Interview with Dr. Raúl Fradkin. (1) Computer and console Where
speech with the usual clarity that we were fortunate to see first hand those who went through the UNLu.
The interview concerns the transition from colonial rule to the "long wait" and convulsed avatars of a Latin America revolutionized. All with a sharp critical eye.
Education in our hands: What are the keys to understanding the process of emancipation of Latin American countries after 1810? Raúl Fradkin: The first issue is to review a very strong trend we have, to think that these nations were pre-existing before the time of the crisis. But those nations are building will take many decades still to complete. To think about the problem you first have to break the map that everyone has in mind and that is the map of nation states. The map segments at that time something was not segmented. The map you have to think a map is very different and much bigger than we are accustomed to think it is also a map ambiguous and in the process of independence - and still for several decades, it was unclear which covers what later would be Argentina or what later would become Bolivia. It is a problem that will take a long time to resolve because it is a very complex problem, not limited to the definition of territorial boundaries but trusses social relationships and collective identities. There was, therefore, a 'Argentina' which became independent but that Argentina will be the result of a much more complicated that the War of Independence is a part. But is not declared Argentina's independence on July 9, 1816? RF: The question is more complex than you want tradition. For example: although we seek will be difficult to find the minutes of the "declaration of independence Argentina." Why? Because the statement made on July 9, 1816 was conducted on behalf of "United Provinces of South America." And another question, not least with this statement: who should do well and who is not signed it. You will find that the conference was attended by deputies who called the representation of provinces that now belong to Bolivia and will not find members of Argentina's provinces today. It is a challenge to think what was it that was forming, that neither the actors themselves were quite clear and they had agreed among themselves and less in advance. There is a process of revolution and is not entirely clear in the beginning what will be, as it is not in any revolution. Emerges from the combination of a crisis "external" and I say in quotes because in reality are companies that are part of the empire the crisis of empire is also internal crisis, and local manifestations of this crisis, some exceptional like Buenos Aires where the experience of the British invasion opened a crisis in local government that had never happened. That process involved the decomposition of an order that was three centuries of roots and would not be easy or quick a new replacement. Before 1810, there were some groups who sought to modify that order, to reform, but in general, shared the idea that it should be gradual and slow, the crisis of monarchy provoked a completely new situation. There was no previous experience of what it could face a crisis of this magnitude. And fewer had address the great challenges of a war for independence was far more violent and longer than they should have thought of that started. What are the characteristics that war? RF: We have established a very strong and somewhat comforting: we tend to imagine the war of independence and the war that carried out a nation against a foreign army of occupation. But most of the war was not a native army war against a foreign army, except for some very special times and places of America. When analyzing the composition of the chiefs and all the armies, what one sees is that most of the wars of independence were a true civil war. One question often divided into two camps: peninsular criollos against 'patriots' vs. 'realistic'. But the process was much more ambiguous, complex and dynamic. Thus, among the "realists", many of the officers, and even of the most important, and even those who led the strongest repressions were Creoles. And as the soldiers 'realistic', so were mostly. And not only Creoles popular groups were active on both sides. Additionally, other regions of America had a very strong popular support for a few years those authorities who showed loyalty to the crown and faced the revolutionary groups. It is a political identity that is built around "Creole" and "English", a complicated construction, with the war going and producing accentuated. What impact will this war be popular consciousness? RF : The most interesting experience of the River Plate and Latin America compared with Europe, is the very rapid triumph of republicanism in the collective consciousness that has few precedents. The abandonment of the legitimacy of the figure of the king and absolute adherence to republicanism made all attempts by elite groups to find some monarchical solution, which was seen as more stable social structure, failed American policy, except in Brazil. It was the same experience of the struggle, the radicalization that caused the confrontation, which was building this commitment to republicanism, a popular republicanism, not doctrinal, it has to do with an experience of internal confrontation was far more violent and longer than I could imagine in 1810. What projects were in conflict? RF: Not so much a confrontation of projects but was a confrontation between groups and positions that were changing and that were ultimately to give a result that was not that nobody wanted. One of the most difficult was how to build a new identity that would replace the one forged by three centuries of English rule. In the colonial order, the king's legitimacy was not in discussion and break that legitimacy was very complicated because it came from a tradition in which the political dispute was made on behalf of the king. This dilemma was already in much of the turmoil and riots that occurred in most of the English empire during the eighteenth century and had the same slogan: "Long live the king, death to bad government." This slogan expressed a very popular design that separated the figure of the king seen as paternal, sacred, self-government in the form of despotic exerted by corrupt officials. The breakdown of the legitimacy of the king and the triumph of the idea of \u200b\u200ba republic based on the sovereignty of the nation is very