Carrion(v8).

qxd

6/6/05

7:37 PM

Page 26

CENTRO Journal

Volume xv1i Number 1

spring 2005

Two variants of
Caribbean nationalism:
Marcus Garvey and
Pedro Albizu Campos
J UAN M ANUEL C ARRIN

ABSTRACT

Some of the forms that collective identities and nationalism have taken in the
Caribbean are analyzed in this paper, which examines two historical figures, one from
Jamaica and the other from Puerto Rico: Marcus Garvey (18871940) and Pedro
Albizu Campos (18911965), respectively. Both were black, radical, and politically
persecuted. A history of nationalism in both Jamaica and Puerto Rico is impossible
without taking them into account. Marcus Garvey is one of Jamaicas officially
designated national heroes. He was the first such person to whom this honor was
conferred after Jamaicas independence in 1962. Garveys name and portrait appear in
some of Jamaicas currency, in public buildings, and in the names of streets. Puerto
Rican nationalists consider Pedro Albizu Campos, one of the islands greatest patriots
of the twentieth century. There are some important similarities in the life history and
political career of these two Caribbean leaders. But their construction of the ideas of
race and nationalism are very different. This paper compares the different ideas of
Garvey and Albizu about race and nationality, as well as the praxis that went with
them. For Marcus Garvey race took precedent over nation. In contrast, for Albizu
Campos Raza meant the Hispanic race. The explanation of these differences in
nationalist ideology lies, at least in part, in the different ways in which historically the
social construction of ethnicity and race has taken shape throughout the Caribbean,
and in Jamaica and Puerto Rico particularly. Among the factors taken into
consideration to explain these differences in nationalist ideology are the following:
historical differences in the social impact of the plantation system, the relative
Convention address by Hon, Marcus Garvey delivering the constitution for Negro rights.
Liberty Hall, New York City, 1920. Photographer unknown. New York World-Telegram
and Sun Collection Library of Congress . Reprinted, by permission, from the Library of Congress.

position of free blacks during the slave period, the cultural factors involved in the
formation of social classes, and different colonial experiences. [Key words:
Caribbean, nationalism, Marcus Garvey, Pedro Albizu Campos, race, colonialism]

[ 27 ]

Carrion(v8).qxd

6/6/05

7:37 PM

Page 28

here are patterns in the way

nationalism has developed in the Caribbean. Historically it has appeared in some
places earlier than in others, and it has not been at random. Nationalisms intensity
has also varied quite a lot throughout the area. And there are also regional differences
in the way Caribbean nationalism has expressed civic, ethnic, or racial qualities.
Socioeconomic, cultural, and political factors and the way they have played out
are part of the explanation for these differences. The study of nationalism in the
Caribbean requires, just as in other places, the use of a comparative approach.
An interesting comparison is to examine two Caribbean historical figues, one from
Jamaica and the other from Puerto Rico. Marcus Garvey (18871940), from Jamaica,
and Pedro Albizu Campos (18911965), from Puerto Rico, were both black and
radical, and were both politically persecuted; additionally, they are both seen
by many people as national heroes. In Jamaica, as in Puerto Rico, a history of
nationalism would be impossible without taking them into consideration.
Marcus Garvey has been officially designated by his country as one of its national
heroes. He was the first person since the independence of Jamaica in 1962 to be
given this honor by the government. The name of Garvey and his portrait appears
in Jamaican currency, and in the names of public buildings and streets. Pedro Albizu
Campos, on the other hand, is considered by Puerto Rican nationalists as their most
important figure in the twentieth century.

In contrast to Jamaica, Puerto Rico has not up to this moment achieved formal
political independence. This is so in spite of the fact that nationalism in Puerto Rico
has a relatively longer history. Albizu spent most of his adult life in jail as a
consequence of his political activities, but today he is regarded in his country with
considerable respect, although at the same time he is considered by many a wayward
idealist. The memory of Albizu in Puerto Rico does not have the institutional
support that Garveys memory has in Jamaica. It cannot be the same because of the
particular relationship Puerto Rico has with the United States. Notwithstanding the
fact that Puerto Rico is still a colony, several schools, streets, and avenues have his
name. The same can be said about cities in the United States such as New York and
Chicago, where large numbers of Puerto Ricans live. There are important similarities
in the life history and political career of these two Caribbean leaders. But a very
different construction of ideas related to race and nationality separates the two men.
Garvey and Albizu had very different ideas about race and nationality as well as
differences in the methods, strategies, and organizational procedures to carry these
ideas forward. For Marcus Garvey race had priority over nation. He was an exponent
of black nationalism; Jamaica as such was not his main concern. His fundamental
goal was the improvement and liberation of his oppressed race, an oppression that
was felt globally. In comparison, to Albizu race (raza) meant the Hispanic race.
Albizu was a hard critic of race relations in the United States. His characterization
of the United States as a racist country is not so very different from that of Garvey.
In Garveys interpretation the United States was a country racist to its core.
In 1921 Garvey was not completely wrong thinking that the United States was
controlled by white supremacists. According to Garvey it was a fact that the spirit
of the Ku Klux Klan is in 80 or 90 percent of the white americans (Garvey [1921a]
1995: 188). Besides recognizing the importance of American racism, Albizus
characterization of the United States had the intention of deconstructing the
persona that imperial propaganda had created. Against the rhetoric of freedom,
liberty, and democracy Albizu would say in 1933: We know the strength of the
North American plutocracy and how it exploits its own fellow citizens in the
continent (Albizu Campos [1930] 1975a: 116).1 Contrary to what Puerto Ricans
are led to believe, people in the United States have no equality, no liberty,
nor fraternity among themselves. ... The Yankee people is a slave people
(Albizu Campos [1933] 1975b: 334).2
For Albizu, to be obsessed with race was an American mania, an involvement he
rejected with repugnance. At the same time that Albizu recognized his African racial
heritage he also articulated a nonracial Hispanic nationalist ideology. Just like Garvey,
Albizu had an international perspective, although it was not one based upon race but
rather upon cultural affinity and belonging. Albizu, just like Garvey, sought support
and solidarity carrying out visits to different countries, but the point of reference
for Albizu was not Africa but Latin America. As if in response to Albizus Latin
American perspective, Ernesto Che Guevara, in a speech he once gave in the United
Nations, called Albizu Campos a symbol of Am rica irredenta (Guevara 1967: 468)
America having here the meaning given by the Cuban patriot Jos Mart in his
expression Our America. The nationalist connotations are quite evident in the
redemption that is sought.
To explain these differences in nationalist ideology requires the examination in
detail of the different forms in the social and historical construction of ethnicity and
race throughout the Caribbean and specifically between Jamaica and Puerto Rico.

[ 28 ]

[ 29 ]

Marcus Garvey at viewing stand, 1924. Photographer James Van Der Zee. Reprinted, by permission,
from Donna Mussenden Van Der Zee. Donna Mussenden Van Der Zee.

