Claims of a Rigged Vote Foment Bitter Protests in Nicaragua
By MARC LACEY
Published: November 19, 2008
MANAGUA, Nicaragua — As homemade mortar rounds exploded over this capital, and angry demonstrators poured into the streets for a second consecutive day, Nicaragua found itself mired Wednesday in an increasingly bitter struggle over who controls Managua and scores of other cities across the country.
Oswaldo Rivas/Reuters
Police officers on Sunday in León, Nicaragua, detained a supporter of Eduardo Montealegre, who insisted he was the winner of the mayoral race in Managua.
Esteban Felix/Associated Press
Supporters of the left-wing Sandinista party of President Daniel Ortega threw stones during a clash on Sunday in León.
Opposition leaders accuse President Daniel Ortega's left-wing Sandinista party of rigging the mayoral race here and hundreds of other municipal races across the country in an effort to extend its political reach.
Before Election Day, Nov. 9, Mr. Ortega limited the access of outside election observers and then, his critics contend, ordered his underlings to tamper with the balloting to ensure that candidates loyal to him came out on top.
"This fight isn't about the Managua mayoralty," said Eduardo Montealegre, who insisted he was the legitimate winner of the mayoral race even though the Sandinista-controlled electoral council said preliminary figures indicated that he had lost.
"It's more fundamental," he said. "It's about dictatorship versus democracy."
Mr. Montealegre, a member of the Constitutional Liberal Party, has tried to protest the results, but he has been met by angry Sandinistas at every turn. They have chased away his supporters and have turned the streets into a free-for-all.
Demonstrators blocked intersections and pelted cars with rocks. Members of rival political parties have faced off in angry confrontations, and nervous merchants have closed up their businesses.
Mr. Ortega has remained silent. A Sandinista revolutionary who led Nicaragua in the 1980s, he was ousted in 1990. But he was re-elected in 2006 in a hotly contested race in which his closest rival was Mr. Montealegre. While Mr. Ortega won with only 38 percent of the vote, he has moved to impose his Sandinista stamp on all aspects of society.
Sandinistas clearly control the streets. For weeks before Election Day, the party's supporters began camping out at traffic circles in what they called prayers for peace over hate. Opposition leaders saw it as an attempt to hold on to central public spaces and to limit opposition rallies.
"The streets are ours," said José Bonilla, a Sandinista supporter holding a homemade plywood shield, during the tumult in Managua on Tuesday afternoon. Fellow demonstrators, waving red-and-black Sandinista flags, shot explosives over the heads of riot police officers who were blocking them from Mr. Montealegre's rally a block away.
When Mr. Ortega cast his ballot in an election that was viewed as the first test of his influence since his re-election, he defended the integrity of the balloting and accused the local media of trying to discredit the results and "create an image of Nicaragua at war."
Mr. Montealegre, backed by leaders of the Catholic Church and Nicaragua's two largest business organizations, is demanding a full recount monitored by international observers.
Mr. Ortega's skepticism of international observers traces back to the 1990 election, in which he was defeated by Violeta Barrios de Chamorro. "From that moment, the truth is that I lost faith in the Organization of American States and all the other organisms," he said in a speech before the election.
The Supreme Electoral Council of Nicaragua, in its initial report on the voting on Nov. 9, said the Sandinista mayoral candidate in Managua, Alexis Argüello, 52, a three-time world boxing champion, had defeated Mr. Montealegre, 53, who is a Harvard-educated former finance minister.
But in response to a barrage of criticism, including some from the United States and other governments, Roberto Rivas, the president of the electoral council, ordered a recount. But he said it would not be monitored by independent outsiders.
"We are doing it so that the Nicaraguan people — not the embassies, but the Nicaraguan people — are completely satisfied that their vote was respected," Mr. Rivas said in a news conference last week.
Mr. Rivas did not address accusations that polls closed early and that opposition electoral delegates were forced out of the final counting of the vote in Managua. He did request that state prosecutors investigate reports that ballots marked for the opposition were found in the municipal dump in León, northwest of Managua.
"It must be found out whether public officials are involved," he said, adding that he would "get to the bottom of this case."
In his news conference, Mr. Rivas chided Mr. Montealegre for failing to file a formal fraud complaint with Nicaraguan prosecutors and for calling on his supporters to take to the streets in protest.
But Mr. Montealegre, in an interview on Wednesday, said it was the government that was responsible for the violence. Gesturing at newspaper photographs that showed his supporters waving Nicaraguan flags and Sandinista backers clutching rocks and sticks, he said Mr. Ortega was responsible for the violence in the streets.
"He is the president of the country, not me," Mr. Montealegre said. "He can end this."
Blake Schmidt contributed reporting.
More Articles in World » A version of this article appeared in print on November 20, 2008, on page A6 of the New York edition.
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Sontule (read this before the prior post if you want chronological order...)
The group and I are back from Sontule, a rural community 40 minutes outside of the city of Esteli. Honestly, I was not expecting to enjoy myself to the extent that I did. The group and I got out of a packed week building up to a substantial paper that we finished the night before leaving. One could say that the timing worked out great, but my mindset was just not into the extra moving around at the time...
Now I am surprised at the feelings I have when when thinking about the family I stayed with, after just less than four days of being in their presence... I miss them...really! The environment we were surrounded in was truly phenomenal. Never in Central America have I seen farm land like that which I saw while living in Sontule from Monday to Thursday. Amy, a friend from the group, and I lived together with Doña Isabel, Don Franciso, Henry, Xaña, Araseli, Kevin, and little Fabricio (who is just about to be two years old and is the neatest child I have come across in Central America thus far... I have got to say that by yesterday, he started calling me "Chía," (his way of saying "Tía") which touched my heart incredibly). Our leaders warned us about the drastic climate change (Sontule being quite colder than the intense Managuan heat), but I didn't actually believe it until I felt and heard the fuerte wind that approached and grew from the afternoon on...
While there we learned about the three different cooperatives that Sontule takes part in under the organizational entity of UCA Miraflor. The women's cooperative was specifically emphasized. It was after the Agrarian Reform in 1991 when each family in Sontule was given 16 manzanas (1 manzana = 1.7 acres) of land. Before that time, specifically during the Somoza dictatorship, inhabitants of Sontule worked on a coffee plantation for Rene Molina (who was soon to become a millionaire after working as a deptuty/representative for Somoza)... the farm workers were mainly "blind," as they said, to the inhumane actions and policies of Somoza. They were also working as slaves. But many claimed that they knew nothing else, so it was normal life for them.
It was when different groups from various Nicaraguan cities and international orgs came to meet with the campesinos when they began to realize the wrongs that were being done to them and the injustices that were being imposed upon Nicaragua as a whole... It was around that time when many of the coffee plantation workers began to organize and join the guerrillas against Somoza...
This story was and is lived by the host family that Amy and I stayed with...
Here is a recent article from the New York Times. It can give you a more formal idea of what has been going on around here... PS: the FSLN is now claiming the the US has something to do with the charges of fraud against them... This is odd, especially because the US is sponsoring some of the FSLN's advertisements and organizational groups...
more to come....
love and peace--
Now I am surprised at the feelings I have when when thinking about the family I stayed with, after just less than four days of being in their presence... I miss them...really! The environment we were surrounded in was truly phenomenal. Never in Central America have I seen farm land like that which I saw while living in Sontule from Monday to Thursday. Amy, a friend from the group, and I lived together with Doña Isabel, Don Franciso, Henry, Xaña, Araseli, Kevin, and little Fabricio (who is just about to be two years old and is the neatest child I have come across in Central America thus far... I have got to say that by yesterday, he started calling me "Chía," (his way of saying "Tía") which touched my heart incredibly). Our leaders warned us about the drastic climate change (Sontule being quite colder than the intense Managuan heat), but I didn't actually believe it until I felt and heard the fuerte wind that approached and grew from the afternoon on...
While there we learned about the three different cooperatives that Sontule takes part in under the organizational entity of UCA Miraflor. The women's cooperative was specifically emphasized. It was after the Agrarian Reform in 1991 when each family in Sontule was given 16 manzanas (1 manzana = 1.7 acres) of land. Before that time, specifically during the Somoza dictatorship, inhabitants of Sontule worked on a coffee plantation for Rene Molina (who was soon to become a millionaire after working as a deptuty/representative for Somoza)... the farm workers were mainly "blind," as they said, to the inhumane actions and policies of Somoza. They were also working as slaves. But many claimed that they knew nothing else, so it was normal life for them.
It was when different groups from various Nicaraguan cities and international orgs came to meet with the campesinos when they began to realize the wrongs that were being done to them and the injustices that were being imposed upon Nicaragua as a whole... It was around that time when many of the coffee plantation workers began to organize and join the guerrillas against Somoza...
This story was and is lived by the host family that Amy and I stayed with...
Here is a recent article from the New York Times. It can give you a more formal idea of what has been going on around here... PS: the FSLN is now claiming the the US has something to do with the charges of fraud against them... This is odd, especially because the US is sponsoring some of the FSLN's advertisements and organizational groups...
more to come....
love and peace--
Latest News Update from Nica
Once again, the NY Times has printed another informative and vital article regarding the current political situations and relationships in Nicaragua. In my opinion, this is one people should read.
