💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › manuel-gonzalez-our-indians.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 12:42:17. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

➡️ Next capture (2024-06-20)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: Our Indians
Author: Manuel González
Date: 1904
Language: en
Topics: Latin America, Native Americans, Peru
Source: From Robert Graham (Ed.), Anarchism: A Documentary History of Libertarian Ideas; Volume One: From Anarchy to Anarchism (300 CE to 1939).

Manuel González

Our Indians

Editor’s note: Manuel Gonzalez Prada (1848–1919) was a Peruvian poet,

writer and intellectual who moved toward an anarchist position around

1902. He was familiar with the major anarchist writers, and shared with

Kropotkin an admiration for the French moral philosopher, Jean Marie

Guyau (1854–1888), and opposition to Social Darwinism (Selection 54). He

was one of the first Latin American writers to discuss the issue of

indigenous peoples. Thefollowing excerpts are taken from his 1904 essay,

“Our Indians,” translated here by Paul Sharkey. A collection of Gonzalez

Prada’s writings, translated by F. H. Fornoff, including a good

selection from his anarchist period, has recently been published as Free

Pages and Other Essays: Anarchist Musings (Oxford: Oxford University

Press, 2003).

---

WHAT A HANDY INVENTION ETHNOLOGY is in the hands of some! Once one has

accepted that Mankind is divided into superior races and inferior races

and acknowledged the white man’s superiority and thus his right to sole

governance of the Planet, there cannot be anything more natural than

suppression of the black man in Africa, the redskin in the United

States, the Tagalog in the Philippines and the Indian in Peru.

Just as the supreme law of existence works itself out by selecting or

eliminating the weak on the basis of their failure to adapt, so the

violent eliminators or suppressors are merely accelerating Nature’s slow

and sluggish trend, abandoning the tortoise’s slow gait for the gallop

of the horse. Many do not spell it out but let it be read between the

lines, like Pearson when he speaks of the fellowship between civilized

men of European stock in the face of Nature and human barbarism. For

human barbarism read un-white men.

But not only is the suppression of the black and yellow peoples decreed:

within the white race itself peoples are sorted into those destined for

greatness and survival and peoples doomed to degeneration and extinction

... Some pessimists, thinking themselves the Deucalions of the coming

flood and even Nietzschean supermen, weigh up the disappearance of their

race as if they were talking about pre-historic creatures or events on

the Moon. It has not yet been formulated but the maxim stands: the

crimes and vices ofthe English or Americans are inherent in the human

race and not symptomatic of the decadence of a people; on the other

hand, the crimes and vices of Frenchmen or Italians are freakish and

symptomatic of racial degeneracy ...

Is the suffering of the Indian less under the Republic than under

Spanish rule? The corregidores and encomiendas may have gone, but the

forced labour and impressment endure. The suffering we put him through

is enough to bring the execration of humane persons down upon our heads.

We keep him in ignorance and servitude, debase him in the barracks,

brutalize him with alcohol and dispatch him to self-destruction in civil

wars and, from time to time, orchestrate man-hunts and slaughters ...

Unwritten it may be, but the axiom according to which the Indian has no

rights, only obligations, is honoured. Where he is concerned, the

complaint of an individual is regarded as insubordination, collective

claims as conspiracy to revolt. The Spanish royalists used to butcher

the Indian when he tried to shrug off the yoke of the conquerors, but we

nationalist republicans exterminate him when he takes exception to

onerous taxation, or wearies of silently enduring the iniquities of some

satrap. Our form of government boils down to a big lie, because a state

where two or three million individuals live outside the law does not

deserve to be called a democratic republic. Whereas along the coast

there is an inkling of guarantees under a sham republic, in the interior

the violation of every right under a blatant feudal regime is palpable.

The writ of Codes does not run there, nor do courts of justice carry any

weight, because hacienda owners and lordliness settle every quarrel by

claiming the roles of judge and bailiff for themselves. Far from

supporting the weak and the poor, the political authorities nearly

always abet the rich and strong. There are regions where justices of the

peace and governors are counted as part of the hacienda’s slave force.

What governor, what sub-prefect, let alone prefect, would dare face down

a hacienda owner?

A hacienda comes about through the amassing of tiny plots wrested from

their lawful owners and the lord wields the authority of a Norman baron

over his peons. Not only has he a say in the appointment of governors,

mayors and justices of the peace, but he conducts weddings, appoints

heirs, disposes of inheritances and has the sons submit to a slavery

that normally lasts their life-time just to clear the debts of the

father. He enforces fearful punishments like the foot-stocks, flogging,

the pillory and death; or as droll as head-shaving or cold water enemas.

It would be a miracle if someone with no regard for life or property

were to have any regard for female honour; every Indian woman, single or

married, may find herself the target of the master;s brutish lusts.