Carrion(v8).qxd

6/6/05

7:37 PM

Page 30

Nationalism is many different and related things. When we talk about nationalism
we are dealing, for example, with a political ideology but also with things that go
by the name of national sentiment and national identity. And it is not just politics
nationalism is concerned with, it also refers to cultural manifestations of collective
identity affirmation. The protean quality of nationalism is, on the other hand, widely
recognized. Many different factors are involved in giving it form. Of very special
importance to the study of nationalism in the Caribbean is the way in which racial
categories have taken form in the region. The island territories of the Caribbean have
been multiracial societies since their incorporation into the capitalist world system
very early in the sixteenth century. The way collective identities have developed in
this part of the world has been affected by this multiracial background. But exactly
what do we mean by race in multiracial societies? Race is, as commonly accepted
today, a social construct. In the Caribbean it is quite evident that race does not
always mean the same thing everywhere. The same person could be considered
white in the Dominican Republic, trigue o in Puerto Rico, and black in the
United States. In contrast to the traditional bipolar construction of racial categories
in the United States, in Latin America there is a long history of social recognition
of varieties of racial mixture. In his book Race Mixture in the History of Latin America,
Magnus Mrner (1967) mentions a 16-item nomenclature of racial categories for
eighteenth-century Mexico.
In his pioneering study Caribbean Race Relations: A Study of Two Variants H. Hoetink
(1971) prefers to talk about segmented societies instead of multiracial societies.
Segmented societies are ideal types and not concrete descriptions of specific
societies. These are analytic categories that help us to understand complex realities.
What is particularly compelling about Hoetinks concept of segmented societies is that
from the start it incorporates the question of social structure and power. Moreover,
he talks about different types of segmented society distinguished by their intersegmentary social mobility. Particularly pertinent in the comparison between Garvey and
Albizu is the distinctions Hoetink establishes within the Caribbean region. The first
type of segmentary society he mentions is the one with the least amount of social/racial
mobility, a society associated with the Deep South of the United States. The second
type is where a socioeconomic rise is only possible half-way towards the social position
of the dominant segment on the basis of physical characteristics (for example, the
British, French and Dutch parts of the Caribbean) (Hoetink 1971: 101). And finally
the third type, which he associates with the Hispanic Caribbean and Brazil, is the type
in whom you would find the highest degree of intersegmentary social mobility.
A shared cultural heritage is fundamental in explaining this degree of mobility.
In what Hoetink calls the Iberian variant of Caribbean race relations, the colored
group serves as a cultural bridge between other racial categories in ways that are
absent from what he calls the North-Western variant. A relatively greater degree of
cultural homogeneity is the result of what could be called the Africanization of
whites and the Europeanization of blacks. As an illustration of all this, linguistic

homogeneity is a much older and more common feature in the Hispanic Caribbean
than in the other islands and territories of the region (Hoetink 1971: 178). These cultural
qualities influence the development of nationalism. In the Hispanic Caribbean,
in comparison with the rest of the Caribbean, one finds national identities that
are much older in appearance and are much more widely diffused across class
and racial divides.
Differences in the construction of racial, ethnic, and national identities
throughout the Caribbean respond to particularities of historical development.
Colonialism, although a common historical feature throughout the region, has not
been, for example, the same in its structure and its consequences for the societies
of the Caribbean. Franklin W. Knight (1990) makes the analytically useful distinction
between exploitation colonies and settler colonialism. The cultural consequence
of exploitation colonies is a greater degree of heterogeneity and social fissures.
No actual or historical society in the Caribbean can be described as being purely
one type or the other, although the French colony of Saint-Domingue (Haiti) came
very close to being a pure expression of exploitation colonialism. At the opposite
end, the features of settler colonialism are more commonly present in the Caribbean
region, in those places where Spain once ruled.
In a recent study Winston James (1998) reiterates the importance of the distinction
between the Hispanic and non- Hispanic Caribbean to understand the particularities
of nationalism in the region. Significantly, black nationalism is of scant resonance in
the Hispanic Caribbean, where, on the contrary, popular cross-racial nationalism
has been a feature of society in Cuba and in Puerto Rico. The myth of racial
democracy has been an ever-present feature of Hispanic Caribbean nationalism.
In recent decades the deconstruction of the Hispanic myth of racial democracy has
become almost an industry. So many examples can be drawn to posit the existence of
racism in the Hispanic Caribbean that it is very easy to argue that reality disproves the
myth. The myth of racial democracy, just as any other myth, can become a tool of the
powerful against the weak, but it can also be something more. As de la Fuente (1999)
argues, hegemonic myths of this type have to incorporate by necessity some of the
interests of the subordinate groups. He criticizes the critics by pointing out how the
subordinate racial groups utilize the myth of racial democracy for their own benefit
in spite of the fact of continuing socioeconomic inequality among the groups.
The Caribbean has been a difficult region for the development of national
identities and nationalist projects. The nation is a great solidarity, a deep horizontal
comradeship, descriptive terms that result in an especially illusory conception of
societies shaped by the plantation, slavery, and colonialism. The nation is supposedly
felt as something organic; these are manufactured societies. In spite of it all,
the national idea has had a great impact in the Caribbean just as in other parts of the
world. Two types of nationalism have been able to penetrate deeply into peoples
imagination throughout the region. On the one hand, there is a type of nationalism
that is expressed in racial identities that transcend any particular territory and that
idealize Africa as the land of the forefathers. On the other hand, there is a civic
territorial nationalism with the ethnic qualities of a shared culture. Different
sociocultural, economic, and political terrains have fertilized different types of
nationalism. A very strong correlation between race and class has been influential in
the development of widely popular racial nationalisms. In those other places where
the correlation between race and class has been weaker, the opportunities have been
greater for the development of nationalisms of the civic territorial type.

[ 30 ]

[ 31 ]

Among the factors that have to be taken into consideration to explain these
differences in nationalist ideology are the following: historical differences in
the social impact of the plantation system, the relative social position of the
free colored population during the period of slavery, the different cultural factors
involved in the formation of social classes, and the different colonial experiences.
The formation of ethnic, racial and national identities in the Caribbean

Carrion(v8).qxd

6/6/05

7:37 PM

Page 32

Garvey and Albizu: Social background and life trajectories

Questions of class and the possibilities of social advancement were different among
British and American colonies in the Caribbean early in the twentieth century.
A contrast can be established between a modernizing American colonialism in
Puerto Rico and the English colonialism of old abandoned plantations in Jamaica.
Puerto Rico had changed colonial masters in 1898, and processes of economic growth
and increasing social and political complexity, which had been taking shape in the
last three decades of the nineteenth century, experienced a qualitative jump in
intensity after the American invasion. Under U.S. control a new and modernized
plantation system extended its hold over most of the island territory. The advance
of capitalism can be attested in the increased economic activity, in the growth of the
proletarianized sector of the population, and in the growing commodification of
social relations. With the change of colonial rulers a cultural shock came as well.
The United States in Puerto Rico represented for many the arrival of modernity.
Spain was successfully presented by the new colonial regime as representing a social
backwardness that thankfully was being left behind. Important political changes
occurred also in Puerto Rico in the first decades of the century. A colonial version
of American democracy was established on the island. On the one hand, an electoral
democratic system in the American fashion was quickly developed with regular and
relatively clean elections. On the other hand, the amount of self-government allowed
in the beginnings was quite modest. U.S. control over Puerto Rico has had from the
start ambivalent qualities. In 1917, almost twenty years after the invasion, Puerto
Ricans were made U.S. citizens, but the island continued to be defined in court
rulings as an unincorporated territory, something that belonged to but did not form
a part of the United States.
In Jamaica the beginnings of the twentieth century brought no promises of any
drastic significant change in the colonial situation. Since the abolition of slavery
in 1838 the plantation system in Jamaica had been in a long decline, and a languid
economy was the result. Backwardness was also a feature of the political system.
In 1900 Jamaica was a Crown Colony, ruled directly by London with marginal degrees
of self-government. The Crown Colony system had been established in 1866,
when the Colonial Assembly was eliminated as a direct consequence of the Morant
Bay rebellion of the previous year, demonstrating in the process the growing
incapacity of the planter class to rule its workers. In terms of political development
the comparison with the American colony of Puerto Rico is significant. While in
Puerto Rico the history of political parties starts in 1870 under Spanish colonialism,
in Jamaica that history begins in the 1930s. If we examine the development of suffrage
a similar story comes out. In Puerto Rico the first election with universal male
suffrage was carried out in 1898; women were included in the 1930s. In Jamaica big
changes started to occur only after 1938, but then, with relative quickness, universal
suffrage was achieved in 1944. Another area in which the British colony fell behind the
American colony was in the educational system. A feature of American colonialism in
Puerto Rico early in the twentieth century had been an extension and modernization
of the educational system, as part of an early attempt to Americanize the Puerto
Ricans. The first university in Puerto Rico was, for example, founded in 1903.
In Jamaica, in contrast, extremely few people could go much beyond grade school.
The first university in Jamaica was founded in 1947. The differences that we find in
comparing Garvey and Albizu respond to a significant degree to the different social
and political historical development of the two smallest islands in the Greater Antilles.

