Download LAThoughtCaudillismo_000

Caudillo (It’s political leader, a
commander, a political boss). To
understand the figure of “the
caudillo” (also seen as the
benefactor, the protector, the
boss, the omnipotent man), it is
important to understand the history
the Colonial “Repartimiento” of the
land, which resulted in in the
configuration of latifundismo (one
individual can own great extensions
of land that had belonged to
indigenous communities).
Latifundismo stil exists today in
many countries of LA (Bolivia,
Guatemala, Perú, interestingly
enough, countries with dense
indigenous populations). Other
causes for a cuadillo to rise to
power: becuase the power and wealth
is concentrated in the hands of
political and upper class elites,
normally in the urban centers (or
the colonial cities), the country
side is the periphery and peasantry
becomes invisible. Their social
problems have no resolution. A
caudillo is a local leader that
seizes this situation and uses his
local power to help people, or so
he says. These rural people become
their political base, it’s called
populism. This political base is
made of indigenous and peasantry.
Not all caudillos are rural
leaders, there’s been a good number
of politcal caudillos that raised
in urban centers in Latin America.
Caudillos can be local military
leaders (Cesar Chavez), and in many
instances they have marxist ideas
(re-distribution of lands and
wealth).
Many caudillos evolved from the
wars of independence after the
first part of the XIX century in
Latin America (E.g. Juan Manuel
Rosas in Argentina). It has been a
trait that has lasted until modern
times and due to this continuity
it’s seen as a predicament with
historical and political
consequences that needs to be
studied with careful approach. Its
political base is the populace.
A Dictator: An autocratic political
figure: Some caudillos have rose to
power and ruled as dictators.
Caudillos not necessarily become to
dictators though, they can remain
local leaders and have great local
control of the government, the
church, and over political
decision-making. The best example
of this if Generalísimo Francisco
Franco who ruled Spain from 19391974. It’s important to remember
that Latin America has strong
history of dictatorships: (Batista
in Cuba, Trujillo in Dominican
Republic, Pinochet in Chile, Perón
in Argentina, all Central America
was a succession of military
dictatorships during the cold war.
Brutal dictators ruled this region
supported by the U.S. due to its
vehement desire to contain
communism from spreading in the
region).
Caudillos and Political Favoritism:
Sometimes seen as nepotism or the
practice of returning or paying
political favors. Within
caudillismo, it’s also refer as
amiguismo. They construct a network
of friends/political allies, and
exchanging of political favors.
The caudillo is often times a
charismatic figure, very able to
get the attention of others, and
attract others with his magnetism.
This magnetism gives him a sense of
authority. We can’t presume that a
dictator rises out of his charm and
ability to seduce, his success to
gain power has more to do with the
political and social circumstances
that surround him than his personal
charm.
Angel Rama, a Latin American critic
and writer, suggest that though the
figure of the caudillo or the
dictator exercises his power over
others, he also has a great
personal solitude, because he
cannot trust anyone. Most cuadillos
and dictators end up assassinated
by their own henchmen, or
persecuted by the old allies.
Despite the powerful system he
creates around him and that places
him on top of a pyramid, he still
faces the that fact that other
(men) underneath him most likely
want to take his place. Thus, he
cannot trust anyone, and only few
are close to him (See Angel Rama in
“Latin American Dictators,” and
their psychological profile).
Democratic Cesarism:
Latin American dictators relate to
an archetype that manifest in
different images:
The Supreme, the wiseman, the
patriarch, the benefactor, the
boss, the generalísimo, the supreme
commander, and so on.
The dictator commits arbitrary
actions towards the citizens and
even those close to him. He imparts
suffering, punishment, and he is
the law. Often times he abuses his
power for his own benefit
(explotation of national
resources). He and his government
use the media to transmit their
political propaganda and to control
the citizens. They use also the
public spaces to display symbols of
the dictatorship and assure that
the citizens are continuously
reminded of the power of the
dictator.
