That is what the valiant people of Sucre, Capital of Bolivia and possible future whole Capital of our Nation said to Evo Morales and his process of change. By now on, almost everybody reading this blog knows about last weekends despicable acts instigated by Evo Morales and his goons; not even the real ponchos rojos this time, but a few local puppets of the regime that though were protected enough by the marionettes in the army. Ohhh, how mistaken they were, and they paid the price for it. Off course, a small price taking in account that if things would have being the other way and this would have occurred in Achacachi, El Chapare or other maSSist stronghold, instead of shirtless people yelling the true against Evo we would had shitless citizens burn and hanged.
I waited some time to write about this because I wanted people to make his own mind, so I can write mine in peace and quiet. It is in deed despicable how the maSSist regime sacrifices their clue less squadristry in order to try gaining some ground from the international community, yelling to the four corners of the world, racism, racism! And I say in the international community because in the country no one, that is not a hard core adept to the regime’s racist ideology off course, believes in their words any more. Off course, we live in the country and are experiencing the whole picture and not just a couple of shots from internet.
What happened in Sucre had noting to do with racism, it had to do with fighting for ones freedom against a foreign invading their city; because Evo’s ideals, his barbarism, his hate, racism and violent ways are only part of the 1/3 off the country he is actually governing and only a small part of it, and had nothing to do with the ideals and thinking of the Sucrenses.
I have read and heard a lot of the regime’s lackeys screaming that Evo should use the military, or other forces, the reader don’t have to wander to much to understand what these zealots are referring to, because their beloved Evo and some of his SS cannot visit parts of the Country. As a matter of fact, in some areas they have no access at all and in 2/3 of the country their security isn’t ensure.
I tell too those cry babies, the maSSist are just harvesting what they had planted since the beginning of the XXI century! They have being the masters at teaching that to win they have to prevent the opposition to enter in their strongholds. Those, in the last presidential elections nobody from the opposition to the future maSSist regime was able to safely participate in political campaigns in places like El Chapare, El Alto, Achacachi, etc, etc. Today, Evo is receiving his own medicine provided by the social movements endorsing the “re change” within Bolivian politics; and since this is just the beginning of the cure, better be ready getting use to be vaccinated until extracted all the way to the Caribbean, where the disease originated.
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Saturday, May 17, 2008
Repercussions of the People’s Will
I let some time pass to allow my nation, as in their people, and the many foreign that believe my nation is somehow their nation, to comment on the latest political tsunami that hit the country, the convocation to a presidential/VP and Prefect revocation by the people trough a referendum.
Many repercussions and assumptions have populated newspapers and blogs alike, from the legality of the law, by the way; dose anybody knows the law’s number and where can one get a copy of it?; To the possible result scenarios during elections and in their aftermath.
Believes or not, the maSSist zealots are the ones more exited about the possible situation since they where being obliterated and dragged to the ground after their beating in the Santa Cruz autonomic referendum and because of the stupidity of Evo’s decrees prohibiting exportations and nationalizing private companies. From my point of view, this latest piece of legislation is enabling the regime to gasp for air, something that under the current circumstances in the country could be positive; since we all know that an encroached rat will turn and attack if there is no room to escape.
Among the most relevant comments incoming from the ma†ist side are the following.
Ø If Evo looses he will run for president again and win for sure because it will be him against several other from the opposition that will divide the votes among them. I will like to know, what gave them the idea a president in Bolivia can run for reelection?
Ø If the prefect looses, Evo will immediately change him (no female prefect right know) for a party member. Why not another prefect election, like is going to happen in Sucre? I will have to wait for the law’s text to measure this up.
The illegality or not of the referendum in this instance isn’t really relevant since it is being approved by both, the officialiSSm and the opposition and in addition there is no Constitutional Tribunal to define its constitutional legality; so I will set that possible discussion aside.
I am happily amazed by my country, it seams that after the agrarian revolution, the dark periods of military ruling and the recent and bloody periods of Social Sectors (SS) violence we have learned that is better to settle things in the urns instead of through full violent civil escalation which will mean a fraternal blood bath to achieve the same results.
A lot of questions are raised about loyalties and intentions of the congressmen that approved this law, specially from the autonomist region; I only have to tell them, it is the repercussion of our will through our democratic participation and victory in the autonomic referendum that this door to save Bolivia as a country has being opened.
I can only request for every Bolivian that wants to keep the country together and decentralized from the racist and neo fascist regime of Evo Morales and the mSSist to fully participate in these revocation referendum, from your homes, work, in the street and voting NO for the continuation of Evo and YES for the continuation of your prefect, any of them.