In terms of social origins Marcus Garvey can perhaps be described as belonging

to a rural petite bourgeoisie. His father and grandfather were master masons
(Stein 1986: 24) and as such relatively well-off artisans in what was in some ways a
peasant economy. Garveys education was mostly self-taught. In formal terms he did
not go beyond primary education, although he was well read and a life-long student
of oratory. In pursuit of oratical skills he studied the speaking style of church
ministers in Jamaica and parliamentary members in London. At the peak of his career
he was considered by some one of the worlds greatest orators (Martin 1983: 13),
although in the last years of his life he was reduced to being a soap-box orator in the
speakers corner of Londons Hyde Park. Following his artisanal origins he became
early on in his life an apprentice to a printer and was a foreman printer by the time
he was 18 years old. These acquired skills as a printer would be very important
throughout his life, for one of the areas in which he distinguished himself was as
a publisher of newspapers and magazines.
The beginnings of Albizu are very different. Garvey was a black man of dark
complexion, while Albizu was a mulatto, whose skin color was many times described
as similar in complexion to the natives of the Indian subcontinent. Socially speaking
Albizus origins are much lower than Garvey. Albizu was the illegitimate son of a
white Puerto Rican of the land-owning class. His father did not recognize his
paternity until very late, when his wife was dead and his son was already 23 years old.
In spite of the fathers neglect Albizu would speak fondly about his father and carry
with pride his surname. His mother was a black woman employed by his fathers
family. She died when Albizu was only 4 years old, so his origins are basically those
of an orphan. A maternal aunt took care of him. His early years were of great poverty.
He began school relatively late, when he was 9 years old, but was able to graduate
from high school with high honors by the time he was 19 years old.
Like Garvey, Albizu is remembered as a great speaker. Albizus oratical skills were
first tested in high school, and by that time he was winning speaking contests both
in Spanish and in English. Unlike Garvey, Albizus post-secondary education was top
rated. After graduating from high school he was able to go to a university in Vermont,
thanks to a scholarship provided by a freemason lodge in Ponce, his native city.
He ended up with a bachelors degree and a Juris Doctor degee from Harvard
University before he returned to Puerto Rico in 1922.
Garveys years of greatest success as a leader were from 1919 to 1923, while living in
the United States. During those years the organization that he created, the Universal
Negro Improvement Association (UNIA), experienced its greatest impact and
resonance. Branches of this organization were established throughout the United
States and the Caribbean. UNIA organized international meetings of black leaders
and people. The First International Convention of the Negro Peoples of the World
was inaugurated on August 1, 1920 in Madison Square Garden in New York City.
UNIAs newspaper, The Negro World, had a wide circulation that included many
colonial countries in Africa, a situation which incurred the displeasure of European
colonial authorities. UNIAs greatest success was the Black Star Line, a sea shipping
company that throughout its history owned five ships. The Black Star Line helped
for a moment to contribute to Garveys prestige among many blacks in the United
States and in the world. According to Martin Luther King Jr. Marcus Garvey was
the first person to create a mass movement among black people in the United States
(Garrow 1986: 428). Unfortunately, after all these successes, by 1923 the Black Star
Line was bankrupt, and Garvey was arrested by federal agents, who accused him of

[ 32 ]

[ 33 ]

Carrion(v8).qxd

6/6/05

7:37 PM

Page 34

postal fraud. Irregularities in the business management of the Black Star Line
were used by federal authorities to eliminate what came to be regarded as a black
radical nuisance. Garvey was in jail from 1925 to 1927 when his sentence was changed;
subsequently, he was deported back to Jamaica. Back in his home country he tried
to revive the UNIA and also to impact the local social and political situation.
Initial successes were followed by disappointment and some time in jail.
Disillusioned, he left for London, where he died in 1940.
Albizus years of greatest success as a leader were from 1930 to 1936. During
those years he changed completely the scope and reach of Puerto Rican nationalism.
In 1930 he was elected president of a small political organization founded in 1922
by dissidents from the Unionist Party, the largest political party in the country.
Albizus party was called the Nationalist Party of Puerto Rico. He quickly
transformed this organization into a political party that impacted the entire power
structure and that drew the wrath of the American colonial authorities in the island.
In spite of the Nationalist Partys unsuccessful participation in the 1932 elections,
the influence of the party was extensive because they were the most radical
expression of pro-independence sentiments that were then, perhaps, at the most
intense form they reached during the twentieth century. The Liberal Party,
electorally the largest party in the country in the 1930s, was also in favor of
independence for Puerto Rico. The democratic pretenses of the U.S. colonial regime
were deconstructed by Albizus insistent challenge. A massive political persecution
by the colonial regime, which included a massacre in which 19 people were killed
and more than a hundred wounded in 1937, while Albizu was in prison, nearly destroyed
his organization. Unlike Garvey, Albizu was not imprisoned because of postal fraud
but because of sedition and rebellion. After 1936 he spent most of the rest of his life
in jail. Freed from the Atlanta federal penitentiary in 1943, the same prison that had
held Garvey earlier, he was not allowed to return to Puerto Rico until 1947. He was
imprisoned again in 1950 when his followers carried out an armed insurrection on
the island; militant actions included attacks against objectives in the U.S., such as
the Blair House where President Harry S. Truman was temporarily staying.
Freed in 1953 by an amnesty decreed by the now elected colonial Puerto Rican
governor Luis Muoz Marn, Albizu was quickly jailed again when some of his
followers carried out an armed attack on the U.S. House of Representatives in 1954.
Severely ill, he was granted a pardon shortly before he died in 1965.

Pedro Albizu Campos inside the San Juan Cathedral, surrounded by a multitude, during the Te Deum honoring his return to Puerto Rico,
December 15, 1947. Photographer unknown. The Ruth M. Reynolds Papers, Archives of the Puerto Rican Diaspora. Centro de Estudios
Puertorrique os, Hunter College, CUNY. Reprinted, by permission, from Centro de Estudios Puertorrique os.

