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.