Many repercussions and assumptions have populated newspapers and blogs alike, from the legality of the law, by the way; dose anybody knows the law’s number and where can one get a copy of it?; To the possible result scenarios during elections and in their aftermath.
Believes or not, the maSSist zealots are the ones more exited about the possible situation since they where being obliterated and dragged to the ground after their beating in the Santa Cruz autonomic referendum and because of the stupidity of Evo’s decrees prohibiting exportations and nationalizing private companies. From my point of view, this latest piece of legislation is enabling the regime to gasp for air, something that under the current circumstances in the country could be positive; since we all know that an encroached rat will turn and attack if there is no room to escape.
Among the most relevant comments incoming from the ma†ist side are the following.
Ø If Evo looses he will run for president again and win for sure because it will be him against several other from the opposition that will divide the votes among them. I will like to know, what gave them the idea a president in Bolivia can run for reelection?
Ø If the prefect looses, Evo will immediately change him (no female prefect right know) for a party member. Why not another prefect election, like is going to happen in Sucre? I will have to wait for the law’s text to measure this up.
The illegality or not of the referendum in this instance isn’t really relevant since it is being approved by both, the officialiSSm and the opposition and in addition there is no Constitutional Tribunal to define its constitutional legality; so I will set that possible discussion aside.
I am happily amazed by my country, it seams that after the agrarian revolution, the dark periods of military ruling and the recent and bloody periods of Social Sectors (SS) violence we have learned that is better to settle things in the urns instead of through full violent civil escalation which will mean a fraternal blood bath to achieve the same results.
A lot of questions are raised about loyalties and intentions of the congressmen that approved this law, specially from the autonomist region; I only have to tell them, it is the repercussion of our will through our democratic participation and victory in the autonomic referendum that this door to save Bolivia as a country has being opened.
I can only request for every Bolivian that wants to keep the country together and decentralized from the racist and neo fascist regime of Evo Morales and the mSSist to fully participate in these revocation referendum, from your homes, work, in the street and voting NO for the continuation of Evo and YES for the continuation of your prefect, any of them.
Monday, May 05, 2008
Bolivian Democracy at is Best
Yesterday, May 4th of 2008, is going to pass to the annals of history as the date the Bolivian population legitimately started a counterrevolution in order to recuperate freedom of will and democracy. It all happened in the most diverse and multicultural city of the Country, Santa Cruz; and what took place was the greatest of victories coming from popular democratic elections since the days after the agrarian revolution. Only that this time, the counterrevolution was born and delivered without gunshots and civil warfare but among the rocks and dynamite from a racist anti democratic regime. Here an analysis of the situation:
All do the official results will be deliver in around 5 days, there is enough information from preliminary vote count at the ballots that clearly establish the Santa Cruz population have unmistakably and by a wide margin decided they want autonomy form the central government, leaded by the intransigent Evo Morales. At the moment there are two different results, one that says that the YES for the autonomic referendum was of 86% in favor and other that it says that the YES achieved 84.5%. Either result a devastating blow to the maSSist regime that under the same system won 54% of the votes in the last presidential elections and that had used that number trying to justify his archaic and racist policies.
Apart from the invaluable results that represents way more than the 2/3 (67%) votes accepted worldwide as the number where a proposition is said to be supported by both, the majority and the minority of the population. The fact that the priest from the Catholic church, the most important religious institution in the country and the ones Evo Morales requested for helping him to initiate talks with the opposition, also participated alongside most of the common population and several police officers and military personnel gives the Morales regime and the international community another hint to look this process in a different way. We should also rescued and congratulate de participation of accredited international observers from the Human Rights Foundation, The Latin American Union Party and the Daniels Hamant Foundation.
From the loosing side, the neo fascistic indigenous regime of Evo Morales, it is very important to rescue the fact that their leaders took very much in account the “early” numbers of this election, making a strong point that they know their claims of “illegality” have no sustainability until there is a Constitutional Tribunal up and running again in the country; institution that the regime itself destroyed to be able to pass their laws and regulations trough violence and violating the Bolivian constitution. The brutality showed by the maSSist zealots in some places of Santa Cruz, to prevent people from peacefully cast their votes is going to give the regime another negative evaluation worldwide, especially when the tapes of Morales, his Vice president and his closest cronies requesting to stop the referendum through violence are run again.
The regime’s strategy, evident by Morales press conference and in all maSSist comments in the blogosphere, has shifted to the fallacy of “interpreting” the possible votes of the people that did not assisted at the referendum, the early absenteeism numbers range from 25.5% to 39%. According to Morales and his cronies, all, absolutely all those that did not participated where going to vote against the autonomic proposition. Two things are going to backfire against the regime. First, people is going to replay to Morales that if taking in account the results of the referendum the way he wants to do it, he better renounce to the presidential seat since under those conditions he only got 42% of the electoral vote in the past presidential elections. The second thing that is going to backfire on the regime’s “interpretation” is that many votes were not delivered because they were violently denied of their human right of political participation by the maSSist hordes in some places where they were able to make significant numbers. In addition to this, Morales and the regime are taking in account as 39% of absenteeism as the ultimate true and not as probable data.
No matter how is this seen, the true is that the other governmental fallacy, that the Santa Cruz autonomy was the desired of 4 oligarchic families, was crushed by at least half a million people. Unless these four families are in the Guinness records for nativity breakthroughs, the regime, their allies and the international community better take a 90 degree change of posture before it is too late to spare the most beautiful country in the world from unnecessary bloodshed.
All do the official results will be deliver in around 5 days, there is enough information from preliminary vote count at the ballots that clearly establish the Santa Cruz population have unmistakably and by a wide margin decided they want autonomy form the central government, leaded by the intransigent Evo Morales. At the moment there are two different results, one that says that the YES for the autonomic referendum was of 86% in favor and other that it says that the YES achieved 84.5%. Either result a devastating blow to the maSSist regime that under the same system won 54% of the votes in the last presidential elections and that had used that number trying to justify his archaic and racist policies.
Apart from the invaluable results that represents way more than the 2/3 (67%) votes accepted worldwide as the number where a proposition is said to be supported by both, the majority and the minority of the population. The fact that the priest from the Catholic church, the most important religious institution in the country and the ones Evo Morales requested for helping him to initiate talks with the opposition, also participated alongside most of the common population and several police officers and military personnel gives the Morales regime and the international community another hint to look this process in a different way. We should also rescued and congratulate de participation of accredited international observers from the Human Rights Foundation, The Latin American Union Party and the Daniels Hamant Foundation.
From the loosing side, the neo fascistic indigenous regime of Evo Morales, it is very important to rescue the fact that their leaders took very much in account the “early” numbers of this election, making a strong point that they know their claims of “illegality” have no sustainability until there is a Constitutional Tribunal up and running again in the country; institution that the regime itself destroyed to be able to pass their laws and regulations trough violence and violating the Bolivian constitution. The brutality showed by the maSSist zealots in some places of Santa Cruz, to prevent people from peacefully cast their votes is going to give the regime another negative evaluation worldwide, especially when the tapes of Morales, his Vice president and his closest cronies requesting to stop the referendum through violence are run again.
The regime’s strategy, evident by Morales press conference and in all maSSist comments in the blogosphere, has shifted to the fallacy of “interpreting” the possible votes of the people that did not assisted at the referendum, the early absenteeism numbers range from 25.5% to 39%. According to Morales and his cronies, all, absolutely all those that did not participated where going to vote against the autonomic proposition. Two things are going to backfire against the regime. First, people is going to replay to Morales that if taking in account the results of the referendum the way he wants to do it, he better renounce to the presidential seat since under those conditions he only got 42% of the electoral vote in the past presidential elections. The second thing that is going to backfire on the regime’s “interpretation” is that many votes were not delivered because they were violently denied of their human right of political participation by the maSSist hordes in some places where they were able to make significant numbers. In addition to this, Morales and the regime are taking in account as 39% of absenteeism as the ultimate true and not as probable data.
No matter how is this seen, the true is that the other governmental fallacy, that the Santa Cruz autonomy was the desired of 4 oligarchic families, was crushed by at least half a million people. Unless these four families are in the Guinness records for nativity breakthroughs, the regime, their allies and the international community better take a 90 degree change of posture before it is too late to spare the most beautiful country in the world from unnecessary bloodshed.
Friday, May 02, 2008
The Ugly, the Bad and the Good
That will be today’s film title by an Italian film production wanting to portray Bolivia’s “wild west” political scenario; I explain myself.
The Ugly; comes from the economical stupidity and political anorexia, including a not so secret desire to spy and control the information of the freedom fighters opposing the totalitarian regime of Evo Morales. That is, the “nationalization” of Entel, Transredes, Chaco and CLHD; ENTEL, with Italian investors is the main telecommunications company in the country, the only one of today’s nationalized corporations that is not related to the hydrocarbon activity and the reason of its nationalization has to do more with the possibility to intervene phone calls, specially cell phones and to have access to censor internet, since ENTEL has about 90% of the internet connections of the Country.
The nationalization of the other 3 oil corporations is plain economic ignorance; the idea is for the government of Bolivia to “forcefully” buy the little percentage of the stock needed to acquire 51% or more from these companies at the buyer’s, the maSSist regime, settled price. I am pretty sure Microsoft and Yahoo are all ears about this “intellectual” proposition of the XXI century socialism, specially the former.