The greatest differences between Garvey and Albizu lie principally on the subject
of race. Let us take first the case of Garvey. Although born in Jamaica, he is part of
a story that transcends that island society. He is part, a very important part, in the
story of what has been called black nationalism. As an example of his importance
in this story, the last part of Wilson Jeremiah Moses book The Golden Age of Black
Nationalism (1988) deals with Garvey. And the subtitle of the book Modern Black
Nationalism, edited by Van Deburg (1997) is From Marcus Garvey to Louis Farrakhan.
In the story of black nationalism Garvey represents one of the last manifestations of
the type of leader that developed after emancipation, and at the same time an early
manifestation of a type of leader that will become common in the twentieth century.
According to Judith Stein (1986), at the start of the twentieth century black politics
was dominated by an international elite socially distant from the black working
masses. These were the people that organized the First Pan African Conference that

was held in London in 1900. This was in many ways an elitist and conservative
leadership. As self-proclaimed leaders of their people they propose as a solution to
their common problems a strategy based on hard work to accumulate capital and
education to remedy a civilizational deficit they recognized existed vis-a-vis the
Western world, dominated by whites. Garvey shared many things with this
leadership. Booker T. Washington, preeminent black leader in the U.S. in the late
nineteenth century, was, for example, an inspiration to him. Garvey decided to
become a racial leader after reading Washingtons book Up From Slavery. Garvey
shared his civilizationist bent, as can be seen in the improvement part in the name
of the organization he created: the Universal Negro Improvement Association
(UNIA). Garveys communality with this past leadership can also be attested to in
the entrepreneurial strategy that he preferred. A fundamental part of Garveys Negro
ideology was a type of economic nationalism. Before political empowerment came
the search for economic empowerment through entrepreneurial activities. Garvey
had a great admiration for Booker T. Washington, and in some ways some of his ideas
look like a radical version of Washingtons economic boosterism. In 1919 in Newport,
after extolling the virtues of blackness and black pride, Garvey proceeded to ask the
crowd for money: We cannot live on sentiment. We have to live on the material
production of the world. I am here representing the Black Star Line Steamship
Corporation of the World (Garvey [1919] 1996: 248).
A type of economic nationalism was also part of Albizus ideology. When Albizu
talked about the Puerto Rican nation his rethoric could become poetic and even
mystical, but he also had a more down to earth view of the nation. For Albizu the
nation had an indispensable material component in that the nation seeks to control
its economic resources: The comprehension of what is a nationality requires us to
understand that it is not only the ethnic, cultural and religious unity of human

[ 34 ]

[ 35 ]

Race and nationality in Garvey and in Albizu

Carrion(v8).qxd

6/6/05

7:37 PM

Page 36

society, but also the community of its material interests upon a determined territory,
in which its own sons should be lords and masters (Albizu Campos [1930] 1975a:
144).3 Essential to Albizus economic nationalism was a sharp indictment of U.S.
colonialism in Puerto Rico. Colonialism had robbed the people of Puerto Rico:
From the very first moment of the North American invasion, the legal bases were
laid for our collective despoliation(Albizu Campos [1930] 1975a: 147).4
Garveys greatest success as well as his greatest failure was the Black Star Line,
the sea shipping company mentioned earlier. What made Garvey different from
others in the international black elite of early twentieth century was that he reached
out to the masses. The need to sell bonds to finance the corporation moved Garvey to
seek the masses. After Garvey the emphasis in mass mobilization became greater.
Garvey was also different in the boldness of his speech, and in the provocative quality of
his rhetoric. For example, in a period when lynching of blacks was becoming increasingly
common in the South of the U.S., Garvey would scold his people for their
submissiveness, arguing that for every black that was lynched they should lynch a white.
Garvey was quite explicit about the novelty of his approach to the racial problem.
Talking about his organization he would say, in 1922, We represent a new line of
thought among Negroes (Garvey [1922] 1986: 93). An essential aspect of the new
approach was to be more assertive and aggressive in dealings with the powerful.
In a speech in 1921 Garvey said: We are dealing with the New Negro today, the
Negro who intends to return a blow for a blow (Garvey [1921b] 1995: 130). This more
aggressive posture was necessary to achieve respect. Moreover, it was necessary
because nothing could be achieved supplicating. In that same speech Garvey thrilled
the people in the meeting by pointing out that we realized that the world discounts
us because we have always been begging for the things that are ours .... But tonight
we are assembled to beg no more. (Cheers) We are assembled to demand ...
(Garvey [1921b] 1995: 129).
The goals of Garveys movement were defined in clearly racial terms. In his
influential essay African Fundamentalism he posed the need of making among
ourselves a Racial Empire upon which the sun shall never set (Garvey [1925] 1987:
5). The purpose of his organization was defined in The Principles of the UNIA:
to fight for the emancipation of the race and of the redemption of the country
of our fathers (Garvey [1922] 1986: 93). Garvey was guided by the principle that
there must be a black republic of Africa (Garvey [1919] 1996: 247). He wanted his
people to be guided by the principle of striving for Negro Supremacy in every
department of life (Garvey [1927] 1987: 193). Garvey wanted a radical transformation
of the racial status quo, reversing centuries of oppression suffered by the black masses:
... I was determined that the black man would not be kicked about by all the other
races and nations of the world (Garvey [1923] 1986: 126). His demands were on many
occasions expressed in terms of claiming a fair chance; Garvey wanted blacks to be
given what was considered their due. In a speech in 1924 Garvey was demanding
a place in the world for the Negro. He said in this speech: The world is the property
of all mankind, and each and every group is entitled to a portion. The black man now
wants his, and in terms uncompromising he is asking for it (Garvey [1924] 1986: 120).
Garveyism had, according to Tony Martin (1983), three major elements: race first,
self-reliance, and nationhood. Race first emphasized the importance of racial pride
and consciousness. Blacks had to understand that the basis of their oppression was
racial and that it was only by asserting their racial self-interest that a way out of their
misfortune could be found. He was in favor of what could be called a transmutation

