Imperialism And Resistance

Both books provide an extended history and context of indigenous struggles, both have an anthropological bent to them, but do try to authentically represent the people who are being talked about… important reading especially for educators, and anyone interested in getting a deeper understanding of Bolivia, Ecuador and the Andean region.

New Languages of the State: Indigenous Resurgence and the Politics of Knowledge in Bolivia

During the mid-1990s, a bilingual intercultural education initiative was launched to promote the introduction of indigenous languages alongside Spanish in public elementary schools in Bolivia’s indigenous regions. Bret Gustafson spent fourteen years studying and working in southeastern Bolivia with the Guarani, who were at the vanguard of the movement for bilingual education. Drawing on his collaborative work with indigenous organizations and bilingual-education activists as well as more traditional ethnographic research, Gustafson traces two decades of indigenous resurgence and education politics in Bolivia, from the 1980s through the election of Evo Morales in 2005. Bilingual education was a component of education reform linked to foreign-aid development mandates, and foreign aid workers figure in New Languages of the State, as do teachers and their unions, transnational intellectual networks, and assertive indigenous political and intellectual movements across the Andes.

Gustafson shows that bilingual education is an issue that extends far beyond the classroom. Public schools are at the center of a broader battle over territory, power, and knowledge as indigenous movements across Latin America actively defend their languages and knowledge systems. In attempting to decolonize nation-states, the indigenous movements are challenging deep-rooted colonial racism and neoliberal reforms intended to mold public education to serve the market. Meanwhile, market reformers nominally embrace cultural pluralism while implementing political and economic policies that exacerbate inequality. Juxtaposing Guarani life, language, and activism with intimate portraits of reform politics among academics, bureaucrats, and others in and beyond La Paz, Gustafson illuminates the issues, strategic dilemmas, and imperfect alliances behind bilingual intercultural education.

Indians and Leftists in the Making of Ecuador’s Modern Indigenous Movements

In June 1990, Indigenous peoples shocked Ecuadorian elites with a powerful uprising that paralyzed the country for a week. Militants insisted that the government address Indigenous demands for land ownership, education, and economic development. This uprising was a milestone in the history of Ecuador’s social justice movements, and it inspired popular organizing efforts across Latin America. While the insurrection seemed to come out of nowhere, Marc Becker demonstrates that it emerged out of years of organizing and developing strategies to advance Indigenous rights. In this richly documented account, he chronicles a long history of Indigenous political activism in Ecuador, from the creation of the first local agricultural syndicates in the 1920s through the galvanizing protests of 1990. In so doing, he reveals the central role of women in Indigenous movements and the history of productive collaborations between rural Indigenous activists and urban leftist intellectuals.

Becker explains how rural laborers and urban activists worked together in Ecuador, merging ethnic and class-based struggles for social justice. Socialists were often the first to defend Indigenous languages, cultures, and social organizations. They introduced rural activists to new tactics, including demonstrations and strikes. Drawing on leftist influences, Indigenous peoples became adept at reacting to immediate, local forms of exploitation while at the same time addressing broader underlying structural inequities. Through an examination of strike activity in the 1930s, the establishment of a national-level Ecuadorian Federation of Indians in 1944, and agitation for agrarian reform in the 1960s, Becker shows that the history of Indigenous mobilizations in Ecuador is longer and deeper than many contemporary observers have recognized.

The water debate and protests continued in Ecuador, as indigenous groups blockaded some streets in Quito, however there are also other groups who have expressed support for the Correa government.

Meanwhile the general strike call in Bolivia did not garner much support, with some in the Morales administration suggesting a US hand behind the protests:

The Bolivian government has blamed the United States for fomenting the strike, AFP reported.

“Anybody who comes from the unions knows that a general, indefinite strike has political content. General indefinite strikes are called to overthrow governments,” Vice President Alvaro Garcia told reporters.

“No doubt, behind this there could be some officials from the US Embassy,” he added.

The call for an indefinite work stoppage by the country’s trade union federation is seen as a challenge to President Evo Morales, who is regarded as the champion of the poor indigenous masses.

Two of the more important nations struggling for an independent socio-economic system are going through some challenges. In Bolivia, unions are insisting on a wage increase greater than the 5% offered by Evo Morales’ government, and segments of the indigenous population of Ecuador are protesting new water laws that they believe will lead to privatization. These are important issues, and reveal some of shortcomings of nationalist based reform oriented movements. In both cases there are attempts by the governments to try and be a government of all the people of the respective countries. In doing so, they are ending up with compromises that don’t sit well with significant parts of the population who elected Morales and Correa. On the other hand, if the protests are not contained and focused, they can easily end up playing into the hands of the imperialist oligarchy who are waiting in the wings to take the spoils.