The writing emphasizes the interesting shift that has occurred amongst the Sandinista Party (FSLN)... from those who used to be staunch revolutionaries side by side with Daniel - to those who have become deeply disillusioned by Daniel and what they believe to be his betrayal of the Sandinista Revolution's principles... When reading, notice the revolutionary Dora María Téllez who was one of the founders of the break-off FSLN party - the MRS (Sandinista Renovation Movement) - and who is the former President of the MRS... The group and I met with her for nearly two hours yesterday. She could not come to the Center for Global Education house (because it is on the same block as President Ortega's house and she has been a conflicting figure during these past weeks surrounding the elections - not to mention her criticisms of Daniel's ruling) so we met her in a conference room of a pastry restaurant. What a hidden place to meet, eh;) But she was awesome - I mean literally this woman is a huge Nicaraguan - furthermore a Central and Latin American - figure. Dora was 18 yrs old when she joined the FSLN...And when the Sandinistas took over the National Assembly (from Somoza before the revolutionary triumph) she stood on the balcony as the only female and Second in Command. What a woman.
Two friends and I will be doing on final project on the MRS; Dora said she would meet with us privately again... wow alright!
Read on to find more...
Sandinista Fervor Turns Sour for Former Comrades of Nicaragua’s President
Oswaldo Rivas/Reuters
Sandinista supporters celebrated a victory in mayoral elections in Managua, Nicaragua’s capital, this month. Many Sandinistas, though, have left the movement.
By MARC LACEY
Published: November 23, 2008
MANAGUA, Nicaragua — The music of President Daniel Ortega’s Sandinista party, the rousing songs sung during political rallies and street protests that draw his supporters by the thousands, is the same as what rang out during the war years of the 1980s. “Brother, give me your hand, we now march united toward the victorious sun, on the path to liberty,” goes one.
Esteban Felix/Associated Press
Carlos Mejía Godoy, left, and Edmundo Jarquín in 2006, when Mr. Jarquín ran for president. Mr. Mejía Godoy, a songwriter, was his running mate in a party made up of former Sandinistas.
But Carlos Mejía Godoy, the revolutionary singer-songwriter who dreamed up those songs when he was the Sandinistas’ chief balladeer, has told Mr. Ortega’s government to stop using his music and in recent days has been furiously scribbling new lyrics that lament the direction that Mr. Ortega is taking the country.
Like many prominent Sandinistas who have left Mr. Ortega’s movement in disgust, Mr. Mejía Godoy is now denounced by party members as a sellout who has lost his revolutionary fervor. But ex-Sandinistas, it turns out, are some of Mr. Ortega’s harshest critics these days, hounding him and provoking his ire.
Mr. Ortega’s critics have accused him of rigging this month’s municipal elections in an effort to spread his power. Leading the charge against Mr. Ortega have been some of his former comrades in the Sandinista National Liberation Front, which ruled Nicaragua in the 1980s and returned to power two years ago. The dissenters include cabinet members in Mr. Ortega’s old government and intellectuals who championed the revolution that brought him to power.
“I want a peaceful and harmonious Nicaragua,” goes Mr. Mejía Godoy’s latest song, which he pulled out proudly on Thursday afternoon after spending much of the previous evening working on the arrangement and fine-tuning the lyrics. “I want a Nicaragua that is free, where nobody destroys the flower of my happiness, nor puts a straitjacket on my way of thinking.”
Present-day Sandinistas brush off the criticism from their former comrades in arms.
“The revolution is like a train. People get on and off,” said Elías Chévez, a Sandinista legislator and former guerrilla, who stood with his arms crossed in the street Thursday night watching a raucous group of party supporters await final results from the Nov. 9 election.
Recent actions by the government have made it clear that the defections are rattling Mr. Ortega. Orlando Nuñez, an adviser to the president, acknowledged that the infighting among former comrades could have the intensity of a family feud.
Edmundo Jarquín, a former Sandinista, said of Mr. Ortega, “He views us as traitors.” Mr. Jarquín challenged Mr. Ortega for the presidency in 2006 as a member of the Sandinista Renovation Movement, a political party made up mostly of former Sandinistas. Mr. Mejía Godoy was Mr. Jarquín’s vice presidential candidate.
Mr. Nuñez said the Sandinistas had stayed true to their principles and continued to focus on the poor masses in a country with an economy that is only a notch above Haiti’s. “We’re continuing the themes of the revolution of the ’80s,” he said, a point vehemently disputed by Mr. Ortega’s detractors.
Both sides in the political skirmishing in Nicaragua these days portray themselves as the true disciples of Augusto Sandino, the nationalist leader who conducted guerrilla raids against occupying American soldiers in the late 1920s and early 1930s. In the past two years, the government has renamed Managua’s airport for Sandino and posted his photo in public offices and public spaces.
To outflank the former Sandinistas, Mr. Ortega’s government managed to keep Mr. Jarquín’s party off the ballot in the municipal elections two weeks ago. That move prompted Dora María Téllez, a former rebel leader who fought alongside Mr. Ortega and was once his health minister, to go on a 12-day hunger strike.
In 1978, Ms. Téllez helped lead a Sandinista raid of Nicaragua’s National Palace in which the guerrillas took the entire Congress hostage. The operation’s second-in-command, Ms. Téllez managed negotiations with the regime of the beleaguered dictator Anastasio Somoza, who ceded the rebels a $1 million ransom and Sandinista political prisoners.
Nowadays, she focuses her wrath on what she considers Mr. Ortega’s repressive ways. She said he had deformed the movement so that it would “revolve around him” and not any revolutionary ideals.
Mr. Ortega’s government found itself on the defensive recently when it took on one of the most cherished icons of the revolution, Ernesto Cardenal, the 83-year-old priest and poet who helped create the intellectual backbone of the revolution.
This summer, after Father Cardenal lashed out against Mr. Ortega while in Paraguay, calling him a “thief” who runs “a monarchy made up of a few families,” a Nicaraguan judge revived an old court case against the poet and froze his bank accounts. Politics frequently creeps into Nicaragua’s judiciary, and the action prompted widespread condemnation from intellectuals both at home and abroad.
“It’s vengeance,” Father Cardenal said Friday in a telephone interview from Brazil, where he was giving a reading. “I spoke out against him, and he’s striking back.”
For the past 30 years, a left-right schism of Sandinistas and anti-Sandinistas has largely defined Nicaraguan politics. Mr. Ortega has shaken that up by making political agreements with ideological opposites aimed at bolstering his political future. But with former Sandinistas now playing a more vocal role, Nicaraguans find themselves in two opposing camps: Ortegistas, who back the president, and anti-Ortegistas, who denounce him.
One of those in the latter group is Sophia Montenegro, whose office was recently raided by Mr. Ortega’s government. It accused the group she works for, the Autonomous Women’s Movement, of laundering overseas donations. The organization has been an outspoken critic of Mr. Ortega’s record on women.
Women’s empowerment was one of the cornerstones of the Sandinista revolution, but Ms. Montenegro said that ideal had been lost. Especially infuriating to her was the decision by the Sandinistas to support a ban on all abortions, even when mothers’ lives were threatened. That decision in 2006 came as part of Mr. Ortega’s effort to improve relations with the Roman Catholic Church, which clashed with the Sandinistas during the war.
The sexual abuse allegations leveled against Mr. Ortega by his stepdaughter in 1998 are another point frequently raised by his female critics. Women’s rights advocates in Nicaragua have helped organize anti-Ortega campaigns throughout Latin America, and the president faces the threat of ugly protests on the issue wherever he travels. In Nicaragua, he had legal immunity and was never prosecuted.
Mr. Ortega’s relationship with one of his close advisers, Dionisio Marenco, the departing mayor of Managua, has also crumbled recently. Mr. Marenco traces the shift to his decision to oppose a vice mayoral candidate put forward a year ago by Rosario Murillo, the president’s wife. Since then, Mr. Marenco said, Ms. Murillo has accused him of conspiring against the president.
“Treason is the worst thing you can be accused of,” he said, indicating that he might become the latest Sandinista to leave the party.
“We have to wait and see how the water feels,” he said. “It’s very tense and complicated right now.”
As for the music, Ms. Murillo, the president’s closest adviser, has dismissed Mr. Mejía Godoy’s attempt to keep his revolutionary notes to himself. She had an orchestra play one of Mr. Mejía Godoy’s most famous songs, “La Consigna,” at a government rally and the party put out a CD featuring others.
As Mr. Mejía Godoy tries, with little effect so far, to use lawyers to restrain the government, it is clear that Mr. Ortega’s supporters prefer the singer’s older works.
Ms. Murillo, herself a poet, wrote on her Web site: “There will always be, for me, one Carlos who was on the left, who was a leftist in his heart, and another Carlos, the one of today, who has lost his voice.”
Blake Schmidt contributed reporting.