of values where European esthetic values would be confronted by the slogan Black is
beautiful and history rewritten in a fashion that today would be called Afro-centric.
Racially based nationalisms, one must admit, are dangerous, and Garvey was in many
ways a racist. He was capable of making very nasty remarks against Jews and also
against miscegenation. But Garveys racism was of a special kind, of the kind Jos
Mart (Ortiz 1953) called on the rebound (de rebote). Garveys opinions about race
were to a large extent shaped by his experience of racism on the part of whites and
also by his experience with the mulatto elites of his native Jamaica.
Garveys racial politics in the U.S. were deeply influenced by his Jamaican
background, where minute distinctions of color and ancestry could be quite
important. In the article he published in Current History in 1923 Garvey gave a short
account of his racial background and context. My parents were black negroes
(Garvey [1923] 1986: 124). This is a fact Garvey wants us to know because when he
was born there was so much color prejudice in Jamaica. In Jamaica nobody wanted
to be Negro. There were many black-whites in Jamaicathese were the colored
men of the island who did not want to be classified as negroes, but as white.
There was hostility between Garvey and the rivals whom he identified with the
black-whites. Garvey would talk about the wicked and vicious opposition
he had met from among my own people, especially among the very lightly colored
(Garvey [1923] 1986: 133).
Self-reliance was a second important element in Garveyism. In contrast to the
NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People), which was
founded in 1909 with the participation of white liberals, Garveys organization, the
UNIA, prided itself in having an exclusively black membership. The oppression of
blacks will come to an end by black peoples own efforts and not by perpetuating a
dependence upon whites. This was a proposition that could not always be followed.
For example, most of the captains in the ships of the Black Star Line were whites
because there were not enough blacks qualified for these positions early in the
twentieth century. An even greater contradiction, given Garveys beliefs, was his
two-hour meeting in 1922 with Edward Clarke, one of the top-ranking members
of the Ku Klux Klan. This was perhaps the weirdest episode in Garveys career.
In Garveyism the third important element is a particular conception of
nationhood. For Garvey the political composition of the nation had by force of
structural circumstances a racial character. Garveys goal was to bring Negroes together
for the building up of a nation of their own. And why? Because we have been forced to
it (Garvey [1922] 1986: 96). He was convinced that the Negro in America will never get
his constitutional rights (Garvey [1922] 1986: 97). The Negro had to realize that beyond
the nation there was a greater loyalty, the loyalty of race (Garvey [1922] 1986: 100).
Garveyism is perhaps most accurately expressed in the slogan Africa for the Africans,
at home and abroad. Garvey believed that blacks would gain needed respect and
consideration world wide once a strong black nation had been developed. The logical
location for such a nation had to be in Africa, and blacks the world over, and especially
American blacks, should help in creating such a nation. Here we have the basis for
Garveys anticolonialism because of the objective fact that when he is proposing an
African nation, Africa was overwhelmingly dominated by European colonial powers.
For the colonial powers in Africa Garveyism was, at the least, distasteful because of its
possible disturbing influence among the natives. But Garveys anticolonialism was not
always consistent because in more than one occasion he declared his loyalty to Britain
while asking for reforms from within the colonial system.

[ 36 ]

[ 37 ]

Carrion(v8).qxd

6/6/05

7:37 PM

Page 38

Albizu must have heard about Garvey, although there is no public record that he ever
acknowledged that fact. Albizu must have heard about Garvey because he was living in
Boston during the heyday of the UNIA, and Boston was an important center of the
UNIA. Independently of having known each other, there are similarities between
Garvey and Albizu in terms of public ritual and rethorical style. Like the UNIA, the
Nationalist Party of Albizu would carry out political rallies that included brass bands
and uniformed men and women. There was, for example, the Universal African Legion
on the one hand and the Cadetes de la Repblica on the other. There were also some
similarities in their rhetorical boldness. Since the American invasion of Puerto Rico
there had been other pro-independence leaders, but none had articulated political
demands with the forcefulness of Albizu. The colonial regime was openly challenged
by a total denial of its legitimacy. The timidity of so many others, the product of the
fear of drawing the anger of metropolitan powers toward them, was set aside.
Very early in his political career Albizu pushed in favor of an approach to Puerto
Ricos colonial problem radically different from the timid approach typical up to that
moment. Albizus approach was one of insubordination. In 1923, during a speech among
Union Party members, before he joined the Nationalist Party, Albizu made sure to
emphasize the need to abandon, to banish the unwholesome custom of supplication
and petition(Torres 1975: 12).5 According to Albizu Puerto Ricans had to demand what
by right was theirs. In 1927 in an interview published in the weekly magazine Los Quijotes
Albizu gave one of the reasons for the need to banish all timid approaches to the colonial
problem: A nation such as the North American ... has no time to deal with submissive
and servile men(Torres 1975: 45).6 The servile attitudes of many Puerto Rican colonial
leaders, instead of leading to complaisant attitudes among the American rulers,
resulted in their being treated with contempt. Because of all these reasons it is necessary
to state valiantly our relationships facing the United States with the valiant and decisiveness that the case requires (Torres 1975: 70).7 In May of 1930, during a meeting of
the Nationalist Party leadership, Albizu stated that there was no margin for a fraternal
and solidary attitude towards the enemies of the fatherland (Torres 1975: 83).8
Albizu, by saying this, wanted to affirm his relationship to a particular political
tradition. This tradition was the history of the struggles for independence in Latin
America and nineteenth-century Puerto Rican revolutionary separatism. Albizu was
looking for a connection to the concept of a Puerto Rican fatherland (patria) in the
Antillean tradition of nineteenth-century leaders such as Ramn Emeterio Betances
and Eugenio Mara de Hostos. Puerto Rican nationalism was seen as part of a larger
purpose: a pan-Hispanic Caribbean and Latin American nationalism.
Albizus nationalism had an explicit Latin American content and orientation. For him
Puerto Ricos ties to Latin American countries had to be emphasized: We are linked as
a chain to those indomitable peoples, whose example we must imitate (Torres 1975: 28).9
In the interview he gave in 1927 to the magazine Los Quijotes he clearly spelled out the
Latin American and antiimperialist context of Puerto Rican nationalism: Our painful
situation under the Empire of the United States is the situation that North America
pretends to impose on all our fellow peoples of the continent. Our cause is the continental
cause. In Albizus view Puerto Rico and the other Antilles constitute the battlefield
between Yankee imperialism and iberoamericanism (Torres 1975: 45).10 In 1933 Albizu
defined the goals of his movement directly in relationship to Latin America: ...
nationalism postulates four beautiful principles: the independence of Puerto Rico,
the Antillean Confederation, the Panamerican Union and the hegemony of Iberoamerican
peoples, for our honour before posterity (Albizu Campos [1933] 197b5: 337).11
[ 38 ]

Albizu applauds the crossing and mixing of cultures and races, not as a celebration
of diversity but as a celebration of a special type of unity that arises out from the
blurring of differences. This viewpoint is typical of Latin American ideologies of
mestizaje. According to Albizu: We are a people predestined in history because
Puerto Rico is the first nation in the world where the unity of the spirit takes shape
together with the biological unity of the body (Albizu Campos [1933] 1975b: 324).12
In Puerto Rico all this mixing was restoring man to his pristine originality (Albizu
Campos [1933] 1975b: 324).13 Albizus concept of the Puerto Rican nation can demand
a political commitment but does not exclude anyone because of ethnic or racial origin.
According to Albizu Puerto Ricans are all the friends of the independence of Puerto
Rico (Torres 1975: 275).14 Albizu preferred to use the word race with cultural and not
with biological connotations. For us race has nothing to do with biology .Race is
the perpetuity of virtues and characteristic institutions. We are distinguished by our
culture, by our valor, by our nobility, by our catholic sense of civilization (Albizu
Campos [1935] 1981: 118).15 Let us not forget that catholic means universal.
In sharp contrast to Garvey, in Albizu the racial question becomes subsumed in
his concept of a transracial fatherland. For Albizu the Puerto Rican nation was an
ethnonation, multiracial but ethnically homogeneous. In this Albizu was working
within a typical Hispanic Caribbean context. A similar concept of the nation can
be found in Cuba, defended up to this moment (Guanche Prez 1996). For Albizu
the Puerto Rican nation is a living reality produced by a long historical process.
This process has created an ethnically based nation in spite of racial differences, and this
is a nation related in kinship to neighboring nations of the same cultural background.
Both Garvey and Albizu were explicit in their egocentric point of view, even if
Garvey propelled a racial definition of the nation and Albizu defended a nonracial
understanding of nationality. Garvey told his followers: Your entire obsession must
be to see things from the Negros point of view (Garvey [1927] 1987: 193). In his essay
African Fundamentalism, he stated: There is no humanity before that which starts
with yourself. Charity begins at home. First to thyself be true, and thou canst not then
be false to any man (Garvey [1925a] 1987: 5). Albizu had a similar point of view.

