cuba's, ten years later.
That the democratic left will have the wherewithal to oppose either the current Party elite, as they transform themselves into "state businessmen"; or the well-funded, US-supported contras seething for vengeful return in Miami, is also doubtful. The largest mass social movement is likely, instead, to be out of Cuba toward the United States, undercutting the popular base Farber hopes to mobilize for a post-Castro social democracy.
Farber is a Cuban-born democratic socialist, the son of Jewish immigrants and a participant in the 1950s revolutionary movement. As such he is well-poised to both understand his subject and communicate its nuances to outsiders. As a democratic leftist he is torn, however, between condemning Castro's personal rule, and the Soviet-imitation bureaucratic repression of Cuban daily life; and the need and desirability of a social revolution to transform the island's backwardness, and defy US hegemony. There is no reason - in theory - why one is needed with the other. Yet. . . .
Farber does a great job in exploring the US' intrinsic hostility to social democracy and social revolution on principle. Thus it becomes irrelevant if Castro was a Communist in 1959 or not; and equally beside the point that the US could have been more understanding and tolerant. Castro was a revolutionary; the Cuban elite and the US demanded business as usual; and both sides believed in their own absolute moral virtue. The real "class conflict" lay between the new "revolutionary vanguard", as Che Guevara aptly put it, and those vested in the old order. Thus, as Farber explains well, there was little possibility of compromise on essentials.
Farber also explores the sui generis populist radicalism of the early Revolution, how its transformation into official Marxism-Leninism was not planned but an outgrowth of action and reactions in a cold war context. There is a world of revolutionary thought and practice between Washington and Moscow, and the Cuban Revolution was in its first days sincere in exploring these. Farber concludes with a belief that opening Cuba will give the democratic left the space necessary to resume its aborted vision in the interests of the Cuban people. Yet. . . .
The issues Farber leaves dangling tend to undermine his own case. Just how would the Revolution meet its security and economic needs against determined US opposition? In this sense, it really doesn't matter how democratic Fidel was, as his alleged Communism was also irrelevant. It was the process of change that produced the reaction, as witness Arbenz in Guatemala or Allende in Chile. Fidel congratulated himself on his survival precisely because he didn't trifle with democratic and legal nicities. How could the Revolution have survived without cold war realignment, just 90 miles from US waters, with a US government that had no more use for non-alignment in its sphere than the USSR? Hungary's revolution could not have survived in '56 as a neutral state; neither could Cuba's, ten years later.
That the democratic left will have the wherewithal to oppose either the current Party elite, as they transform themselves into "state businessmen"; or the well-funded, US-supported contras seething for vengeful return in Miami, is also doubtful. The largest mass social movement is likely, instead, to be out of Cuba toward the United States, undercutting the popular base Farber hopes to mobilize for a post-Castro social democracy.
January 7, 2024
It makes the argument that Fidel Castro was an ideological opportunist who shaped the nature of the revolution in a way to benefit himself and that it was not a bottom-up socialist revolution, which I agree with.
It argues that its pivot towards the Eastern Bloc was not the result of its treatment by the US but was rather a conscious path chosen by Castro.
- In a sense, I agree that it was a conscious choice. On the other hand, any attempt at sovereignty would be unacceptable to the US whether socialist or not and so long as the new administration wanted to stay out of the control of the US they would never be tolerated. This would only naturally land them in the camp of the Eastern Bloc for protection
It argues that its pivot towards the Eastern Bloc was not the result of its treatment by the US but was rather a conscious path chosen by Castro.
- In a sense, I agree that it was a conscious choice. On the other hand, any attempt at sovereignty would be unacceptable to the US whether socialist or not and so long as the new administration wanted to stay out of the control of the US they would never be tolerated. This would only naturally land them in the camp of the Eastern Bloc for protection
February 4, 2023
I read some of the chapters of this book in order to write an undergraduate university paper.
February 27, 2007
Interesting look at the factors that "made" the Cuban Revolution. Has a good, unconventional perspective, but the way the material is arranged (topically, rather than chronologically), Farber tends to repeat the same basic points from different angles. Worth reading but only if you've read another book on the Cuban Revolution.
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews