Cristobal R., quoting me, writes:
In a message dated 4/7/2006 4:51:56 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
But Humala's political background is of extreme ultra-nationalism and
racialism
Comment: In a continent submitted to systematic pillage by Spanish and
Anglo-Saxon powers why would it be a case of alarm that a popular movement
adopts a strong nationalist stand? In a society in which one of the
standard tools of domination was that of racial devaluation and
humiliation of the indigenous people (actually it still goes on) why would
it be wrong to show indigenous racial pride? And what is the definition of
"ultra-nationalism" here? To oppose the IMF? Your arguments sound too
Euro-centric
Thanks to Cristobal for the feedback which is so needed to bring out
issues. In case I was not emphatic enough I will remind Pen-lers that I
urged "great reserve" towards Humala's personal rise, not "alarm". A small
but, IMO, critical difference since I don't see how anyone can tell at this
point where Humala may be going, although there are reasons to be dubious.
I believe Cristobal rightly points out that national and ethnic pride *can*
be forces for positive social change, and at times have been and are being
a positive force today. But the long history of "nationalist pride" in
Latin America certainly has another side - beginning with the defeat of
Bolivar right through the "philosophy" of Pinochet. Many petty nationalist
wars are strewn in between (including Peru's ongoing conflicts and wars
with Chile and Ecuador). Perhaps Cristobal has evidence that Humala will
be associated with the more positive side? -- but I am aware of none and
there is much evidence that, up to very very recently, he was a fanatic
devotee of his family's movement which represents the negative side.
It is telling that Chavez named his movement after Bolivar who sought to
unite Latin Americans. The movement that Humala was associated with calls
itself Ethno-Cacerismo, named after a General in the war against Chile
(where Peru lost its southern provinces). It is an emblem of the
revanchist movement against Chile, who demand reconquest of these provinces
which is a major preoccupation of ultra-nationalists especially in southern
Peru (ultra-nationalists from northern Peru carry on more about
Ecuador). The base of the Humala family's movement is southern Peru
(Arequipa, the Humala family's home province of
Ayacucho). (http://www.etnocaceristas.galeon.com/ )
Andean ethnic pride, in its current political form, has had a shorter
history - emerging in Peru since the disaster of neo-liberalism and the
bloody dead end of Sendero (whose political base was among those with an
indigenous ethnic background). As Cristobal points out it *can* be a force
supporting positive social change (as in Bolivia and somewhat
Ecuador). But we have already seen another side in Peru where it has
simply been used to blow smoke in support of neo-liberalism. The current
President, Toledo, made ethnic pride practically his only campaign
point. This even started under the previous President Fujimori who tried
to present his Japanese heritage as merging with Andean Indians. But one
should point out that the party that Humala was associated with did not
simply stand for ethnic pride -- it had an elaborate and eccentric
racialist philosophy (4 races, one inferior (black), one needing to be put
apart (white), two that must now rule their territory (Asian and Andean)
and then the wider world.
Again, I stress: we know where Humala has been and it is unpleasant. We
don't know where he is going. (In this case no one can know). Hence:
"great reserve"
You also bring the case that accusations against Humala have been brought
up recently and that:
"The charges are only now being investigated..." This is a very naive
statement. Of course they have been produced only after Humala took a
lead in the campaign.It is a typical smear campaign of the type a neo-con
would take pride.
Cristobal raises a fair point: these may be last minute smear charges. On
the other hand, there is some reason to take the charges seriously. I
imagine Pen-lers are well aware of the pervasive human rights violations
routinely permitted the Army during the war against Sendero. In 1992,
Humala was the Captain in charge of a small base in a jungle district where
it is well documented the Army committed atrocities, allegedly with the
personal presence of a Captain using the code name "El Capitan
Carlos". Humala and his supporters do not deny that the atrocities
happenned but maintain that he is not that Captain and never used that code
name. However,family members of the victims have identified Humala from
photos and Humala's own brother (not the estranged brother running in the
election), a fellow officer, maintains that he did use that code name (but
knows nothing about the operations at the time). Humala has refused to
provide details about his actions at the time. (see for example School of
the America's Watch - Humala is an SOA "alumnus" -
http://www.soaw.org/new/newswire_detail.php?id=1051 drawing on an IPS report)
At the very least one can point out that atrocities took place at the small
military base under Humala's direct and personal command (only whether he
was personally present when people were shot and tortured is in
dispute). One can also point out that the Peruvian officer corps committed
massive atrocities, particularly against indigenous villagers, entirely
comparable to Guatemala, etc. All officers were aware of these atrocities
at the time (as were the Peruvian public, the US government, human rights
organizations, etc), certainly by 1992. At no time did he object and he
was an active and loyal participant in the overall military machinery.
Finally you say:
"It is not known what he stands for and he has had no real political
experience." This statement may be due to your lack of homework on the
subject since even an European organization like Open Democracy has
written a couple of pieces on Humala's programs. Or maybe what you say
comes from an Eurocentric tendency to deny residence in the left to those
who do not argue their causes in terms of the "law of value" or the
validity of the transformation problem in the Andean mountains.By the way,
in terms of nationalism and racial pride, both Chavez' and Morales'
movements differ absolutely in nothing from Humala's.
Cristobal Senior de Ruiz
Yes, I am aware of Open Democracy (PoliSci Dept of U. Brit C) and their
electoral coverage and that there have been many other sources of
information about Humala's Presidential campaign. I hope it is understood
that the issue at hand is NOT the relatively recent statements made during
a political campaign (many, not all, of which have been progressive, as I
pointed out). Rather the question is what will happen once he is elected
and how should "we" (don't ask!) be positioning ourselves vis-a-vis Humala.
We can NOT really speak of Humala's "movement" -- never mind compare it
with Chavez or Morales (I assume Cristobal is not speaking of his family's
fringe movement which he says he has left). That is really the
point. (And says a lot about the limits placed on Peruvian electoral
politics under neo-liberalism, just like in many other "developing" countries.)
We are in a position of possibly supporting or being associated with an
individual (relatively unknown and untested) not a social movement and we
are reduced to guessing based on 2 things:
- Humala's Presidential Campaign of a few months which is hardly
the same thing. Even in the campaign there is not really even a party
(never mind a "movement"). He is running as the candidate of a personal
vehicle created by him a few months ago (the Peruvian Nationalist Party
http://www.partidonacionalistaperuano.com ) and the empty vehicle of a
small neo-liberal party that ran Perez de Cuellar for President (?!) (the
UPP http://www.partidoupp.org/ ). Governing with Parliament will be yet
another issue we haven't touched.
- Humala's personal past: i.e. his long association with a very
unsavory movement and his association with one of the worst massive human
rights abuses.
Hence..."great reserve".
[BTW, I find it useful to avoid personal references on Pen-l. One really
can't presume (and it doesn't advance the discussion or future action)
people's motives, background, or whether they "haven't done their
homework"...You never know :-) ]
Paul
