By FRANCISCO HIDALGO FLOR*
This program emerged from the new Latin American indigenous movements and in Ecuador took the form of the Program for Plurinationality, Interculturality and Good Living.
1.
The world scenario in this second decade of the 21st century is marked by the horror of the genocide suffered by the Palestinian people, which is rejected by the majority of humanity, but all the institutional and legal frameworks built after the Second World War, the United Nations, the International Court of Justice, as guarantors of humanitarian coexistence, are proving incapable of preventing it, overlapped by an imperial, financial and colonialist approach of war and domination that devours everything.
Faced with this imperial-colonial scaffolding, which fights with weapons, but also with ideological apparatuses, derived from a pattern of capitalist and racist power with global reach, it seems essential to recover, deepen, other options, other paths, alternatives to recover a sense of peace and humanity.
It is a need that is heightened by the electoral and state advances of the right and the extreme right in Latin America (Javier Milei and others), in the United States (Donald Trump and others) and in Europe (Marine Le Pen, Giulia Meloni and others), which incite racism and colonialism.
It is also worth noting, albeit on a different level, the limits of social democratic policies and regimes in Europe (Olaf Sholz and others), or progressive ones in South America (Gabriel Boric and others).
Alternatives, other paths, other perspectives that recover human senses and feelings, that dare to think and propose post-capitalist and post-colonial horizons of change.
It seems relevant to us to emphasize the alternative of organic social, political and cultural programs. By this we understand projects that emerge from classes, strata, ethnicities, popular groups, to proposals with the capacity to involve, incorporate, social sectors, organizations and mechanisms of action and struggle.
In this article, we propose to resume and revitalize the project that emerged from the new Latin American indigenous movements in the late 1990s and early 2000s, and which, in the case of Ecuador, took the form of the Program for Plurinationality, Interculturality and Good Living, which confronts central aspects of the capitalist-colonial power pattern.
It should be noted that there are similar projects, albeit with their own specificities, in the indigenous movements of Bolivia, Peru, Guatemala, Chile and Mexico, among others. In the case of Ecuador, we refer to the formulation of this program in the organic documents of the Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities, and we also retrieve texts from historical leaders of this organization.
2.
This program took its first steps in the 80s, in the context of the identity and organization of indigenous peoples and nationalities, which was consolidated alongside the affirmation of the grouping and struggle of the peoples in the so-called National Uprisings, and, in the Ecuadorian case, involved the strategy of demanding constituent processes, and, in a third phase, incorporated the fight against neoliberal measures.
One of the virtues of this trajectory is that these are proposals that emerge from the debate, organization and struggle of the indigenous groups themselves, which is nourished and diversified in the fight against internal colonialism and neoliberalism, with successes and defeats in a political process in which indigenous demands are gaining prominence and joining the struggles of workers, teachers, the women's movement and the environmental movement.
This article deals with the exposition of the contents of this program; we will respect the place of enunciation of the organization of the contemporary indigenous movement, recognizing that there are other contributions and definitions of these concepts in sectors of the formal academy, but we will not include them in this text.
This is a program that was developed as the organization, struggle and political influence of the indigenous movement evolved: first, there was a consensus around Plurinationality (1990), then Interculturality was incorporated (2001) and, finally, Sumak kawsay – Living Well (2007).
We are faced with an alternative program that emerges from the debates and demands of the social movement. This is a fundamental milestone in the indigenous process in Ecuador and other countries in the region and, based on this founding pillar, it breaks with one of the obstacles created by colonialism, that it is others who speak on behalf of the indigenous people, it is others who write on behalf of the indigenous people, which is what anthropologist Andrés Guerrero[I] defined as “ventriloquism” and “transcription” within a state strategy of “population management”.
This indigenous program confronts the coloniality of power as a pattern of subordination that articulates capitalism and racism. One of the virtues of Quijano’s (2000) definition is that it is a mode of domination at a global level, which is not reduced or limited to a single country or region. It comes from the establishment of the old colonial system in the XNUMXth and XNUMXth centuries, which was later articulated with the capitalist-imperialist system in the XNUMXth and XNUMXth centuries, and is in full force in what is now called “globalization.”
Therefore, the Plurinationality, Interculturality and Good Living program faces a global problem: capitalism – colonialism – racism.
