7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
1/41
MANCHESTERANTHROPOLOGY
WORKINGPAPERS
Social Anthropology
School of Social Sciences
University of Manchester
M13 9PL
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
2/41
2
BeyondSpeakingTruthtoPower:Anthropologicalentanglementswithmulticulturalandindigenousrights
politics1
JohnGledhill
TheUniversityofManchester
SocialAnthropology,
SchoolofSocialSciences
RoscoeBuilding
OxfordRoad
ManchesterM139PL
Email:[email protected]
Abstract
Professional anthropologists conspicuously disagree about the kind of
practicalengagementweshouldhavewithmulticulturalistand indigenous
rightspolitics.Disagreement isnotsimplyaboutwhetheracademicsshould
actas
advocates
for
the
specific
interests
of
their
research
subjects
but
about
thedesirability of this type ofpolitics in itself.Although the latter is often
presentedasamatterofacademic conscience,where, for example, strategic
essentialisms prove more politically effective than our preferred scholarly
accounts,otheractorsinevitablyseeitaspolitical.Thattheprofessionalwe
often excludes anthropologists not based in North America or Western
Europe further complicates the issues. I argue that retreat to the study to
composeanalysesthatspeaktruthtopowerisquiteineffectualinaworldin
whichforceswewishtodenouncehavethemselvesbecomeskilledplayersof
multiculturalistpolitics.
For
all
its
difficulties,
more
active
engagement
in
the
messyrealitiesofconcretesituationsistheonlywayforward.Thatentailsthe
rejectionofsomeoftheintellectualtrendsthathavedominatedthediscipline
inthepasttwodecadesandthekindofreevaluationofourprofessionalrole
that has todatebeen sidestepped in efforts to contain ethical andpolitical
controversy.
1 Paper presented to the workshop Pouvoir critique et critique du pouvoir des
anthropologues/Critical
power
and
critique
of
the
power
of
anthropologists,EighthConferenceofthe
EuropeanAssociationofSocialAnthropologists(EASA),Vienna,8thto12thSeptember,2004).
DraftVersion.Pleasedonotcitewithoutpermission.
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
3/41
3
Introduction
Ifwe reflect on the historical failures of the socialprojects of theLeft that
capturedthe imaginationofsomanyintellectuals inthecreativeartsaswell
astheacademyduringthetwentiethcentury,itseemsdifficulttodenythata
lack of pluralismwas one of the rocks onwhich such projects foundered.
EventheNicaraguanSandinistas,despitetheirconscientiouseffortstobeself
reflexiveabout theerrorsof thepast,did too little too late toaddress the
Miskituproblem,alongwithotherregionallybasedformsofdisaffectionthat
strengthened thehandof their imperialopponent and its local allies (Hale,
1994).This reflects theway theactually existing socialismsbelonged toa
broader stream ofmodernist thinking in which the Statewas the key not
simply to inducing economic modernization but the transformation of
consciousness and culture necessary to produce the newmen andwomen
requiredbyarevolutionizedsocialorder.Througheducationandtheexercise
ofmoral
and
intellectual
leadership,
the
agents
of
the
State
who
already
understoodthenecessaryshapeofthefuturewouldconstructthekindofmen
andwomenwhomightultimately,but not yet,become subjectsworthy of
exercisingpowerintheirownright.
Theproblemwiththismodelwas,ofcourse,thatitrestedonoveroptimistic
assumptionsabout
what
modernist
forms
of
power
and
sovereignty
could
actuallyachieveonthegroundwhenconfrontedwiththerecalcitrantmaterial
ofrealhumanbeingsembedded inparticularanddiverse regional formsof
lifethataboundedinspecifickindsofcontradictionsbetweenheterogeneous
actors. State agents could sometimes intervene in such local contradictions
quite productively from the point of view of strengthening the overall
hegemonyof
national
political
centres.
National
educational
institutions,
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
4/41
4
alongwiththeemergingmassmediathatcontributedsignificantlytonation
building projects, had far from negligible effects. Yet as has now been
comprehensively demonstrated by the Latin American literature that has
focusedon
decentering
the
regime
and
analyzing
processes
of
national
state
formation from below, even the comparatively successful hegemony
created inMexicoafter the1910Revolutionremaineda thingofshredsand
patches(JosephandNugent(eds.)1994,Rubin1996).
Over its seventyyearhistory, theMexicanpostrevolutionaryStateand the
rulingparty
that
incarnated
the
regime
infiltrated
deeply
into
the
social
life
of
most regions, yet it never eliminated countermovements. Some of these
countermovements might be described as antistate, but more were
concernedwiththewaytheStateshouldinterveneintheirlivesandthekind
of State that they deemed desirable. The State could often reachmutually
acceptable accommodations in particular cases,2 and such accommodations
hadasignificant
impact
on
how
State
power
was
actually
exercised
locally,
as
wellasinsomecasesreflectingsubstantialshiftsinideology,aswasthecase
when the longstanding policy of seeking to Mexicanize and assimilate
indigenous peoplebegan tobe rolledback in the 1970s. But its failure to
deliversubstantiallyonthesocialjusticepromisedbytheRevolutionimplied
thecontinualreemergenceofnontrivialformsdissidence,thatisdissidence
thatchallenged
the
way
resources
were
distributed,
the
way
power
was
allocated and governance effected, and the ideological premises around
whichtheStatehadsoughttobuildconsensus.
2 In the caseof some indigenous regions, suchas theTojolabal andLasCaadas zonesof
southernChiapas (LeyvaSolanoandAscencioFranco1996,vanderHaar2004), theState
exercisedvery little influenceoverhow localpeopleadapted its institutional forms to their
own purposes, and although there aremany other cases inwhich State impositionswere
more profound, therewas generally some scope for locals to adapt official organizational
formstotheirownpurposes,evenifthesewere,asinthecaseofthecommunityofSanJuan
ChamulaintheCentralHighlandsofChiapas,thepurposesofbossrulebyanoligarchy.
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
5/41
5
Anthropologists havemade a significant contribution to this rethinking of
statecentredanalysesand, indeed, to rethinkinghow theState itselfshould
beconceptualized,
as
atranslocal
institution
that
can
only
be
known
in
a
partialformthroughtheexperienceofinteractionwithspecificStateagentsin
particular settings in which multiple fields of power intersect, with those
related directly to the State apparatus only one element inwhat are often
morecomplexscenarios.TheState isalwaysunderconstruction frombelow
aswellasfromabove,aspeopleconstructimaginariesoftheactuallyexisting
formsof
power
and
of
desired
alternative
forms
of
governance,
their
actions
reflecting the balance between desire and conjunctural judgements about
practicalpossibilities(Gupta1995,Nuijten2004),abalancethatgenerallyhas
tobenegotiatedunderconditionsofdisagreement thatmay lead toconflict.
Explorationofthisbasicmessinessisattheheartoftheethnographicproject,
though itgenerallyneeds tobecomplementedbyanunderstandingofhow
localconflicts
may
be
exploited
tactically
and
strategically
by
non
local
actors.
Among the issues thatwe routinely need to consider iswhether apparent
ideological cleavages and the formal political banners under which
contendingforcesgroupareaclosereflectionoftherealsourcesandnatureof
divisions.Asking these kinds of questions effectively evidently demands a
minimaldegreeofcriticaldistancefromthecontendingparties.
Yet the fundamental shifts in the role of national states consequent on
globalization and the proliferation of neoliberal rule systems now present
anthropologists with some new dilemmas. Providing that we retain a
purchase on the messiness of ethnographic realities, we can be suitably
dismissiveofthemoreromanticizingtendenciesthatcharacterizedthesearch
of
Northern
intellectuals
for
new
bearers
of
projects
of
emancipation
to
replacetheworkingclassesinotherformsofsubalternidentities,alongwith
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
6/41
6
theexcessofresistance thatanalystsofpoststructuralistbent found in the
widestpossiblevarietyofsocialbehaviours(AbuLughod1990,Brown1996,
Ortner 1996). Indeed, one of the potential fruits of such scepticism about
simplisticdichotomies
between
resistance
and
domination
is
the
prospect
ofgainingabetterunderstandingofhowworkingpeopleintheirdiversity
think and act inways that do still express desires for social and political
transformation (Gutmann 2002). But our problem as adiscipline is our far
from residual position in the savage slot and general expertise on
otherness.AsMicaela di Leonardo (1998) has trenchantly demonstrated,
thishas
conditioned
the
way
the
anthropology
of
North
America
has
developed in the eraof liberalmulticulturalism in far fromdesirableways,
whiletheissueonwhichIwillfocushere,theriseofmulticulturalistprojects
andan indigenouspoliticsofrecognition in theotherAmericas,provokes
nolessseriousproblems.Theirrootsareclearlynotsimplyintellectual,since
multicultural policies create jobs for the experts emerging from
postgraduateprogrammes
that
are
now
producing
far
more
highly
qualified
peoplethantheacademycanabsorbintheSouthaswellastheNorth.Yetthis
situation has further intellectual as well as political consequences, to the
extent, forexample, that theproliferationofprofessionalized intermediaries
inboththeStateandNGOsectorscontributestothereinforcementofgroup
boundariesandvisionsofculturaldistinctivenesswithwhichatleastsome
academicanthropologists
feel
uncomfortable.
Thesearenot,however,problems thatareunique to thoseworkingoutside
universities, since academic anthropologistsmay alsowork as consultants,
andnow face strong challenges todo research that is useful to someone,
fromboth theState (in thenameofsociety)andmanyof thepeople that
they
seek
to
study.
