Introduction: The year 1956 is based in Montevideo, the Uruguayan Anarchist Federation (FAU) with the remaining libertarians who had managed to survive the crisis of anarcho-syndicalism in late 1930. Since its inception this organization will be characterized by a willingness to review some tactical and organizational approaches of anarchism to be in a position to participate in the new cycle of protests that opened in the sixties, and had as some of the most important catalysts neobatllista model crisis in Uruguay, the impact of the Cuban Revolution of 1959 in Latin America and the upward cycle of protests from the sixties to the international level. This process "revisionist" will be analyzed as a result of three social-symbolic processes analog and its impact on the Uruguayan anarchist movement in its attempt to adapt his speech to these changes:
1) the transformation that takes place in class structure of the country with the emergence of a "new" working class during the "populism" of the Second batllismo (1947-1958) different from the "old" working class Prime batllismo (1903-1929) approaching the analytical paradigm Gino Germani, 2) the transformation that takes place in the structure class in the country but this time in relation to the situation of tie between the neighboring classes leading to the establishment of a political pact in a movement of national-popular, approaching Murmis theses and Portantiero, 3) accumulation a series of demands that the traditional Uruguayan partitocrático system is incapable of meeting and its articulation in heterogeneous social movement whose discourse adopts a national-popular character to build a new hegemony, approaching the theoretical approach of Ernesto Laclau.
words, keep the hypothesis that the three theoretical approaches are not exclusive but complementary to explain this process of transformation discourse that affect the libertarian movement in Uruguay and especially to the FAU, which is the main facet organized since 1956.
However, bear in mind that the first two processes refer to the emergence and consolidation of the movement of national-popular character known as the Second or Neo-batllismo batllismo (1947-1958) and the third the attempt to build a new hegemony - some - of their avatars by Uruguayan anarchist similarly - but also with significant differences - the rest of the revolutionary left of the moment. It is precisely this use nuanced "symbolic universe" (1) national-popular by Uruguayan anarchist which connects the three approaches especially if we assume that this was both a result of socio-economic transformations and therefore crucial to use essential to articulate a new political discourse hegemonic anarchist.
2. The "new" working class in Germany (2), El Segundo batllismo, and loss of social hegemony of anarchism in Uruguay. The fundamental theoretical basis of the sociology of Gino Germani explains populism of this political phenomenon in relation the emergence of a "new" working class in Argentina as a result of mass migration from countryside to city, a phenomenon that is caused by the employment opportunities that the rapid process of industrialization and urbanization was generated from the thirties. Germani this was characterized as, unlike the "old" for its lack of union background and his attachment to forms of domination characteristic of rural caudillo. The uprooting his arrival was brought to urban areas, according to the author, the fundamental cause of their commitment to populism: a modern reactionary movement contradictory because exercise forms of domination caudillo politics in a largely urban context.
This evolutionary interpretation and whose concerns revolved around the different social bases of Argentine populism European fascism (proletariat and petty bourgeoisie) was shared by Angel Cappeletti (1927-1995), surely the most important philosopher and historian Latin American anarchist, who in his Latin American Anarchism (1990) points out that the Peronist "(...) was fed, above all, the weak social conscience of a great mass of workers who emigrated to the suburb of agriculture, and not peasants, workers not yet " (3). This idea of \u200b\u200b"identity in transition" of the "new" working class is retrieved by the Association Libertarian Cerro La Teja (responsible for the thematic working) in a plenary paper for the Libertarian National, which would lead to the FAU, March 1956:
"The labor market now draws the native peasantry, healthy but rude, uneducated, culture of" machismo "montonero and fidelity to the master caudillo" (4). In fact, during the so-called Second batllismo, particularly between 1945 and 1954, was promoted a policy of substitution imports that industrial production increased by 8.5% annually. As a result in 1955 employees in the industry became 7.31% of total population on the 1936 figure which stood at 4.5%. Increase coming from the migration of the rural departments of the country due to pull factors (industrial development) but also removal (maintenance of large estates and hostility livestock farmers and the recovery of European agriculture and American). Between 1951 and 1956 the percentage of rural population on total population declined from 20% to 17%. (5)
The Second Neo-batllismo batllismo or was a political doctrine and government was based on the First batllismo (1903-1929) and had as leader President Luis Batlle Berres (1897-1964). It was based on the momentum to the industry, the State's progress in the provision of public services, expansion of labor and social legislation and the consolidation of political democracy. The speech that accompanied these achievements was characterized by the reconciliation of social classes, meritocratic society, protecting the lifestyle of the middle classes, the expansion of civil rights and social etc.
