A comparative estudy of indigenous movements in Ecuador and Colombia

CHAPTER I

THE THEORY OF SOCIAL MOVEMENTS AND THE INDIGENOUS CASE

The first chapter examines existing theories of Social Movements as a way of understanding the formation and evolution of indigenous movements within the political and social sphere. The structure evolves from a panoramic view of the theory, followed by its contextualisation in the Latin American case and concretised in the indigenous movement.

Within this context three issues will be considered; Firstly, how indigenous movements share common features with other social movements despite their unique ethnic component and how it is not possible to make a distinction between “old” and “new” social movements. Secondly, to highlight the double struggle in which indigenous people are involved in order to understand properly its concerns and to avoid the reduction of the problem to mere peasant demands. Therefore, indigenous movements face a class struggle (indigenous/ peasants versus landlords) and an ethnic conflict (indigenous versus non indigenous people). And thirdly, to identify the political project that the indigenous movement has developed within the national political context, and to examine its relationship with the state.

Social Movement Theory has developed mainly through the case studies of North American and European social movements leading to two different traditions. In North America, the theory examines the strategy, participation,organisationand interests of the movements. Moreover, it analyses their political and social impact. All these issues are addressed by Resource Mobilisation Theory (RMT). By contrast, the European literature focuses on the origin of these movements, why social movements arise, and how the creation of new identities challenges political and social order. This notion of identity underlines New Social Movements Theory (NSM).[3]

The assessment of social movements in Latin American countries has been influenced by these two streams although it has tended to stress the NSM paradigm and ignore the contribution of RMT. With regard to this, Foweraker argues that in the Latin American context New Social Movement Theory might serve to explain the increasing incidence and broader scope of social mobilisation whereas Resource Mobilisation Theory might address the political constraints and opportunities, and explain the success of social movements.[4]Within this context indigenous movements often falls outside the scope of existing theory.

The origin of mass mobilisation in Latin America was founded during the populist regimes of the 1930s to the 1960s. During this period industrialisation took place through the implementation of import-substitution economic policy. At this time the range of social movements was relatively limited and made up of class actors as with labour and agrarian movements. Two crucial facts changed this stage; Firstly, the shift from rural to urban and industrial society through industrial projects and the capitalisation of agriculture. Secondly the crisis of the populist and develop mentalist state and the advent of the repressive military and authoritarian regimes of the 1970s and 1980s.[5]Escobar and Alvarez also emphasise the crisis of political parties and the mechanism of representation from traditional parties to leftist parties. Within this context, the class- based category of labour unions, and peasant movements, were left behind by the emergence of new social movements such as urban movements and women’s movements which were demanding their rights.[6] Urban movements would represent the popular response to state repression and economic austerity. As Foweraker points out; urban movements were an open-ended category which depending on time, place and circumstances, could include new forms of labour, women’s, teachers or, student movements. All these movements as well as agrarian and ethnic movements in the countryside, began to state their demands as rights; land rights, labour rights or educational rights.

At this stage the emergence of many social phenomena in the Latin American spectrum tended to be included under the term New Social Movements. But as Foweraker asserts “not everything that moves is a social movement”. The social movement itself must exhibit a sense of collective purpose and political objectives which require interaction with other political actors, and it must also mobilise its supporters in pursuit of its goals.[7]In addition, the political protest of NSM will converge on three features as Slater points out; The excessive centralisation of decision making power within the apparatus of the state combined with acute and increasing administrative inefficiency; The state’s incapacity to provide adequate services in the area of collective means of consumption; And the steadily-eroding legitimacy of the state together with scepticism towards the established political parties. This situation has increased the articulation of social demands not following the traditional channels of political representation.[8]

On the other hand, Escobar and Alvarez considered that many theorists insist that the “catch-all” concept of NSM challenges the state’s economic and political model and calls into question the traditional way of doing politics. In contrast, other authors argue that many NSM are unable to move from confrontational tactics to strategies of negotiation and compromise required by the new democratic period.[9]

As it has been said, it seems that there are “old” and “new” social movements. This distinction is a traditional debate within the literature of social movement theory. Authors like Main warring and Viola find this classification useful; “New social movements are inclined towards affective concerns, expressive relations, group orientation, and horizontal organisation. Whereas, old social movements are inclined towards material concerns, instrumental relations, orientation towards the state, and vertical organisation”.[10]By contrast, Fuentes and Frank observes that;

“... the many social movement in the West, South and East that are now commonly called “new” are with few exceptions, new forms of social movements which have existed through the ages”.[11]

With regard to this, Scott is very clear; new movements carry the project of older movement in one vital respect; “they open up the political sphere, they articulate popular demands and they politicise issues previously confined to the private realm”.[12]

Certainly there is no clear divide between what are called “old” and what are called “new” social movements but it can not be denied that there are new elements within social movements. For Cardoso the newness of social movements in Latin America lies in the introduction of popular and previously excluded sectors into the balance of forces within civil society and in their “occasional ability to challenge the State”.[13] In this regard, the case of indigenous movements represents a clear illustration of this discussion.