Ethnography
is
perhaps
always
in
danger
of
cultivating
tunnelvision,given thepersonalsympathiesandcommitments that tend to
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
7/41
7
be forged in fieldwork,but thepowerofanthropologists todeterminewhat
research is done and how it is done is increasingly circumscribed inmore
politicizedcontexts.Thisishardlyabadthinginthelightofthemanyethical
issuesof
both
informed
consent
and
scientific
representation
that
were
not
resolved to the satisfaction of all partiesby theAmericanAnthropological
AssociationTaskForcesinvestigationoftheNealChagnonaffair,3althoughit
wouldbe disingenuous to suggest that any ethical code ofpractice or any
attemptbythesubjectsofresearchtoasserttheirownershipoftheresearch
process could completely eliminate opportunities formanipulation or even
duplicityon
the
part
of
aresearcher,
and
especially
aforeign
researcher
who
wouldprobablynothavetolivewiththelongertermconsequences.
Yet even if basic field research is carried out according to the ideals of
sharedorcollaborativeanthropology,wearestillfacedwithbroaderissues
aboutthesocialandpoliticalimplicationsofanykindofcommitmenttothe
interestsof
the
group
that
our
analysis
is
inevitably
constructing
for
a
widerpublicdomain.WhatIaimtoshowinthispaperisthattheseproblems
havebeenexacerbatedbythefactthatspecifictypesofpluralismhavenow
becomeintegraltotheredefinedstateprojectsoftheneoliberalera,andare,in
aclosely integratedway,alsofrequentlyintegraltothestrategiesofpolitical
and economic forces that have far from progressive social agendas. We
needto
ask
both
how
far
greater
pluralism
relates
to
both
conscious
tactics
offragmentationofpopularmovementsandalsohowfarfragmentation
isabottomupresponse tochangingsocioeconomicconditions thatneed to
remainatthecentreofouranalyses.Ifouraspirationistomakeacontribution
to transcending the fragmentation of the diverse social forces that share a
desire to improve those conditions, I suggest that we will find some
3Seehttp://www.aaanet.org/edtf/index.htmfortheFinalReportoftheTaskForce.
http://www.aaanet.org/edtf/index.htmhttp://www.aaanet.org/edtf/index.htm7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
8/41
8
approaches to theoryandpractice inour fieldmore relevant thanothers in
thisrespect.
Tomake
the
discussion
more
concrete,
Iam
going
to
draw
on
avariety
of
situationsofwhichIhavesomepersonalethnographicknowledgeinMexico
andBrazil.Butto introducetheindigenousrightsthemeandhighlightways
in which it seems problematic, I want tobegin with some recent debates
between other anthropologistsworking in and outside LatinAmerica, not
leastbecause the contributions of the former are often largely ignored in
debateswithin
the
Northern
academy.
Indigenousrights:Aninescapableessentialism?
The politics of Indigenous Rights have always provoked mixed reactions
amongst anthropologists.Many an indigenous land claim that has enjoyed
the support of aprofessional anthropologist as expertwitness in courthas
also had to face the countertestimony of another witness of the same
profession. Thesedifferenceshavesometimesbeenamatterofwhoispaying
thepiperbutperhapsmore frequently theyhavebeenamatterofpersonal
convictionorideology.
In todays debates for and against the role of the anthropologist as an
advocate for indigenous rights, it is all too easy to forget that in a country
suchasMexico,therathersignificantinstitutionalandpoliticalweightofthe
disciplinenationallyowesitsoriginstothefactthatMexicananthropologists
playedacentral,albeitnotentirelyunambiguous,role inpostrevolutionary
State projects designed to assimilate minorities into dominant national
(mestizo)culturesunderconstruction.Yet thatprojectwasabandonednotso
muchdue to thedefectionofanewgenerationofanthropologists from the
officialindigenistperspective(Warmanetal1970),butasaconsequenceof
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
9/41
9
the dogged refusal of many indigenous people to be assimilated, the
revolutions failure to deliver on its promises of material improvements,
and lastbutnot least,anunintendedconsequenceof theextensionofpublic
education,namely,
the
creation
of
anew
generation
of
bilingual
schoolteachers of indigenous origin who saw the celebration of their
difference and projects to conserve and rescue cultural traditions as a
wayofcompetingsuccessfully forhegemony in localpolitical fieldshitherto
dominatedbyrepresentativesofmestizominorities.
Inmaking
this
move,
they
were
aided
by
global
developments
that
changed
theconditionsunderwhichindigenousrightspoliticscouldbepracticedfrom
the 1980s onwards. Indigenous movements have learned to exploit the
additionofapostcolonialsensibilitytothehumanrightsdiscoursewithin
NorthernCountries,thealternativedevelopmentdiscoursethatprosperedin
the wake of the ecological and social disasters provokedby World Bank
megaprojects,
and
above
all,
the
explosion
of
transnational
NGO
activity.
As
DevelopmentalistStateprojectscollapsedinLatinAmerica,andtheiralready
limitedredistributiveandsocialwelfareachievementswererolledbackby
structural adjustment and the implantation of neoliberalism, playing the
identitycardincreasinglybecameoneofthefewremainingmeansavailable
tomakematerialdemandsontherestructuredState.
AfricanandAsiangovernmentshaverefusedtoratifyILOConvention169on
Indigenous and Tribal Peoples, which advocates selfdetermination for
indigenous minorities in decisions about development, along with land
restitution.Yet theConventionhasbeen ratifiedby an interesting range of
neoliberal states inLatinAmerica, including those ofGuatemala,Peru and
Mexico.
Although
indigenous
activists
have
been
disappointed
by
the
practicalresults todate, itremainssignificant thatacountrysuchasMexico
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
10/41
10
hasmodifieditsconstitutiontoredefinethenationasapluriculturalentity
giventhecountrysstrongpastcommitmenttoMexicanizingtheIndianby
eliminatingindigenousidentitiesandformsoflifeentirely.
Yetatthemomentwhenthingsseemtobelookingupforpeoplelookingfora
modicumofcompensation foranoftensavagehistoryofdiscriminationand
dispossession, anthropologists have become increasingly worried about
supportingthem.In2003wesawAdamKuperquestionthejusticeandgood
senseofprettywellanyconcessiontoalocalindigenouspeoplesmovement
inthe
pages
of
Current
Anthropology
(Kuper
2003:
395)
and
also,
without
the
criticalresponsesfromcolleagues,inamorepopularversionpublishedinthe
NewHumanist.ForKuper,indigenousclaimstolandinvolvethedeployment
of essentialist or racist criteria that mimic the most destructive European
nationalist ideologies based on ties of blood and territory. Indigenous
movements find support amongst ingenuous Northern dogooders by
exploitingromantic
images
of
the
primitive
that
modern
anthropology
must
repudiate.Worse than that,Kupercontends,almostcertainlywithSouthern
African experience in mind, though the problem is far from irrelevant to
regionsofLatinAmericawhereindigenouspeoplearecompetingforcontrol
of landwith relativelypoormestizos, successful indigenous land claims are
likely toproduce serious ethnic conflicts that it is thedutyofa responsible
analystto
highlight.
What
makes
Kupers
intervention
particularly
interesting
is itsstrongrejectionof theentirepoliticsof indigenousrightsandapparent
endorsementnotsimplyofauniversalistic,individualisticliberalframework
forrightspolitics,butalso,asAlcidaRamospointsout incriticisinghim,an
unusuallyunreconstructednotionofdevelopment(Ramos2003:397).
Yet
many
of
Kupers
worries
about
dominant
representations
of
indigenous
people arewidely shared evenby anthropologistswho are sympathetic to
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
11/41
11
theircause.Agoodexample is theMexicananthropologistGabrielaVargas,
writing in the American Anthropological Associations Anthropology News
(VargasCetina 2003).With a PhD fromMcGill and research experience in
Chiapas,Vargas
has
had
apractical
ethnographic
engagement
with
organized
indigenous groups of a kind that draws her to the conclusion that their
struggles should be supported. Yet she finds that the most politically
influential representations of indigenous people are misrepresentations or
falsehoods in Kupers sense, albeit practically effective strategic
essentialismsinSpivaks(1988)sense,thusleadinganthropologiststosome
difficultchoices
about
how
we
can
meet
our
professional
and
ethical
obligations, especially when we are asked to validate false models, or
perhapsmostconsequentially,tosupportonelocalfactionoveranother.
However,asLesFieldpointsoutinacommentaryonVargasspieceinalater
issueofAN(Field2003),thedebateabouttheroleofstrategicessentialismsin
bothacademic
circles
(and
the
indigenous
movement
itself
in
the
United
StatesandCanada) isnow twentyyearsold.We shouldnowperhapshave
reached the point of transcending an unreflective opposition between a
professionalcollectiveweandanequallyhomogenousandexternalthem
of indigenous movement activists and members. Firstly, Field points out,
indigenous intellectuals themselves now routinely deploy anthropological
toolsof
research
for
community
ends.
Secondly,
and
more
consequentially:
The socalled anthropological community invoked at the AAA and other
nationalandinternationalmeetingscouldbeseenasakindoffalseconsciousness
thatobscuresthedeepcleavagesamonganthropologistsconcerningpowerandits
deploymentsinindigenouscommunities.(Field2003:6)
In the lightof that, it seemsuseful to return toRamoss response toKuper.