difficult to understand for the subjects of 1810. So impressive is the speed with which it introduced this new legitimacy, much faster and more durable than it was in Western Europe and even in France which is a sort of paradigm of the Republican revolution. In America, except Brazil, all attempts to replace the colonial monarchy by another independent, failed. How was making popular participation? RF: Something very special is that the Latin American experience to substitute for legitimacy policy based on the monarchy, the only alternative available in the early nineteenth century is not only a republican form of government but a form of government based on popular legitimacy. What distinguishes this process is the speed with which you install mechanisms for political participation, including election to an extent greater than in contemporary Europe. It is generally recognized a broad right to vote, as in the Rio de la Plata and also, albeit very different in the other Latin American countries in which the right to restrict voter turnout will be the end of the nineteenth century . That range comes from the need to resolve the crisis of legitimacy generated independence, which is the major challenge with the ruling groups, and should address it in a context where the political dispute could not be solved otherwise than through war. And that war could not be done, let alone win, without getting popular support. They needed some way to include these popular groups, or at least part, to political life. This gave a very strong tone commoner Latin American politics and in particular the River Plate. Then the problem will be the leading sectors, which characterized the nineteenth century, is how things back in order, to re-establish a hierarchy once achieved the initial objective. Invasions HGLas English. ColonialR power crisis. F.: The experience of rejection of the British invasion is essential in the revolutionary process back for three reasons. First, having twice defeated the invasion of the world's leading power-power with which there is also an ethnic and religious difference, which is why the struggle against the British adopted a speech almost holy war strengthened the collective identity city \u200b\u200band the Rio de la Plata as a whole. The second is the political experience unusual deposition viceroy. Being the king was the ultimate crime of criminal justice system and to depose the viceroy, whatever the reason was a crime of 'lese majeste'. Have been defeated participants of the community meeting in August 1806, which deposed and replaced it Sobremonte Liniers, they would have received the death penalty. The deposition is made by local institutions themselves, start there a break between the colonial political institutions. The third point is that the way to organize the defense, especially in the second invasion, becomes a massive militarization of the Buenos Aires society. The formation of militias in turn shows the internal division of this society: each regiment is organized by areas of the city and groups of belonging, no one group of natives and Spaniards, the Spaniards are also fragmented and Creoles , and in turn there are other regiments of other ethnic groups who are neither Creoles and Spaniards. The magnitude of this charge can be seen in the approximately 9,000 armed citizens in 1807 in a city there are 40 to 50 thousand inhabitants. That is, barring women and children, we're talking almost the total adult male population turned into a militia. This is a structure of political leadership training and connection between the political groups they come from these leaders, popular grassroots groups that did not exist before 1806. That's the formation channel of revolutionary groups and Buenos Aires gives this revolution so particular so little revolution that is 25 May. Because the May 25 discussion are many things but not who has the military power of the city. In other Latin American contexts, the establishment of the first meeting immediately triggered civil war in their own lugar.Belgrano. This construction is collectivism. F.: Belgrano is the son of one of the largest traders of Buenos Aires and one of the major slave traders. Study in Spain, which is exceptional even for the elite of Buenos Aires. The first job is to be received by the secretary of the newly founded Consulate in Buenos Aires, which is showing a close relationship between his family, the viceroy and officials Indies. Belgrano could have been, by its origin and its surroundings, the elite of the city with a very close relationship with the crown. But his career is changing. First trust, like nearly all from that school, in which the instrument of reform and modernization of this corporation is the colonial bureaucracy. It is a time of the English empire, where the central bureaucracy is taking a very innovative ideas for the season, among others, that the colonies did not provide what the metropolis needs and this is why reforms are needed in their own ruling elite of colonial society . There is a tension between career bureaucrats and local dominant groups are on the basis of the bankruptcy of the colonial order. The growing drama for him, as for many others, is the weakness of the metropolis. The forced alliance between Spain and France in the war against England short from 1803, virtually all communications with the colonies. Under these conditions, before the British invasion and aggravated after the invasions, there is a sort of 'de facto independence', although it was not policy statements, local autonomy was extreme. That greatly weakens the reformist bureaucracy. When there is crisis of the English empire, Belgrano will try some form of political continuity that allows further the policy of reform. As known is the hope that puts to create an American regency with the Infanta Carlota letterhead in Rio de Janeiro. Finally will be defined by a local self-government during the crisis to ensure the English government order and control of the situation. The experience of Belgrano, transformed first into intellectual drive and influential politician of the process in May, and then military leader, it is more radical in their attitudes and perceptions of the need for a policy that has a broader social consensus. I think the highest point is the monarchical project of 1816, to propose to the Congress of Tucumán a monarchical solution but not South American River Plate, establishing a monarchy with Inca