What is simply going to happen is that the offended international companies, with German, British and American interests will rightly put their own price to their Bolivian stock and demand for it to be paid. Once the issue is settled in international courts, you can forget about the IDH and the super habit, the money will be diverted strait from the gas sales to these companies bank accounts. It is simple, as a former US president could put it; it is the jurisdictional security stupid!
The Bad; comes from the fact the REPSOL, has decided to sell their 1.8% percentage to the government, alleging un understanding with the Morales regime but at the same time stating that their revenue from Bolivia was so insignificant within their company that it was easier to make money doing nothing that to spent time and resources on international arbitration.
The above and the previous only mean and end of international investment in hydrocarbons for the long run in the country, at least form the competent companies. I am pretty sure we will be hearing the maSSist zealots in YPFB saying that investors from China, Iran, Rusia and Venezuela will be coming; Great, there goes to the trash the first world industrial safety standards, the best environmental protection standards we aver had in the country and of course, state of the art quality controls ensuring economic sustainability. Way to go Evo the great indigenous king protector of mother earth and its inhabitants.
The Good; yes, believed or not there is a good thing about all this, t is a little obscure and there will be very little talk about it, perhaps is only going to happen in this post and that is it. But the socialistic intellectuals have come up with a, well, socialistic, idea that would work to improve equalitarian conditions among the workers within a capitalistic structure, improving upwards; yes I know, sounds impossible. That is the decree that come up with the other nationalization decrees stating that the executives of the companies that make more than US$ 4.440 a month wild have to contribute 10% of it, which will be distributed to the workers in the country that have a minimum retired pension.
It is of course, not a new idea, the rich tax deduction is widely used in the US and in Europe, the only innovation is where this founds will go. Hopefully this money will in deed go to those ex workers of different sectors with the minimum retired pension and not to the pocket of the typical maSSist collaborator or to the infamous “ghost” retired employees.
Socialistic policies like the above where the ones expected from this government, this is just one small idea among a sea of possibilities; that is “executing” government and I applaud it. I also hope that after the Santa Cruz referendum the maSSist regime realizes it is better to work over policies and decentralization instead of being constantly campaigning for a XXI century socialism that is an already smelling corpse.
The Ugly; comes from the economical stupidity and political anorexia, including a not so secret desire to spy and control the information of the freedom fighters opposing the totalitarian regime of Evo Morales. That is, the “nationalization” of Entel, Transredes, Chaco and CLHD; ENTEL, with Italian investors is the main telecommunications company in the country, the only one of today’s nationalized corporations that is not related to the hydrocarbon activity and the reason of its nationalization has to do more with the possibility to intervene phone calls, specially cell phones and to have access to censor internet, since ENTEL has about 90% of the internet connections of the Country.
The nationalization of the other 3 oil corporations is plain economic ignorance; the idea is for the government of Bolivia to “forcefully” buy the little percentage of the stock needed to acquire 51% or more from these companies at the buyer’s, the maSSist regime, settled price. I am pretty sure Microsoft and Yahoo are all ears about this “intellectual” proposition of the XXI century socialism, specially the former.
What is simply going to happen is that the offended international companies, with German, British and American interests will rightly put their own price to their Bolivian stock and demand for it to be paid. Once the issue is settled in international courts, you can forget about the IDH and the super habit, the money will be diverted strait from the gas sales to these companies bank accounts. It is simple, as a former US president could put it; it is the jurisdictional security stupid!
The Bad; comes from the fact the REPSOL, has decided to sell their 1.8% percentage to the government, alleging un understanding with the Morales regime but at the same time stating that their revenue from Bolivia was so insignificant within their company that it was easier to make money doing nothing that to spent time and resources on international arbitration.
The above and the previous only mean and end of international investment in hydrocarbons for the long run in the country, at least form the competent companies. I am pretty sure we will be hearing the maSSist zealots in YPFB saying that investors from China, Iran, Rusia and Venezuela will be coming; Great, there goes to the trash the first world industrial safety standards, the best environmental protection standards we aver had in the country and of course, state of the art quality controls ensuring economic sustainability. Way to go Evo the great indigenous king protector of mother earth and its inhabitants.
The Good; yes, believed or not there is a good thing about all this, t is a little obscure and there will be very little talk about it, perhaps is only going to happen in this post and that is it. But the socialistic intellectuals have come up with a, well, socialistic, idea that would work to improve equalitarian conditions among the workers within a capitalistic structure, improving upwards; yes I know, sounds impossible. That is the decree that come up with the other nationalization decrees stating that the executives of the companies that make more than US$ 4.440 a month wild have to contribute 10% of it, which will be distributed to the workers in the country that have a minimum retired pension.