The early revolts of indigenous groups against Spanish subjugation lacked a unified strategy or broad vision for social change.[14] From the 1920s to the 1960s indigenous people began to organise themselves in order to fight for land. Moreover, economic development during the 1960s and the 1970s shaped the composition of their demands. In the countryside, threatened by the introduction of modern technology and capitalist values, the indigenous communities began to demand ethnic recognition from the state.[15]

Therefore, the new component in indigenous movements is a consciousness of the struggle for identity and the need for a strategy to achieve political, economic and social rights. In this sense the priority of the indigenous movement will be these kind of projects (bilingual educational programmes or recovery of traditional cultures) which reinforce their sense of identity. Likewise, Evers points out that the innovative capacity of these social movements lay in their ability to create and experiment with different forms of social relations in everyday life and create bits of social practice in which power was not central.[16]

The strategy adopted by the social movements in order to gain access to the political sphere was based not only on solidarity among the members of the movement and others sectors of society but also as Evers says, by a shared antagonism towards “others”. This has been defined as a “continuing overt relationship of conflict between collective actors and authorities”.[17]In fact, the affirmation of indigenous identity is defined in terms of antagonism towards the rest of society. They want to have their own identity, own culture and traditions recognised as something different to the rest of society.

Here, Narrow believes that the “collective action frames” that affirm people’s commitment to the cause must therefore find injustice and unjust authority in particular if they are to be effective, and recurrent conflict cements this solidarity and sense of identity and common cause. This “injust” authority is nearly always vested in the state, because “states hold an exceptional power to define actors in an arena as legitimate or illegitimate, hence to support some actors and destroy others.[18]Moreover, a characteristic shared by social movements is that of force or morality; a sense of injustice in individual motivation and the force of social mobilisation in developing social power. “Social Movements then mobilise their members in a offence/defence against a shared sense of moral injustice”.[19]

This dialectic relationship of just and unjust is always used in indigenous discourse: “It is just and moral to recover the land of our ancestor’s”, “we are the original settlers of the land and it belongs to us”, “we respect and live according the environment whereas the white man contaminates the rivers and cuts down the trees”.[20]Therefore, these kind of arguments help to reinforce indigenous identity and to justify people’s uprising as being something just.

This identity struggle faced by indigenous people in contemporary society has been highlighted to avoid reducing the problem to merely that of class conflict. In spite of this, class conflict and ethnic conflict can be found together from the very beginning within indigenous movements.

The indigenous movement can be understood in class terms as many of their demands date back to the Hacienda system. During this period indigenous workers were needed to increase production but at the same time incited conflict between indigenous peasants and landowners. Land reform during the 1960s left the situation unchanged and the confrontation between the Indian and the landowner’s oligarch became more acute.[21] In this sense, the indigenous problem can be seen as a class conflict, because it is a fight for land and the right to communitarian life in the face of rural capitalism.[22]Similarly, the ethnic conflict found in the indigenous movements also has its roots in the Hacienda period. The fight for land was not just a claim for peasants’ rights but also a recognition of their historical territory.[23]Today, the rapid modernisation of Latin American countries is seen by their indigenous population as a serious threat to their identity. Therefore indigenous demands have expanded to include their right for self-determination, “forcing the necessity to reformulate the structure of the nation”.[24]

The make up of indigenous movements is shaped by two factors: the recovery of indigenous identity and the need to open up a space within the political, economic and social environment of the country. Therefore within this context indigenous movements must develop a political project if they wish to prosper.

Scott argues that social movements have to be seen not only as cultural elements but also as a political ones. Political in the sense of politicising new issues, and expressing “not a retreat from the political sphere, but an extension of politics to cover a wider range of concerns and social relations”.[25]Foweraker addsthatthey are political in the sense of entering into the political and institutional arena, and of engaging in strategic interaction with the state.[26]

At this stage, despite the apparent “hostility of social movements towards formal politics”, the state will become the central focus of movement strategy.[27] But this negotiation may be conducted in a context that often includes patrimonial, corruption and electoral fraud, or what has been called “the inevitable institutionalise” of Latin American social movements.[28]On the other hand, as Cardoso stated, the state often succeeds in dividing and disarticulating the movement before it poses any direct threat.[29] Therefore, both the politics of exclusion and the politics of inclusion are integrated by the state apparatus[30]in order to nullify the social movement.