Chavez, Morales, and Correa at some point soon, will need to confront the oligarchy head on, and radically restructure their economy, without such a move, the danger is that their movements will end up weak and nothing more than liberal social – democratic, with little to distinguish them from Euro-Capitalists.

(As a side note while the events in Ecuador and Bolivia are significant, and appears to represent genuine grievances of the populations, there has been no massive outcry on part of the North American-Euro “left” – such as there was with the USA/Psy-op “green protests” in Iran. Not surprising, of-course, given that the North American-Euro “left” is little more than a replica of the North American-Euro Right wing when it comes to their ignorant attitudes and Islamophobias).

Click here to view video of interview and here to read transcript.

Press TV: What is your take on the double standards at the UN Security Council?

Correa: There is a question of double standards at the international level. I have seen things at the United States… Their foreign policy has always had a double standards issue. The question is whether you are a friend or enemy. If we are friends, everything is permitted. If they think a country is an enemy, then everything is different.

In Iran, there used to be a dictatorship that had the full support of the United States. Then there was a revolution. When they saw that Iran was not in conformity with US policy, they sparked a criminal war against Iran, which lasted for eight years. I consider Iranians a heroic nation. Their achievements are fabulous. Their advance in technology is fabulous.

Few countries have suffered the double standards that Iranians have. For some countries, the question is only whether Iran is an ally or not. These double standards are not good for humanity in general.

The Leader of the Islamic Revolution says Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa has great potentials to defend the rights of his nation.

In a Sunday meeting with the visiting president, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei said the ‘energetic’ Correa could pave the way for the progress of Ecuador.

The development of Latin American nations requires their leaders to stand up for their rights and oppose the imperialistic policies of the United States in the region, Ayatollah Khamenei added.

via Iran Daily:

Of Latin American Alliance

By Mahmoud Mohammadzadeh

Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa’s visit and the agreements signed during his trip show that the relations between Latin American leaders and Tehran have taken more profound dimensions.
Now the Ecuadorian economist turned president is Iran’s third Latin American ally after Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez and Bolivia’s Evo Morales. After the meeting of minds between Iranian and revolutionary Latin American leaders, it is now becoming all the more obvious that Tehran is picking some of its closest allies from among America’s neighbors.

The relationship has gone to the extent that Correa and his friends consider Tehran as the most important aim of their diplomatic endeavors and have billed Iranian officials “their brothers“.
Importance of the new-found cooperation, which was underscored with Correa’s tour this week, calls for some scrutiny.

The position of the young Ecuadorian head of state among Latin American leaders is important. Currently, in the political circles of Latin America and Spanish-speaking countries Correa more than being recognized as head of state is respected as “leader of a successful movement“. The elections in November 2006 which Correa won are viewed as symbolic of a historic confrontation between neo-liberalism and leftist front.

Correa subscribes to the school of creating a revolution in political and economic interaction. Interest of the people of Ecuador in Correa’s vision is indeed rooted in his progressive line of thought. Correa has laid the foundations of his economic plan of action on taking on neo-liberalism.

The practical manifestation of this thought in the Latin American market is reduction in trade with the West and the getting closer to the East and South. Sufficient proof of this claim is Quito pulling out from a free trade pact with the US and opposing the theory of expansion of the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

Correa has based his political views on confronting the neo-liberal enclaves. For example, he has closed down the US military bases in his country, nationalized energy and mine industries, gotten rid of monopolism of multinationals, and established the bloc of leftist Latin American countries.

Ultimately, a plan for regional security has been compiled according to which Ecuador has transformed into a center for challenging liberalism from its previous feature as a historic US outpost.

To the above one must add Ecuador’s economic potential and its strategic depth. In this perspective, Ecuador has similar characteristics to Iran. Because of its rich oil resources, it is a key member of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). Furthermore, it supplies the bulk of cocoa, coffee and bananas in the American continent.

From the political spectrum, this country due to its geographical proximity to a few crisis centers, such as FARC rebels has indeed acquired a strategic position.

It is clear that a series of historic parameters and mechanism have put the newly-emerging movements in the American continent alongside Iran. Currently, Latin America, after the Middle East, is the second spot for growing animosity toward US bullying while striving for justice is a distinct feature of these movements.

Among the primary manifestations of the ongoing developments is that for the first time the idea of a “world after America“ has acquired new currency in the capitals of that region. Correa and other leftist leaders now see Iran as a strong and effective ally in advancing their cause.

It is natural that in light of this view, the scale and scope of being an ally of Iran is such that it has provoked urgent reaction from Washington.

Wide sections of the American media have quoted a White House official as saying that Washington is concerned about reports that Correa and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are pushing for joint strategic investment ventures to further contain and curb US influence in the Caribbean.