More Articles in World » A version of this article appeared in print on November 24, 2008, on page A6 of the New York edition.
The writing emphasizes the interesting shift that has occurred amongst the Sandinista Party (FSLN)... from those who used to be staunch revolutionaries side by side with Daniel - to those who have become deeply disillusioned by Daniel and what they believe to be his betrayal of the Sandinista Revolution's principles... When reading, notice the revolutionary Dora María Téllez who was one of the founders of the break-off FSLN party - the MRS (Sandinista Renovation Movement) - and who is the former President of the MRS... The group and I met with her for nearly two hours yesterday. She could not come to the Center for Global Education house (because it is on the same block as President Ortega's house and she has been a conflicting figure during these past weeks surrounding the elections - not to mention her criticisms of Daniel's ruling) so we met her in a conference room of a pastry restaurant. What a hidden place to meet, eh;) But she was awesome - I mean literally this woman is a huge Nicaraguan - furthermore a Central and Latin American - figure. Dora was 18 yrs old when she joined the FSLN...And when the Sandinistas took over the National Assembly (from Somoza before the revolutionary triumph) she stood on the balcony as the only female and Second in Command. What a woman.
Two friends and I will be doing on final project on the MRS; Dora said she would meet with us privately again... wow alright!
Read on to find more...
Sandinista Fervor Turns Sour for Former Comrades of Nicaragua’s President
Oswaldo Rivas/Reuters
Sandinista supporters celebrated a victory in mayoral elections in Managua, Nicaragua’s capital, this month. Many Sandinistas, though, have left the movement.
By MARC LACEY
Published: November 23, 2008
MANAGUA, Nicaragua — The music of President Daniel Ortega’s Sandinista party, the rousing songs sung during political rallies and street protests that draw his supporters by the thousands, is the same as what rang out during the war years of the 1980s. “Brother, give me your hand, we now march united toward the victorious sun, on the path to liberty,” goes one.
Esteban Felix/Associated Press
Carlos Mejía Godoy, left, and Edmundo Jarquín in 2006, when Mr. Jarquín ran for president. Mr. Mejía Godoy, a songwriter, was his running mate in a party made up of former Sandinistas.
But Carlos Mejía Godoy, the revolutionary singer-songwriter who dreamed up those songs when he was the Sandinistas’ chief balladeer, has told Mr. Ortega’s government to stop using his music and in recent days has been furiously scribbling new lyrics that lament the direction that Mr. Ortega is taking the country.
Like many prominent Sandinistas who have left Mr. Ortega’s movement in disgust, Mr. Mejía Godoy is now denounced by party members as a sellout who has lost his revolutionary fervor. But ex-Sandinistas, it turns out, are some of Mr. Ortega’s harshest critics these days, hounding him and provoking his ire.
Mr. Ortega’s critics have accused him of rigging this month’s municipal elections in an effort to spread his power. Leading the charge against Mr. Ortega have been some of his former comrades in the Sandinista National Liberation Front, which ruled Nicaragua in the 1980s and returned to power two years ago. The dissenters include cabinet members in Mr. Ortega’s old government and intellectuals who championed the revolution that brought him to power.
“I want a peaceful and harmonious Nicaragua,” goes Mr. Mejía Godoy’s latest song, which he pulled out proudly on Thursday afternoon after spending much of the previous evening working on the arrangement and fine-tuning the lyrics. “I want a Nicaragua that is free, where nobody destroys the flower of my happiness, nor puts a straitjacket on my way of thinking.”
Present-day Sandinistas brush off the criticism from their former comrades in arms.
“The revolution is like a train. People get on and off,” said Elías Chévez, a Sandinista legislator and former guerrilla, who stood with his arms crossed in the street Thursday night watching a raucous group of party supporters await final results from the Nov. 9 election.
Recent actions by the government have made it clear that the defections are rattling Mr. Ortega. Orlando Nuñez, an adviser to the president, acknowledged that the infighting among former comrades could have the intensity of a family feud.
Edmundo Jarquín, a former Sandinista, said of Mr. Ortega, “He views us as traitors.” Mr. Jarquín challenged Mr. Ortega for the presidency in 2006 as a member of the Sandinista Renovation Movement, a political party made up mostly of former Sandinistas. Mr. Mejía Godoy was Mr. Jarquín’s vice presidential candidate.
Mr. Nuñez said the Sandinistas had stayed true to their principles and continued to focus on the poor masses in a country with an economy that is only a notch above Haiti’s. “We’re continuing the themes of the revolution of the ’80s,” he said, a point vehemently disputed by Mr. Ortega’s detractors.
Both sides in the political skirmishing in Nicaragua these days portray themselves as the true disciples of Augusto Sandino, the nationalist leader who conducted guerrilla raids against occupying American soldiers in the late 1920s and early 1930s. In the past two years, the government has renamed Managua’s airport for Sandino and posted his photo in public offices and public spaces.
To outflank the former Sandinistas, Mr. Ortega’s government managed to keep Mr. Jarquín’s party off the ballot in the municipal elections two weeks ago. That move prompted Dora María Téllez, a former rebel leader who fought alongside Mr. Ortega and was once his health minister, to go on a 12-day hunger strike.
In 1978, Ms. Téllez helped lead a Sandinista raid of Nicaragua’s National Palace in which the guerrillas took the entire Congress hostage. The operation’s second-in-command, Ms. Téllez managed negotiations with the regime of the beleaguered dictator Anastasio Somoza, who ceded the rebels a $1 million ransom and Sandinista political prisoners.
Nowadays, she focuses her wrath on what she considers Mr. Ortega’s repressive ways. She said he had deformed the movement so that it would “revolve around him” and not any revolutionary ideals.
Mr. Ortega’s government found itself on the defensive recently when it took on one of the most cherished icons of the revolution, Ernesto Cardenal, the 83-year-old priest and poet who helped create the intellectual backbone of the revolution.
This summer, after Father Cardenal lashed out against Mr. Ortega while in Paraguay, calling him a “thief” who runs “a monarchy made up of a few families,” a Nicaraguan judge revived an old court case against the poet and froze his bank accounts. Politics frequently creeps into Nicaragua’s judiciary, and the action prompted widespread condemnation from intellectuals both at home and abroad.
“It’s vengeance,” Father Cardenal said Friday in a telephone interview from Brazil, where he was giving a reading. “I spoke out against him, and he’s striking back.”
For the past 30 years, a left-right schism of Sandinistas and anti-Sandinistas has largely defined Nicaraguan politics. Mr. Ortega has shaken that up by making political agreements with ideological opposites aimed at bolstering his political future. But with former Sandinistas now playing a more vocal role, Nicaraguans find themselves in two opposing camps: Ortegistas, who back the president, and anti-Ortegistas, who denounce him.
One of those in the latter group is Sophia Montenegro, whose office was recently raided by Mr. Ortega’s government. It accused the group she works for, the Autonomous Women’s Movement, of laundering overseas donations. The organization has been an outspoken critic of Mr. Ortega’s record on women.
Women’s empowerment was one of the cornerstones of the Sandinista revolution, but Ms. Montenegro said that ideal had been lost. Especially infuriating to her was the decision by the Sandinistas to support a ban on all abortions, even when mothers’ lives were threatened. That decision in 2006 came as part of Mr. Ortega’s effort to improve relations with the Roman Catholic Church, which clashed with the Sandinistas during the war.
The sexual abuse allegations leveled against Mr. Ortega by his stepdaughter in 1998 are another point frequently raised by his female critics. Women’s rights advocates in Nicaragua have helped organize anti-Ortega campaigns throughout Latin America, and the president faces the threat of ugly protests on the issue wherever he travels. In Nicaragua, he had legal immunity and was never prosecuted.
Mr. Ortega’s relationship with one of his close advisers, Dionisio Marenco, the departing mayor of Managua, has also crumbled recently. Mr. Marenco traces the shift to his decision to oppose a vice mayoral candidate put forward a year ago by Rosario Murillo, the president’s wife. Since then, Mr. Marenco said, Ms. Murillo has accused him of conspiring against the president.
“Treason is the worst thing you can be accused of,” he said, indicating that he might become the latest Sandinista to leave the party.
“We have to wait and see how the water feels,” he said. “It’s very tense and complicated right now.”
As for the music, Ms. Murillo, the president’s closest adviser, has dismissed Mr. Mejía Godoy’s attempt to keep his revolutionary notes to himself. She had an orchestra play one of Mr. Mejía Godoy’s most famous songs, “La Consigna,” at a government rally and the party put out a CD featuring others.
As Mr. Mejía Godoy tries, with little effect so far, to use lawyers to restrain the government, it is clear that Mr. Ortega’s supporters prefer the singer’s older works.
Ms. Murillo, herself a poet, wrote on her Web site: “There will always be, for me, one Carlos who was on the left, who was a leftist in his heart, and another Carlos, the one of today, who has lost his voice.”
Blake Schmidt contributed reporting.
More Articles in World » A version of this article appeared in print on November 24, 2008, on page A6 of the New York edition.
