In Stern’s description of how the indigenous peoples of the Andes adapted economically to Spanish colonialism, I found it very interesting how a small portion of that indigenous population managed to accumulate property, gain wealth, and explore business endeavors in an economic environment that was stacked entirely against them. At first, I was taken aback by this information; why would the Spanish colonizers have allowed any form of freedom or movement within a population that they had so harshly subjugated? It seemed counter-intuitive to their primary goal of dominating the land and, in turn, destroying indigenous culture. However, I took a moment to consider what it meant for the broader indigenous community of the Andes to have certain members absorbed into the earliest days of capitalism. In fact, it was indeed destroying the indigenous population as effectively as any form of conquest could. As Stern notes, the imposition of a capitalist system by the Spanish completely uprooted the economic relations and strategies employed by the indigenous peoples. At the forefront of this uprooting was the fanatical individualism that the capitalist system perpetuates. While I do not claim to comprehensively understand the economic strategies of indigenous Andeans, it has been noted on multiple occasions that they adopted a far more community-oriented approach. Jon has mentioned this himself multiple times regarding us paying him back; reciprocal economic relations that rely completely on other community members. So when certain indigenous people began to participate in the capitalist economy (beyond solely being laborers, who of course did not get to accumulate anything), the community-oriented forms of trade and accumulation became obsolete. This realization ties back to one of my earlier blog posts, where I mentioned my dismay at the vicious intent within every single aspect of colonialism. I think the reason I have found these somewhat trivial realizations (colonialism is obviously evil) worth noting is that I’ve been spending quite a bit of time considering how we can preserve, make room for, and promote indigeneity within the current economic, political, and social climate. Is it even possible to reconcile indigeneity with this framework? Even that question feels convoluted, as the label ‘indigeneity’ only exists because of that colonial other. Is it perhaps too late? Has too much damage already been done? These are rather heavy questions that I imagine may be partially answered as we dive further into the course. Lastly, I don’t wish to convey a solely tragic and depressing view of contemporary indigenous life; indigenous peoples all over the world experience joy, love, and peace. I suppose I’m grasping at an idyllic view of indigeneity; that life in indigenous cultures has been inherently worse since contact, and the best way to preserve indigeneity is to somehow re-create conditions of pre-contact life. As I’m typing that out, I’m not remotely sure if there’s any truth to that idea at all. Perhaps, given my positionality as a white dude, this is all just me being a part of the problem as well? It’s very complex!!
Categories
Capitalism & Peru’s Indigeneity
3 replies on “Capitalism & Peru’s Indigeneity”
Hi Julian it’s Annie (from the couch in the room). I think your reflection upon the development of an Indigenous elite is super interesting. I too was rather perplexed but I find it interesting that our reasons for them take very different shaped. For me, I was instantly reminded of current neoliberal movements of inclusion as a way of signalling to minority groups that ‘they too, can participate in capitalist structures’. However, your statement about the absorption as a community-oriented approach is just as likely of a statement and one that I would not have considered. I wonder if these reflections come from perhaps different acadmemic backgrounds? Thanks for sharing!
Hi Julian,
I will take pretty much any opportunity to rant about capitalism so seeing your title was like a magpie seeing a shiny object but, outside of that motivator, I really enjoyed your post! The way you unpack the insidious nature of capitalism to destroy culture from the outside-in got me thinking about the idea of the model minority myth. This myth is not Indigenous-focused, but through your examination of the effectiveness of the economy of stripping culture, I think the competitive cut-throat nature applies. Like colonial societies are excellent at manipulating people to go against each other by dangling a carrot on a stick that is always just out of reach and punishing them for never reaching it. It’s exploitative, violent and highly individualistic to separate people from their communities. All that to say I appreciate your take and it got me thinking more. Thank you!!
Although it may seem strange to some, the Hispanic Monarchy had no intention of having the indigenous people absolutely subjugated. You have to remember that ultimately they were also Christians, part of Catholicism. In fact, it was part of the rulers’ interest to have prosperous economies and subjects in the best possible conditions. It is true: this does not deny that there was exploitation. But the values were different from ours in Early Modernity.