Arguing that the kinds ofblanket generalizations thatKupermakes about
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
12/41
12
indigenousmovements are unsustainable as generalizations, she concludes
that whatwe need is serious anthropological research, rather than casual
generalizations, and openminded anthropologists who neither adopt
indigenouscauses
as
an
article
of
faith
nor
reject
ethnic
struggles
as
racist
manipulationsbyunscrupulousopportunists(Ramos2003:398).Itwouldbe
difficulttoaccuseRamosofharbouringessentialistandromanticideasabout
the primitive, given that herbitingly critical accounts of indigenism in
Brazil have highlighted the vast gap that exists between the real lives,
aspirations,behaviourandhistoriesofdisplacementandreconstitutionofthe
countryssurviving
indigenous
people,
on
the
one
hand,
and
their
symbolic
rolesinbothcolonialEuropeanandlatterdayNGOfantasiesofotherness,
not tomention thesignificanceofwhat isacomparatively tinyminority4 in
the construction of Brazilian national identity, on the other.5 Nor is it
particularly easy todepictwhat are often life anddeath strugglesbetween
IndiansandnonIndiansinBrazilastheproductofamisplacedpolicyofState
tutelaryprotection
within
amodernizing
project
(Lima
1995,
Diacon
2004)
converted into indigenous rights politics thanks to the interventions of
Northern dogooders. Not only do legacies of genocidal projects of
exploitation,prejudice and theofficial infantilizationof the Indianweigh
heavilyoncontemporarycircumstances,butethnicconflictsarefuelledby
Brazilsclassstructure.IftheviolenceperpetratedonIndiansbypoormestios
hassometimes
been
deliberately
orchestrated
by
the
military,
large
landowners and the owners of the capitalist extractive industries, it is also
fuelledbythebrutalrealismofthestruggletotranscendpovertyinahostile
4Brazils350,000Indiansconstitute1%ofthecontemporarynationalpopulation.Indigenous
people are also a minority, at just over 12%, in Mexico, but, with an absolute number
exceeding 13million, constitute the largest singlenational indigenouspopulation in Latin
America.5See,forexample,thecollectionofseminalessayspublishedinEnglishinRamos1998.
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
13/41
13
environment.Thesearesomeof the issuesanthropologicalresearchperhaps
needstoaddressinmoredepth,ifitistodeservetheadjectiveserious.
Atone
level,
this
could
be
seen
as
simply
arepeat
of
the
call
for
anthropologiststofocusonthemessinessofconcretelocalsituations(which
would include an eye for manipulation where that was relevant), but
indigenousrightspoliticshaveclearlyraisedfundamentalquestionsaboutthe
authority of anthropological knowledge.Thiswasmade starkly evidentby
thereceptionofDavidStollsattackonthefactualveracityoftheaccountthat
theGuatemalan
indigenous
activist
and
Nobel
laureate
Rigoberta
Mench
Tumgave toanthropologistElizabethBurgos (wifeofRgisDebray) inher
famous testimonioYome llamoRigobertaMenchy asme naci la conciencia
(Stoll1999,Arias(ed.)2001).
Solidarityandobjectivism:thelimitsofrepresentation
Writing in thenameofobjectivityagainstboth thepostmodernist turn in
anthropologyandthesupposednaivetyoftheCulturalStudiesmovementin
theUnitedStates,Stoll ineffectdisqualifiedasubalternvoiceat thesame
timeashepromotedareadingofthesupposedfactsofrecentGuatemalan
historythatjustifiedhisownbeliefinthefutilityofarmedinsurrection.This
gives his work at least an elective affinity with the prose of counter
insurgency but the precise political purpose underlying his work has
remainedunclear.Asagenuine liberal,Stollwished toavoidabsolving the
Guatemalan military from their widely documented responsibility for the
majorityoftheactsofviolencecommittedintheperiod,buthisintervention
wasbound toprovide theGuatemalanRightwithnewammunition in their
contemporarystruggleswithRigobertaMench,nowamajorinternationalas
well as national political figure. Furthermore, even if one concedes the
validityofatleastpartofStollsanalysisofthesituationintheIxilTriangleof
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
14/41
14
Guatemala, the fact thathe sought toextend it to theZapatista rebellion in
Chiapas offered poor support for his claim that objectivism shouldbe the
overridinggoalofanthropologicalresearch,sincehisinterpretationrevealeda
strikingfailure
to
avail
himself
of
the
by
then
plentiful
ethnographic
and
historicalliteratureonwhatwas,infact,averydifferentsituation.
CommentingonMenchstestimoniofromtheperspectiveofparticipationin
theLatinAmericanCulturalStudiesmovementthatisoneofStollsprinciple
targetsofcritique,JohnBeverleyhaspointedout thatMenchspurpose in
constructingher
story
for
Burgos
was
not
to
have
it
become
part
of
Western
Culture,which in any case she distrusts deeply, so that it canbecome an
objectforus,ameansofgettingthewholetruthtodalarealidadofher
people (Beverley 1999: 82). This is not a subaltern cultural practice
signifyingitssubalternitytousbutanartefactthatseekstobeanagentofa
transformativehistoricalprojectthataspirestobecomehegemonicinitsown
right.Mench
sought
to
advance
the
interests
of
those
she
represented,
and the way she did that was inevitably conditioned at the timeby her
militancyinaguerrillamovementseekingtoincorporateindigenouspeasants
intoabroaderclassbasedmovement.YetasBeverleygoeson toargue, the
fact that it should not be simply our desires and purposes as
anthropologistsor literarycritics thatcount in relation to testimoniodoes
notnecessarily
have
to
simply
redraw
the
simple
us
versus
them
kind
of
boundarythattroubledField,oratanyrate,offersuspossibilitiesforthinking
aboutdifferentplacesinwhichsuchboundariesmightbedrawn:
Butwe theweofourdesiresandpurposesabovearenotexactly in the
position of thedominant in thedominant/subalternbinary.Whilewe serve the
ruling class, we are not (necessarily) part of it. To leave things simply at the
celebrationof
difference
and
alterity,
therefore
is
to
leave
things
in
the
space
of
a
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
15/41
15
liberalmulticulturalism.Itistoreplacepoliticswithadeconstructiveethos.Partof
theappealofI,RigobertaMenchthatDavidStollobjectstoresidesinthefactthat
itboth symbolizes and enacts concretely a relation of active solidaritybetween
ourselves
as
members
of
the
professional
middle
class
and
practitioners
of
the
humansciencesandsubalternsocialsubjects(Beverley1999:83).
Yet takingBeverleys injunction torecognize the inevitabilityofpolitics, the
question remains withwhom shouldwe actively solidarize?where there
aredifferences of desires and purpose among subaltern social subjects
themselves?
This isaproblem thatMenchs text itselfposes forus. Itconstructsbotha
visionofdifferencereinforcedbyherfamousassertionthatnoone,not
even the anthropologists, can ever get to know all our secrets and a
visionofherown conversion toanunderstanding that classallianceacross
ethnicboundarieswasa condition for the survivalofMaya6 identityand
culturethat
does
not
shirk
from
giving
very
strong
insights
into
why
indigenouspeoplemighthate the ladinoother. Ifwe read itasapolitical
text,locatingitwithinthebroaderfieldofGuatemalanpoliticsinitsday,we
canobviouslyrelocateitintimeamongstaseriesofalternative,evolvingand
contested expressions of indigenous political projects. Some of these are
strongly essentialising and some are not, some are overtly critical of
professionalanthropological
projects,
domestic
and
foreign,
while
others
seek
toenlisttheparticipationofprofessionalacademicsforavarietyofpurposes,
rangingfromstudiesofthehistoryofculturalformstocampaignsoverland
tenureandaccess tosocialdevelopmentresources.Thekey issue is thus for
whomwe thinkweareproducingknowledge. Individed communitiesand
6MayaidentityisapoliticalconstructthathasbecomeincreasinglyimportantinGuatemala
sincetheviolencebutstilldoesnotnecessarilycorrespondclosely tolived identities(see,
forexample,Warren1998).ThesameargumentcanbemadeequallystronglyforChiapas.
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
16/41
16
conditions which pit subaltern against subaltern, solidarity seems tobe a
purelypoliticalchoice.Arethereanyprinciplesthatcouldguideusinmaking
orrefusingsuchchoicesotherthanpersonalinclination?
I think the answer is yes, and my answer will ultimately appeal to a
possibilityofrigorousor,ifyouwill,scientificanalysisinanthropologythat
mightseemindangerofresonatingwiththepostureofDavidStoll,thoughI
hope tomake it clear thatmyargument isquitedifferentlygrounded from
his. Letmebegin, however,by focusing onmore immediate questions of
politicalengagement
in
ethnographic
contexts.
Facinguptouncomfortableconversationsasanethicopoliticalimperative
The firstpoint tobemade is that solidarizingwithpeople,by recognizing
their desires, aspirations and sensibilities as worthy of respect, does not
necessarilyentailacceptingtheirpointofviewasbeyonddebate.Kuperisnot
wrong, for example, in claiming that identitypolitics sometimes incorporate
racist assumptions that reflect the internalization of ideas imported by
dominantgroups.