Sunday, November 16, 2008
The Neoliberal Politics of Nicaragua & Their Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPs)
The Neoliberal Politics of Nicaragua
Structural Adjustment Policies (SAPs) originated in the 1980s when the IMF and World Bank began to solicit their services to Latin America, promoting the production of ‘tradable goods’ through the message of ‘recovery with growth’ (Brydon, 346, 347). On this path, claimed the IMF and World Bank, Third World states would potentially develop into middle-income countries by 2020 (Brydon, 347). The unsuspecting propositions of these institutions were alluringly ideal, but it is that idealness that has ultimately undermined and harmed Nicaragua’s development. Saying this, it is necessary to further take into account the Nicaraguan government’s role (past and present) in dealing with the IMF and World Bank regarding SAPs. In the following paragraphs, I will address varying view points on what I believe to be SAPs’ two principle themes (privatization and liberalization) and their effects on Nicaraguan society (specifically relating to gender and various economic classes). These examples will essentially show that because of SAPs’ neoliberal tendencies and presumptuous beliefs of a “perfect market,” Nicaragua has therefore continued to suffer from detrimental instability.
After President Violeta Chamorro took office in 1990, Nicaragua had accumulated the highest per capita debt in the world, due in large part to the Somoza regime (“Deadly Embrace”, 11/12/08). With mounting pressure to alleviate the financial burden, it was during this time when Nicaragua built a substantial relationship with the IMF and World Bank. The IMF rapidly imposed their version of structural adjustment which lowered Nicaragua’s fiscal deficits to an absolute minimum, when the country’s fiscal income was already incredibly small.
In that context of scant fiscal income and huge foreign debt payments, keeping the fiscal deficit at a minimum could only be done with absolutely rock-bottom per-capita spending on the state’s fundamental responsibilities: education, health care, drinking water and sanitation, housing and physical infrastructure” (Vogl, 1).
President Chamorro encouraged this by initiating privatization into Nicaraguan society. The argument for privatization was “to enable the country to participate in an effective global economy” (“Deadly Embrace”, 11/12/08). Fans of privatization claimed that it would increase employment by bringing in more foreign investors who would in turn construct large factories and offer a greater number of jobs. The private sector, it was said, would “fill in the gap” of the market economy. In reality, the unemployment rate in Nicaragua had already reached 60% nationally, and on the Atlantic Coast it skyrocketed at 90% (“Deadly Embrace”, 11/12/08). Not only did unemployment continue to increase, but labor unions were also cut and Free Trade Zones (with loose labor restrictions) were growing. The act of liberalization, specifically financial liberalization in this case, played a large role in affecting these circumstances.
Enacting liberalization in coalition with privatization meant the removal of government interference. Trade liberalization opened the markets, emphasized an export economy, lowered the value of farmers’ goods in the market, and ultimately stripped farmers of their subsidies (Espinoza, 11/13/08). Import duty barriers that protect national product (for example, tariffs) as well as quotas were continuously reduced. As Isolda Espinoza claimed, financial market liberalization increased the potential for market distraction (for example, international chain companies entered Nicaragua for money but not for the substantial development of the country) and created a mismatch of incentives (the thought that jobs would increase with employment options from international companies but in reality maquilas with little labor codes and foreign banks came and took over small, local businesses). In 2001 and 2002, the IMF proposed financial liberalizations in the name of the Washington Consensus and neoliberalization; this resultantly cost Nicaragua $500 million in debt when four of the country’s banks went bankrupt (Avendaño, 11/12/08).
All this was done in the purely ideological belief that government interventions only distort markets, and that if left to act freely, markets produce a restructuring that favors greater “efficiency.” The IMF demanded the fastest possible privatization of public enterprises and the total opening, deregulation and liberalization of the economy rather than ensuring the country’s rehabilitation and the creation of basic infrastructure conditions and human capital with an eye to future development. (Vogl, 2)
Because of the IMF’s blatant mistreatment and virtual dismissal of the different sectors of Nicaraguan society, specifically those of the lower economic class, the IMF has developed a selective, narrow dialogue and has reproduced social inequalities because of its relationships based on power and money.
The IMF’s exclusion of Nicaraguans is exemplified when critiquing the manner in which policies have been imposed “without even negotiating the preservation of certain margins of social inclusion” [specifically those that the Sandinista Revolution fought in the name of] (Vogl, 4). Regarding transparency and the utter lack of it, “top level transactions” starting in the 1990s then set the stage for how policies are decided currently. Vogl writes about the FSLN’s internal commitments with the IMF… what officials label a “poverty reduction program” actually is a process that moves resources to the BCN in order to recover its international reserve levels and then cover the domestic debt service… which ultimately limits social spending even more severely. Therefore the majority of Nicaragua’s population has little to no say in how their national budget is spent and thus people are left even more helpless when they, in turn, must suffer from governmental cut-backs on their social and health needs. “We have to question ‘how priorities are established, and who gives way when agents’ decisions do not add up to a coherent whole’, thus taking on board issues of power and entitlements…” (Brydon, 350) From a context such as this, the role of gender in neoliberalism (neoliberal politics) comes into play.
Viewing neoliberalism and its connections with the world economy, it is seen that men and women are affected in diverse ways by changes in production, trade and financial flows (O’Brien & Williams, 283). This division of labor thus supports the theory that it is the impoverished and working-class women, then, who suffer most from the world’s ongoing economy crises. Although many men also endure impoverishment, the systemic feminization of poverty is undeniable and therefore the costs of SAPs are unequally carried by women.
As governments attempt to balance budgets and engage in structural adjustment programs to make their economies more internationally competitive, women are often forced to pay the price by taking up tasks hitherto performed by the state or giving up their existing sources of income in order to concentrate on caring for their families’ immediate needs. In other words, structural adjustment programs are dependent on unpaid women’s labor. (O’Brien & Williams, 285)
Unfortunately women’s work has much been overshadowed by the false autonomy of the masculine sector of the population. It does not help when a government such as the FSLN, for example, in 1990 voted in favor of all the IMF’s SAPs (Vogl, 7). The result of these votes ultimately decreased spending to balance Nicaragua’s budget, therefore losing many public services – such services that would support the already over-stretched woman. This emphasizes that Nicaraguan neoliberal policies have thus far failed to take women into full and equal account in the light of their unique circumstances.
Civic society still has the potential to educate the public about the dynamics of neoliberal policies in order to affect good governance clauses, bring light to ecological issues, and broaden the theory to development by placing greater importance on social conditions. This could result in greater transparency (which current policies have been gravely lacking) and more open dialogue/debate. So far, though, Nicaragua’s SAPs – simulated by the IMF’s neoliberal policies – have failed and thus deepened instability because of their lack of competition laws, their lack of sequencing and pacing, their lack of gender and social equalities, and their lack of wealth distribution. Néstor Avendaño was right when he spoke of society’s lack of faith and trust in Nicaragua’s leaders… “No one believes in the Supreme Electoral Council. Leaders of the institutions are all made of either the FSLN or the PLC; these leaders are not being bi-partisan. This is all affecting Nicaragua economically” (Avendaño, 11/12/08). Effective, bi-partisan government regulation is necessary in order to ensure fair practices and just working conditions and wages. With government regulation, foreign companies have less power to enter into a country like Nicaragua and develop a monopoly within the market, therefore knocking out all other competition just to later raise their prices. Safety nets are also needed, especially when the economic market suffers from crises. SAPs must adapt to and meet each specific cultural context depending on the country in which they are occurring. SAPs cannot follow just one neoliberal model because each country develops at its own pace, based on its own societal circumstances. It is when power balances and internal aspects such as corruption and political tensions are eased that SAPs can be utilized to promote Nicaragua’s development rather than commit the adverse. As Carlos Pacheco declared, “The solution does not depend on one government or one country. No individual solutions exist. These are global” (Pacheco, 11/09/08).
Structural Adjustment Policies (SAPs) originated in the 1980s when the IMF and World Bank began to solicit their services to Latin America, promoting the production of ‘tradable goods’ through the message of ‘recovery with growth’ (Brydon, 346, 347). On this path, claimed the IMF and World Bank, Third World states would potentially develop into middle-income countries by 2020 (Brydon, 347). The unsuspecting propositions of these institutions were alluringly ideal, but it is that idealness that has ultimately undermined and harmed Nicaragua’s development. Saying this, it is necessary to further take into account the Nicaraguan government’s role (past and present) in dealing with the IMF and World Bank regarding SAPs. In the following paragraphs, I will address varying view points on what I believe to be SAPs’ two principle themes (privatization and liberalization) and their effects on Nicaraguan society (specifically relating to gender and various economic classes). These examples will essentially show that because of SAPs’ neoliberal tendencies and presumptuous beliefs of a “perfect market,” Nicaragua has therefore continued to suffer from detrimental instability.
After President Violeta Chamorro took office in 1990, Nicaragua had accumulated the highest per capita debt in the world, due in large part to the Somoza regime (“Deadly Embrace”, 11/12/08). With mounting pressure to alleviate the financial burden, it was during this time when Nicaragua built a substantial relationship with the IMF and World Bank. The IMF rapidly imposed their version of structural adjustment which lowered Nicaragua’s fiscal deficits to an absolute minimum, when the country’s fiscal income was already incredibly small.
