More on Los Chinos Mambises

The China Cuba Commission Report, 1874 tells a different story. The Report, which consisted of the collected answers of Chinese laborers in Cuba about their lives and working conditions, says this in response to the question "Have Coolies aided rebels, and if so, under what circumstances-- where and how?":

The petition of Chang Luan （张銮）and thirty others states "the rebellion in Cuba is one of Spanish subjects against the Spanish government; many instances have occurred of planters, when joining the rebels, endeavoring to induce Chinese laborers to do likewise and of the latter, even at risk of death, refusing."

The reports are not necessarily contradictory. The China Cuba Commission admits that they could not reach the insurgent camps. What the two reports do bring up is the definition of valor. If Los Chinos Mambises, who fought against the Spanish government, served with sacrifice and valor, did the Chinese who refused possess less valor?

The definition of a movement defines one's actions in the moment. This reminds me of the 442nd and the No No Boys. The No No Boys were Japanese Americans who refused to fight for the US armed forces in World War II, even in the face of imprisonment. To them, it was unconscionable to fight for a country that imprisoned their families in a war against their relatives. To refuse to fight was to refuse colluding with a morally corrupt government. The 442nd was the all-Japanese regiment that became the most decorated in US history. For the 442nd, they were Americans, and they were determined to protect their families and their country as best they could, looking past injustices done to themselves to protect the greater good.

Is this a similar situation? Perhaps some Chinese, like the No No Boys, refused to support their masters, who oppressed them so cruelly. And other Chinese, los Chinos Mambises, recognized that they were now Cuban, and agreed to try and gain independence for their country.