Cadets Cadetes de la Repblica lined up to receive Pedro Albiuzu Campos upon his return to Puerto Rico, December 15, 1947.
Photographer unknown. The Ruth M. Reynolds Papers, Archives of the Puerto Rican Diaspora. Centro de Estudios Puertorrique os,
Hunter College, CUNY. Reprinted, by permission, from Centro de Estudios Puertorrique os.

[ 39 ]

Carrion(v8).qxd

6/6/05

7:37 PM

Page 40

Albizu rejected false universalisms that try to deny oppressed people their right to be
themselves. In Albizus words: I am not one of those that say: I am not nationalistic
because I am an internationalist, because I love humanity. And that man who says that
he loves humanity is killing his Puerto Rican brother. Charity begins at home. The one
who loves his own people, loves his neighbor. The one who does not love his own people,
does not love his neighbor. He is an hypocrite (Albizu Campos [1933] 1975b: 332).16
The egocentric positions defended by Garvey and Albizu were with the purpose of
assuming a posture of defiance in the presence of the powerful, but their stance did not
necessarily demonstrate the exclusionary tendencies that are usually assumed in denouncements of nationalism. According to Albizu nationalism was profession of world
brotherhood and afirmation of ones own dignity (Albizu Campos [1933] 1975b: 337).17
Instead of being an advocate of black consciousness Albizu has been described as
a representative of Hispanophilia. For some critics of Albizu this seems to be a type
of disease made up of nostalgic longing for the days of Spanish colonialism with all
the particular features of past class and race relations. There is no doubt that Albizu
was fond of calling Spain the Mother Country (madre patria). But he was also
instrumental in the exaltation of nineteenth-century political struggles against
Spain. And if his class and racial background is taken into consideration, it seems
close to absurd to present Albizu as representative of the old Spanish colonial ruling
class in Puerto Rico. His defense and idealization of Spain can be more suitably
presented as the creation of an anticolonial counter myth to combat the American
imperialist discourse that sought to present Puerto Rico as a barren and savage land
devoid of culture, claiming that the island should be grateful to America, which was
unselfishly bringing progress and liberty to a people who had only known
backwardness and obscurity. In contrast to this myth, Albizu would create a counter
myth in which Puerto Rico had all the necessary ingredients to be a free country
because it was the inheritor of a civilization older than the American invaders,
who were the descendants of Anglo-Saxon barbarians. In the Albizuist nationalist
discourse the Puerto Rican nation could be culturally connected via Spain to
ancient Greece and Rome.
Respect and pride were very important issues for both Garvey and Albizu.
It was one of Garveys goals that the Negro should never more be disrespected by men
(Garvey [1922] 1986: 100). The purpose of UNIAs work was inspiring an unfortunate
race with pride in self and with the determination of going ahead in the creation of
those ideals that will lift them to the unprejudiced company of races and nations
(Garvey [1925b] 1986: 256). In his inagural speech as president of the Nationalist Party
in 1930, Albizu stated the need for a more positive outlook concerning Puerto Ricos
possibility of being free. Colonialism sought to undermine the Puerto Rican peoples will
to endure. Against colonialist tendencies Albizu argued that an optimist philosophy
should inform all our actions. Rains over our people a pessimist doctrine that
demoralizes and disheartens it and that we must cut short in every occasion. We have
to raise the public spirit of Puerto Rico to the conviction that it can become whatever
it desires, and that it is capable of achieving independence if that is its will. According to
Albizu the Puerto Rican people needed a moral infusion to make it possible for it
to believe again in its destiny and in its possibilities (Torres 1975: 87).18
To foment pride and will to power among historically discriminated and colonized
peoples might require a certain degree of historical revisionism. Items propitious to the
development of self-reliance and confidence in a colonized and/or oppressed population
must be rescued from past events that can be linked to the subject people. Albizu has been

criticized because for his praise of Spain as the Mother Country. He clearly exaggerated
when he said that Spain was one of the few countries in the world that had always been
civilized, or when he emphasized the links between Puerto Rican culture and GrecoLatin civilization (Albizu Campos [1933] 1975b: 325).19 But these exaggerations had a
purpose, namely, to counteract the U.S. imperial discourse about Puerto Rican
backwardness and uncultured ways that was used to argue unfitness for self-rule.
Albizu also exaggerated the positive aspects of the social and economic conditions
of Puerto Rico before the American invasion. In 1930, in an article published in
El Mundo commenting on a report published by the Brookings Institute about the
economy of Puerto Rico, Albizu said: The legion of proprietors that we had in 1898 must
rise again (Albizu Campos [1930] 1975a: 103).20 This exaggeration has the kernel of
truth in that there is a clear reference to the processes of concentration and centralization
of property that took place under the aegis of U.S. capital after 1898. This exaggeration
also had the purpose of combating U.S. sinister designs and the impact of Yankee
propaganda. According to the American colonial myth, Puerto Ricos history had
begun in 1898, and the invasion had been an act of enlightenment for the Puerto
Rican masses, who were then able to enjoy U.S. philantropy and humanism.
Historical revisionism was even more important for Marcus Garvey. Looking back
through time, Garvey saw a drama in which blacks were the original civilized people but
whose civilization had been stolen from them, and to make things worse, whites had been
treacherously able to make blacks forget their glorious past. According to Garveys
historical account the white man owes all he possess today to the Negro. The Negro gave
him science and art and literature and everything that is dear to him today (Garvey [1919]
1996: 243). Garvey was a pioneer in the academic fashion that today goes by the name
Afrocentrism. According to this viewpoint many historical figures are reinterpreted as
black. Jesus Christ is, for example, seen in a new light as someone who had much of
Negro blood in him (Garvey [1927] 1987: 196). Garveys historical inventiveness sought to
redress centuries of mental and cultural oppression that lay like a hard crust on top of all
the history of economic exploitation and political oppression that blacks had had to suffer
for so long. The inventiveness of his approach to historical data was a conscious process.
Garvey made a recommendation to his followers: Even if you cannot prove it always
claim that the Negro was great (Garvey [1927] 1987: 194). According to Garvey:
Things that may not be true can be made if you repeat them long enough, therefore,
always repeat statements that will give your race a status and an advantage. That is how
the white man has built up his system of superiority (Garvey [1927] 1987: 194). In what
could be perhaps interpreted as postmodernism avant la lettre Garvey told his followers
that you must interpret anthropology to suit yourself... (Garvey [1927] 1987: 195).
Albizu, for his part, had a particular theory of the Puerto Rican nation. According
to Rodrguez Vzquez (1998), this included a discourse in which liberal and romantic
paradigms of the nation where intermixed. The Puerto Rican nation is a political
cultural entity whose indispensable material base is based upon population and
territory. From this context an integrated cultural community has formed, manifesting
a political will since the early nineteenth century in spite of all the tribulations of
colonialism. For Albizu a cultural nation has existed for a long time in Puerto Rico,
and this cultural nation necessarily seeks its own nation-state. Confirming the existence
of the nation there is an ethical dimension in the historical process that consists of the
sacrifice of our political heroes. The nation that seeks its own autonomous existence
is defined in traditional civic-territorial fashion, in which ethnicity transcends race and
includes not only inheritance but also a desire to belong.