From all this process is interesting to note as Ángel Cappelletti and Libertarian Group Cerro La Teja fundamental attribute causality in the process of dismantling of the Argentine and Uruguayan anarchist. The first because it says that this mass of peasants "uprooted" increased membership of a CGT "reform" to the detriment of a FORA "revolutionary" anarchist influence, which diminished but was still combative, the latter because it interprets the process as "destructive" of community ties of the "old" working class Montevideo libertarian European origin (6). Although it should be noted that in both cases it was stated the "knockout" for a process of disintegration that begins in the thirties. addition to the Uruguayan case, Angel Cappelletti notes the existence of a current "anarcobatllista, which pulled at the First batllismo beginning of the century, some militants of the movement to a principled adherence to the radical liberalism of Batlle y Ordoñez . This connection between the ideas mentioned by Gino Germani, Angel Band Cappeletti and Libertarian Cerro La Teja show connections positivist sociology of anarchism and libertarian intellectuals in the Gramscian sense, in bulk of the membership.
3. The loss of anarchist influence in the unions, the dismantling of the Uruguayan labor room and the "tie" between classes as the source of the movement "national-popular" and Portantiero Murmis (7). Portantiero Murmis and even sharing the concern of Germani to explain the working-class support to Latin American populism, disagree grant the explanatory centrality to the difference between "old" and "new" working class. For them, this distinction is only valid as to differentiate various forms of political participation (organizational leadership street or activity) of the working class in Argentine Peronism. The key issue is the interdependence of the two strategies, within a sociopolitical project of national-popular class alliance with the industrial bourgeoisie and the developmental bureaucracy, which is given from the thirties and accelerated with Peronism.
Portantiero Murmis and provide analytical significance to the stage of dismantling of the Argentine trade union movement (with the current disputes between socialist, communist and trade unionist) prior to the rise of Juan Domingo Peron, as it enables the activity of this at the Registry Labour and leadership proved to be an alternativo surgido del Estado. Además también recuerdan el carácter eminentemente reformista del sindicalismo argentino al menos desde la década de los treinta. Ángel Cappelletti destaca en su obra el paulatino proceso de descomposición del anarcosindicalismo uruguayo de la F.O.R.U. (Federación Obrera Regional Uruguaya) desde los treinta con el trasvase de su afiliación a las tendencias sindicalistas y comunistas, en un proceso muy similar al argentino.
Este proceso fue facilitado, según la Ponencia de la Agrupación Libertaria Cerro-La Teja, por la división del anarcosindicalismo uruguayo en “principistas” de la F.O.R.U y partidarios de apoyar “críticamente” the Russian Revolution of USU (Trade Union of Uruguay), then derive central to trade unionism. So this paper establishes a close relationship between the loss of anarchist influence in the unions, once hegemonic, and the dismantling of communist space Uruguayan union (UGT), socialists (Committee for Foreign Trade), anarchists and independent labor (Committee Liaison of Independent Trade Unions) and syndicalists in decline.
should be noted that both Angel Cappelletti as the Libertarian Group Cerro La Teja seems to allow, as is clear from both textos, un carácter secundario a este segundo fenómeno: el primero porque lo cita en una nota a pie de página afirmando que “Otros autores interpretan el peronismo como “bonapartismo” (…) Enrique Rivera (…) Abelardo Ramos (…) Torcuato S. Di Tella” (8) y la Agrupación Libertaria Cerro-La Teja porque después de analizar la fragmentación del sindicalismo uruguayo afirma que “con ser de una importancia material tan notoria (…) nos equivocaríamos si creyéramos que son las únicas o más decisivas” (9) y acto seguido pasa a considerar el aspecto emigratorio campo-ciudad antes analizado.
's bold social policy of Luis Batlle Berres is exemplified in the implementation of the Wage Councils in 1943 with a tripartite structure that integrated employers, workers and state. This institution would acquire such prestige that the struggle for its reintroduction would be the main trade union demand for a democratic transition forty years later. According to most workers of this institution FAU groups generated dramatic changes in social psychology that would force workers to transform the discourse anarchist because "the common man of our times do not expect anything from her own efforts (...) expects everything to be above the wrist, the influence of bribery " (10), they argue, the anarchist movement must go where the new context has placed workers and not expect them to turn (this is where the anarchists of the anarcho-syndicalist FAU distance themselves). 3. Laclau's approach (11) to the troubled Uruguay in the sixties and the construction of a new socio-political movement anarchist (FAU-ROE-OPR 33). Ernesto Laclau disagrees with Murmis and Portantiero Germani and while that does not accept a certain view that considers "mechanistic" research the origins of the populist political discourse in a particular socio-economic situation, arguing with the positivist and Marxist approaches and toward constructivism. For this author, populism is not nothing but a political accumulation strategy to achieve social hegemony, interpreted as necessarily breaks with a "status quo" above, and this is built for the articulation of demands, which are not so satisfied separated by the existing political system in an alternative political discourse.
