| Ever since the imposition of a partial embargo on Cuba by the Eisenhower administration in 1960, more than one hundred organizations in the United States have been challenging the state on U.S. Cuba policy. Collectively, these organizations constitute a dynamic social movement which represents the crucible of a new contentious ferment triggered by an intriguing blend of international, national and sub-national impulses, ironically sparking intensified relations between the two nations, particularly in the post-Cold War era. Over time, the movement has invariably re-energized, reinvented, redefined and reconstituted itself to persistently reject and attempt to reform this state policy which restricts tourist, family, cultural and academic travel, limits remittances and prohibits free trade with Cuba.; This dissertation presents the first comprehensive analysis of the anti-embargo movement. It seeks to address the central research puzzle of why the movement has persisted in attempting to change U.S. Cuba policy when it has met with such limited success over time. Undertaking the analysis from the levels of both a single social movement and multiple interest groups, it describes and analyzes the network of organizations which constitute the movement. First, it recounts the story of the organizations from birth to the present: their history, goals, organizational structure, resources, size, leadership, strategies, tactics and activism. Second, it employs a social movements theoretical framework to explain the impulses prompting individuals to join the movement and the impetus accounting for its sustained activism over the last three decades.; Drawing on the popular resource mobilization literature, it contends that the rational, utilitarian model is inadequate to understand the multifarious attributes of the movement. Hence, it turns to alternative views on tactical frames, solidarity networks, co-option, social capital, commitment theory, moral incentives and psychological benefits for possible answers.; However, the resource mobilization perspective fails to capture the political impetus and the new contentious ferment sparked by the end of the Cold War in 1989. This necessitates encapsulating the discourse within the theoretical framework of political opportunity structures prompting an analysis of the systemic, national and sub-national impulses propelling increased collective action in the post-Cold War era. |
