sufrimos tanto, los seres humanos.
on me dit de ne pas trop réfléchir et analyser les choses, qu'on doit s'amuser dans la vie. mais en même temps on me dit de ne pas être trop décontracté, qu'il y a tant d'injustice et oppression que ce serait une illusion croire qu'il s'agit seulement de s'amuser.
y entonces qué hacer?
Yo me imagino ser parte de una colectiva compuesta de varios grupos colectivos. Pero a la vez me imagino ser un individuo también, independiente y dependiente de todo lo que me rodea. En voyant que nous nous situons dans un réseau tellement complexe, c'est évident que l'être humain doit être fort émotionelle, mentale, et physiquement pour pouvoir vivre avec aussi bien que pour s'aimer.
en fin, sufrimos tanto pero no nos contamos de lo que pasa y no nos podemos ayudar en la manera que debemos.
Friday, December 5, 2008
Monday, September 15, 2008
On September 15: Central American 'Independence'?
On September 15, 1821, the Captaincy General (an administrative unit in colonial Spanish America) of Guatemala successfully became independent from Spain. This Captaincy General includes what are now Guatemala, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Honduras and Costa Rica (not including Belize or Panama), as well as the now-Mexican state of Chiapas. These now-countries (except for the now-state of Chiapas) formed the Federal Republic of Central America in 1823 but dissolved in 1838. It was a failed project of democracy; but in my eyes I see it as a failed project of nationalism subverted by, ironically, more local nationalism.
Before exploring nationalism, then, I’d like to ask you: what exactly is to be celebrated during these so-called “independence” days all across the Americas—from the United States down to Chile? When we talk about Spanish American independences, we talk about how the colonies broke from imperial Spain. True, there were and continue to be marginalized peoples in what is now Latin America; but we are conflating “Latin America” with ‘marginalized’ and ‘oppressed’ when it is certainly much more nuanced than that. It is true that even the children of Spanish immigrants were treated as less than equals (so essentially discriminated against, ESPECIALLY if they were poor) in colonial Spanish America; so it was this resentment and sense of “Americanness” that drove the break from Europe.
But we cannot forget that independence movements were by and large—and this is a generalization, I’ll admit—for and by Creoles (children or descendants of Spaniards and sometimes other Europeans, a.k.a. ‘white people’) and consequently, the dominant power shifted from Europeans to ‘white people’ born in this continent who are now called, for example, Mexicans, Cubans, Peruvians, and Guatemalans. I will not discount the rebellions on the part of Black, Indigenous and other oppressed peoples against the status quo (even during the battles for independence) in order to achieve freedom. I will not discount that sometimes all peoples in colonial Spanish America fought in solidarity against the Spanish. But the outcome of this is, as I have said, a transference of power from one form of whiteness (the Spanish as the European) to another (the descendants of the Spanish or other Europeans, and sometimes even mestizos—in short, a gradation of racial whiteness).
But what does it mean to be Mexican, Cuban, Peruvian or Guatemalan? We are erroneously led to deem these nationalities as races by both the countries’ (racist) nationalist agendas and the United States’ racialization of Latin Americans in general. Countries such as Mexico and Guatemala publicly proclaim ‘el Indio’ or ‘the Indian’ as the symbol of the nation; but it’s merely rhetoric as it does not account for 1.) the continual oppression against Indigenous peoples and explicit/implicit denigration of Indigenous culture, values, and even appearance due to 2). White supremacy that persists across the Americas, from Canada down to Chile. In Latin America, one drop of ‘white blood’ does not make you white, but it makes you whiter. It is this that causes many mestizos and mulattos to denigrate people who do not exhibit ‘modern’ (i.e. white/western/Spanish) ways of dress, speech, cultural values, and even APPEARANCE. In short, nationalism has worked to reduce difference and variations (as nationalism does) through policy, institutions, military suppression and the public imagination in order to ensure that the society functions as the status quo needs it to.
Marginalized peoples in Latin America have not yet been liberated. So tell me: whose independence was it?
So forgive me for my hypocrisy since you'll probably see me sporting 'El Salvador' attire. Lets start to seriously challenge our assumptions.
Before exploring nationalism, then, I’d like to ask you: what exactly is to be celebrated during these so-called “independence” days all across the Americas—from the United States down to Chile? When we talk about Spanish American independences, we talk about how the colonies broke from imperial Spain. True, there were and continue to be marginalized peoples in what is now Latin America; but we are conflating “Latin America” with ‘marginalized’ and ‘oppressed’ when it is certainly much more nuanced than that. It is true that even the children of Spanish immigrants were treated as less than equals (so essentially discriminated against, ESPECIALLY if they were poor) in colonial Spanish America; so it was this resentment and sense of “Americanness” that drove the break from Europe.
But we cannot forget that independence movements were by and large—and this is a generalization, I’ll admit—for and by Creoles (children or descendants of Spaniards and sometimes other Europeans, a.k.a. ‘white people’) and consequently, the dominant power shifted from Europeans to ‘white people’ born in this continent who are now called, for example, Mexicans, Cubans, Peruvians, and Guatemalans. I will not discount the rebellions on the part of Black, Indigenous and other oppressed peoples against the status quo (even during the battles for independence) in order to achieve freedom. I will not discount that sometimes all peoples in colonial Spanish America fought in solidarity against the Spanish. But the outcome of this is, as I have said, a transference of power from one form of whiteness (the Spanish as the European) to another (the descendants of the Spanish or other Europeans, and sometimes even mestizos—in short, a gradation of racial whiteness).
But what does it mean to be Mexican, Cuban, Peruvian or Guatemalan? We are erroneously led to deem these nationalities as races by both the countries’ (racist) nationalist agendas and the United States’ racialization of Latin Americans in general. Countries such as Mexico and Guatemala publicly proclaim ‘el Indio’ or ‘the Indian’ as the symbol of the nation; but it’s merely rhetoric as it does not account for 1.) the continual oppression against Indigenous peoples and explicit/implicit denigration of Indigenous culture, values, and even appearance due to 2). White supremacy that persists across the Americas, from Canada down to Chile. In Latin America, one drop of ‘white blood’ does not make you white, but it makes you whiter. It is this that causes many mestizos and mulattos to denigrate people who do not exhibit ‘modern’ (i.e. white/western/Spanish) ways of dress, speech, cultural values, and even APPEARANCE. In short, nationalism has worked to reduce difference and variations (as nationalism does) through policy, institutions, military suppression and the public imagination in order to ensure that the society functions as the status quo needs it to.
Marginalized peoples in Latin America have not yet been liberated. So tell me: whose independence was it?
So forgive me for my hypocrisy since you'll probably see me sporting 'El Salvador' attire. Lets start to seriously challenge our assumptions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)