said Daniel Barrett, a sociologist and a militant libertarian Uruguay, Uruguay at this time was the scene of a movement up in three areas: the formation of " a complex organizational architecture that allowed him a place to vast sectors of society were disconnected (...) a persistent agitation renewed periodically (...) an acceleration of the political rhythm of the popular" (12). We know that Ernesto Laclau not interested so much the fact of the crisis context of social integration model of Neo-batllismo, and failed economic base model of industrialization by import substitution studied by the authors of the "dependency theory" but as the new political actors articulate a new discourse of counter-hegemonic pretensions and a significant influence of the Cuban Revolution of 1959.
fact, according to historian Daniel Eduardo Rey Tristán and Barret, socio-political process will produce the first schism in FAU and serves to illustrate the political tensions that caused the shift of discourse organization. Those sectors attached to classical anarchism, gathered around the Faculty of Fine Arts and intellectuals such as Luce Fabbri, considered unviable organizational support to the pro-Soviet Cuban drift and the gradual abandonment of its positions "third party" (independent of both blocks) compared to the nuclear industry around the labor unions and members as Hugo Cores and José Jorge Martinez kept the need for further support by holding a "critical". This situation will cause a split that will result, by the first, the Libertarian Association of Uruguay (ALU) have little impact in the social struggles of the moment and end up dissolving.
addition, at this time the Uruguayan Anarchist Federation will promote two organizations: Student Worker Resistance (ROE), designed as "mass front" and the Popular Revolutionary Organization - 33 Oriental intended as "armed apparatus" (13). The first organization leaves room, of course, militants of varied backgrounds of ideology, as for example the final slogan of one of their press releases denouncing the attempt to turn on 1 May in a ceremony, says "We celebrate a May 1 joy. The fight will be when we defeat the enemy of all class and build the People's Power in our Patria Libre Socialist " (14). It is clear that references to "people power" and socialist patriotism are the result of interpretation leftist revolutionary national-popular matrix given at the time and somehow contradict the traditional discourse of anarchist principles
Moreover, the same denomination of the RPG-33 with the use of the term "popular", hardly used by previous anarchism multi-class connotations, but especially by the use of the national myth of the 33 East are even more representative of this process. The founding document of this group was exactly the appropriation of the flag of the expedition that freed Uruguay Brazilian imperial rule, justified it one of its members: " (...) The anarchists are not very patriotic issues but we understood that that approach because we had walked MLN model, a nationalist movement, and we understood that it was in the mood of the people (...) ". (15) A justification highly illustrative of the motivations of this discursive shift. So the speech was structured movement, with its differences, counter-hegemonic project and participated in the national-popular of the revolutionary left of the time sought to articulate a series of specific demands (student protests against rising passenger farmers against Bonded workers against wage cuts etc.) that the current political system no longer adequately processed by the economic crisis, the discrediting of political parties and the frequent recourse to repression.
These differences, though specific, can be distinguished in that despite the impact of the model Guevara never accepted the FAU foquista military strategy (the main difference with the MLN-Tupamaros) and OPR-33 activity was always conceived as a mere "logistical support" of the political and mass, considered secondary to the strategy for armed activity. The assumption of the national-popular political matrix also had its limitations because in practice it continued to give a clear priority of the average worker, acting student support groups in several strikes factory (these also had a major presence in the Universidad del Trabajo del Uruguay vocational guidance) also looks set him apart from the groups more supporters of Cuban or Chinese model, as the MRO and the RCP, who conceived the revolution as basically a peasant-student alliance (16).
4. Conclusions: Over This paper has analyzed how the demographic, socioeconomic and political union that start in the early thirty by rural-urban migration, industrialization and urbanization and political fragmentation of the space of association following the decline of a once hegemonic syndicalism, substantial changes occurred in Uruguayan society that resulted in the decline and fragmentation of space-libertarian anarchist in the country in parallel with the rise of national-popular political matrix. To understand this process has been used and Portantiero Murmis Germani and theoretical connections and the interpretation of these anarchists.
The deep concern about this situation encouraged the strategic reorientation, ideological and Uruguayan anarchist discourse that would lead to the FAU and some appropriation of leftist revolutionary reinterpretation of a popular national political matrix decomposed by the new Uruguayan economic and political scenario of the sixties. According to Laclau the disintegration of the ALU would be paradigmatic of the urgent need to build a new paradigm of discourse in a society increasingly heterogenised and ideological elements available that classical anarchism and principled not understand as opposed to the FAU that grasped the necessary plasticity of the political. However, we have seen that this process was not complete by highlighting the limits historical, social, symbolic, etc. of this transformation discourse.