This is a comprehensive program, but for the sake of exposition, we will address the concepts one by one, and then we will articulate them again. It is also worth highlighting that they become strategic demands in the actions of struggle at the national and local levels, and are inserted in the dynamics of the concrete social and political struggle, in a context of political and economic crisis.
We base ourselves on three organic documents of CONAIE, which in turn correspond to three situations that allow the consolidation of the organization and the program it promotes. It is always necessary to emphasize that CONAIE is not the only indigenous organization in Ecuador, but it is the one around which it has been possible to form and synthesize this alternative, ethnic and anti-colonial program, and which has had the greatest impact in its ability to bring people together.
These documents are: “Conaie Political Project”, 1994,[ii] then a version that slightly modifies the previous one: “Political Project of the Nationalities and Peoples of Ecuador”, 2001;[iii] and "Conaie's proposal before the Constituent Assembly”, 2007,[iv] to which are added public texts by historical leaders of the new indigenous movement: Nina Pacari, Luis Macas and Patricia Gualinga.
3.
At the "Political Project” about Plurinationality it is stated: “Plurinationality is based on the real and undeniable diversity of the existence of the Nationalities and Peoples of Ecuador as differentiated economic, political and historical cultural entities. Plurinationality defends the equality, unity, respect, reciprocity and solidarity of all the nationalities and peoples that make up Ecuador. It recognizes the right of the Nationalities to their territory and to their internal political and administrative autonomy” (CONAIE, 2001: 2.4).
The document on the “New Constitution” proposes: “The plurinational State is a model of political organization for the decolonization of our nations and peoples. It involves recognizing not only the contribution of indigenous peoples and nationalities to the heritage of Ecuador’s cultural, political and civilizing diversity, but also seeking to overcome centuries of impoverishment and discrimination of indigenous civilizations. Due to their sociocultural, political and historical peculiarities, peoples and nationalities claim specific rights and these are contributions such as symbolic values, forms of exercising authority and systems of social administration of enormous merit and political value” (Conaie: 2007, p. 14).
Let us comment that the Plurinationality component within the Indigenous Program to transform Ecuadorian society breaks with one of the pillars of the modern political system: “one state – one nation”, which goes hand in hand with the postulate of “one state – one culture”. This monolithic state is what covers the capitalist-colonial system, this single nation and culture that is recognized as modern and industrial, white-mestizo, urban and cosmopolitan, which, in relation to indigenous peoples, applied a strategy of “population administration”, with which it denied direct political participation to these sectors, excluded them from the official system, treated them as marginalized and delegated, to local institutions, the processing of their demands.
The Program, by proposing the recognition of other peoples and nationalities, officially accepts them as “economic, political and cultural entities”. This implies the defense of a political system of equality, reciprocity and solidarity between the different classes, strata and ethnic groups that exist, which goes hand in hand with the “overcoming of impoverishment and discrimination” to which indigenous populations have been structurally subjected.
Plurinationality goes hand in hand with the recognition of indigenous territories, both those that already exist and those that are claimed in restitution in the face of expropriation by large landowners, mining or oil companies; it also involves respect for the governance system specific to indigenous nationalities.
The pillar of plurinationality is the recovery and revaluation of indigenous community society, which is a collective order based on internal mechanisms of solidarity, reciprocity and mutual support. It is linked to a jurisprudence of the peoples.
It also implies that the state system assumes and considers the direct participation of indigenous peoples in the formulation and definition of public policies, both at national and local levels, not only in those related to indigenous populations, but also in those related to development and well-being.
In short, these are changes in the political system that do not only affect indigenous peoples, but lead to profound transformations throughout the country.
4.
At the "Political Project” about Interculturality it is stated: “The principle of interculturality respects the diversity of nationalities and peoples, the Afro-Ecuadorian and mestizo-Ecuadorian people and other social sectors, but, in turn, demands their unity, in the economic, social, cultural and political fields, within a framework of equality, mutual respect, peace and harmony. The recognition, promotion and validity of diversity guarantee unity and allow coexistence, fraternal and supportive interrelationship between nationalities and peoples, which guarantees the establishment of the Plurinational State”. (CONAIE, 2001, p. 2.5).