[ 40 ]

[ 41 ]

Carrion(v8).qxd

6/6/05

7:37 PM

Page 42

The legacy

Finally, what are the similarities and differences between Garvey and Albizu
in terms of their legacy?
In todays Jamaica Garvey belongs to all. Garvey is part of the Jamaican
foundational myth. But in the process Garvey has to a large extent become
domesticated. His figure comes to serve the elites that have defended a territorial
definition of the nation with the slogan out of many, one people. Garvey, the
historical figure, was in favor of a racial definition of the national identity and was
in conflict with the Jamaican mulatto elites on more than one occasion. But Garveys
role in the foundational myth is much milder; his doctrines are in conflict with the
status quo in the same way that the antiestablishment qualities of the Rastafarian
movement have eroded because its commercialization has affected believers from
all kinds of racial backgrounds. The radical edge of Garveyism has reappeared in such
figures as Malcolm X and Walter Rodney and still survives in the United States in the
Afro-centric academic current and in the political-religious organization that goes
by the name Nation of Islam and that is directed by Louis Farrakhan. But black
nationalism had intrinsic weaknesses that were recognized and transcended by both
Malcolm X and Walter Rodney even if they were both eventually killed because of
their political ideals (Dupuy 1997).
The domestication of Albizu in Puerto Rico is still only very partial. It is true that
Albizu figures in the T-Shirts that many young people wear in Puerto Rico and that he
also appears in items sold in handicraft fairs. This represents a change in public
acceptance from what was typical not so long ago. A change that goes with the
decriminalization of the pro-independence movement occurred in 1987, when the
Supreme Court in Puerto Rico declared illegal the making and maintenance of lists of
subversives based solely on ideological predilection. But Albizus domestication remains
very partial, as can be attested by the reaction of some political sectors in Puerto Rico
to the decision of New York Puerto Rican political leaders to dedicate the June 2000
Puerto Rican Day Parade to Pedro Albizu Campos and the island of Vieques in its
struggle with the U.S. Navy. This decision was denounced in extremely alarmist fashion
by Carlos Romero Barcel, then Resident Commissioner of Puerto Rico in Washington
D.C. (Romero is the non-voting representative of Puerto Rico in the U.S. House of
Representatives. He belongs to the New Progressive Party, the pro-U.S. statehood party
in Puerto Rico.) For Romero, Albizu is not only a violent terrorist but also a fascist.
The accusation against Albizu of being a fascist has its long history (Ferrao 1990) but a
more adequate and objective description would place Albizu within a group of other
Latin American radical nationalists (Taller 1991). The point is that in the colony that is
Puerto Rico, in spite of the substantiality of its democratic facade, Albizu still represents
a forceful challenge to the very fabric of the colonial political order.
With less insistence Garvey has also been accused of being fascist (Gilroy 2000).
Garvey once said that Mussolini had stolen his ideas, speaking well about fascism
in his way. But in spite of it all Garvey was not a fascist. The historical phenomenon
that was fascism was directly related to factors completely alien to the Jamaican
and American black peoples reality. Factors such as the devastations of a world war,
the frustrated ambitions of world powers, and particularities about European class
struggles separate European conditions from American ones. Albizu shared with
Garvey a vitriolic rhetoric against the established order and a certain panache
in his political reclamations. Albizu like Garvey was a master of political theater,
protocol and wardrobe being essential aspects of it.
[ 42 ]

Albizu and Garvey were also leaders accused of authoritarianism and messianic
qualities. But all of these details do not sum up into a convincing argument about
the fascism of one or the other. In the case of Albizu his characterization as fascist
is denied by the experience of being defended in the 1930s by the American leftist
congressman Vito Marcantonio and the fact that in 1943, when Albizu left the Atlanta
jail, his train ticket to New York City was paid by the American Communist Party.
In the Caribbean, things are not always what they seem to be. The Caribbean attractions
shown in tourist brochures fail to include by design those features that are a testimony to
a history of oppression and racial and class struggles. Garvey and Albizu both represent
sincere and radical popular expressions of opposition to colonialism. Their differences are
illustrations of Caribbean diversity in the process of formation of national identities.
N OT E S

1 ... conocemos la fuerza de la plutocracia norteamericana y como explota a sus

propios conciudadanos en el continente.
2 ... no tiene igualdad, ni libertad, ni fraternidad entre los suyos.... El pueblo yanqui es
un pueblo esclavo.
3 ... la comprensin de lo que es la nacionalidad. No slo es la unidad tnica, cultural y
religiosa de la sociedad humana, sino tambin la comunidad de sus intereses materiales
sobre un territorio determinado, en el cual sus propios hijos sean dueos y seores.
4 Desde el mismo momento de la invasin norteamericana, se sentaron las bases
legales para nuestro despojo colectivo.
5 ... la necesidad de abandonar, de desterrar la mala costumbre de la splica y peticin;
que Puerto Rico debe exigir lo que por derecho le corresponde, le pertenece.
6 Una nacin como la norteamericana ... no tiene tiempo para atender a hombres
sumisos y serviles.
7 Es necesario plantear valientemente nuestras relaciones frente a Estados Unidos con
la actitud valiente y decidida que requiere el caso.
8 ... no hay margen para una actitud fraternal y solidaria con los enemigos de la patria.
9 ... formamos una cadena con esos pueblos indomitos, cuyo ejemplo debemos imitar.
10 Nuestra situacin dolorosa bajo el Imperio de Estados Unidos es la situacin que
pretende norteamerica imponer a todos los pueblos hermanos nuestros del continente.
Nuestra causa es la causa continental. ... Puerto Rico y las otras antillas constituyen el
campo de batalla entre el imperialismo yanqui y el iberoamericanismo.
11 ... el nacionalismo postula cuatro hermosos principios: la independencia de Puerto
Rico, la Confederacin Antillana, la unin panamericana y la hegemona de los pueblos
iberoamericanos para honra de nosotros todos ante la posteridad.
12 Nosotros somos un pueblo predestinado en la historia, por que Puerto Rico es la
primera nacin en el mundo donde se forma la unidad del espritu con la unidad biolgica
del cuerpo.
13 [PR]... viene formando tambin la unidad racial en el sentido biolgico y viene
restaurando al hombre a su prstina originalidad.
14 Son puertorriqueos todos los amigos de la independencia de Puerto Rico.
15 Para nosotros la raza nada tiene que ver con la biologa. ... Raza es una perpetuidad
de virtudes y de instituciones caractersticas. Nos distinguimos por nuestra cultura, por
nuestro valor, por nuestra hidalgua, por nuestro sentido catlico de la civilizacin.
16 No soy de los que dicen: No soy nacionalista por que soy internacionalista, por que
quiero a la humanidad. Y ese hombre que dice que quiere a la humanidad, est matando
a su hermano puertorriqueo. La caridad empieza por casa. El que quiera a los suyos,
quiere al vecino. El que no quiere a los suyos, no quiere al vecino. Es un hipcrita.