In that context of scant fiscal income and huge foreign debt payments, keeping the fiscal deficit at a minimum could only be done with absolutely rock-bottom per-capita spending on the state’s fundamental responsibilities: education, health care, drinking water and sanitation, housing and physical infrastructure” (Vogl, 1).
President Chamorro encouraged this by initiating privatization into Nicaraguan society. The argument for privatization was “to enable the country to participate in an effective global economy” (“Deadly Embrace”, 11/12/08). Fans of privatization claimed that it would increase employment by bringing in more foreign investors who would in turn construct large factories and offer a greater number of jobs. The private sector, it was said, would “fill in the gap” of the market economy. In reality, the unemployment rate in Nicaragua had already reached 60% nationally, and on the Atlantic Coast it skyrocketed at 90% (“Deadly Embrace”, 11/12/08). Not only did unemployment continue to increase, but labor unions were also cut and Free Trade Zones (with loose labor restrictions) were growing. The act of liberalization, specifically financial liberalization in this case, played a large role in affecting these circumstances.
Enacting liberalization in coalition with privatization meant the removal of government interference. Trade liberalization opened the markets, emphasized an export economy, lowered the value of farmers’ goods in the market, and ultimately stripped farmers of their subsidies (Espinoza, 11/13/08). Import duty barriers that protect national product (for example, tariffs) as well as quotas were continuously reduced. As Isolda Espinoza claimed, financial market liberalization increased the potential for market distraction (for example, international chain companies entered Nicaragua for money but not for the substantial development of the country) and created a mismatch of incentives (the thought that jobs would increase with employment options from international companies but in reality maquilas with little labor codes and foreign banks came and took over small, local businesses). In 2001 and 2002, the IMF proposed financial liberalizations in the name of the Washington Consensus and neoliberalization; this resultantly cost Nicaragua $500 million in debt when four of the country’s banks went bankrupt (Avendaño, 11/12/08).
All this was done in the purely ideological belief that government interventions only distort markets, and that if left to act freely, markets produce a restructuring that favors greater “efficiency.” The IMF demanded the fastest possible privatization of public enterprises and the total opening, deregulation and liberalization of the economy rather than ensuring the country’s rehabilitation and the creation of basic infrastructure conditions and human capital with an eye to future development. (Vogl, 2)
Because of the IMF’s blatant mistreatment and virtual dismissal of the different sectors of Nicaraguan society, specifically those of the lower economic class, the IMF has developed a selective, narrow dialogue and has reproduced social inequalities because of its relationships based on power and money.
The IMF’s exclusion of Nicaraguans is exemplified when critiquing the manner in which policies have been imposed “without even negotiating the preservation of certain margins of social inclusion” [specifically those that the Sandinista Revolution fought in the name of] (Vogl, 4). Regarding transparency and the utter lack of it, “top level transactions” starting in the 1990s then set the stage for how policies are decided currently. Vogl writes about the FSLN’s internal commitments with the IMF… what officials label a “poverty reduction program” actually is a process that moves resources to the BCN in order to recover its international reserve levels and then cover the domestic debt service… which ultimately limits social spending even more severely. Therefore the majority of Nicaragua’s population has little to no say in how their national budget is spent and thus people are left even more helpless when they, in turn, must suffer from governmental cut-backs on their social and health needs. “We have to question ‘how priorities are established, and who gives way when agents’ decisions do not add up to a coherent whole’, thus taking on board issues of power and entitlements…” (Brydon, 350) From a context such as this, the role of gender in neoliberalism (neoliberal politics) comes into play.
Viewing neoliberalism and its connections with the world economy, it is seen that men and women are affected in diverse ways by changes in production, trade and financial flows (O’Brien & Williams, 283). This division of labor thus supports the theory that it is the impoverished and working-class women, then, who suffer most from the world’s ongoing economy crises. Although many men also endure impoverishment, the systemic feminization of poverty is undeniable and therefore the costs of SAPs are unequally carried by women.
As governments attempt to balance budgets and engage in structural adjustment programs to make their economies more internationally competitive, women are often forced to pay the price by taking up tasks hitherto performed by the state or giving up their existing sources of income in order to concentrate on caring for their families’ immediate needs. In other words, structural adjustment programs are dependent on unpaid women’s labor. (O’Brien & Williams, 285)
Unfortunately women’s work has much been overshadowed by the false autonomy of the masculine sector of the population. It does not help when a government such as the FSLN, for example, in 1990 voted in favor of all the IMF’s SAPs (Vogl, 7). The result of these votes ultimately decreased spending to balance Nicaragua’s budget, therefore losing many public services – such services that would support the already over-stretched woman. This emphasizes that Nicaraguan neoliberal policies have thus far failed to take women into full and equal account in the light of their unique circumstances.
Civic society still has the potential to educate the public about the dynamics of neoliberal policies in order to affect good governance clauses, bring light to ecological issues, and broaden the theory to development by placing greater importance on social conditions. This could result in greater transparency (which current policies have been gravely lacking) and more open dialogue/debate. So far, though, Nicaragua’s SAPs – simulated by the IMF’s neoliberal policies – have failed and thus deepened instability because of their lack of competition laws, their lack of sequencing and pacing, their lack of gender and social equalities, and their lack of wealth distribution. Néstor Avendaño was right when he spoke of society’s lack of faith and trust in Nicaragua’s leaders… “No one believes in the Supreme Electoral Council. Leaders of the institutions are all made of either the FSLN or the PLC; these leaders are not being bi-partisan. This is all affecting Nicaragua economically” (Avendaño, 11/12/08). Effective, bi-partisan government regulation is necessary in order to ensure fair practices and just working conditions and wages. With government regulation, foreign companies have less power to enter into a country like Nicaragua and develop a monopoly within the market, therefore knocking out all other competition just to later raise their prices. Safety nets are also needed, especially when the economic market suffers from crises. SAPs must adapt to and meet each specific cultural context depending on the country in which they are occurring. SAPs cannot follow just one neoliberal model because each country develops at its own pace, based on its own societal circumstances. It is when power balances and internal aspects such as corruption and political tensions are eased that SAPs can be utilized to promote Nicaragua’s development rather than commit the adverse. As Carlos Pacheco declared, “The solution does not depend on one government or one country. No individual solutions exist. These are global” (Pacheco, 11/09/08).
The Myth of Mestizaje
Besides “mestizaje” being a myth, Jeffrey Gould’s principle argument supporting that claim in the introduction of “To Die in This Way” is that the construction and active social and institutional continuation of this myth (mestizaje) enduringly impacts the indigenous (communities) of Nicaragua negatively. This effect not only questions and suppresses the indigenous’ place in every day life, but it furthermore threatens to virtually erase indigenous identity. From the assigned reading and recent speakers, I will emphasize three main themes to support the above statements: colonialism, the building of a nation-state (nationalism), and the current educational and social system of Nicaragua (emphasized in the conclusion).
In Gould’s writing he cites José Coronel Urtecho during his witnessing of the “harmonious merging of Indians and Spaniards in the tiangüe.” This marketplace setting Urtecho portrays transcends one of colonialism’s detrimental effects, demonstrated best by his narrative account of the marketplace “where the Indians of Nicaragua became Nicaraguan and where they Nicaraguanized the Creoles and Mestizos.” Of course, the detrimental effect mentioned above is that colonialism formed, in part, and promoted this false belief voiced by Urtecho. In the initial stages of colonialism, both Gould and speaker Wendy Bellinger make a point to emphasize the roles of hierarchy and land.
Both Creoles and Peninsulares, for example, underwent a colonial organization style based on hierarchy. This hierarchy not only took away communal indigenous land, but it further illegalized indigenous people to be communal land holders. With the stripping away of land went the fading of indigenous identity, as the majority of the indigenous strongly rooted their identity in the land. Along with colonization came the demeaning rationalization that because of the indigenous people’s land and its specific geographical locations, the indigenous were therefore prone to racial differences – to inferiority, thus being more prone to assimilation. One of the most striking ties Bellinger implements into the argument against mestizaje is the relationship between colonization and nationalism (nation-state building) – and how that relationship virtually requires the practice of exclusion and inclusion.