Abduction, violation and rape do not mean much when the belief is that

Indian women are there to be taken by force. And for all that, the

Indian never addresses his master without kneeling before him and

kissing his hand. Let it not be said that the lords of the land act that

way out of ignorance or for want of education; the children of some

hacienda owners are shipped off to Europe in their child hood, educated

in France or England and return to Peru with all ofthe appearances of

civilized folk; but once they are back on their haciendas, the European

veneer comes off and they act even more inhumanely and violently than

their fathers; haciendas are tantamount to kingships in the heart of the

Republic and the hacienda owners act like autocrats in the bosom of

democracy ...

In order to excuse the dereliction of Government and the inhumanity of

the exploiters, some ... pessimists place the mark of shame upon the

Indian’s forehead: they charge that he shies away from civilization.

Anyone would think that splendid schools teeming with very well-paid

erudite teachers had been thrown up in all our townships only to find

their classrooms empty because the children, under instructions from

their parents, refuse to attend for education. One would also think that

the Indians are refusing to follow the morally edifying example set by

the ruling classes or have no scruples about nailing to a cross all who

peddle high-minded and unselfish notions. The Indian gets what he is

given: fanaticism and fire-water.

So, what do we mean by civilization? Morality illumines industry and

art, learning and science like a beacon at the top ofa great pyramid.

Not theological morality, which looks for some posthumous sanction, but

rather human morality which looks for no sanction and would look no

further than the Earth. The greatest accomplishment of morality, for

individuals and societies alike, consists of its having turned man’s

strife with his neighbour into a mutual agreement to live. Where there

is no justice, mercy nor goodwill, civilization is nowhere to be found;

where the “struggle for existence” is enunciated as the rule of society,

barbarism rules. What is the point of amassing the learning of an

Aristotle when one is a tiger at heart? What matter the artistic gifts

of a Michelangelo when one has the heart of a swine? Rather than going

around the world spreading the light of art or science, better to go

around dispensing the milk of human kindness. Societies where doing good

has graduated from being an obligation to being a habit and where the

act of kindness has turned into an instinctive impulse deserve the

description highly civilized. Have Peru’s rulers attained that degree of

morality? Are they entitled to look upon the Indian as a creature

incapable of civilization?

... As long as the Indian attends lessons in school or is educated

through simply rubbing shoulders with civilized folk, he acquires the

same level of morality and culture as the descendant of the Spaniard. We

are forever rubbing shoulders with yellow-skinned folk who dress, eat,

live and think just like soft-spoken gentlemen from Lima. We see Indians

in parliaments, town councils, on the bench, in the universities and

athenaeums, where they seem to be no more venal and no more ignorant

than folk from other races. In the hurty-burly of national politics

there is no way of sorting out the blame and being able to state what

damage was done by the mestizos, the mulatos and the whites. There is

such a mish-mash of blood and colouring, every individual represents so

many licit or illicit dalliances, that when faced by many a Peruvian we

would be baffled as to the contribution of the black man or yellow man

to their make-up: none deserves the description of pure-bred white man,

even if he has blue eyes and blond hair...

Some educationists (competing with the snake-oil salesmen) imagine that

if a man can name the tributaries of the Amazon and the average

temperature in Berlin, half the job of resolving all society’s ills is

done and dusted. If, through some super human effort, the illiterate of

this nation were to wake up tomorrow morning not just knowing how to

read and write but holding university degrees, the Indian problem would

still not have been resolved: a proletariat of ignoramuses would give

way to one of BAs and PhDs. The most civilized nations are awash with

doctors without patients, lawyers without clients, engineers without

projects, writers without public, artists without patrons and teachers

without students and they make up a countless army of enlightened brains

and empty stomachs. But where haciendas along the coast occupy four or

five thousand acres and where ranches in the sierras measure thirty or

even fifty leagues, a nation must be split into lords and serfs ...

There are two ways in which the Indian’s circumstances might be

improved; either the hearts of his oppressors soften to the extent that

they concede the rights of the oppressed; or enough manliness is

injected into the minds of the oppressed to chasten the oppressors.

Ifthe Indian were to spend on rifles and cartridges all ofthe money that

he friitters away on drink and fiestas, if he were to hide a weapon in

some corner of his hovel or some hollow in the rocks, his circumstances

would alter and he would command respect for his property and his life.

He would answer violence with violence, teaching a lesson to the master

that rustles his sheep, the trooper that press-gangs him in the

Government’s name, the bully who carries off his livestock and draught

animals.

Preach not humility and resignation to the Indian: rather pride and

rebelliousness. What has he gained from three or four hundred years of

forbearance and patience? The fewer the authorities he tolerates, the

greater the number of harms he avoids. There is one telling fact:

greater well-being is to be found in the districts furthest removed from

the great haciendas, and there is more order and tranquility in the

towns that are least visited by the authorities.

In short: the Indian will be redeemed through his own exertions, not

through the humanization of his oppressors. Every white man, pretty

much, is a Pizarro, a Valverde or an Areche.