Ideas ofbiologically determined naturesbrought into the regionby criollo
elites intent on whitening it, ifnecessaryby genocide,have left a strong
legacy within the Nahua community7 I recently studied in a relatively
forgottenbackwaterofMichoacn state inMexico.Notonlydo indigenous
peopleusethetermracetodistinguishthemselvesfromthedescendentsof
thenottremendouslyaffluentmestizoswhobeganto invadetheircommunal
7Communityherereferstoanofficiallyrecognizedagrarianunitandalocalconceptionof
unqualified sovereignty over a given territory sanctified by both historical rights of
possessionand the sharingofacommon setof religious traditions thatdelineateaunique
group:thecommunityisthereforemadeupofmultiplesettlementsandthetermisbotha
juridical and an emic one (in the latter sense resonatingwith theNahua notion of an
altepetl).
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
17/41
17
territoriesattheendofthe19thcentury,extinguishingseveralofthecolonial
indigenouscommunitiesentirelyanddisplacing theirpopulations, theyalso
express equally historically rooted antagonisms between their own
communitiesthrough
the
notion
that
they
were
formed
by
people
of
different
origins and races, i.e. in completely essentialized terms. It is a relatively
straightforwardmattertoshowthat,eveniftheideaofracialdifferencewere
acceptable, an hypothesis of separate collective origins is nonsensical
historically, given that postcolonial processes totally reorganized pre
Hispanicsettlementpatternsandmixed togethergroupsofpeoplespeaking
diverselanguages.
It
is
also
possible
to
produce
evidence
that
attitudes
to
nonindigenousneighboursweredifferentbeforethelaternineteenthcentury.
Thesearematters inwhich it ispossible tohaveadialogueandonwhich it
seemspoliticallynecessarytotrytoforceadialogueforanumberofreasons.
Inthiscase,wearedealingwithcommunitiesthathavearemarkablehistory
ofdefending
their
autonomy
and
control
of
resources,
and
which
remain
combative. Yet if, as Roseberry (1994: 361) argued, what hegemony
constructsisnotasharedideologybutacommonmaterialandmeaningful
framework for living through, talking about, and acting on social orders
characterizedbydomination, the internalizationof frameworksofmeaning
derived from the ideasofdominantgroups is itspotentiallydisempowering
andfragmenting
side.
Since
the
Nahuas
are
aminority
within
aminority
in
termsof thepoliticsof indigenous rights inMichoacn,whereonly3.5%of
thetotalpopulationnowprofessesanindigenousidentity,divisionsthatlimit
their collective solidarity are particularly unwelcome. Secondly, however
historically understandable it may be, the indigenous communities
antagonismtomestizoneighbours,whonowsharecommonproblemsofstark
poverty
due
to
environmental
degradation
and
neoliberal
economics
that
leave them few alternatives to international migration, is a tremendous
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
18/41
18
resource for the regional elites that dominateboth populations and have
provedhistoricallyadeptatmanipulatingtheirmutualdistrust.
Asthe
Zapatistas
in
Chiapas
have
shown,
it
is
quite
possible
to
imagine
a
nonexclusionary, bridgebuilding politics that asserts indigenous identity
and autonomy claims whilst at the same time challenging the boundary
between Indian and mestizo whose construction was at least in part a
consciousstrategyonthepartofelitesinthefirstplace.Thisisnotamatterof
returningtothetraditionalclaimthatclassissuesshouldoverridethepolitics
ofidentity,
though
it
is
in
asense
areassertion
of
the
significance
of
class.
It
is
aquestionofchallengingformsofidentitybasedpoliticsthatarecompatible
withleavingthevesselemptyasfarasanyseriousassaultonchronicpoverty
is concerned. There have, furthermore,been a series of recent incidents in
otherpartsofMexicoof indigenous communitiesmobilizingunderarms to
resolve longstandinggrievancesbyevictingmestizobeneficiariesofagrarian
reformfrom
their
lands:
whilst
the
boot
has
more
unusually
been
on
the
other
foot, in at least some of these cases, it is difficult to see the indigenous
communitiesasthevictimsofinjustice.
Theideaofacademicresearchbecomingpartofaconversationordialogue
between outsiders and insiders is, of course, liberal, rationalistic and not a
littlenave.
Firstly,
there
may
be
quite
practical
problems.
Where
indigenous
communitiesjealouslyguard their autonomy indecisionmaking, theymay
simplynotallowethnographersaccesstocommunalassemblieswhereissues
are debated and decisions reached.8 This principally affects what the
8IhavealwaysbeenratherluckywithregardtothekindofaccessthatIhavebeengranted
myself,thoughbeingpermittedtowitnessfactionalconflictsandhearpeopledebatingvery
delicate issues and speakingwithoutnecessarily remembering that anoutsider is listening
posesethicalproblemstowhichselfcensorshipissometimestheonlyacceptablesolution.
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
19/41
19
ethnographercanknowandunderstand,sinceevenifadmittedtoobservethe
workings of such a forum, it would not generallybe appropriate for an
outsidertoparticipate(beyond,perhaps,providingsomepotentiallyuseful
information,as
distinct
from
adirect
opinion,
if
asked
to
do
so).
Yet
the
assemblyis,generally,theforuminwhichthecommunityrealisesitselfasa
broad and inclusivebody adopting positions and reaching a consensus. In
practice, opinions may be forged through backstage processes in which
representatives of different factions strive to garner the support of
individuals,andpublicprocessesof consensusbuildingmay themselvesbe
subjectto
adegree
of
manipulation.
In
the
words
of
historian
Florencia
Mallon (1995), outcomes reflect the process of constructing communal
hegemony. Thus, as a nonparticipant observer, the mute anthropologist
cannotconductanykindofdialogueinwhatremainsthemosttransparent,
inclusive,publicspaceofdebate,butofnecessitymustresorttootherkindsof
conversations, with leaders and/or ordinary members of the community.
Althoughthere
are
various
tactics
that
one
can
adopt
to
make
such
conversationsrelativelyopenandpublic,thereisaconstantdangerthatthey
willbeseenasbelonging to thebackstage formsofhegemonybuilding that
frequently invoke suspicion and censure, especially where the issues are
alreadyentangledininternalpoliticalconflicts.
Secondly,there
is
the
problem
raised
by
Stolls
intervention.
Dialogue
implies
listeningandrespecting thepointofviewofones interlocutor,allowing for
thepossibilityofirreconcilabledifferences.Sinceanthropologistsoftenfailto
understand thingscorrectlyorat thevery least,onlysucceed ingaininga
partialunderstanding,whichmustbe takenas thenorm,given thatmostof
us would probably accept that our fields move on and that there is a
cumulative
collective
gain
in
both
empirical
and
theoretical
work
we
need
to take thedialogic characterofdialogue seriously.We alsoneed to accept
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
20/41
20
thatourinterestscannotbeexactlythesameasthoseinhabitingalifeworld
thatmaybe connected to andpenetratedbyoursbutnevertheless remains
verydifferent.Contrarytothestereotypesthatfrequentlyguidethethinking
ofthe
leaderships
of
popular
movements
dedicated
to
consciousness
raising and transformation, I see little ethnographic evidence that people
livinginconditionsofextremeabjectionareincapableoftakingalongerterm
and broader view of the world, even if a handtomouth existence does
promote a tendency towards pragmatism and acceptance of shortterm
fixes. But since no amount of empathy at an intellectual level can
replicatethe
lived
experiences
of
discrimination,
humiliation
and
suffering
thatsomanyofthepeoplewestudyhaveexperienced(inwhatareoftenfar
more complicated lives than our own), rationalist or instrumentalist
argumentswillnotalwayswintheday.Theheartwillalwayshaveitsreasons
that reason cannot know, to paraphrase Pascal, and those reasons are
generallyrootedinhistory.
Butanthropologistsshouldhavesomeassetstocontribute intalkingtotheir
subjectsaboutpoliticalchoicesandstrategies.Firstly,wehavetheprivilegeof
distanceandtheluxuryofobservationinacomparativeframe.Weshouldnot
only, inprinciple,beabletounderstandthemicropoliticsof localsituations
but alsobe able to see how they fit into a larger picture. Thoughwe are
unlikelyto
be
completely
impartial,
honest
brokers,
we
should
at
least
be
able tounderstand thementalitiesandmotivationsofcontendingparties,at
leastinmostsituations.9Talkingtotheactorsabouttheseissuesmay,infact,
9ThisismybasicobjectiontothepositionadoptedbyScheperHughes(1995)inhercallfora
militantanthropology,despitemyprofoundadmirationforhercurrentcampaigningwork
onorgantraffickingandforboththepassionandtheinsightsofDeathWithoutWeeping.Not
onlyarefewsituationsreadilyreducibletotheblackandwhitetermsthatenableustomake
a simple determination of which group should become the focus of our unqualified
commitment,butweneedtodoourutmosttounderstandthepointsofviewofalltheactors
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
21/41
21
bequiteusefulforthem,inthesensethatanoutsiderdedicatinghim/herself
tocanvassingabroadrangeofopiniononadailybasismaybeabletoshed
lightonwhycertain tactics failed thatwouldnotsoreadilybeproducedby
thosewho
advocated
them
in
the
first
place,
even
if
they
practice
agood
deal
ofselfreflection.Secondly,andperhapsmoreimportantly,actorsoperatingin
aparticular localitymaynothaveadetailedknowledgeofrelatedsituations
elsewhere.DespiteabriefvisitbyZapatistaactivists,Chiapasmightaswell
havebeenlocatedonadifferentplanetasfarastheNahuasoftheMichoacn
coast were concerned, and even their more intensive interaction with the
Purhpechaindigenous
communities
in
the
states
central
highlands,
the
fulcrumof the indigenousmovement in their state,hadnotequipped them
with a very deep understanding of what was a fundamentally distinct
agrarian and political situation or of the varied political colours of the
organizations that the compaeros purhpechas had built up over recent
decades(ZrateHernndez1994).