The document on the “New Constitution” states that: “Interculturality implies the construction of a national project involving all, which advocates respect and appreciation of all forms of cultural expression, knowledge and spirituality, which requires the unity of peoples and nationalities and of society as a whole as a basic condition for a plurinational democracy and a fair and equitable economy. One of the pillars for the development of cultures and the exercise of interculturality is the incorporation of the languages of peoples and nationalities into the educational system. It is impossible to promote these languages (and, therefore, these cultures, these other ways of understanding the world) if there is no national and collective effort” (Conaie: 2007, p. 22).
Let us comment that the Interculturality component within the Indigenous Program to transform Ecuadorian society implies, first of all, denouncing and dismantling the old colonialism and neocolonialism, their material and cultural expropriation, which denies indigenous peoples, ignores them as bearers of knowledge, understandings, of a complex social system, which has managed to endure despite efforts at extermination and annulment, and incorporates the fight against racist ideology.
As Amazonian leader Patricia Gualinga highlights: “it is the respect we can have for each other, the opposite of interculturality is racism. Racism is thinking oneself superior to other people, having this air of “we are what know how to think, others don’t” (Gualinga: 2021, p.55).[v]
Interculturality goes hand in hand with the postulate of “unity in diversity”, that all of Ecuadorian society and the state recognize and incorporate indigenous knowledge and the languages of its peoples. It is about rewriting the historical evolution of Ecuador, giving relevance to its events and characters, that the possibility of rebuilding the nation depends on the valorization of its knowledge and philosophies, in order to generate new understandings about development and well-being.
The intercultural approach has been a fundamental contribution of indigenous movements to motivate and develop decolonization processes in the social sciences, the arts and even in epistemological debates.
In recent years, it has become clear that the intercultural approach has generated uncontainable irritation on the far right, both in Europe and in America.
5.
In the document “New Constitution” it is stated: “The Sumak kawsay is an ancestral principle that proposes good living, and should promote the harmonious coexistence of people and peoples among themselves and with nature. Biodiversity and nature are not just another commodity to be bought and sold, and which is exploited irrationally; nature is Pachamama, we are part of it, therefore, the relationship with the components of the natural environment must be respectful”. (Conaie: 2007, p. 21).
In the document “Political Project” it is indicated that: “nationalities and peoples practice an Integral Philosophy where human beings and nature are in close and harmonious interrelation, guaranteeing the life of all beings. Historical consciousness ratifies the Integral Philosophy practiced by Nationalities and Peoples, who survived the exploitation, genocide, ethnocide and dehumanized subjugation of Western civilization” (CONAIE, 2001: 2.1).
Commenting on the component Sumak kawsay – Living Well places at the center of the debate one of the central points of Western modernity: the relationship between human beings and nature, between the “ideology of progress” and the notions of collective well-being that incorporate respect for nature. For indigenous peoples, in their codes of life and also in their territorial practices, a harmonious relationship must be sought, based on the postulates that all beings have life, which implies that nature also has life, and that it is necessary to seek a situation of balance that allows the integral survival of human beings and ecosystems.
As leader Nina Pacari explains: “The Sumak kawsay, which literally translates as 'good living' or 'full life', reveals itself to be a summary of the notion developed by the indigenous peoples, and is oriented from the collective subject, which means: my well-being only to the extent that all others are in a situation of equity. To that extent, there is balance and equity. Put in this way, it becomes a paradigm to strengthen not only the experiences in the community territories, but also in the general scope” (Pacari: 2021, p. 19).[vi].
Nina Pacari, while warning against the reduction of a literal translation, situates the notion of Sumak kawsay from a perspective of collective well-being based on balance and equity between all human beings and between them and nature.
The visions of Good Living clash, first of all, with extractive offensives, especially those that are implemented in indigenous territories and in the preservation of ecosystems; the evolution of the “Yasuni Initiative” is a good example of this.[vii] It has been a point of confrontation with both neoliberal and developmentalist tendencies.
The debates around the Sumak kawsay – Good Living were so powerful that, in the context of the Constituent Assembly of 2007-2008, they led to the approval of the Rights of Nature (Constitution 2008, chapter 7).
6.