It was in 1838 when Central America became independent from Mexico and ventured on to make nation-states. “To create a nation you want,” Bellinger states, the nation must be a “stable, sovereign territory; it must have a measureable, stable population; therefore you have to segregate, reject and attack.” What makes this process easier to play out but conforming diverse societies into one? Hence, mestizaje. To force a mass shift away from an empowered self-identification of indigenous culture, cultural homogeneity was imposed by elites, which Gould puts best, “as a standard part of their repertoire of nation-building.” The indigenous were intervened upon not only by the elite and the state, but also by the church, political parties, and local intellectuals. The indigenous thus were forced to either keep their identity and be utterly persecuted (socially and institutionally) or be “ladinoized” and leave their culture lost in a drifting memory in order to “fit in” to society. Notably, this ladinoization executes the hierarchical goal: to promote the myth of mestizaje. Even some of the most idealized leaders of Nicaraguan history such as Agusto Sandino furthered the rallying behind such deceptions when he spoke about everyone being “equal”. This so-called equality essentially dealt with terms of race. To be equal, then, and to be united for such revolutions like that of the Sandinistas (FSLN), the indigenous must erase their identity. What a pity this was for me to realize that not even the revolutionary forces, such as the FSLN Party or Sandino himself, could come to an understanding with the indigenous. Being “for the people” has mainly meant being in support of a homogenous people, and in the case of “Nicaragua’s” indigenous people, homogeneity holds no truth in relation to their Pre-Colombian roots. The fact is that, as Bellinger expresses, “In Pre-Columbian times none of the different indigenous groups that migrated spoke the same language; they were completely different cultures” that migrated from Colombia and Mexico and that came to the Caribbean during the African Slave Trade. This cultural uniqueness holds its validity today.
Each culture that occupies Nicaragua is authentic, whether it be Miskito, Garifona, Rama, or Sumo, for example; but it is the educational, social, and institutional systems (internationally and nationally) that are gravely lacking this recognition. By delegitimizing these cultures, “mestizaje” is taught both subconsciously and consciously. Mirna Cunningham in “Sandino Daughters Revisited” talks about the ways in which mestizaje continues to be promoted today: “Bush’s initiatives in all our countries, the stance taken by the international banking institutions, the incredible unemployment, the misery in which the indigenous, black, and poor mestizos of our continent [Central America] live: it’s all a product of the model of colonization which began 500 years ago and remains in place today.” What society must do, Cunningham proposes, is seek out an alternative that includes attention to the “ethnic question”. Cunningham goes on to critique political entities by challenging the FSLN to “articulate a Sandinism that is truly multiethnic.”
Personally, I believe strongly in Cunningham’s statements, and I furthermore want to push all social, educational and institutional systems to “re-write” history – to take into account and educate people about the “underside” of history – the oppressed, the marginalized, the mestizo-grouped indigenous. We must tell different stories, the culturally-unique stories of those who inhabit the Atlantic/Caribbean Coast and the Pacific Coast. Start with the young; implement revised curriculums in schools that promote an interest and a pride in Central America’s historical and continued cultural diversity. Advocate inclusion but not assimilation. Work from the bottom-up so institutions respect that a people can still be united and effective while each embracing their own ancestral origins. It is when we break down the superficial acceptance of the dominant society that we will further give dignity and light to the multiple cultural traditions that are overshadowed by the myth of mestizaje.
In Gould’s writing he cites José Coronel Urtecho during his witnessing of the “harmonious merging of Indians and Spaniards in the tiangüe.” This marketplace setting Urtecho portrays transcends one of colonialism’s detrimental effects, demonstrated best by his narrative account of the marketplace “where the Indians of Nicaragua became Nicaraguan and where they Nicaraguanized the Creoles and Mestizos.” Of course, the detrimental effect mentioned above is that colonialism formed, in part, and promoted this false belief voiced by Urtecho. In the initial stages of colonialism, both Gould and speaker Wendy Bellinger make a point to emphasize the roles of hierarchy and land.
Both Creoles and Peninsulares, for example, underwent a colonial organization style based on hierarchy. This hierarchy not only took away communal indigenous land, but it further illegalized indigenous people to be communal land holders. With the stripping away of land went the fading of indigenous identity, as the majority of the indigenous strongly rooted their identity in the land. Along with colonization came the demeaning rationalization that because of the indigenous people’s land and its specific geographical locations, the indigenous were therefore prone to racial differences – to inferiority, thus being more prone to assimilation. One of the most striking ties Bellinger implements into the argument against mestizaje is the relationship between colonization and nationalism (nation-state building) – and how that relationship virtually requires the practice of exclusion and inclusion.
It was in 1838 when Central America became independent from Mexico and ventured on to make nation-states. “To create a nation you want,” Bellinger states, the nation must be a “stable, sovereign territory; it must have a measureable, stable population; therefore you have to segregate, reject and attack.” What makes this process easier to play out but conforming diverse societies into one? Hence, mestizaje. To force a mass shift away from an empowered self-identification of indigenous culture, cultural homogeneity was imposed by elites, which Gould puts best, “as a standard part of their repertoire of nation-building.” The indigenous were intervened upon not only by the elite and the state, but also by the church, political parties, and local intellectuals. The indigenous thus were forced to either keep their identity and be utterly persecuted (socially and institutionally) or be “ladinoized” and leave their culture lost in a drifting memory in order to “fit in” to society. Notably, this ladinoization executes the hierarchical goal: to promote the myth of mestizaje. Even some of the most idealized leaders of Nicaraguan history such as Agusto Sandino furthered the rallying behind such deceptions when he spoke about everyone being “equal”. This so-called equality essentially dealt with terms of race. To be equal, then, and to be united for such revolutions like that of the Sandinistas (FSLN), the indigenous must erase their identity. What a pity this was for me to realize that not even the revolutionary forces, such as the FSLN Party or Sandino himself, could come to an understanding with the indigenous. Being “for the people” has mainly meant being in support of a homogenous people, and in the case of “Nicaragua’s” indigenous people, homogeneity holds no truth in relation to their Pre-Colombian roots. The fact is that, as Bellinger expresses, “In Pre-Columbian times none of the different indigenous groups that migrated spoke the same language; they were completely different cultures” that migrated from Colombia and Mexico and that came to the Caribbean during the African Slave Trade. This cultural uniqueness holds its validity today.
Each culture that occupies Nicaragua is authentic, whether it be Miskito, Garifona, Rama, or Sumo, for example; but it is the educational, social, and institutional systems (internationally and nationally) that are gravely lacking this recognition. By delegitimizing these cultures, “mestizaje” is taught both subconsciously and consciously. Mirna Cunningham in “Sandino Daughters Revisited” talks about the ways in which mestizaje continues to be promoted today: “Bush’s initiatives in all our countries, the stance taken by the international banking institutions, the incredible unemployment, the misery in which the indigenous, black, and poor mestizos of our continent [Central America] live: it’s all a product of the model of colonization which began 500 years ago and remains in place today.” What society must do, Cunningham proposes, is seek out an alternative that includes attention to the “ethnic question”. Cunningham goes on to critique political entities by challenging the FSLN to “articulate a Sandinism that is truly multiethnic.”
Personally, I believe strongly in Cunningham’s statements, and I furthermore want to push all social, educational and institutional systems to “re-write” history – to take into account and educate people about the “underside” of history – the oppressed, the marginalized, the mestizo-grouped indigenous. We must tell different stories, the culturally-unique stories of those who inhabit the Atlantic/Caribbean Coast and the Pacific Coast. Start with the young; implement revised curriculums in schools that promote an interest and a pride in Central America’s historical and continued cultural diversity. Advocate inclusion but not assimilation. Work from the bottom-up so institutions respect that a people can still be united and effective while each embracing their own ancestral origins. It is when we break down the superficial acceptance of the dominant society that we will further give dignity and light to the multiple cultural traditions that are overshadowed by the myth of mestizaje.
Friday, November 14, 2008
Riots as an excuse to let testosterone run rampant
While watching TV the other night, since my host family always has the news channels on (that have been exclusively reporting on topics involving the municiple elections), I became "arta" (maxed out) with the scenes of young males rioting throughout their own pueblo´s streets.
Although the news can´t be fully relied on in order to be completely informed, and of course, one must take their own initiative to view and read other information sources -- all the coverage of violence since the election results has shown specifically males committing harm to their society, their people. They say it is because they are "defending their vote." But can´t defending one´s vote be non in a non-violent, dialogue manner? YES. YES IT CAN!!!!
It has come to the point where these constant occurrences of cars being set on fire, people being stoned out of nowhere, homes being vandalized, billboards being torn down, rotundas being taken over by angry people threatening the environment with sticks and poles (all being committed mainly by men)--- have become an excuse to run rampant and destructively throughout the streets, letting out built-up and ideologized testosterone.
Police fill the rotundas (round-abouts) that are located on many popular, busy streets... but where have they been to prevent and to STOP this terrible and disgusting expression of "macho-ness"????
Although the news can´t be fully relied on in order to be completely informed, and of course, one must take their own initiative to view and read other information sources -- all the coverage of violence since the election results has shown specifically males committing harm to their society, their people. They say it is because they are "defending their vote." But can´t defending one´s vote be non in a non-violent, dialogue manner? YES. YES IT CAN!!!!
It has come to the point where these constant occurrences of cars being set on fire, people being stoned out of nowhere, homes being vandalized, billboards being torn down, rotundas being taken over by angry people threatening the environment with sticks and poles (all being committed mainly by men)--- have become an excuse to run rampant and destructively throughout the streets, letting out built-up and ideologized testosterone.
Police fill the rotundas (round-abouts) that are located on many popular, busy streets... but where have they been to prevent and to STOP this terrible and disgusting expression of "macho-ness"????
