According to Lewis in Afro-Uruguayan Literature, Afro-Uruguayan periodicals have historically taken one of two basic approaches to their societal concerns (Lewis 32). Some, like Nuestra Raza, “assumed a more aggressive posture to gain equality while others were less forceful” (32). An example of the latter would be Revista Uruguay, the publication for the Asociación Cultural y Social Uruguay (ACSU), one of the longest-lasting black social clubs in all of Latin America, which is still active today under the name Asociación Cultural y Social Uruguay Negro (ACSUN). Founded in 1941 at the beginning of the “golden years” with Uruguay’s expanding economy, and thus higher wages of Afro-Uruguayans who could support the society, ACSU represented Afro-Uruguayans seeking to become part of middle class society (Andrews 106). The founding members of ACSU “believed that they knew how to achieve that goal: through education, hard work, good manners, and unimpeachable morality” (106). The ACSU’s monthly publication, Revista Uruguay sought to impress the proper and formal rules of society on the Afro-Uruguayan population, from discussing proper behavior at dances to reporting discrimination to the authorities (106-7).

The goals and published works of Revista Uruguay differed greatly from those of Nuestra Raza. The editors of Revista Uruguay believed the problems and prejudices suffered by the Afro-Uruguayan population had been brought upon them by themselves, and made it clear that they did not believe racism was an issue in Uruguay, whereas Nuestra Raza focused greatly on the discrimination of Afro-Uruguayans (106-7). The first president of ACSU, Suárez Peña, stated in his 1956 interview with Marcha that “feelings of racial difference were widespread among white Uruguayans. Labeling these feelings as ‘discrimination,’ he described them as ‘natural,’ and not a problem for most Afro-Uruguayans…He drew a line, however, between ‘discrimination’ and ‘segregation,’” which as mentioned previously in our Racial Inequality section, was what the ACSU wanted to abolish (109).

During the dictatorship of the 1970s and 80s, many civil society organizations were shut down, however the ACSU managed to not only stay active, but also received a new building for their headquarters in 1974 (145). In the early 1980s, the ACSU and members of the Franciscan religious order formed a relationship. The friars were developing projects in Montevideo’s working class neighborhoods and believed the ACSU’s history of working with the Afro-Uruguayan community would make a good investment, even donating a house for a permanent ACSU headquarters in 1985 (145). According to Andrews, “this infusion of funding and property intensified internal conflicts that had been simmering with ACSU for some time” (145). The age disparity amongst the members of the ACSU meant there was also a great divide in education levels, as the older founding members may not have completed elementary school, while younger members had much higher levels of education (145). The younger members were unhappy with where the new funds were going within the organization, and by the lack of help the ACSU was offering to the poor. The older members in the organization “responded with angry orders to the young dissidents to keep their mouths shut and obey their elders” (146).

In 1988, after two years of in-fighting, a new organization, Mundo Afro, was formed by Romero Rodríguez and Beatriz Ramírez, who shared a more ‘international’ perspective on the issues of Afro-Uruguayans, and were joined by a group of other unhappy members who formally withdrew from the ACSU (146). It was decided that Mundo Afro would function as an umbrella for other Afro-Uruguayan organizations with more specific focuses, including a group for women started by Ramírez called Grupo de Apoyo a la Mujer Afrouruguaya (GAMA, Support Group for Afro-Uruguayan Women) (146-7). When the new Mundo Afro members left the ACSU, so too did the funding of the Franciscans and others who had funded and awarded grants to the ACSU, claiming the ACSU had not fulfilled the intended purposes of the money (147). In the 1990s, a lawsuit was brought against the ACSU over the use of a grant, and it lost its legal incorporation, leading it to later be reincorporated under its current name, Asociación Cultural y Social Uruguay Negro (ACSUN) (147).

Mundo Afro meanwhile, became, according to Andrews, “by far the most visible and influential of the Afro-Uruguayan social and civic groups” in the 1990s and early 2000s (148). There were three main issues Mundo Afro believed plagued the Afro-Uruguayan community: “(1) poverty; (2) the ‘invisibilization’ of black people in Uruguay, where society refused to acknowledge black contributions to national history and culture; and (3) racial discrimination and prejudice” (148). In Encyclopedia of Contemporary Latin American and Caribbean Cultures, Darién J. Davis states that Mundo Afro became “increasingly militant in its demands, calling for official recognition and for education and employment opportunities free from discrimination” (Davis “Black Movements”).

In Montevideo in 1994, Mundo Afro welcomed Afro-descendants from across the Americas at ‘The First Seminar on Racism and Xenophobia’ (Davis, “Pan-Africanism” 1488). Uruguayans young and old were present at the conference, along with participants from all over the Americas (1488). According to Minority Rights Group in No Longer Invisible, the conference in Montevideo “symbolized an important watershed in black consciousness within the region as delegates began to define, in words of the official agenda, a ‘Program for the Development of Black Latin America’” (1489). There were five commissions at the conference in which ideas and resolutions were discussed. The commissions were: Education, Culture, and Communication; Women and Society; International Cooperation and Alternative Development; Political Strategies; and Population, Human Rights, Youth, and the Elderly (1489). For further information about the activities of each commission, and the outcomes of the the commissions at the conference, please see the information for No Longer Invisible in our Bibliography.

It should be noted that Tomás Olivera Chirimini, a source we have used frequently throughout our research, was the cultural director of ACSUN, along with being a musician, artist, and researcher (Walker 30). Also please note that Dr. George Reid Andrews, one of the main sources we have used in our research, has relationships with both Chirimini and Romero Rodríguez of Mundo Afro. As he explains in the Acknowledgements portion of Blackness in a White Nation, it was at the urging of Rodríguez that he began his research on Afro-Uruguay, and his relationship with the Mundo Afro community is mentioned throughout the text.