It is of course, not a new idea, the rich tax deduction is widely used in the US and in Europe, the only innovation is where this founds will go. Hopefully this money will in deed go to those ex workers of different sectors with the minimum retired pension and not to the pocket of the typical maSSist collaborator or to the infamous “ghost” retired employees.
Socialistic policies like the above where the ones expected from this government, this is just one small idea among a sea of possibilities; that is “executing” government and I applaud it. I also hope that after the Santa Cruz referendum the maSSist regime realizes it is better to work over policies and decentralization instead of being constantly campaigning for a XXI century socialism that is an already smelling corpse.
La trampa del indigenismo
Por: Marcos Aguinis
http://www.lostiempos.com/noticias/30-04-08/30_04_08_pv1.php
El encuentro internacional al que concurro ha sido organizado por la Fundación Libertad y Desarrollo en celebración de sus fecundos quince años de existencia.
Me habían encomendado disecar un tema perturbador de nuestro continente: el indigenismo. Concurrían expertos de Canadá, España, Estados Unidos, China, Perú, Venezuela y Bolivia para tratar ése y otros ígneos asuntos de nuestro tiempo.
Sin más rodeos, paso a sintetizar lo que allí expuse.
Mis primeras palabras consistieron en recordar que los indígenas son considerados, con justicia, los primeros dueños de esta tierra, cuyas culturas y protagonismo fueron reprimidos sin misericordia. Con diferencias de un país a otro, en muchos aún forman comunidades importantes y en otras han alcanzado un mestizaje intenso. El problema actual consiste en ayudarlos a encontrar un camino de verdadera reparación y ascenso, o permitir que se los desvíe hacia la trampa de zanjones regresivos y totalitarios, como sucede ahora en Bolivia. Es muy fácil confundir. Y en ese punto centré mi advertencia.
En efecto, su reivindicación ya es importante. No sólo hay una revisión de la historia, sino proyectos que incluyen utopía y epopeya. Los indígenas han pasado a convertirse en las grandes víctimas del continente, lo cual no es ajeno a la verdad. Pero el énfasis distorsiona, simplifica e idealiza su pasado. Más grave aún: pretende convertir el pasado en modelo. Eso no está bien, porque es reaccionario y letal. Como ejemplo, bastaría reflexionar sobre la exigencia de Sendero Luminoso a los campesinos peruanos con el fin de "liberarse" de la opresión europea: cultivar sólo productos anteriores a la Conquista, tales como papa, quinua y maíz. En cambio, descartar las venenosas importaciones llamadas trigo, cebada, centeno, avena, arroz, caña de azúcar y vid; no criar animales malditos, como la vaca, la oveja, el cerdo, la cabra, el conejo y las aves de corral. Para no dejar de ser coherente --agrego yo-- habría que abandonar la rueda, el caballo, el buey, el hierro, el vidrio y el arado. Buen futuro, ¿no?
El líder indigenista Felipe Quispe ha dicho que si una parte de la sociedad usa ojotas y otra zapatos, que todos usen ojotas. Es decir, igualar para abajo, porque confunde justicia con miseria.
En la mitificación de numerosos historiadores se han llegado a considerar los levantamientos indígenas de la Colonia como antecedentes de la gesta emancipadora.
Pero lo que deseaban no era la independencia ni asemejarse a las repúblicas modernas, sino retornar al tiempo incaico o incluso preincaico, que no fue un paraíso, sino un eterno campo de batalla con masacres, guerras de dominio e incontables sacrificios humanos.
La rebelión aymara de Túpac Katarí, en 1782, por ejemplo, no sólo agredió a los criollos, sino a los mestizos y a los quechuas.
Esos levantamientos, aunque heroicos, no significaron un proyecto superador, sino regresivo. Y tuvo el final de todos los movimientos regresivos, como los esclavos en la Antigüedad o los campesinos en la Edad Media.
Podemos conmovernos con su heroísmo, pero no considerarlos un paradigma. Los indígenas estaban aterrorizados ante el nuevo orden, que, entre otras cosas, tendía a dejar atrás la etapa primitiva del colectivismo.
Los actuales "bolivarianos" deberían recordar que Simón Bolívar firmó, con su puño y letra, en el año 1824, un decreto que establecía la propiedad privada de la tierra. Acertó en considerar la propiedad comunal un resto arcaico, un modo de producción infecundo. Esto fue trágicamente comprobado por la dictadura izquierdista del general Velazco Alvarado, quien intentó resucitarlas en la década de los años 70: produjo hambre y empobrecimiento acelerado. Ahora se intenta probarlo otra vez.