The knowledge broker role of anthropologists can be of substantive
practicalvalue,asFox(2000)hasobservedintransmittingasuggestionbyan
indigenous leader in Oaxaca state that his organization might be able to
negotiatemoreeffectivelywiththeWorldBankifitactuallyknewthedetails
of its changing policies and procedures, so frequently misrepresented by
involved in complex scenarios, including those we may find repugnant, be they
paramilitarieskillinghumanrightsworkersandindigenousrightsactivistsortheelitesthat
we might hold responsible both for economic misery and intellectual authorship of
repression.Whatethnographicand/orhistoricalresearchusually showsus is thatelitesare
farfromhomogeneousorevenparticularlysmart(animportantissueforunderstandingwhy
popular movements sometimes advance), whilst paramilitary groups are often not too
different in their social composition from their victims, forcing us to askmore searching
questions about the circumstances that account for the emergence of such groups and the
motivations of thosewhojoin them (whichmaybe quitedistinct from themotivationsof
thosewhogain from theiractionsatasafedistance).Evenasingle typeofmovementor
organizationcan,ofcourse,embodyavarietyofambiguousandcontradictoryqualities,as
StarnhasshowninhisanalysisofthePeruvianrondascampesinas,forexample(Starn1999).
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
22/41
22
agents of the official intermediary, theMexican government. Butmymain
pointhereisthatanthropologicalknowledge,orperhapsbetter,toreducethe
stampofauthorityofthe term,anthropologicalanalysis,can itselfbeuseful,
providingwe
are
willing
to
run
the
risk
of
disclosing
our
thoughts
and
disseminating them in locallyaccessible forms,acknowledging that theyare
relevanttodebatesaboutpoliticalstrategy.
Yettheimplicationofthisargumentisthatitisnot,inthelastanalysis,simply
ourlocalknowledge thatcounts, in twosenses.Firstly,what localpeople
cannotso
readily
obtain
for
themselves
is
abigger
picture.
This
may
seem
an
oddthingtosayinanerawhen,inthecaseofMexicoandCentralAmericaat
least, many people from tiny rural places habitually cross international
borders to live in the worlds most advanced urban spaces, and global
electronic media have enhanced the imaginations of us all. But what
undocumented migrants navigating public spaces apprehensive about
surveillancein
between
long
hours
of
work
actually
experience
of
aradically
distinctformofliferemainslimitedinfundamentalways,andthesamemust
besaidoftheinformationimpartedbyelectronicmedia,howevercatalyticit
mayproveinreshapingpopulardesiresandunderstandingsofglobalpower
relations. Anthropology does have something distinct to offer if we are
willingtorethinkourmissionintermsofthewaysomeonelikeJohnBeverley
understandssolidarity.
Yet
this
raises
the
second
and
more
fundamental
issue.
Beyondtheethnographiccontext,beyondrepresentation
Ibeganthispaperbyacceptingthepotentialvirtuesofamorepluralworld,
but have, I hope, consistently turned away from the proposition that
anthropologys mission should be purely representational, and purely
representational for a Northern us, a position which lends itself to the
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
23/41
23
celebrationofapolyphony (ifnot cacophony)ofvoicesandahorrorof the
grand social projects embodied in capitalist, populist and socialist
developmental states and the ideologies which underwrote their social
engineeringendeavours.
Thus
far
Ihave
tended
to
present
the
political
articulationofanthropologistsat the leveloftheethnographic interfacewith
our subjects, but anthropology should not be reduced to ethnography,
especiallywhen it tries toenter thepolitical field. Ifweare tomakeserious
pronouncements about indigenous andmulticulturalist politicswe need to
ground those pronouncements in some kind ofbroader understanding of
historicalpossibility,
of
the
kind
that
Eric
Wolf
(1999,
2001)
advocated
in
his
discussion of structural power. A concept that sought to integrate the
classical concernsofMarxismwith someof the insightsofpoststructuralist
theory, notably Foucaults account of governmentality, structural power
offers a framework for discussing (and explaining) why some historical
outcomesbecomemorepossible thanothers (without trappingus ina rigid
determinism).
Wolf also argued that efforts to develop and deploy concepts that lend
themselves to comparativeanalysisandexplanatorygoalswhatwemight
describeasascientificprocedure in thehumanitiesremainsapreferable
optionforanthropologytosettlingforinterpretationandexperiencenear
writingthat
is
simply
representational
(Wolf
2001:
386).
In
relation
to
the
presentdiscussion,Iwouldarguethatthekindofpositionthatweadopton
indigenous rights issues, for example, shouldbe guidedby at least some
engagement with the question of what indigenous autonomy could be
expected to achieve for its beneficiaries under contemporary global
conditions.Asking thatkind ofquestion takesus straight into the territory
that
Wolf
charted
out
in
insisting
on
the
need
for
the
kind
of
bigger
picture
providedbytheconceptofstructuralpower.
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
24/41
24
Letusassume for thesakeofargument (asactually seems tobe thecase in
LatinAmerica, thanks inpart to the recent support of theWorldBank for
communaltitling
exercises
under
certain
circumstances
despite
its
overall
efforts topromote individualized landed property systems globally) that it
becomeseasierratherthanharderfor indigenousgroupstoestablishcontrol
over territories, administer them inways of their own choosing, run local
politicalandjusticesystemsaccordingtotheirownusesandcustomsand
reproducetheirculturalpracticesandlanguages.Althoughtherearecertainly
contextswhere
such
aproject
would
be
opposed
by
either
capitalist
interests
and/ornonindigenousgroupslivinginterspersedwithindigenouspeople,in
theabsenceofsuchconditions,thecontemporaryneoliberalState islikelyto
seesuchadevelopmentprincipallyasanopportunitytopromoteculturaland
ecotourism, turning an opportunity to demonstrate its willingness to
acknowledge global postcolonial sensibilities and offer redress for an un
pluralisticpast
into
alivelihood
project
that
will
be
consistent
with
the
neoliberal prescription that the poor be helped to help themselves by
marketingsomethinginthiscasetheirpatrimony.
One problem is, of course, that some people have more marketable
patrimoniesthanothers.Suchschemes forruralredevelopmentnowtendto
beseen
as
alternatives
to
supporting
small
farmers
working
in
agrossly
inequitableglobalagrofoodsystem,andonlyaminorityofthemarelikelyto
providesufficientlivelihoodstostemtemporaryorpermanentoutmigration.
Indeed, the fact thatextensivemigrationhasalreadyoccurredraises further
issues.
It
is
more
likely
today
than
fifty
years
ago
that
indigenous
people
who
leave
ruralareasforthecitieswillretaintheirindigenousidentities,andwhilstthey
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
25/41
25
are likely tobe socially transformed in variousways thatmay complicate
continuinginteractionswiththeirhomeland,itisevenpossiblethattheywill
try toparticipate in indigenouspoliticalmovements (as evidencedby some
smalltraders
in
Mexico
City,
for
example).
But
what
does
indigenous
autonomyseenastherecreationordefenceofaruralterritorymeanforthese
urbanpeople,forpeoplewhohavefoundworkinsweatshops,offshoretextile
andassemblyplants(asisoftenthecaseinGuatemala),orindistantzonesof
capitalistagriculture?Whatdoesitmeanforpeopleworkinginconstruction,
asjobbingplumbersordomestic servants inCalifornia?Whatdoes itmean
forremaining
rural
residents
who
have
become
increasingly
dependent
on
migrantremissions?
I suggest that it means an anchor for identity that is empowering under
contemporary conditions,but may notbe directly relevant to solving the
problems posed by the place of many of the putative members of the
communityin
national
and
transnational
class
structures.
The
leaders
of
indigenousmovementshavealsobecomeurbanbasedtoalargeextent,since
theyworkwithinNGOnetworksandneeddirectaccess to thepartsof the
stateapparatusrelevanttotheirgoals.Thereis,attheveryleast,adangerof
theirbecomingincreasinglyoutoftouchandsetintothekindsofagendas
that produce funding and official approval. At least one anthropologist,
CharlesHale,
is
currently
working
with
indigenous
leaderships
in
Guatemala
to facilitatedebate around the implications of global economic changes for
movement strategies and the pitfalls of their becoming increasingly
disarticulatedfromtheirsocialbases.Yetweshouldalsonotetheparadox
that an indigenousMexicanwhose ancestorsmigrated to a city afterbeing
dispossessedoftheircommunallandthrougha(possibly illegal,andeven if
legal,
fundamentally
unfair)
manipulation
of
the
pre
revolutionary
liberal
reform laws has no hope of securing restitution under the conditions that
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
26/41
26
govern the contemporarypolitics of recognition. In so far as contemporary
policiesarenotaddressingthebroadersocialandeconomicconsequencesof
the neoliberal decade, they are maintaining ambiguous feelings about
Indiansas
people
who
deserve
sympathy
and
respect
at
one
level,
but
are
notsimplydifferentbutmayevenbeovercompensated for theirunhappy
pastbyaStatethatignorestheneedsofthemajorityofitscitizens.
