From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2002 14:50:01 -0800 To: undisclosed-recipients:; Subject: [pttp] Women, African Colombians, Indigenes in the FARC-EP To all those that are skeptical of the Vida and it's grassroots and popular support among the Indigenes: One thing we are still researching, and do not have a lot of info on now, but will later, is the makup of the "National" group or front of Indiginous groups in Colombia. The word out on the street is that that group pretends to represent ALL Indiginous groups but in fact many Indiginous groups that are in the Liberated Zone are exclude from membership, so it is an exclusionary and elite group, or certainly not complete. Perhaps the Indiginous groups that are outside the zone cannot say they support the FARC whether they do or not, because of AUC reprisals, and since Indiginous groups and tribes within the Liberated zones may be excluded from the "national group" their opinion concerning their grassroots support of the FARC-EP is not heard, even by peace groups that may be affiliated with the "national group". Again, we are still gathering the facts on this, we have heard some things, but we don't profess to know everything about it. We are open to your knowledge of this as well. Again we will restate some other facts given in past discussions: 1 There are many Indiginous FARC-EP commanders and soldiers, whole families where children follow their elder siblings into the army for reasons of family ties and perhaps sentimentalism. 2 There are many many African-Colombians in the FARC-EP and many of these African-Colombians have been intermarrying with the Indigenes for 400 years. Would these "mixed" people be considered Indiginous, and if so would that add to the "popular support" that the FARC-EP has? 3 Women, including African-Colombian women and Indiginous women constitute 40% of the FARC-EP, so this is a feminist movement, or a feminist-indiginous movement. Women find total equality in the FARC-EP, and this is not the case in the Colombian culture at large, nor in all the Indiginous groups. This is the same as the EZLN and the Nepal socialist movement. If you are a woman or if you love women, how can you ignore this glaring fact, knowing that the culture at large is so hostile to the womens movement in these places, and knowing how bad women, especially poor women, are treated. All three of the above points have NEVER been addressed by you or the other people on the listserve, and one wonders who is the real "inclusive" one here, if so much is being ignored? The FARC does not want to squeeze anybody into a narrow ideology, on the other hand, it tends to rule in a rather autonomous, benevolent, and mild hand. The "soldier judges" try to resolve disputes in the fairest way, and avoid harsh punishments most of the time, and spend their time reading books on common law. They are young, inexperienced guerrillas in some cases so mistakes are bound to be made, but on the whole the people are MUCH happier to have them around rather than the Colombian military, or worse, the AUC. Here is a letter from another listserve giving a similar perspective: Well, here is a defense of the FARC 1. They have managed to secure a huge tract of territory from the Colombian government, and installed a more benign form of state power in that area. a. Their government does not harass peasants to the degree the government does, does not employ torture anywhere near the same degree and, if accounts are to be believed, manage a more or less stable society without the use of extreme repression. b. They allow peasants to harvest coca, which is just about the only crop with advantageous terms of trade. c. They have a much fairer system of taxation. d. They expropriate landowners and perform agrarian reform. This is without question the biggest thing in their favour 2. Their structure is not as statist or totalitarian as other "communist" revolutions. a. They have a decentralised structure; their political management, like their army organisation, is fractured yet the whole thing does not collapse into warlordism. b. They allow a limited form of democracy, a la Cuba. c. They do not seem to have a plan to move away from this as they gain more power, which is a good thing 3. Specifically addressing Pete's point, the FARC is composed almost exclusively of lower-class folks, mostly peasants. 4. They have a high representation of women, at 30% of the fighting force according to the report by Le Monde Diplomatique. 5. They encourage education and health; a recent article in the New Scientist commented how a team of American biologists were amazed with the degree to which the FARC was willing to cooperate and encourage research in the areas they control. There are all sorts of problems with the FARC, like any other military organisation. But buggered if I can think of any movement in Latin America which shows more promise - the MST could grow into something significant, certainly they have a higher degree of support amongst the population. Maybe something will come out of the argentinian thing, though I doubt it. Suppose that Argentina had a FARC and was experiencing what it is now, the situation would be entirely different and we might reasonably foresee some sort of take-over atempt. So there you have it, and in addition don't forget that the press here in the USA and even more so down there will lie about the FARC and try to drive a wedge between the FARC and it's Indiginous base of support any chance it can get. Be sure of your information, there has been many lies lately about Nepal, perhaps Colombia is just as bad. Un Abrazo, NorteAmericanos for Bolivar _________________________________________________ KOMINFORM P.O. Box 66 00841 Helsinki Phone +358-40-7177941 Fax +358-9-7591081 http://www.kominf.pp.fi General class struggle news: [EMAIL PROTECTED] subscribe mails to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Geopolitical news: [EMAIL PROTECTED] subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED] __________________________________________________