La idealización contaminó incluso a marxistas como Carlos Astrada, quien no tuvo náuseas en utilizar conceptos científicos nazis sobre el vínculo de los pueblos con la tierra y la sangre. En esa línea, posteriores movimientos populistas y tercermundistas usaron a los indios para construir sus artificiales teorías sobre una identidad nacional opuesta al centralismo europeo y a Occidente (este último, odiado por los reaccionarios con patente de progresistas que se fastidian ante las aperturas de la modernidad, la democracia genuina, los derechos individuales y otras abyecciones).
La revolución bolchevique, incapaz de construir un socialismo próspero y democrático, había impuesto concepciones estatistas que permitían el control de las masas y su impúdica manipulación "en nombre" del proletariado. De ahí que sus seguidores y simpatizantes hayan celebrado la civilización incaica como un antecedente del socialismo moderno (¡!). No les importaba la maciza estratificación de clases ni la opresión que padecían los de abajo. Tampoco los derechos humanos, porque para estos fascistas de izquierda, el Estado merece todo y cada hombre no es más que una molécula anónima. Aunque hubo maravillas en las civilizaciones precolombinas, tenían un atraso de cuatro mil años respecto de la Europa del Renacimiento. Esto no justifica, por supuesto, la tábula rasa que se efectuó con sus riquezas y tradiciones. Es otro tema.
Resulta curioso que al indigenismo regresivo lo empezaran a fogonear blancos descendientes de europeos, sin advertir que adoptaban el camino racista que pretendían combatir. En los 70, el boliviano Fausto Reinaga, inspirado en el "black power", preconizó la "revolución india" y las luchas entre blancos e indios; la indianidad debía servir para la toma del poder y limpiar el continente de las etnias invasoras (en la Argentina no quedaría casi nadie). El peruano Guillermo Carnero Hoke afirmó que "nuestra razón de ser desde el fondo de los siglos es la razón colectivista". "El pensamiento de nuestros abuelos del Tawantisuyo era justo, moral, científico y cósmico, es decir insuperable" (¡!).
Expresiones como ésas parecían minoritarias. Pero el Primer Congreso de Movimientos Indios celebrado en el Perú, en 1980, proclamó que los indígenas eran la única alternativa redentora, no sólo de ellos mismos, sino de la humanidad. Pasaban a ocupar el trono que el marxismo había atribuido al proletariado, con un condimento horrible: suponer, como los nazis, que las razas puras son mejores.
El problema indígena no es de raza ni de cultura: es social. Los indígenas no tienen que retroceder a un pasado inviable ni limitarse a la economía de subsistencia. Pueden y deben cultivar sus tradiciones, su acervo lingüístico y sus leyendas, por supuesto, pero sin aislarse ni repudiar los beneficios de la modernidad. Si resisten la modernidad se condenan a permanecer como un sector inferior, aislado, débil y carente de real protagonismo. Por el contrario, tienen derecho a dejar de ser las comunidades que dan lástima, resentidas y marginales. Tienen derecho a concurrir a buenas escuelas y universidades, participar en los partidos políticos y asociaciones profesionales. El indio Benito Juárez, que llegó a presidente de México, no se dejó intimidar por quienes lo consideraron un traidor.
Para tomar perspectiva, deberían discutirse las experiencias de la comunidad negra en los Estados Unidos, por ejemplo. Salió de la esclavitud legal, pero continuó sometida a una severa discriminación. Surgieron reacciones como el black power y manifestaciones racistas invertidas, entre las que adquirieron renombre las del primer Malcolm X. A la vez, hubo intentos de vencer los prejuicios mediante el intercambio de estudiantes que provenían de barrios blancos y barrios negros, lo cual no dio frutos.
Luego, avanzó la propuesta fraternal de Martin Luther King, que terminó por conquistar a la mayoría de la nación. No alcanzaba, empero, y se sancionó la "discriminación positiva" o affirmative action, mediante la cual se impulsó el ingreso de negros en los centros de estudio y su mejor posicionamiento en el trabajo.
Ahora ya existe una amplia clase media negra con infinidad de profesionales, jueces, diplomáticos, académicos y empresarios. Dos sucesivos secretarios de Estado fueron negros y la actual, además, es una mujer. La affirmative action se ha imitado en muchos países para elevar la cuota de presencia femenina en la política, por ejemplo. Pero considero que este recurso sólo debe utilizarse para cambiar la tendencia, no para durar eternamente. De lo contrario emponzoñaría la igualdad de derechos que debe primar en una verdadera democracia.