Finally...almost
The "preliminary" results were announced last night. Heather, my roommate and I, thought when we had heard the FSLN "officially" won last night with 51% of the votes - we thought that it was final. Finally final and maybe the riots would simmer down.
But just a half hour ago the group and I were told that the other party, the PLC, is still saying that they need to be present along side of the Supreme Electoral Council and an international presence... in order to ensure the validity of the results.
But people have basically known that the FSLN won since the first "fraudulent" results were proclaimed. Now the PLC just has to work with its constituents (who claim the stance "todos contra Ortega") to push cooperation and effective dialogue with the FSLN... But who knows if the FSLN will allow for this.
But just a half hour ago the group and I were told that the other party, the PLC, is still saying that they need to be present along side of the Supreme Electoral Council and an international presence... in order to ensure the validity of the results.
But people have basically known that the FSLN won since the first "fraudulent" results were proclaimed. Now the PLC just has to work with its constituents (who claim the stance "todos contra Ortega") to push cooperation and effective dialogue with the FSLN... But who knows if the FSLN will allow for this.
Thursday, November 13, 2008
Still no final results out...
Yesterday afternoon they announced to us at the Center for Global Education that the re-count of the Municipal Elections results would be announced at 6pm... It didn´t happen.
We are still waiting anxiously and the violence keeps happening.
We are still waiting anxiously and the violence keeps happening.
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
The myth of mestizaje
During our past days in class the other students and I have been reading from others such as Jeffrey Gould and Mirna Cunningham to learn more about the colonization and multi-cultural dimensions of Nicaragua...
Yesterday I finished writing a reflection paper on some of this reading and I found myself agreeing very strongly with the thesis that mestizaje is a myth.
So there is the word "mestizo" which means "mixed races" and then "mestizaje" signifies the process of becoming mestizo.
This theory of mestizaje came out of colonial times, specifically speaking about Latin America, when the Spanish and British came and colonized. Of course, before colonization indigenous people inhabited the lands (and remained but had their land taken away). African presence came about when escaped slaves (and then-current slaves during the African Slave Trade) came to Latin American. So when these cultures began connecting, "inter-mixing" (as the words associated with mestizaje often say), new generations began having multiple heritages.
Basically the concept of mestizaje de-values and delegitimizes the holding on to one's cultural uniqueness. Rather than specifically identifying from one's roots, one is given the title of mestizo in order to generalize and group a people.
To articulate these issues more I will post my paper that I wrote because I feel as though I´m not explaining the topic as well as I should, in order to give it full justice.
More to come, then...
Yesterday I finished writing a reflection paper on some of this reading and I found myself agreeing very strongly with the thesis that mestizaje is a myth.
So there is the word "mestizo" which means "mixed races" and then "mestizaje" signifies the process of becoming mestizo.
This theory of mestizaje came out of colonial times, specifically speaking about Latin America, when the Spanish and British came and colonized. Of course, before colonization indigenous people inhabited the lands (and remained but had their land taken away). African presence came about when escaped slaves (and then-current slaves during the African Slave Trade) came to Latin American. So when these cultures began connecting, "inter-mixing" (as the words associated with mestizaje often say), new generations began having multiple heritages.
Basically the concept of mestizaje de-values and delegitimizes the holding on to one's cultural uniqueness. Rather than specifically identifying from one's roots, one is given the title of mestizo in order to generalize and group a people.
To articulate these issues more I will post my paper that I wrote because I feel as though I´m not explaining the topic as well as I should, in order to give it full justice.
More to come, then...
Municipal Elections
Hey all!
Alright-- so here´s the update with Nicaragua's municipal elections:
Tension has been pretty high. The PLC (Rightist party - which is called the Liberal party, but "liberal" here has a different meaning than it does in the States) has been claiming since results came out (on Sunday night) that there is a fraud.
Monday the FSLN (Leftist party that has been holding power nationally since 2006) was already claiming victory in Managua when they were only up by 5% with 69% of votes counted. The PLC claims that their vote counts from the polls show that they have received a larger number of votes than the Supreme Electoral Council has reported.
Actually Monday, the huge fiasco was over the Supreme Electoral Council saying they had received 100% of the votes when there were actually stacks and stacks of votes that the PLC had yet in their position (that still hadnt been taken into account).
Since Monday there have been riots throughout the streets... No worries, all this has been viewed by myself and the other students only through the television (and not in person). The leaders of our program keep us updated and very safe. Además our neighborhood is very tranquil (although the overwhelming majority of its inhabitants are prideful FSLN supporters).
Last night Heather (a friend from my program who lives in the homestay with me) and I took our brother, one of our sisters and a neighbor to the new James Bond 007 movie (which interestingly enough focused on US relations with Latin America..hmm... But anyway, on the way to the theater our taxi driver was waved over by two police cars on the side of the road. Another car in front of the taxi was also made to pull-over. As we were about to park, the others and I already knew what this would be about... The police were making random checks to make sure that no one traveling on the main road ways were carrying rocks or other weapons in their cars (rocks have been used in violent manners throughout these days in the riots). So as the minutes to the start of the movie were dwindling down and our taxi driver was still over talking with the police, the five of us scrunched, sitting on on another in the cab decided to get out. As we looked back we saw the driver getting upset with the police... Ay. It turns out when the driver finally returned to the cab that the police had wanted the driver to pay them off. Because the driver became upset and (probably) made up an excuse, he ended up not giving the police any money. Our sister said it is common that the police will ask to be paid-off, although of course that it not technically right.
So we finally arrived to our movie. But we couldn´t help but laugh along the way because during our whole ride with the cab driver, he automatically thought we were supporters of the PLC. Mind you my family members are staunch supporters of the FSLN... but they went along with him saying "Así es..."
Verymuch love and support for the MRS...
Anni.
(IT IS SO INTERESTING HERE TO WITNESS THIS POLITICAL PRIDE AND ENERGY------
This is a vital election because the winner will be more likely to remain in power through the presidential elections (which will occur in 2011) and furthermore because many say that Daniel Ortega (Nicaragua´s current President) has been increasingly trying to secure-in his position (wanting to potentially change Nicaragua´s constitution to run for another term)
Alright-- so here´s the update with Nicaragua's municipal elections:
Tension has been pretty high. The PLC (Rightist party - which is called the Liberal party, but "liberal" here has a different meaning than it does in the States) has been claiming since results came out (on Sunday night) that there is a fraud.
Monday the FSLN (Leftist party that has been holding power nationally since 2006) was already claiming victory in Managua when they were only up by 5% with 69% of votes counted. The PLC claims that their vote counts from the polls show that they have received a larger number of votes than the Supreme Electoral Council has reported.
Actually Monday, the huge fiasco was over the Supreme Electoral Council saying they had received 100% of the votes when there were actually stacks and stacks of votes that the PLC had yet in their position (that still hadnt been taken into account).
Since Monday there have been riots throughout the streets... No worries, all this has been viewed by myself and the other students only through the television (and not in person). The leaders of our program keep us updated and very safe. Además our neighborhood is very tranquil (although the overwhelming majority of its inhabitants are prideful FSLN supporters).
Last night Heather (a friend from my program who lives in the homestay with me) and I took our brother, one of our sisters and a neighbor to the new James Bond 007 movie (which interestingly enough focused on US relations with Latin America..hmm... But anyway, on the way to the theater our taxi driver was waved over by two police cars on the side of the road. Another car in front of the taxi was also made to pull-over. As we were about to park, the others and I already knew what this would be about... The police were making random checks to make sure that no one traveling on the main road ways were carrying rocks or other weapons in their cars (rocks have been used in violent manners throughout these days in the riots). So as the minutes to the start of the movie were dwindling down and our taxi driver was still over talking with the police, the five of us scrunched, sitting on on another in the cab decided to get out. As we looked back we saw the driver getting upset with the police... Ay. It turns out when the driver finally returned to the cab that the police had wanted the driver to pay them off. Because the driver became upset and (probably) made up an excuse, he ended up not giving the police any money. Our sister said it is common that the police will ask to be paid-off, although of course that it not technically right.
So we finally arrived to our movie. But we couldn´t help but laugh along the way because during our whole ride with the cab driver, he automatically thought we were supporters of the PLC. Mind you my family members are staunch supporters of the FSLN... but they went along with him saying "Así es..."
Verymuch love and support for the MRS...
Anni.
(IT IS SO INTERESTING HERE TO WITNESS THIS POLITICAL PRIDE AND ENERGY------
This is a vital election because the winner will be more likely to remain in power through the presidential elections (which will occur in 2011) and furthermore because many say that Daniel Ortega (Nicaragua´s current President) has been increasingly trying to secure-in his position (wanting to potentially change Nicaragua´s constitution to run for another term)
Saturday, November 8, 2008
Obama.
It was said that all will remember where they were and what they were doing on Tuesday, November 4, 2008. I believe this to be especially true. What an environment it was in Managua, Nicaragua, the night of the election results and the days building up to them and after...