Both dictators and caudillos may
raise of a messianic spirit that
result after a revolution. They
construct regimes that a phallocentric
view of the world.
This phallocentris imposes a culture
that is patriarchal, gendered based
(men rule, women obey and suffer),and
classist (elites on the top, a
struggling middle class, and a majority
of invisible peasantry). The peasantry
is subject to the configuration of
these structures.
Antonio Gramsci states that within this
kind of masculine nationalist
discourses a “sexual moral” is
established. That is, the masculine
eroticism is seen as the norm, the
superior, in opposition to the
subaltern’s eroticism which is
inferior, instinctive, and irrational.
(Here Foucault would allude to the
asymmetry of power in sexual
relations).
This configuration of human eroticism
with nationalism is relevant, says
because is establishes the oppressor or
the powerful dictator or caudillo and
his behavior as a role model and this
role defuses through all the social
institutions (schools, churches,
family etc.,).
How is power exercise? Foucault and
Gramsci seem to agree that power is
exercised over others by controlling
and dominating their lives. Sounds
obvious, but how?
-through institutions
-by dictating discipline over the
physical body of individuals (gender
categories determine and define
individuals by imposing arbitrary
concepts of sexuality).
-through mechanisms of power that
consolidate “docile” bodies (both
political and physical, E.G. the
military).
-By maintaining the control to submit,
dominate, impose punishment, impose
rights, and distribute goods (symbolic
or real).
Comparación y contraste entre El
Matadero (Esteban Echavarría,
Argentina, 1870) y Doña Bárbara
(Romulo Gallegos, Venezuela, 1912).
Las dos obras tienen una similaridad
fundamental: los autores de estas obras
ven una gran diferencia y distancia que
existe entre los marignados y las
élites privilegiadas (generalmente de
las cuidades).
En la novela de Echavarría las gentes
del matadero representan a la barbarie,
los incivilizados. En la obra de
Gallegos, Doña Bárbara “la dovoradora
de hombres” es un símbolo de barbarie.
Sin embargo, en la obra de Echavarría
no existe ningún deseo del autor de
reivindicar al marginado. SImplemente
desea para ellos la exclusion total y
el abandon pues considera que son tan
subhumanos que no se merecen ser
considerados cuidadanos de la nueva
Argentina.
Por el contrario, en “Doña Bárbara” hay
una crítica al saqueo del
latifundismo*. Es una obra mucho más
compleja. Se ve la figura del caudillo
(pero en esta novela el caudillo es una
mujer) que atraves de maniobras
maquiavelicas logra hacerse dueña de
grandes extensiones de tierra. Es una
mujer que ha sido educada por los
indígenas y según el narrador tiene “la
perspicacia” de éstos. Santos Luzardo,
por el contrario, simboliza el ideal
humano. Un hombre culto, educado, de la
ciudad que tiene ideas de justicia
social pero a expensas de su
superioridad. Así que sigue existiendo
en esta obra las ideas de racismo y
elitismo (Luzardo vs. Doña Bárbara),
pero se critica la expropiación de
tierras indígenas a manos del caudillo.
Un personaje importante el Mr. Danger,
el norteamericano que llega a la region
para empezar una compañía de
exploración y quien se siente superior
a todos porque es blanco y tiene ojos
azules. Marisela, la hija de Santos
Luzardo y Doña Barbara evoluciona de
ser una muchacha tonta e inocente a una
mujer inteligente y racional
(simbolismo del ideal del autor por
Venzuela). Los demás personajes son
representativos de la cultura llanera
venezolana: el Brujeador, Melquíades
Cámara etc.,).
Esta novela fue un gran éxito pero el escritor
tuvo que exiliarse en N.Y. porque el dictador
presidente de Venezuela en esta época temía que
influyera en la opinion pública.
Por qué es tan importante esta novela?
Cada personaje es un símbolo politico y cultural.