En resumen, impulsar el indigenismo hacia el pasado es una trampa que sólo beneficia a demagogos, ignorantes y populistas. Lleva hacia conflictos ingobernables, derramamiento de sangre y un aumento de la pobreza. Habría que reflexionar, en cambio, sobre medidas racionales, como la affirmative action, para que todos los indígenas de América latina, sin perder sus raíces, tengan por fin cómodo acceso al progreso cultural, económico y social.
El autor es escritor y filósofo argentino. Artículo fue publicado en La Nación de Buenos Aires.
http://www.lostiempos.com/noticias/30-04-08/30_04_08_pv1.php
El encuentro internacional al que concurro ha sido organizado por la Fundación Libertad y Desarrollo en celebración de sus fecundos quince años de existencia.
Me habían encomendado disecar un tema perturbador de nuestro continente: el indigenismo. Concurrían expertos de Canadá, España, Estados Unidos, China, Perú, Venezuela y Bolivia para tratar ése y otros ígneos asuntos de nuestro tiempo.
Sin más rodeos, paso a sintetizar lo que allí expuse.
Mis primeras palabras consistieron en recordar que los indígenas son considerados, con justicia, los primeros dueños de esta tierra, cuyas culturas y protagonismo fueron reprimidos sin misericordia. Con diferencias de un país a otro, en muchos aún forman comunidades importantes y en otras han alcanzado un mestizaje intenso. El problema actual consiste en ayudarlos a encontrar un camino de verdadera reparación y ascenso, o permitir que se los desvíe hacia la trampa de zanjones regresivos y totalitarios, como sucede ahora en Bolivia. Es muy fácil confundir. Y en ese punto centré mi advertencia.
En efecto, su reivindicación ya es importante. No sólo hay una revisión de la historia, sino proyectos que incluyen utopía y epopeya. Los indígenas han pasado a convertirse en las grandes víctimas del continente, lo cual no es ajeno a la verdad. Pero el énfasis distorsiona, simplifica e idealiza su pasado. Más grave aún: pretende convertir el pasado en modelo. Eso no está bien, porque es reaccionario y letal. Como ejemplo, bastaría reflexionar sobre la exigencia de Sendero Luminoso a los campesinos peruanos con el fin de "liberarse" de la opresión europea: cultivar sólo productos anteriores a la Conquista, tales como papa, quinua y maíz. En cambio, descartar las venenosas importaciones llamadas trigo, cebada, centeno, avena, arroz, caña de azúcar y vid; no criar animales malditos, como la vaca, la oveja, el cerdo, la cabra, el conejo y las aves de corral. Para no dejar de ser coherente --agrego yo-- habría que abandonar la rueda, el caballo, el buey, el hierro, el vidrio y el arado. Buen futuro, ¿no?
El líder indigenista Felipe Quispe ha dicho que si una parte de la sociedad usa ojotas y otra zapatos, que todos usen ojotas. Es decir, igualar para abajo, porque confunde justicia con miseria.
En la mitificación de numerosos historiadores se han llegado a considerar los levantamientos indígenas de la Colonia como antecedentes de la gesta emancipadora.
Pero lo que deseaban no era la independencia ni asemejarse a las repúblicas modernas, sino retornar al tiempo incaico o incluso preincaico, que no fue un paraíso, sino un eterno campo de batalla con masacres, guerras de dominio e incontables sacrificios humanos.
La rebelión aymara de Túpac Katarí, en 1782, por ejemplo, no sólo agredió a los criollos, sino a los mestizos y a los quechuas.
Esos levantamientos, aunque heroicos, no significaron un proyecto superador, sino regresivo. Y tuvo el final de todos los movimientos regresivos, como los esclavos en la Antigüedad o los campesinos en la Edad Media.
Podemos conmovernos con su heroísmo, pero no considerarlos un paradigma. Los indígenas estaban aterrorizados ante el nuevo orden, que, entre otras cosas, tendía a dejar atrás la etapa primitiva del colectivismo.
Los actuales "bolivarianos" deberían recordar que Simón Bolívar firmó, con su puño y letra, en el año 1824, un decreto que establecía la propiedad privada de la tierra. Acertó en considerar la propiedad comunal un resto arcaico, un modo de producción infecundo. Esto fue trágicamente comprobado por la dictadura izquierdista del general Velazco Alvarado, quien intentó resucitarlas en la década de los años 70: produjo hambre y empobrecimiento acelerado. Ahora se intenta probarlo otra vez.
La idealización contaminó incluso a marxistas como Carlos Astrada, quien no tuvo náuseas en utilizar conceptos científicos nazis sobre el vínculo de los pueblos con la tierra y la sangre. En esa línea, posteriores movimientos populistas y tercermundistas usaron a los indios para construir sus artificiales teorías sobre una identidad nacional opuesta al centralismo europeo y a Occidente (este último, odiado por los reaccionarios con patente de progresistas que se fastidian ante las aperturas de la modernidad, la democracia genuina, los derechos individuales y otras abyecciones).