One example of this policy has been applied by the Ecuadorian and Colombian government to the indigenous problem. For many years they have ignored Indian demands. Now they have to confront the organisation and the strategy of these movements. In the case of Ecuador, the state has shifted from co-optation to disintegration policies. When the first indigenous organisation, Federación de Centros Shuar, was founded in 1964, in the Southwest of the Amazon region, the government allowed it to exist for two reasons. Firstly, the ultimate goal in the state’s unofficial Indian policy was integration, and the Federation could be viewed as the most effective agent of change for the Shuar.[31] A second reason concerns Ecuador’s fear of losing more territory to Peru. While Shuar schools emphasise Shuar history, language and culture, they also promote patriotism and loyalty to Ecuador.[32] Today, the Ecuadorian government is trying to destroy the indigenous movement unity by neglecting the representation of the Ecuadorian indigenous people gathered under the Confederación de Nacionalidades Indigenas del Ecuador (CONAIE). Political leaders are more keen to dialogue with each Indian community and to propose partial solutions in an attempt to divide the indigenous movement.[33] In the case of Colombia, the government followed a policy of integration from the beginning. The very constitution of the National Organisation of Indigenous in Colombia (Organisation Nacional de Indigenas de Colombia- ONIC-) was backed by official institutions, thereby shaping the demands of the indigenous people and avoiding a social conflict.

On the other hand, indigenous movements look for their own independence despite their relationship with the state. This balance is not easy to reach in a situation in which the success of the movement depends very much on what they get from the state.[34] As Foweraker points out, they will need sooner or later some kind of fund to pay for organisational costs, and some will finally seek political alliances to press their demands. In short, an insistence on “autonomy” does not mean that social movements automatically refuse outside assistance and advice.[35] On the other hand, one of the first challenges of the organisation is to become economically self-sufficient. CONAIE estimate that the country’s Indian organisations have an external financial dependency of almost 90% if not more.[36] Therefore, to what extent can we talk about the indigenous movements as being independent?. Some authors, such as Hellman, think that those analyses that insist that the incorporation of autonomous social movements into broader political movements represent a loss of an authentic popular voice, fail to grasp that the encounter between movement and party is dialectic. The movement is altered but so, too, is the party.[37]

Within this context, the success or the failure of indigenous movements is related to two issues. The first, the strategy designed to pursue their demands and the second, how they manage the relationship with state institutions. This point will be developed in detail in the third chapter.

Finally, this chapter can be concluded by saying that social movements must be seen equally and inseparably as “struggles over meanings as well as material conditions. That is, as cultural struggles”.[38] Indian organisations are making not only cultural demands but are also asking their leaders for economic and social improvements. Many indigenous Ecuadorians now want more from their organisations believing that their agenda should move beyond cultural revitalisation and the leveraging of better services from the state. CONAIE believe that meeting this challenge will define the future of Ecuador’s Indian movement.[39]

The challenge of the indigenous movement is to reach an equilibrium between cultural identity and economic and social achievement within capitalist society. Indigenous people are no longer satisfied with ethnic recognition. The whole notion is intrinsically related to Evers’ idea where “more power means less identity, and more alienation”.[40]

[1] Latin American Weekly Report, 1994, p.64.

[2] Scott Alan , Ideology and Social Movements. Allen and Unwin. London 1991.

[3] For further references look at Escobar Arturo and Alvarez E. Sonia (eds),The making of social movement in Latin America; identity, strategy and democracy. Westview Press 1992, and Foweraker Joe TheorisingSocial Movements. Pluto Press 1995.

[4] Foweraker, Op. cit, 1995, p.3.

[5] Ibid, p.5.

[6] The combination of urban expansion and repressive government spread the increasing demands in terms of rights in Latin America from the 1970s onwards. Ibid.

[7] Ibid, p.4.

[8] Slater David, New Social Movements and the State in Latin America. CEDLA. Amsterdam. 1985, pp.3-4.

[9] Mainwaring and Cardoso thinks that the problem that many social movements face is that they lack a program of negotiation with political and social actors and they just remain as a protest movement. For futher information look at; Cardoso Ruth Correa Leite “Movimentos Sociais na America Latina”, Revista Brasileira de Ciencias Sociais1987, vol. 1, no.3 and Mainwaring Scott “Urban popular movements, identity, and democratisation in Brasil”, Comparative Political Studies 1987, 20, 2 (July).

[10] Mainwaring, Scott and Viola, New Social Movements, Political culture and Democracy; Brazil and Argentina in 1980s. Tetos 61 (fall). 1984, p. 20.

[11] Fuentes Sonia and Gunder Frank, “Ten Theses on Social Movements”, in World Development. Vol. 17, No. 2. 1989,pp. 179-180.

[12] Scott, Op. cit, p. 155.