The political defeat of the revolutionary left, and anarchism in particular, also have highlighted the limitations of this paradigm discourse national-popular and revolutionary compared to the dense network of political patronage of the traditional parties (especially Colorado) and the legitimacy that a significant part of society, represented by much of the middle and high, gave the growing authoritarianism of successive governments, culminating in the military coup of 1973. The military in turn failed to produce a breakdown of discurso político hegemónico que ellos serían incapaces de reemplazar. Así se puede concluir la necesidad de integrar los enfoques planteados pues muestran a la vez la plasticidad de lo político y el carácter condicionado de dicha plasticidad.
Alma
Apátrida
------------------------------------
(1) This is a concept drawn from a classic in the sociology of knowledge as Social Construction of Reality by Berger and Luckmann. Although not share his radical thesis that "all reality is socially constructed" as is defining the sociological relativism, battered by J. Searle with the realization that all social construction is the "allocation of public service to something" if I seems an appropriate metaphor to define the complexity of institutions, values \u200b\u200band beliefs and their interdependencies that make up the so-called process of "secondary socialization" ie those that occur outside the family (in this case, the myths, ideological, values \u200b\u200betc. This policy matrix).
(2) Germani, Gino Politics and Society in a time of transition: from traditional society to a society of mass Paidós, Buenos Aires 1965.
(3) CAPPELLETTI, ANGEL Anarchism in Latin America Fundación Biblioteca Ayacucho, Caracas 1990. Page XLIII (emphasis mine).
(4) LIBERTARIAN ASSOCIATION PRESENTATION OF THE TILE HILL, ON POINT II POINT AGENDA I in Mechoso, JUAN C. Anarchist Direct Action: A History of FAU Volume II: The Foundation Cuts Editorial, Montevideo 2005. Page 167.
(5) Figures taken from NAHUM , BENJAMIN Uruguay History Manual Volume II 1903-1909 Banda Oriental Publishing 1997. Pages 208 to 210.
(6) A similar analysis for the Argentine case, this process of disarticulation of sociability socialist and anarchist labor politics and the emergence of a new working class destined to join the national cause-popular (from inside and generational change in the city) is in CARLOS TORRE, JUAN and PASTORIZA , ELENA welfare democratization in CARLOS TORRE, JUAN Peronist Years (1943-1955) Editorial Sudamericana, Buenos Aires, 2002.
(7) Murmis, and Portantiero MIGUEL, JUAN CARLOS Studies on the origins of Peronism Siglo XXI Editores, Buenos Aires 1971.
(8) CAPPELLETTI, ANGEL Anarchism in Latin America Fundación Biblioteca Ayacucho, Caracas 1990. Page XLIII. We must remember that "Bonapartist" means a coercive model of school integration in situations of symmetrical balance of forces, the concept was coined by Karl Marx in The 18 Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte.
(9) LIBERTARIAN ASSOCIATION PRESENTATION OF THE TILE HILL, ON POINT II POINT AGENDA I in Mechoso, JUAN C. Anarchist Direct Action: A History of FAU Volume II: The Foundation Editorial Clippings, Montevideo 2005. Page 167.
(10) OP. CIT. Page 167.
(11) Laclau, Ernesto Politics and ideology in Marxist theory: Capitalism, fascism, populism Siglo XXI Editores, Buenos Aires, the year "?. Laclau, Ernesto Populist Reason Fondo de Cultura Economica Argentina, Buenos Aires 2005.
(12) BARRET, DANIEL Uruguayan anarchist movement in the Time of Cholera Selected Texts by Daniel Barret www.nodo50.org/ellibertario. (Emphasis mine).
(13) To learn more about this threefold model of political organization, and military people around FAU nucleated anarchism can be found TRISTAN KING, EDWARD Uruguayan Revolutionary Left, 1955-1973 Diputación de Sevilla, University de Sevilla, Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, Escuela de Estudios Hispano-Americans. 2005.
(14) THE MAY 1 NOT A PARTY IS A WORKING DAY OF STRUGGLE AND POPULAR release from ROE published in March in Action Anarchist Direct: A History of FAU Editorial Cuts Volume IV, Montevideo 2005. Page 417. (Emphasis mine).
(15) TIRSO Fiorotto, DANIEL "Che is all" interview with Hebert Mejías Collazo Documentation Center of Armed Movements (DESC) www.cedema.org (Section Uruguay - Popular Revolutionary Organization-33 East).
(16) To learn more about the differences of FAU with other revolutionary organizations of the time compared to foquismo / workerism FAU Action Association and armed struggle in Punto Final, 96. January 20, 1970 at the Documentation Center of Armed Movements (DESC) www.cedema.org (Section Uruguay - Uruguayan Anarchist Federation) and Mechoso, JUAN C. Anarchist Direct Action: A History of FAU Editorial Cuts Volume IV, Montevideo 2005. Yellow 222-224. 361-364.
0 comments:
Post a Comment