Week 12:

This week we saw how Latin American countries continued to be failed societies.

The drug phenomenon in Latin America is interesting because of the realism it embodies, it does not matter if it is the state or a guerrilla, the drug market corrupted everyone.

On the other side, this week we read about empowered women who as Rita said represent a different and latin american type of feminism, one were women look into political justice before gender dynamics.  “Madres” is not an isolated case. After decades of terror, women have been the ones who have been looking for democratic justice. We have been witnesses of hundreds of women who are looking for their children who were disappeared by the guerrilleros or the state, but we also saw women looking for justice for themselves.  I will like to use as an example the case of “the death of the Cabitos”. “Los Cabitos” was a military base that was used to torture and kill hundreds of pseudo terrorists during the 80’s. During four decades a group of Quechua speaker mothers have looked for justice for their sons and they have achieved it this past month. The importance of this achievement lies in significance of the journey of empowerment of non-spanish speakers quechua women. I would have said that due to experience and history this outcome looked impossible. However, this and the history of Argentina’s “mothers” shows as that women’s responsibility with their family and community triggers the redefinition  of Latin American political dynamics. Nonetheless, women’s political presence in Latin America is insufficient. An example of this are the thousands of women who were raped by militaries and women who were sterilized by government campaigns and are still fighting for justice and truth in a complicated society of failing democracy.

Analysis of  “Militares y Sendero Luminoso Frente al Sistema Democrático Peruano”

Unlike neighboring countries, Peru never started an official campaign of elimination or indigenous segregation. Therefore, in 1930 the indigenous people represented half of the population of the Andes. However, indigenous communities share a history of land expropriation, people exploitation and cultural exclusion from national politics. Throughout that year Peruvian political system and its economic model were restructured occasioning the institutionalization of the domestic model of a neoliberal oligarchy. Peruvian economy was seen regionally weak among South American countries. It depended on agriculture and the export of raw materials. In order to achieve a growth of export rate, the State allowed that the administration of the land continue to be feudal. The industrialization of Peruvian agriculture meant the aggravation of the socioeconomic and political state of a population that historically occupied the margins of society.

After the period of redefinition of the domestic politics which preceded the decade of 1940’s a migratory current began, people from rural areas immigrated to the capital where they experimented social ostracism and racism.  In Lima, indigenous immigration was controversial and seen as problematic. Indigenous people who were looking for a better quality of life did not adapt to the static frameworks of class hierarchy. Traditionally, the political and economic power have been centralized in Lima. However, the phenomenon of Sendero Luminoso revealed the dramatic shifts of power from democracies to military regimes during the 20th century weaken the oligarchy limeña and allowed to pursue and gain political power from rural areas. Sendero Luminoso did not relate to any political group not even to The Peruvian Communist Party, Patria Roja. The terrorist group proposes a “hegemonism without limits” advocating its ideology as the only repository of political truth. Its confrontation was frontal they aimed for the total destruction of the system, not “identifying anything as salvageable” in the old system. Sendero had the ability of dichotomize the powers of the State.

On the other side, the government’s response was political-military. Contrariwise, the military forces did not have an strategy to fulfill the task. Sendero Luminoso’s magnitude of power grew while the jurisdiction of the government in rural areas decreased and military forces traditional and repetitive tactics were ineffective but as violent and repressive as Sendero. This permitted the government to incur into “mechanisms of constitutional dictatorship”. The democratic opposition lost its voice during the times of anocrocy and was unable to restrict the institutional excesses. Human rights do not have any authority. The state of emergency interferes with social development, military forces breaking into zones of immigrants encourage the idea of “indigenous equal to terrorist”.

As Marcial Rubio Correa suggest gradually the terror became part of the daily life of every Peruvian. The political moment which gave origin to the emergence of Sendero Luminoso was rooted in decades of history.  The political fronts are dichotomized however there are many other important aspects such as the Peruvians denial of their cultural identity and the repercussion of traditional views of domestic politics which open a window to violence and terror.

Bibliography:

Rubio Correa, Marcial, ” Militares y Sendero Luminoso Frente al Sistema Democrático Peruano”, En estudios politicos, Madrid, 1986, N53

week 11

I will like to start saying that what happened in Peru was not a civil war, it was terrorism. Terrorism caused by different fronts, the state, the military forces, the narcotraficants, Shinning Path and MRTA. Civilians were trapped in the middle of this conflict but it was not their war. The moment in which the problem begins is controversial however I believe that is rooted in decades of history of indigenous segregation exploitation.

The problem with Peru is that we have not accepted our identity moreover we have built a class hierarchy which fundaments are last names and physical appearance. When Peru’s government redefined its frameworks based on neoliberalism. It continued to limit social and economic mobilization and the recognition of indigenous identity, subjecting the indigenous to exploitative relationships. At the same time, the new material social relations of the Lima bourgeoisie fed by neoliberalism and industrial globalization strengthen the intersubjective systems of ethnic-cultural hierarchy.

The result were initiatives such as Shinning Path and MRTA which aimed the total destruction of the system.

Populism and leadership

It is really interesting to read in Dawson’s document how populist leaders had taken advantage of technological resources in order to improve their political speech. Furthermore, it is fascinating to see how Latin American society’s strong political views were compatible with the leadership of such a charismatic woman as Eva Perón. When one analyzes the good in populism Eva Peron would be the entity who personifies these values. However, as the author suggest it is difficult to agree on the standards that define a populist leader. From here I will like to talk about two things.

First, the contradiction between the ways in which unitarism that oppose the Rosas Federal Regime and Peronism aimed a more modernize political distribution of power. Peronism can be seen by many as the more improved and modernized caudillaje however for others Peronism and its leaders have to be disconnected in order to understand the new socialist system that the movement proposed. On the other side, one of the most important principles of unitarism is the opposition to the caudillaje within federalism. I bring up unitarism because I believe many will agree that unitarism with its liberal ideals appears to be the better option in comparison with the oppression, little socioeconomic mobilization and lack of a global sociocultural development of federalism and caudillaje.  Until now we have seen how the government promotion of caudillaje was a method to gain control over masses without needing to understand the complexity of Latin America cultural dynamics. Therefore, how could the populism of Eva and her husband that is considered by many the new caudillaje be the better option and the aim of Argentina’s people?

Second, I will like to talk about the political speech in populism. The strategy that many Latin American populist leaders utilize is simple, they portray their persona as the entity who is ‘the people’ hence it is innate to he or she to know the solution for their needs.

“Let the enemies of the people, of Perón and the Fatherland come” and “Remain faithful to Perón as you’ve been until today, because this means being loyal to the Fatherland and loyal to yourselves”

 are fragments of Eva’s political speech that show how the populist political speech is used. Also, colonialism, caudillaje and many other political systems have harmed so deeply Latin American countries that have divided the population thus it has make it easier for populist leaders to move the larger group in order to oppose minorities and oligarchies.

“I know that God is with us because he is with the humble and despises the arrogance of the oligarchy.”

– Eva Perón 

 Could populism be considered a political ideology or it is just a political method? Does populist leaders follow the same principles of populism or does it adapt according to the needs of an individual?