Thequestionofthekindofeconomicprojectthatcanbetiedtothepoliticsof
indigenous autonomy is thus far from trivial. Despite the loss of a
considerableamount
of
support
and
the
division
of
even
some
of
the
communitiesintherebellionsheartlandintoproandantiZapatistafactions,
tenyearsaftertherebellionoftheZapatistaArmyofNationalLiberation,the
movement isstillbuilding itsautonomyproject inChiapas.Yet itsability to
dosoreflects theunusual levelofexternaleconomicsupport themovement
receivesfromabroad,and itscapacitytoactasgatekeepertotheremaining
NGOsthat
operate
in
the
zones
under
EZLN
control.
This
is
such
an
exceptionalcasethatitcanhardlyserveasageneralmodel,anditisdifficult
to argue that even theZapatistashave solved theproblemsofproviding
risingstandardsoflivingfortheiradherentsinthelongterm.
WhattheZapatistastriedbutfailedtodowastobuildarainbowcoalition
ofsocial
movements
at
home
and
abroad
that
could
challenge
the
entire
neoliberal economicmodel and transform the State throughpopular action
frombelowwithoutbidding tocaptureStatepowerassuch.Although their
ideologicalinfluenceonthewiderindigenousmovementandcontributionto
theantiglobalizationmovementhasbeenimmense,theirconcreteprojectfor
peopleremainslockedupintheirsmallpartofthelargerregionalspacethat
forms
the
object
of
transnational
capitals
Plan
Puebla
Panama
(Villafuerte
2001).IftheZapatistapoliticalprojectmakesanysenseatalltenyearsdown
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
27/41
27
the line,10 it needs to renew its initial concernwith how to create a viable
alternativeeconomicorderthatisalsosomethingthatotherscanseebothasa
politically feasible goal and as relevant to their own, often very different,
socialcircumstances,
aspirations
and
desires.
Toaverygreatextent, thatalternativeeconomicordermustbeappropriate
foralargelyurbanizedsocietyincountriessuchasMexicoandBrazil,evenif
abroader vision could and should embracediscussion ofpossibleways of
transformingurbanrural relations and restructuring life and livelihoods in
ruralplaces.
In
practice,
adichotomous
view
of
the
urban
and
rural
is
no
longeranalyticallyappropriate tounderstanding the livelihoodstrategiesof
people who retain at least a foothold in rural places,but the urbanrural
divideremainsmaterialenough inothersenses,bothculturally (often inthe
form of negative attitudes towards thosewho remain country folk) and
practically (in terms of access to services, education, and the knowledge
basedeconomy).
TheexceptionallyacuteproblemsoftheBrazilianmegacity,afunctionofa
development model that reinforced an already strong concentration of
population in a small number of large coastal cities by undermining the
economicbases of smaller urban places even in the backlands relatively
closeto
the
coastal
areas
in
the
old
colonial
heartlands
of
the
North
East,
have
favoured thegrowthofamovementexplicitlyorientated toagrarianreform
10SomeMexicananthropologistswhooncedisplayedarelativelyuncriticalattachmenttothe
EZLNnow seem tohavegone to theopposite extremeofberating themovementatevery
turn.Although this isanunderstandable reaction ifweassume that theiroriginalposition
reflectedthehopethattheEZLNrebellionwouldserveasthevehiclefortheemancipationof
allofus,thisseemstometobeanundulynegativepositiontotakeonamovementthathas
beengenuinelyinnovativeinitspoliticalstyleandapproachtoculturalpolitics,establishinga
legacy thatwillcontinuetomakean importantcontributionbuildingnewkindsofpopular
politicalculturesandmovementsinthefuture.
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
28/41
28
andasocial reevaluationofsmall farmers, theSemTerramovement (MST).
AlthoughthereareinnumerablecontradictionsintheMSTproject,notleastin
termsof itsdependenceonresourceschannelledthroughtheStatetoensure
theviability
of
its
new
agrarian
colonies
(which
could
be
seen
as
areplica
of
earlierstatesponsoredruralcolonizationandmodernizationprojectsinsome
ways),it isaprojectthathasattractedsomepeopletoabandonthecitiesfor
thecountrysideagain.Giventhesocialheterogeneityofitsbase,andthevery
natureofaprojectthatseekstocreateanewkindofsocialorderbasedona
radicalrevisionofdominant ideasaboutruralwaysof life, theMST isquite
distinctfrom
identity
based
movements,
though
it
arguably
embodies
a
culturalprojectof itsown inabroader sense. Indeed, this isoneof those
cultural projects that might be seen as an alternative to the kind of
citizenship projects embodied in State hegemonic strategies, though it is
clearlyoneinwhichareformedandrevitalizedStateisanecessaryelement.
Furthermore,theMSTiswillingtodealwiththeStateasitis,asdistinctfrom
theZapatista
approach
to
autonomy
as
refusal
of
all
dealings
in
the
medium termwith a corrupt and corrupting Statemachine, a posture not
replicatedbymany of the other regional indigenousmovements inMexico
that subscribe to the Zapatista position as defined by the San Andrs
Agreementsbetween theChiapas rebels and government of 1996, still not
honouredbythegovernmentside.
Itwould seemhighlydesirable to try to think about indigenous andBlack
peoplesprojects inLatinAmerica in termsof thesewider issuesandother
kinds ofprojects, rather than think of them, somewhat anachronistically in
sociological terms, asbeing aboutwhat happenswith regard to control of
resources and political andjuridical organization in isolated rural spaces.
Some
rural
social
movements
themselves
have
begun
to
think
in
these
broader terms, as they seek to weave transnational alliances with other
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
29/41
29
movements that share theirmilitancybutmobilize very different kinds of
people(Gledhill2004).Privatefarmerslosingtheirlandtobankshavebegun
to think about what they might have in common with groups that they
previouslyfeared,
detested
and
despised,
such
as
indigenous
people
and
land
invaders.Suchalliancesmaybeshallowandfragile,astheEZLNseffortsto
make commoncause with the El Barzn debtors movement in Mexico
demonstrated, but globalization has fostered the conditions necessary for
leaderships to think through the immediate problems of those that they
represent inmuchbroaderterms, termswhich invokeaclearquestioningof
theshape
of
contemporary
capitalist
development
and
global
power
relations.
Structuralpower,governmentalityandresistance
Anthropological perspectives should surely mirror this new thinking in
breadth,buttheycannoteasilymirrorthekindsofutopianpositionsthathave
inspired intellectuals inotherdisciplines toseeendlessgrounds forhope in
the flipsideofcapitalistglobalization.Weknow toomuchethnographically
about thedifficultiesofsustainingcrossclassand interethniccoalitionsand
aboutthewayneoliberaltechniquesofruleareprovingrelativelysuccessful
at maintaining a high degree of fragmentation amongst the social forces
demandingalternativedevelopmentmodels.
Consider,forexample,ananalysisthatWillemAssies(1999)hasprovidedof
themuchlaudedprogressivesocialmovementsoftheBraziliancityofRecife,
governedby theWorkersPartyandapacesetter in suchdevelopmentsas
participatory citybudgeting.Assiesoffersanumberofuseful correctives to
widelyheldmisconceptionsabout therootsofBrazilsnewpolitics in the
spontaneityofthegrassrootssocialmovements thatemergedundermilitary
rule, noting that the role of the Catholic Church and other institutional
actors should not be underestimated and that middle class professionals
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
30/41
30
played a significant role in the social construction of the movements.
Politicizedunderthepeculiarcircumstancesofthetransitionfrommilitaryto
democratic rule, with the consolidation of democratic governance these
professionalshave
found
themselves
in
achanged
relationship
with
the
popularbasewhich,asAssiesputsit,offersagoodillustrationofhowonce
radical demands for participation and empowerment blend into a
strategy of neoliberal reform as they acquire connotations of self
advancement and selfreliance to participate as economic subjects (Assies
1999: 223). I have already mentioned the problems posed for indigenous
movementsby
the
disarticulation
of
leaderships
from
local
social
realities
andtheirincorporationintowiderpartypoliticalandNGOcircuitsthathave
their own ideas about appropriate agendas formulticulturalistpolitics and
the politics of recognition. But these problems are now magnifiedby the
neoliberalpremises thatunderliethethinkingofeventheelectableLeft in
countrieslikeBrazilandMexico.
There are still alternatives in the region, notably the much berated
populism of Hugo Chvez in Venezuela, which has proved far more
politically resilient than most commentators expected, despite its limited
deliveryofeconomicimprovements,becauseof itsuncompromisingattitude
to all sectors of the countrys elite and its clear commitment to the
empowermentof
people
of
colour
whatever
the
reaction
of
the
white
middle
classes. But truly significant mass mobilizations in Ecuador and Bolivia,
involvingapluralityofpopularactorsfrontallyconfronting theneoliberal
model,haveyettoproducearealregimechange,whilstPeruseemstohave
reached an impasse inwhich thealmostnegligiblepopularity ratingsof its
currentPresident,AlejandroToledo,havecreatedasmuchnostalgia for the
authoritarian
style
of
his
disgraced
and
exiled
predecessor,
Alberto
Fujimori,
asprovidedopeningsformoreprogressivesocialmovements.
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
31/41
31
Anthropologists often get excited by the small local victories that social
movements sometimes score against globalization, often in the name of
defendingcultural
patrimony.