[ 43 ]

Carrion(v8).qxd

6/6/05

7:37 PM

Page 44

17 El nacionalismo es ctedra de hermandad mundial y es afirmacin de propia dignidad.

18 Una filosofa optimista debe informar todas nuestras actuaciones. Llueve sobre
nuestro pueblo una doctrina pesimista que lo desmoraliza y lo acobarda y que
debemos atajar en todos los momentos. Hay que levantar el espritu pblico de
Puerto Rico y decirle que puede llegar a ser lo que quiera y conquistar su
independencia si as lo desea su voluntad. Estamos en plena bancarrota cvica y es
menester que llevemos una infusin moral a nuestro pueblo para que vuelva a creer en
su destino y en sus posibilidades.
19 ... recordemos a la madre patria, Espaa, y Espaa, seores, es una de las pocas
naciones que siempre ha sido civilizada ... la barbarie nunca domino a Espaa ... Nuestra
civilizacin grecolatina viene de Grecia, Italia y Espaa, de las tres pennsulas madres que
tiene la civilizacin de Occidente.
20 Debe surgir de nuevo la legin de propietarios que tenamos en 1898.

______. [1924] 1986. Speech Delivered at Madison Square Garden, New York, Sunday,
March 16. In The Philosophy and Opinions of Marcus Garvey: or Africa for the Africans,
Vols. I & II, Amy Jacques Garvey, 11823. Dover, MA: The Majority Press.
______. [1925a] 1987. African Fundamentalism. In Marcus Garvey. Life and Lessons: A
Centennial Companion to the Marcus Garvey and UNIA Papers, eds. Robert A. Hill
and Barbara Blair, 125. Berkeley: University of California Press.
______. [1925b] 1986. Appeal to the Conscience of the Black Race to See Itself. In The
Philosophy and Opinions of Marcus Garvey: or Africa for the Africans, Vols. I & II, Amy
Jacques Garvey, 226. Dover, MA: The Majority Press.
______. [1927] 1987. Lessons from the School of African Philosophy. In Marcus Garvey. Life
and Lessons: A Centennial Companion to the Marcus Garvey and UNIA Papers, eds.
Robert A. Hill and Barbara Blair, 181352. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Gilroy, Paul. 2000. Black Fascism. Transition 81/82 9(12): 7091.

REFERENCES

Albizu Campos, Pedro. [1930] 1975a. Independencia econmica. In Pedro Albizu Campos
Obras Escogidas, 1923 1936. Tomo I, comp. J. Benjamn Torres, 11164. San Juan:
Editorial Jelofe.
______. [1930] 1975a. Comentarios del Presidente del Partido Nacionalista al margen del
informe rendido por el Instituto Brookings. In Pedro Albizu Campos Obras Escogidas,
1923 1936. Tomo I, comp. J. Benjamn Torres, 98103. San Juan: Editorial Jelofe.
______. [1933] 1975b. Discurso del Da de la Raza. In Antolog a del pensamiento
puertorrique o 1900 1970 . Tomo I, comp. Eugenio Fernndez Mndez, 32138.
Ro Piedras: Editorial de la Universidad de Puerto Rico.
______. [1935] 1981. Concepto de la raza. In Pedro Albizu Campos Obras Escogidas,
1923 1936. Tomo II, comp. J. Benjamn Torres, 1189. San Juan: Editorial Jelofe.
Dupuy, Alex. 1997. Race and Class in the Post Colonial Caribbean: The Views of Walter
Rodney. Latin American Perspectives 23(2): 10729.
Ferrao, Luis A. 1990. Pedro Albizu Campos y el nacionalismo puertorrique o. San Juan:
Editorial Cultural.
Garrow, David J. 1986. Bearing the Cross: Martin Luther King, Jr., and the Southern Christian
Leadership Conference. New York: Morrow.
Garvey, Marcus. [1919] 1996. Address at Newport News. In Classical Black Nationalism:
From the American Revolution to Marcus Garvey, ed. William Jeremiah Moses,
24150. New York: New York University Press.
______. [1921a] 1995. Speech by Marcus Garvey, Liberty Hall, New York, Sept. 7. In The Marcus
Garvey and Universal Negro Improvement Association Papers. Vol. IX, Africa for the
Africans, 19191922, ed. Robert A. Hill, 18596.Berkeley: University of California Press.
______. [1921b] 1995. Opening Convention Speech. In The Marcus Garvey and Universal
Negro Improvement Association Papers. Vol. IX, Africa for the Africans, 1919 1922, ed.
Robert A. Hill, 12938. Berkeley: University of California Press.
______. [1922] 1986. The Principles of the Universal Negro Improvement Association. In
The Philosophy and Opinions of Marcus Garvey: or Africa for the Africans, Vols. I & II,
ed. Amy Jacques Garvey, 93100. Dover, MA: The Majority Press.
______. [1923] 1986. The Negros Greatest Enemy.In The Philosophy and Opinions of Marcus
Garvey: or Africa for the Africans, Vols. I & II, ed. Amy Jacques Garvey, 12434.
Dover, MA: The Majority Press.

[ 44 ]

Guanche Prez, Jess. 1996. Etnicidad y racialidad en la Cuba actual. Temas (La Habana)
7(JulySeptember): 517.
Guevara, Ernesto Che. 1967. Obra revolucionaria. Mxico: Ediciones Era.
Hoetink, H. 1971. Caribbean Race Relations: A Study of Two Variants. New York: Oxford
University Press.
James, Winston. 1998. Holding Aloft the Banner of Ethiopia: Caribbean Radicalism in Early
Twentieth-Century America. London & New York: Verso.
Knight, Franklin W. 1990. The Caribbean: The Genesis of a Fragmented Nationalism. Second
edition. New York: Oxford University Press.
Martin, Tony. 1983. Marcus Garvey, Hero: A First Biography. Dover, MA: The Majority Press.
Mrner, Magnus. 1967. Race Mixture in the History of Latin America. Boston: Little &
Brown and Company.
Moses, Wilson Jeremiah. 1978. The Golden Age of Black Nationalism, 1850 1925. New York:
Oxford University Press.
______, ed. 1996. Classical Black Nationalism: From the American Revolution to Marcus
Garvey. New York: New York University Press.
Ortiz, Fernando. 1953. Mart y las razas. La Habana: Comisin Nacional Organizadora de
los Actos y Ediciones del Centenario y del Monumento Mart.
Rodrguez Vzquez, Jos J. 1998. El nacionalismo radical en la fase de maniobra: Pedro
Albizu Campos y el mito de la nacin perfecta. Op. Cit. 10: 2560.
Rosado, Marisa. 1991. Las llamas de la aurora: acercamiento a una biograf a de Pedro Albizu
Campos. San Juan: n.p.
Taller de Formacin Poltica. 1991. Pedro Albizu Campos: Conservador, fascista o
revolucionario? Comentarios al libro de Luis A. Ferrao, Pedro Albizu Campos y el
nacionalismo puertorrique o . Ro Piedras: Taller de Formacin Poltica.
Torres, J. Benjamn, comp. 1975. Pedro Albizu Campos
San Juan: Editorial Jelofe.

Obras Escogidas, 1923 1936. Tomo I.

Stein, Judith. 1986. The World of Marcus Garvey: Race and Class in Modern Society. Baton
Rouge and London: Louisiana State University Press.
Van Deburg, William L., ed. 1997. Modern Black Nationalism: From Marcus Garvey to Louis
Farrakhan. New York: New York University Press.

[ 45 ]