capital Cuzco. Belgrano strategy that would lead to the massive support of the indigenous population of Peru and Upper Peru, the revolutionary process, which until then could not achieve. Linked to this is the issue of setting the flag in 1812. This arises from the need to build a symbol that entity to that which is being forged, and is not even independence, at least not officially. To build a collective identity can not continue fighting with the opponent's flag. There is an endless discussion about the colors of the flag are not, as one has learned, the sky only. But I think the most significant flag is the sun. That sun, which is the hallmark of the assembly of the year 13, is the Inca sun. In this construction of a new identity and begins to appear around the year 1812, 1813, the political discourse to legitimize the new state being formed in the Indian tradition: State, which had been submitted and is now recovering its sovereignty. In this there is also a military strategy. The key to the war, which will define whether this revolution succeeds or fails is in what happens in Peru and Upper Peru, because there in the silver mining in Potosi primarily, is the key to the colonial state funding and any new state. So the first thing the First Board is sending an army to Upper Peru, and is also the first thing the Viceroy of Peru. Some, on both sides believe that to win the support of the high Peruvian indigenous population is what will determine the course of guerra.Artigas. PueblosR sovereignty. F.: Artigas from the family of a major landowner in Montevideo and make a military career in the border regiment of the Portuguese empire, which gives a perspective of social and political reality very clearly. Artigas is going to join the movement in the Banda Oriental will adhere to the Revolution of Buenos Aires and will lead it to the expeditious. While in Buenos Aires war is a problem strategic, in the Banda Oriental, war is a daily occurrence. From the beginning, the movement led by Artigas has a different social composition. While in Buenos Aires is primarily urban and led by the elite of the city, the east is mainly rural with very strong participation, the principle of farmers living in the countryside. The dynamics of the war in the Banda Oriental, against the English first-currently stationed in Montevideo, and against the Portuguese after-when they invade the territory, is radicalizing the revolution in the Banda Oriental and is adding new sectors. When groups of rural elites begin to deviate there is a lot radicalization more intense. Artigas developed a war strategy based on attracting the adherence of rural groups first, and indigenous groups in northern Uruguay and the area of \u200b\u200bCorrientes and Misiones. For that, the political solution is the recognition of the autonomy of peoples. Artigas done as a twist to the political principles of the Revolution of Buenos Aires. The legitimacy of the revolution of May is that defunct imperial authority in the prison of the king-people assume its sovereignty. The problem was how the people exercise that sovereignty. Buenos Aires, while capital, claims for itself to be the head of the viceroyalty. In the Banda Oriental this does not happen because Montevideo is maintained at least until 1814, faithful to the regency. Then, questioning the power of Montevideo is transformed in the Banda Oriental, on the assumption of the sovereignty of the various peoples: first the Banda Oriental, Entre Rios later, after Corrientes, etc. That is the basis of what Artigas called the 'League of Free Peoples. " The result of this dynamic, which is both military and political, Artigas transforms into a leadership alternative to the Revolution of Buenos Aires. That breaks out, covertly and openly from 1813 in 1814, civil war within the revolutionary camp. This explains why the Congress of Tucumán All provinces are now the Littoral, do not participate, are questioning the leadership of the revolution Buenos Aires. Artigas drama will be that this double initial conflict with the English and the Portuguese first then you will be adding this confrontation with the power of Buenos Aires. And in this iron will be defeated. For Belgrano While a political solution to build a new order is somewhat liberal, constitutional, representative, but the monarchy, for Artigas, by the very dynamic that has its leadership, the only possible solution to America is a republic that recognizes that popular sovereignty . This difference has to do with their social bases of sustentación.San Martin. Military solution to the RevoluciónR. F.: San Martin participates in the English War of Independence, which is a political war of enormous violence and enormous social confrontation. He sees the defeat of the popular uprising and I think that is a decisive political experience for him. Hence his insistence, when he joined River Plate revolution, to give it a military instrument to channel the social energy, but be disciplined and have a very precise driving. His whole career is marked by the need to provide a military solution to the revolution. The main problem is that the military solution requires a lot of support much political and social discipline, and therefore a strong state. San Martin is going to try, and for a time is going to make, that the military is the base of support in that state. What weapon in Cuyo is a military state where the new group leader is no longer part of the old colonial elite, but men have emerged from this elite class but converted military. For San Martin, the solution also was monarchical. This no-brainer in the context of the time. The leaders of the revolution are, in general, very little enthusiastic republican forms given the experience of the French Revolution itself had ended a few years in Napoleon. For these groups, there was a conclusion quite widespread, that the monarchy was the only solution that guaranteed the passage orderly, peaceful and stable new political order. And if you look at what happened in Latin America in the nineteenth century, the country can see that a transition was less invasive and not fragmented in that passage was Brazil, which was the only solution was a monarchy. The problem is that sometime in the 10s, and popular political mobilization for war became 'monarchy' synonymous with 'tyranny' and 'English', and therefore the monarchical solution not be viable.
1. Review taken from Education in our hands, No. 76, June 2006