It
is
slightly
ironic
that
successful
mobilizations
against the locationofaCostcosuperstoreandagolfcourse in theMexican
state of Morelos have taken place in areas already transformedby heavy
suburbanization (asdemonstratedbydensityofgarden centres) andwhich
drawagooddealoftheirincomefromculturallysensitivetourism,whilst
thefolkwhosegrandfathersfoughtwithEmilianoZapataintheimpoverished
southof
the
state
remain
busy
migrating
to
cope
with
the
impacts
of
the
decline of a sugar industry, thanks to the poor terms offered to Mexican
peasant producers under the NAFTA, the subsequent refusal of the US
governmenteventohonourtheagreementsitdidmakeintheoriginaltreaty
negotiationsasfarassugarisconcerned,andtheunwillingnessofneoliberal
governments to even think about the rather numerous alternative uses of
sugarcane
that
some
of
their
own
technical
experts
strive
to
draw
to
their
attention.
Itmaybe true that real peopleby and large have to dowhat they can to
resistorperhapsbetter,negotiate the impactsofglobalization locally.But
thisdoesnotmeanthattheworldcanactuallybechangedsimplybycreating
indigenousautonomy
in
the
Selva
Lacandona,
however
much
we
might
admiretheresilienceandvisionofpeoplefacedwithbotheconomichardship
andcontinuinghumanrightsabuseor,forthatmatter,theEZLNsnotalways
gentle approach to managing dissent and giving hope to its loyalists.
Maintainingagroundedoptimismofthespiritrequiresarealisticappraisalof
situationsandpossibilities,orientatedtosupportingtheeffortsofmovements
themselves
to
recognize
contradictions
and
seek
ways
of
transcending
them.
This includesthealliancebuildingprocess thatseemssonecessary togiving
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
32/41
32
localmanifestationsofdissentwiththeexistingpoliticalandeconomicorder
greater leverage. Here, of course, I am getting close to Gramscis original
conception of hegemony in terms of class alliance and intellectual and
moralleadership,
an
essentially
practical
and
political
frame
of
thought.
What
wemight now hope to purge fromGramscis original conceptionwas the
kindofprejudice thatemerges fromhisaccountsof the lackof cultureand
fanaticismof theSouthernItalianpeasantry.But thatstill leavesuswith the
heterogeneityofactuallyexistingpeople,wartsandall,as theZapatistas
oftenuphillstrugglestoinstilpermanentchangesinthepositionofwomenin
manyChiapaneco
communities
attest,
along
with
problems
such
as
the
essentializationofidentitiesthatIhavealreadydiscussed.
Eventhebadguysaremulticulturalistsnow
Identity politics is clearly not incompatible with demands for radical
transformationof theStateand structuresofgovernance thatwouldbenefit
all citizens, or with radical demands for transformation of the existing
structuresofsocialandeconomicpower.Yetitisalsoimportanttorecognize
howfardominantgroupshavetravelledinregionssuchasLatinAmericain
terms of their ability to exploit the new, and apparently more pluralistic,
techniquesof ruleassociatedwithpostmodernorneoliberalsovereignty.A
strikingexampleof this is tobefound in theBrazilianstateofBahia,whose
capital, Salvador,was the original centre of Portuguese colonial power, its
portintegratingitsregionintotheAtlanticeconomybothasexporterofsugar
andtobaccoandasimporteroftheslavesthatcontinuedtoformthebasisof
the plantation economy of the Recncavo region until independent Brazil
belatedlyturneditsbackonbothslaveryandmonarchicalgovernmentatthe
veryendofthe19thcentury.
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
33/41
33
Inmany senses, Salvador remained closer toAfrica than to other parts of
Brazil, and a good deal of attention has been paid by contemporary
anthropologistsandhistoriansworkingonthecityandtheRecncavotothe
waythe
conservation
of
Black
cultures
of
resistance
(Reis
2003)
laid
the
basisforapersistentpopularrejectionoftheclaimsthatBahiawasaparadise
ofracialdemocracyadvancednotonlybyregionalelitesbutbythedominant
anthropologicalandsociologicalvoicesofanearliergenerationnotsimply
thewhite, Boastrained,Gilberto Freirebut also theblackDonald Pierson,
trained in theChicagoofPark,RedfieldandWirth (Bacelar2001).Although
AfroBrazilians
constitute
amajority
in
Bahia,
there
is
another
form
of
regional identity based on ideologies of racemixing that tends to reject
blacknessasan ingredient11 in favourof the ideaofaEuropeanIndianmix,
thatofthecabocloinhabitantsofthearidbacklandsorserto.Oncedeemeda
degenerate racegiven tomillenarian fanaticism that couldhavenoplace in
Brazilian modernity, the posture that led to the war of extermination
launchedagainst
the
community
founded
by
the
thaumaturge
Antnio
Conselheiro atCanudosbetween 1893 and 1897,was replaced, forty years
laterunderthepopulistregimeofGetulioVargas,withamorebenignnotion
of theredeemabilityandaptness fordevelopmentof thesenearlywhite
citizens.
AsPatricia
Pessar
(2004)
has
shown
in
arecent
study
of
alater
millenarian
episode, thePedroBautistamovement, this reflected thewillingness of the
newgenerationof thaumaturges to collaboratewith theproject ofVargass
11 Although the identity of os sertes and their place in a racialized hierarchy has, in an
important sense,been constructedby others, it is important to stress that denigration of
blackness isembedded in thesocialpracticesof thecommunities themselves,asevidenced,
forexample,bythewayfactionalconflicts inthereligiouscommunitytendtodebouchinto
accusationsthatonesopponentsaredark,andthereforeclearlyofAfricandescent,aiming,
as their kind would, to introduce AfroBrazilian elements into a Christian community,
throughthepractiseofwitchcraft(macumba)(Pessar2004:182183).
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
34/41
34
EstadoNovo: establishing his communitywith the collaboration of the local
politicalbossandprincipal landowner,oneof the coroneis (colonels)whose
dominionwasreinforcedbytheaccommodationsthatVargasmadewiththe
ruraldominant
classes
to
ensure
the
viability
of
alarger
populist
project
centred on preemptive control of the growing urban working classes,
Bautistahimselfbecamealocalboss,andsubsequentlybrokeredtheentryof
the federal state into his domain by sponsoring one of its agricultural
colonizationprograms.Healsoensuredthat themembersofhiscommunity
cast theirvotes for thepartiesofhispoliticalpatrons,and spared them the
embarrassmentof
an
association
with
fanatics
by
keeping
the
public
profile
ofthecommunitysreligiouslifeaslowaspossible.YetasPessarshows,this
successful strategy of compliant heterodoxy created a number of longer
termcontradictionspreciselybecausethereligiouspracticeofthecommunity
was far frombeing inessential to its reproduction.Thisbecame evenmore
apparent when the official public image of the backlanders underwent a
furthertransformation
in
line
with
the
transition
to
liberal
multiculturalism
andthedeclineinrurallivelihoodpossibilities.
Yesterdaysfanaticsnowhadanewvalueasbearersofa richfolkloric
tradition, now seen as integral to Brazilian national uniqueness, and
community leaders in charge of municipal government enthusiastically
embracedstate
government
offers
to
help
them
to
convert
their
town
into
a
centre for religious tourism. These moves have, however, provoked
oppositionfromthosemembersofthecommunitywhostilltaketheirreligion
seriously, a matter that hasbecome increasingly tangled since faced with
growing competition from Protestant Evangelical Churches, the Catholic
Church now looks more benignly on less orthodox traditions, while still
drawing
the
line
at
spirit
possession,
not
to
mention
reincarnation
(Pessar
2004: 214). At the same time, Pessar suggests, the older linkagesbetween
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
35/41
35
millenarianism and social and political protest continue to live on in the
stancetakenbypriestsalignedwiththeTheologyofLiberationandtheMST.
Attemptsto
domesticate
forms
of
difference
that
have,
at
least
to
a
degree, been associated with challenges to the existing order of power
relationsmaynot therefore run completely smoothly,not leastbecause the
livelihoodsthattheycanoffertoordinarypeoplearelikelytobelimited.Yet
itisimportanttograsptheprecisenatureoftheeliteforcesbehindthegrowth
of liberalmulticulturalism inBahia.Bahianpolitics todayaredominatedby
theParty
of
the
Liberal
Front
(PFL),
whose
leading
figure
remains
the
powerfulregionalboss(cacique)AntonioCarlosMagalhes,bestknownbyhis
initials,ACM.Aprotgof themilitary,ACMandhispartyhaveplayeda
key role in recent Brazilian politics, reaching accommodations with both
FernandoEnriqueCardosoand thecurrentpresidentof theWorkersParty,
Lula,whichwerevitaltotheabilityofbothtogoverneffectively.
ACMhas adark reputation:hehasbeen accusedof spectaculardegreesof
corruption andpoliticalmurder, and recently escapedbeing expelled from
the federal Senate after a wiretapping scandal, in itself something of a
confirmationofpopularviewsabouttheintrinsicsolidarityinwrongdoingof
the entire political class, irrespective of ideological posture. Yet this very
darknessmay
actually
be
an
asset
in
his
projection
of
apowerful
imaginary
of
hispersonalpower,whichisbackedupmateriallybytheresourcesneededto
sustainawiderangingpatronagenetwork.Bethatasmaybe,thestrengthof
theLiberalsingeneral,alsodemonstratedbythefactthattheoutgoingprefect
ofSalvador,AntnioImbassahy,enjoyedthehighestapprovalratings inthe
countryofanymayorinthecountryin2004,liesverymuchintheskillwith
which
it
has
played
the
multiculturalist
card.
ACM
has
achieved
notable
popularity,bordering ondevotion, inkey sectors ofBahiasmajorityBlack
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
36/41
36
communityby fosteringpanAfricanism and subsidizingBlack culture in a
waythathasproducedpoliticalaswellascommercialbenefits.