Before Tuesday, November 4, the interest of many Central Americans whom I encountered had great enthusiasm about Barack Obama... I was asked many times whom I supported and the other times the question of whom I preferred as a candidate was gently alluded to... This didn´t surprise me too much because I already recognized, as the BBC News said, that this was the election that will "affect the entire world."
There was great emotion when the 17 others and I, all in the house of the Center for Global Education, were expecting only California´s polling results and then we automatically saw Barack´s face pop up on the screen with "Elected President." !!!!!!!
Of course people were jumping, hugging, staring at the screen with a long smile on their faces,... in awe in a way. It wasn´t even that people were doubtful that Barack would win, although of course there was a little anxious worry, but it was just that we all knew that this was a monumental moment in history and we were so fortunate to have taken part in it... to even witness it.
I can say that I am so extremely proud and still unbelieving that we have Barack Obama for our new President.
Now it is really time for us to get to work.
Grassroots action is calling. But it is not just Barack´s job. We must support him and our fellow community members.
LET´S DO IT!!!
Before Tuesday, November 4, the interest of many Central Americans whom I encountered had great enthusiasm about Barack Obama... I was asked many times whom I supported and the other times the question of whom I preferred as a candidate was gently alluded to... This didn´t surprise me too much because I already recognized, as the BBC News said, that this was the election that will "affect the entire world."
There was great emotion when the 17 others and I, all in the house of the Center for Global Education, were expecting only California´s polling results and then we automatically saw Barack´s face pop up on the screen with "Elected President." !!!!!!!
Of course people were jumping, hugging, staring at the screen with a long smile on their faces,... in awe in a way. It wasn´t even that people were doubtful that Barack would win, although of course there was a little anxious worry, but it was just that we all knew that this was a monumental moment in history and we were so fortunate to have taken part in it... to even witness it.
I can say that I am so extremely proud and still unbelieving that we have Barack Obama for our new President.
Now it is really time for us to get to work.
Grassroots action is calling. But it is not just Barack´s job. We must support him and our fellow community members.
LET´S DO IT!!!
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
"Sí podemos." --La mantra de Barack
Muy, muy buenas noches amigas y amigos*
Quería compartir esta noche con ustedes, específicamente porque acabamos de estar presentadas y presentados a nuestro nuevo presidente, Barack Obama.
Estoy muy orgullosa decir que él va a representar los Estados Unidos. Espero que ya Barack pueda mostrar más de su progresivismo...
¡Es un flipe acá, eh!!
Ya ha sido claro que las/os ciudadanas/os estadounidenses tenemos que empezar aun más fuerte haciendo nuestros propios movimientos sociales, politicales e ambientales para afectar positivamente a los Estados Unidos y para mejorar la relación entre los EEUU y los otros paises del mundo.
Es obvio en todos lugares, especialmente estando aquí en Centro América, que esta elección no solo afecta a los EEUU... Ha sido impresionante la energía y interés que hemos recibido por muchos Centro Americanos sobre las elecciones estadounidenses. Muchos nos han mencionado como les afectan las elecciones... como muchos que hemos conocido nos querían votar para Barack... Ha sido muy interesante.. .
Espero que sientan bien con los resultos y que vengan el progreso positivo...!!!!¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡
Tanto amor-------
Annika
Quería compartir esta noche con ustedes, específicamente porque acabamos de estar presentadas y presentados a nuestro nuevo presidente, Barack Obama.
Estoy muy orgullosa decir que él va a representar los Estados Unidos. Espero que ya Barack pueda mostrar más de su progresivismo...
¡Es un flipe acá, eh!!
Ya ha sido claro que las/os ciudadanas/os estadounidenses tenemos que empezar aun más fuerte haciendo nuestros propios movimientos sociales, politicales e ambientales para afectar positivamente a los Estados Unidos y para mejorar la relación entre los EEUU y los otros paises del mundo.
Es obvio en todos lugares, especialmente estando aquí en Centro América, que esta elección no solo afecta a los EEUU... Ha sido impresionante la energía y interés que hemos recibido por muchos Centro Americanos sobre las elecciones estadounidenses. Muchos nos han mencionado como les afectan las elecciones... como muchos que hemos conocido nos querían votar para Barack... Ha sido muy interesante.. .
Espero que sientan bien con los resultos y que vengan el progreso positivo...!!!!¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡
Tanto amor-------
Annika
Sunday, November 2, 2008
Now in Nica
After arriving back from a week-long vacation in various parts of Nicaragua, the 17 other students and I reunited this afternoon back at our home-base in Managua, Nicaragua´s capital. With the Municipal Elections ocurring soon, political tensions, excitement and, of course, advertisements have been booming. On nearly every street post and on many city walls one sees bright pink signs displaying sayings such as "¡Vamos por más victorias!" "Luchamos por el pueblo." and "El amor es más fuerte que el odio." These phrases and more have been posted by the FSLN (Frente Sandinista de Liberación Nacional - aka Sandinista National Liberation Front) that is a "socialist" Nicaraguan political party that is led by the current president, Daniel Ortega.
Daniel Ortega is not only in power now, but he was also the leader of the Sandinista revolutionary movement which overthrew the Somoza regime in 1979, forming a revolutionary government in its place. In the following years the Sandinistas ruled Nicaragua for 11 years from 1979 to 1990, initially as part of a Junta of National Reconstruction. Later the FSLN took exclusive power in March 1981 after some centrist members from this Junta resigned. In the 1984 Nicaraguan elections it was almost universally declared that the elections were free and fair, and it was in these elections where the FSLN won the majority of votes.
So there is a quick history but here is the deal now... Rather than running a social political party, an overwhelming majority of Nicaraguans believe that Ortega´s ruling has turned into a form of dictatorship. The key saying by the people is "We are (still) Sandinistas but we are not Danielistas." These few words hold a great deal of significance by the way they essentially purvey the people´s belief and pride in the 1979 revolutionary movement, but at the same time the words demonstrate the people´s dissaprovement with how Ortega has dramatically changed since the revolution. Lately, for example, Ortega (indirectly through "his people") has been verbally (if not in many cases physically - being broken into, etc.) harassing a number of NGO´s and grassroots social, political and environmental organizations - charging them with false claims and stating that "rather than international money going through NGO´s it should go directly to the government." But if this money goes straight to Daniel´s officials, where will it end up?? The general populous virtually does not see this money that the government uses on "social spending" or "development." Nicaragua remains to be factually the most impoverished country in Central America. This is evident when one walks and drives through the streets. Even where we are living, a block away from Ortega´s house, there are wood shacks lining many streets that people inhabit. Aren´t the above organizations (and specifically their purposes) something the Sandinista Revolution advocated and fought for?? Isn´t their mission part of the revolution - you know, for the people...
More to come-- but definitely stay in-tune with especially independent news sources and even other outlets such as the BBC (if you´re interested) because what has been going on (and continues to go on) with Ortega and his version of what it is to be Sandinista is gripping.
Tomorrow we will start classes.
More updates to come---
Much, much love to all and GOOD VIBES FOR THE U.S. ELECTIONS (El cambio viene-eso esperamos mucho)
Annika
Daniel Ortega is not only in power now, but he was also the leader of the Sandinista revolutionary movement which overthrew the Somoza regime in 1979, forming a revolutionary government in its place. In the following years the Sandinistas ruled Nicaragua for 11 years from 1979 to 1990, initially as part of a Junta of National Reconstruction. Later the FSLN took exclusive power in March 1981 after some centrist members from this Junta resigned. In the 1984 Nicaraguan elections it was almost universally declared that the elections were free and fair, and it was in these elections where the FSLN won the majority of votes.
So there is a quick history but here is the deal now... Rather than running a social political party, an overwhelming majority of Nicaraguans believe that Ortega´s ruling has turned into a form of dictatorship. The key saying by the people is "We are (still) Sandinistas but we are not Danielistas." These few words hold a great deal of significance by the way they essentially purvey the people´s belief and pride in the 1979 revolutionary movement, but at the same time the words demonstrate the people´s dissaprovement with how Ortega has dramatically changed since the revolution. Lately, for example, Ortega (indirectly through "his people") has been verbally (if not in many cases physically - being broken into, etc.) harassing a number of NGO´s and grassroots social, political and environmental organizations - charging them with false claims and stating that "rather than international money going through NGO´s it should go directly to the government." But if this money goes straight to Daniel´s officials, where will it end up?? The general populous virtually does not see this money that the government uses on "social spending" or "development." Nicaragua remains to be factually the most impoverished country in Central America. This is evident when one walks and drives through the streets. Even where we are living, a block away from Ortega´s house, there are wood shacks lining many streets that people inhabit. Aren´t the above organizations (and specifically their purposes) something the Sandinista Revolution advocated and fought for?? Isn´t their mission part of the revolution - you know, for the people...
More to come-- but definitely stay in-tune with especially independent news sources and even other outlets such as the BBC (if you´re interested) because what has been going on (and continues to go on) with Ortega and his version of what it is to be Sandinista is gripping.
Tomorrow we will start classes.
More updates to come---
Much, much love to all and GOOD VIBES FOR THE U.S. ELECTIONS (El cambio viene-eso esperamos mucho)
Annika
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)