For the sake of exposition, we have briefly addressed the central points, but this is a comprehensive social, political and cultural Program, which confronts, first and foremost, the coloniality of power, but also questions the central points of the pattern of capitalist accumulation in our countries and confronts one of the pillars of global domination: racism and the ideology of progress and modernity.
It is not just an Indigenous Program for indigenous people, it is a proposal by indigenous peoples and nationalities for the transformation of the entire country, at the economic, state and ideological levels.
This is a Program whose evolution and dissemination has been accompanied by action and impact strategies, as well explained by leader Luis Macas: “the indigenous peoples and nationalities, through CONAIE, have outlined two lines of action: one is the demand for necessary pragmatic achievements, and another fundamental line is the strategic one, indispensable to generate changes, actions and behaviors that have been evident in their trajectory of struggle. A central theme is that of Plurinationality, we understand through this concept the historical existence of the diversity of peoples... thus, at a certain point, the indigenous movement assumed the power to question the uninational, colonial, oppressive state, and committed to confronting and fighting against the political-economic model that affects the majority of society” (Macas: 2021, p. 27).[viii]
The trajectory of the Program presented has a political vitality that manages to articulate several levels of action and impact, and it gradually gains followers and recognition until it attains a vanguard status for the specific political stage from 1990 to 2008 in the strategy of the Ecuadorian indigenous movement, whose cardinal point is Plurinationality, that is, penetration into the political system and recognition of territories and community governance, thus avoiding other trends, such as multiculturalism, which may recognize knowledge and cultures, but its political participation is kept on the sidelines and limited to specifically indigenous issues. That is why Macas' emphasis on the purpose of “fighting against the political-economic model” of oppression and colonialism is relevant.
In the fight for this program, the Ecuadorian movement has developed actions such as the National Uprisings, the most recent in 2019 and 2022, and relevant political strategies, such as the demand for constituent processes, at specific moments, which have cornered successive governments and generated support in popular sectors and organizations, provoking political and ideological definitions in the classes and urban strata that corner racism.
Its social and cultural notions and impacts have stirred intellectual and academic sectors, encouraging trends such as decoloniality and post-colonialism.
The political evolution of the Plurinationality, Interculturality and Well-Being Program reached its high point in the 2008 Constitution,[ix] which, in its context, incorporated Plurinationality, Interculturality and Good Living, as well as its approval in a national referendum, with the support of 64% of the electorate. Its subsequent development had its ups and downs, clashing with developmentalism and neoliberalism, but this can be discussed in another article.
Finally, I suggest that we are facing a new moment: it is a current program that expands beyond national borders and the vicissitudes of a specific organization; it has managed to overcome its own limits. The notions of plurinationality, interculturality and good living, the recovery of indigenous community societies, challenge a globalization steeped in colonialism and racism, which feels threatened and responds with war, appealing to pure and simple domination.
*Francisco Hidalgo Flor, sociologist, is a professor at the Central University of Ecuador.
Translation: Fernando Lima das Neves.
Notes
[I] Andrés Guerrero (2018). “Anthology of Ecuatorian Critical Thought”, pp. 343 – 388. (Available in this link)
[ii] The document “Conaie Political Project – 1994” is available in this link)
[iii] The document “Proyecto Político de las Nacionalidades y Pueblos del Ecuador – 2001” is available in this link)
[iv] The document “Propuesta de la Conaie Front a la Asamblea Constituyente 2007” is available in this link)
[v] Patricia Gualinga (2021). “Proceso Constituyente y Buen Vivir 2007 – 2022” pp. 53-62. (Available using this link)
[vi] Nina Pacari (2021). “Proceso Constituyente y Buen Vivir 2007 – 2022”, pp. 15 – 14 (Available using this link).
[vii] The “Yasuni Initiative” refers to the proposal not to exploit the oil reserves located in the Yasuní ecological reserve, in the Amazon region. It puts an ecological perspective before an extractive perspective. In a recent referendum, in October 2022, the majority of the Ecuadorian population, 59%, voted in favor of closing the installed oil fields.
[viii] Luis Macas (2021). “Proceso Constituyente y Buen Vivir 2007 – 2022”, pp. 25 – 34 (Available using this link).
[ix] Constitución del Ecuador 2008, available on the National Assembly web portal: this link.
the earth is round there is thanks to our readers and supporters.
Help us keep this idea going.
CONTRIBUTE