Inorder
to
further
to
take
this
project
further,
Imbassahy
has
invested
heavily
inbeautifyingSalvadorfortourism,inawaythathisopponentsnotehasleft
fartoomanyworkingblackclasspeoplenotmerelystilljobless,butlivingin
deteriorating physical circumstances as massive road construction projects
and condominium developments have taken priority over improving
drainageandother infrastructure investmentsmorerelevant to theneedsof
ordinarycitizens.
Yet
despite
the
loudness
of
some
of
the
voices
of
protest,
the
liberalmulticulturalistprojectcannotbedismissedassimplya figleaf fora
newkind of commercialdevelopment thatmakes Salvador a capital of the
exoticcateringtothedesiresandfantasiesofawiderangeofforeignvisitors,
ranging fromcollegestudents toarmiesofsex tourists.Thepoliticalbaseof
thePFLincludesBlackculturalorganizationswithdeephistoricalroots,andit
isnecessary
to
recognize
that
there
is
quite
acontinuum
of
positions
that
organizations and individuals can adoptbetween complete cooptation and
complicity, on the one hand, and outright rejection and resistance, on the
other.Thisisagenuinegameofnegotiation,whichtheLiberalshaveproved
adept at playing, whilst the overall balance of social forces and realistic
assessmentsofthepossiblehavepromotedrealismamongsttheiropponents,
apreference
for
confrontation
through
street
theatre
rather
than
at
the
barricades.
This isnot to say that these tactics can entirely erase theunderlying social
tensions provoked by grotesque levels of inequality and a deteriorating
labourmarket for poorer Black people as a result of the squeezing of the
incomes
of
real
middle
class
households
(as
distinct
from
those
of
richer
citizens who describe themselves as middleclass). As I have described
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
37/41
37
elsewhere (Gledhill 2004:345), even thequintessentialannual expressionof
multiculturalisminSalvadorscarnivaltheworldsbiggeststreetparty
notonlygraphicallyexhibits thecleavages that remainbut fails tosuppress
violentmanifestations
of
these
underlying
tensions,
as
much
because
of
as
despiteanoverwhelmingsecuritypresencebythemilitarypolice.What it is
tosayisthatdiscussionofpoliticalpossibilitiesataparticularmomenthasto
start from anunderstanding of structuralpower inboth its socioeconomic
andgovernmentalitydimensions,withafocusonthecomplexdynamicsof
hegemonicprocesses,seeninRoseberryssense,asameansofunderstanding
strugglethat
does
not
start
from
the
premise
that
there
is
some
completely
uncolonized autonomous domain of resistant consciousness yet also
recognizesthescopeforsubalternstoproduceandreproducetheirownideas.
Thatalsomeansnotsettlingfordeconstructionorspeakingtruthtopower
alone (which is not to deny that both strategies have their uses and
appropriatecontexts).
We
may
not
be
able
to
see
the
future
clearly
but
we
learnenoughabout thepastand thepresent tomakemore thangesturesof
solidarity.Anthropologycanmakevaluablecontributionstotheselfreflective
developmentoftheactorsinthepoliticalsituationsthatwestudy.Theymay
asoftenasnotfailtoagreewithourideasabouthowandonwhichfrontsto
move forward,but if intellectuals have anyusefulness at all, itmustbe in
termsof
trying
to
help
to
expand
local
visions.
Our own (personal and collective) visions are, of course, also, inevitably,
parochialandblinkered intheirownway,andIhavenotmanagedtoavoid
thequestionableuseoftheanthropologicalwe inthecourseofthispaper.
Yettherearealternativestoeitheraselfdeludingconfidenceintheauthority
of
our
science
(and
in
perspectives
in
our
field
that
emanate
exclusively
from
Northernacademiesandcitizens)orthecompletedisengagementthatenables
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
38/41
38
ustowritedeconstructionistproseatasafedistanceorcontentourselveswith
representing the other to and for ourselves.We canbemore active and
engagedparticipantsinthemessyintersectingfieldsofpowerthatwestudy.
Bibliography
AbuLughod,Lila(1990)Theromanceofresistance:tracingtransformations
ofpowerthroughBedouinwomen,AmericanEthnologist17(1):4155.
Arias,Arturo(ed.)(2001)TheRigobertaMenchControversy.Minneapolis:The
University
of
Minnesota
Press.
Assies,Willem(1999)Theory,PracticeandExternalActorsinthemakingof
NewUrbanSocialMovementsinBrazil,BulletinofLatinAmerican
Research18(2):211226.
Bacelar,Jeferson(2001)AHierarquiadasRaas:NegroseBrancosemSalvador.
RiodeJaneiro:PallasEditora.
Beverley,John(1999)SubalternityandRepresentation:ArgumentsinCultural
Theory.DurhamandLondon:DukeUniversityPress.
Brown,Michael(1996)Onresistingresistance,AmericanAnthropologist98(4):
729735.
DiLeonardo,Micaela(1998)ExoticsatHome:Anthropologies,Others,American
Modernity.Chicago:ChicagoUniversityPress.
Diacon,ToddA.(2004)StringingTogetheraNation:CndidoMarianodaSilva
RondonandtheConstructionofModernBrazil,19061930.Durhamand
London:DukeUniversityPress.
Field,Les(2003)Whoareweandisthatdangerousforthem?,
AnthropologyNews44(8):56.
Fox,JonathanA.(2000)AdvocacyResearchandtheWorldBank:
PropositionsforDiscussion,paperpresentedtothe99thMeetingofthe
7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
39/41
39
AmericanAnthropologicalAssociation,SanFrancisco,onlineat
http://lals.ucsc.edu/Fox/Publications.html#transcoalitionsandWBcamps.
Gledhill,John(2004)Neoliberalism,inDavidNugentandJoanVincent
(eds.)A
Companion
to
the
Anthropology
of
Politics,
pp.
332348.
Malden,
MA,OxfordandCarlton,Victoria:BlackwellPublishing.
Gupta,Akhil(1995)Blurredboundaries:thediscourseofcorruption,the
cultureofpolitics,andtheimaginedstate,AmericanEthnologist22(2):
375402.
Gutmann,MatthewC.(2002)TheRomanceofDemocracy:CompliantDefiancein
ContemporaryMexico.
Berkeley:
University
of
California
Press.
Hale,CharlesR.(1994)Resistanceandcontradiction:MiskituIndiansandthe
NicaraguanState,18941987.Stanford:StanfordUniversityPress.
Joseph,GilbertM.andDanielNugent(eds.)(1994)EverydayFormsofState
Formation:RevolutionandtheNegotiationofRuleinModernMexico.
DurhamandLondon:DukeUniversityPress.
Kuper,Adam
(2003)
The
return
of
the
native,
Current
Anthropology
44(3):
389395.
LeyvaSolano,XochitlandGabrielAscencioFranco(1996)Lacandoniaalfilodel
agua.MexicoCity:FondodelaCulturaEconmica.
Lima,AntnioCarlosdeSouza(1995)Umgrandecercodepaz:podertutelar,
indianidadeeformaodoEstadonoBrazil.Petrpolis:Vozes.
Mallon,Florencia
E.
(1995)
Peasant
and
Nation:
The
Making
of
Postcolonial
MexicoandPeru.Berkeley,LosAngelesandLondon:Universityof
CaliforniaPress.
Nuijten,Monique(2004)Betweenfearandfantasy:governmentalityandthe
workingsofpowerinMexico,CritiqueofAnthropology24(2):209230.
Ortner,Sherry(1995)Resistanceandtheproblemofethnographicrefusal,
Comparative
Studies
in
Society
and
History
37(1):
17393.
http://transcoalitionsandwbcamps/http://transcoalitionsandwbcamps/7/31/2019 Beyond Speaking Truth to Power
40/41
40
Pessar,PatriciaR.(2004)FromFanaticstoFolk:BrazilianMillenarianismand
PopularCulture.DurhamandLondon:DukeUniversityPress.
Ramos,AlcidaRita(1998)Indigenism:EthnicPoliticsinBrazil.Madison:The
Universityof
Wisconsin
Press.
Ramos,AlcidaRita(2003)CommentonAdamKupersTheReturnofthe
Native,CurrentAnthropology44(3):397398.
Reis,JooJos(2003)RebelioEscravanoBrasil:AHistriadoLevantedosMales
em1835(SecondPortugueseEdition).SoPaulo:EditoraSchwarczLtda.
Roseberry,William(1994)Hegemonyandthelanguageofcontention,in
GilbertM.
Joseph
and
Daniel
Nugent
(eds.),
Everyday
Forms
of
State
Formation:RevolutionandtheNegotiationofRuleinModernMexico,pp.
355366.DurhamandLondon:DukeUniversityPress.
Rubin,JeffreyW.(1996)Decenteringtheregime:cultureandregionalpolitics
inMexico,LatinAmericanResearchReview,31(3):85126.
ScheperHughes,Nancy(1995)Theprimacyoftheethical:propositionsfora
militantanthropology,
Current
Anthropology
36(3):
409440.
Spivak,GayatriC.(1988)Canthesubalternspeak?,inCaryNelsonand
LawrenceGrossberg(eds.)MarxismandtheInterpretationofCultures,pp.
271313.Urbana:UniversityofIllinoisPress.
Starn,Orin(1999)Nightwatch:ThePoliticsofProtestintheAndes.Durhamand
London:DukeUniversityPress.
Stoll,David
(1999)
Rigoberta
Mench
and
the
Story
of
Top Related