Eduardo Galeano honored: Mexico, "victim of the hypocrisy of the narcosystem"
The great Eduardo Galeano received the 1808 Medal in Mexico City Wednesday. Expressing gratitude for Mexico's sheltering of thousands of refugees from the murderous dirty wars of the hemisphere, such as his native Uruguay, the writer of "Open Veins of Latin America" noted the following of Mexico's current narco "war" (out of respect for Galeano, I won't even try to mangle the words of this poet):
“Y en estas horas duras, México está recibiendo veladas amenazas del gran hermano del norte que parece que quiere venir a salvar a este país de la violencia y del caos, y eso corresponde a la tradición mesiánica del hermano del norte que a lo largo de casi toda su vida independiente se ha consagrado a esa tarea, al parecer encomendada por Dios, de salvar a los países que necesitan su ayuda. Me parece muy peligroso, porque en la experiencia esa ayuda ha sembrado al mundo de dictaduras militares, ha convertido a Irak en un manicomio y está convirtiendo a Afganistán en un vasto cementerio"
And, to be sure, from the also soccer fanatic:
“A mí me parecen peligrosos todos los mesianismos, tengan el color político que tengan y provengan de la religión de donde provengan. El único mesianismo que no parece peligroso es el mesianismo de Lionel Messi, el mejor jugador de futbol del mundo.”
Do you really believe that talk? Seems like the kind of overheated AMLO-esque rhetoric that a sensible dude like yourself tends to view skeptically. From where I sit in el gran hermano del norte it seems like roughly nobody is interested in "saving" Mexico. Leering at the lurid headlines and wistfully shaking one's head at those poor, violent-natured Mexicans, yes. Refusing to confront the sine qua non of the drug trade (consumption/criminalization), check. But salvar, especially in the sense Galeano uses? Not so much.
ReplyDeleteThanks for comment - well, I am not sure I agree with the AMLO-Galeano comparison, for a range of reasons; with regards to this context, I think one may say that while Galeano speaks out against "messianic" behavior, AMLO is actively engaging in it. Be that as it may - nor do I think we agree what "save" refers to here. What I think Galeano means is what has admittedly been a long tradition, coming and going through the past 150 years, of the United States portending to "know" what was best not only for the U.S. but also for LA, and then launching on a crusade to do so. Think of Woodrow Wilson - a man who represents the quintessence of the well meaning do-gooder, ready to spread the blessings of democracy to Latin America (and Mexico, to be sure), and then proceeds to militarily intervene more than any other president before him. But perhaps your interpretation of "salvar" is more on target than mine.
ReplyDeleteIt could certainly be me who's wrong in the interpretation of "salvar," but the fact of placing it immediately before mentions of Iraq and Afghanistan seems pretty suggestive. As for your comment, the reality of US intervention is undeniable, but degrees matter. Obviously the US will seek to "guide" Mexican policy in certain ways in accordance with its perceived interests (and the guidance will probably be misguided), but from there to an analogy with invasions in the Muslim world is just not illuminating. That level of ignoring context is what I meant by overheated rhetoric.
ReplyDeleteMore broadly, it's fine to rail against messianism in the abstract, but the problem, as always, is in the definition. To whom are we to believe Galeano is referring to? Qaddafi? Putin? Obama? AMLO? That he seems to laud Venezuela (even if he is referring to "interesting movements" in this speech, he has certainly had kind words for Chavez in the past) suggests to me that his notion of who is a false messiah versus who is a leader of a people's movement might not be infallible.