La revolución bolchevique, incapaz de construir un socialismo próspero y democrático, había impuesto concepciones estatistas que permitían el control de las masas y su impúdica manipulación "en nombre" del proletariado. De ahí que sus seguidores y simpatizantes hayan celebrado la civilización incaica como un antecedente del socialismo moderno (¡!). No les importaba la maciza estratificación de clases ni la opresión que padecían los de abajo. Tampoco los derechos humanos, porque para estos fascistas de izquierda, el Estado merece todo y cada hombre no es más que una molécula anónima. Aunque hubo maravillas en las civilizaciones precolombinas, tenían un atraso de cuatro mil años respecto de la Europa del Renacimiento. Esto no justifica, por supuesto, la tábula rasa que se efectuó con sus riquezas y tradiciones. Es otro tema.
Resulta curioso que al indigenismo regresivo lo empezaran a fogonear blancos descendientes de europeos, sin advertir que adoptaban el camino racista que pretendían combatir. En los 70, el boliviano Fausto Reinaga, inspirado en el "black power", preconizó la "revolución india" y las luchas entre blancos e indios; la indianidad debía servir para la toma del poder y limpiar el continente de las etnias invasoras (en la Argentina no quedaría casi nadie). El peruano Guillermo Carnero Hoke afirmó que "nuestra razón de ser desde el fondo de los siglos es la razón colectivista". "El pensamiento de nuestros abuelos del Tawantisuyo era justo, moral, científico y cósmico, es decir insuperable" (¡!).
Expresiones como ésas parecían minoritarias. Pero el Primer Congreso de Movimientos Indios celebrado en el Perú, en 1980, proclamó que los indígenas eran la única alternativa redentora, no sólo de ellos mismos, sino de la humanidad. Pasaban a ocupar el trono que el marxismo había atribuido al proletariado, con un condimento horrible: suponer, como los nazis, que las razas puras son mejores.
El problema indígena no es de raza ni de cultura: es social. Los indígenas no tienen que retroceder a un pasado inviable ni limitarse a la economía de subsistencia. Pueden y deben cultivar sus tradiciones, su acervo lingüístico y sus leyendas, por supuesto, pero sin aislarse ni repudiar los beneficios de la modernidad. Si resisten la modernidad se condenan a permanecer como un sector inferior, aislado, débil y carente de real protagonismo. Por el contrario, tienen derecho a dejar de ser las comunidades que dan lástima, resentidas y marginales. Tienen derecho a concurrir a buenas escuelas y universidades, participar en los partidos políticos y asociaciones profesionales. El indio Benito Juárez, que llegó a presidente de México, no se dejó intimidar por quienes lo consideraron un traidor.
Para tomar perspectiva, deberían discutirse las experiencias de la comunidad negra en los Estados Unidos, por ejemplo. Salió de la esclavitud legal, pero continuó sometida a una severa discriminación. Surgieron reacciones como el black power y manifestaciones racistas invertidas, entre las que adquirieron renombre las del primer Malcolm X. A la vez, hubo intentos de vencer los prejuicios mediante el intercambio de estudiantes que provenían de barrios blancos y barrios negros, lo cual no dio frutos.
Luego, avanzó la propuesta fraternal de Martin Luther King, que terminó por conquistar a la mayoría de la nación. No alcanzaba, empero, y se sancionó la "discriminación positiva" o affirmative action, mediante la cual se impulsó el ingreso de negros en los centros de estudio y su mejor posicionamiento en el trabajo.
Ahora ya existe una amplia clase media negra con infinidad de profesionales, jueces, diplomáticos, académicos y empresarios. Dos sucesivos secretarios de Estado fueron negros y la actual, además, es una mujer. La affirmative action se ha imitado en muchos países para elevar la cuota de presencia femenina en la política, por ejemplo. Pero considero que este recurso sólo debe utilizarse para cambiar la tendencia, no para durar eternamente. De lo contrario emponzoñaría la igualdad de derechos que debe primar en una verdadera democracia.
En resumen, impulsar el indigenismo hacia el pasado es una trampa que sólo beneficia a demagogos, ignorantes y populistas. Lleva hacia conflictos ingobernables, derramamiento de sangre y un aumento de la pobreza. Habría que reflexionar, en cambio, sobre medidas racionales, como la affirmative action, para que todos los indígenas de América latina, sin perder sus raíces, tengan por fin cómodo acceso al progreso cultural, económico y social.
El autor es escritor y filósofo argentino. Artículo fue publicado en La Nación de Buenos Aires.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