[13] Cardoso, Op. cit, p.224.

[14] Becker Marc, Nationalism and pluri-nationalism in a multi-ethnic state; indigenous organisation in Ecuador, University of Arkansas. 1992.

[15] Wray Natalia, “La constitución del movimiento etnico-nacional indio en Ecuador”. America Indigena, Instituto Indigenista Americano. Mexico. Vol.XLIX., No. 1. 1989, p. 92. Findji Maria, “From resistance to Social Movement: the Indigenous Authorities in Colombia”, in Escobar Arturo and Alvarez E. Sonia (eds.),The making of Social Movement in Latin America; Identity, strategy and democracy. Westview Press. 1992, p. 114.

[16] Evers Tilman “ Identity, the hidden side of new social movements in Latin America”, in Slater David (eds), Op, cit, 1985, p.58.

[17] Tarrow Sidney “Old movements in new cycles of protest; the career of an Italian Religious Community”, in Klandermans, Bert, Hanspeter Kriesi and Sidney Tarrow (eds) From structure to action; Comparing Movements Across Cultures. International Social Movement Research. Vol.1 JAIPress; Greenwich, CT.1988, p.283.

[18] Foweraker, Op. cit, p. 67.

[19] Fuentes and Frank, Op. cit, p.181.

[20] CONAIE, Political Declaration of Ecuadors’ indigenous people. The Fourth Congress of CONAIE.

[21] Rhon D. Francisco “Lucha etnica o lucha de clases: Ecuador”, in Campesinado e Indigenismo en America Latina. ed. CELATS, Centro Latinoamericano de Trabajo Social.1978, p. 75.

[22] CDDH, El levantamiento indigena y la cuestión nacional, ed. Abya-Yala. 1990, p. 17.

[23] The Indian Ecuadorian Federation, created in 1941 organised the first bilingual school in the early 1940s, and published the first journal in quichua. Natalia Wray, Op, cit, 1989, p.81.

[24] CDDH, Op. cit. 1990, p. 17.

[25] Scott, Op. cit,p. 24.

[26] Foweraker, Op. cit., p. 62.

[27] Ibid.

[28] Foweraker Joe, Popular mobilisation in Mexico. The teachers movement 1977-1987. Cambridge University press. 1993, Ch. 10.

[29] Correa Leite Cardoso Ruth “Movimientos sociales urbanos; Blaco Critico”, Sorj, Bernardo and Maria Herminia Tavares de Almedia (eds) Sociedades y Política no Brasil Pos-1964. Editora brasilense; Sao Paolo. 1983.

[30] Foweraker, Op. cit, 1995, p. 67.

[31] In itsefforts to create a unified Shuar people, the Federation is carrying out the work of civilising the Shuar, by rejecting the more “savage” element of Shuar culture in Hendricks Janet,, “Symbolic Counterhegemony among the Ecuadorian Shuar” in Greg Urban and Joel Shezer (eds) Nation-States and Indians in Latin America. University of Texas Press, Austin. 1991,pp.56-57.

[32] Ibid, pp. 56-67.

[33] In an interview carried out with the leaders of different Ecuadorian political parties, all rejected the representation of the national indigenous movement, CONAIE. Moreover, in 1991 the government launched a campaign to discredit Conaie in order to isolat it from the rest of society. Also the government pursued the institutionalisation of the conflict in order to demobilise the Indian problem.Frank Erwin et. al., Los políticos y los indigenas. Diez entrevistas a candidatos presidenciales de partidos políticos del Ecuador sobre la cuestión indigena”. Ed. Abya-Yala, 1992.

[34] “Success” takes the form of integrating previously excluded issues and groups into the “normal” political process. This argument is diametrically opposed to Touraine’s analysis of social movements as pure forms of activity towards the political system. Quoted in Scott, Op. cit, p.11.

[35] Foweraker, Op. cit, 1995, p. 83.

[36] Bebbington Anthony et al. “From protest to productivity; the evolution ofIndigenous federation in Ecuador”, in Grassroot Development, 16/2, 1992, p.14.

[37] Hellman Adle Judith Adle “The study of new social movements in Latin America and the question of autonomy”, in Escobar and Alvarez (eds.), Op. cit., p. 58.

[38] Escobar Arturo “Culture, Economics and Politics in Latin American Social Movements Theory and Research”, in Escobar and Alvarez (eds.), Op. cit., p.69.

[39] Bebbington et al, Op. cit, p.12.

[40] Evers, Op. cit, p.65.

[41] Social Movements are cyclical in two sense. First, they respond to circumstances, which change as a result of political, economic and perhaps ideological fluctuations or cycles. Second, Social Movements tend to have life cycles of their own. Their membership, mobilisation and strength tend to be cyclical; because the movements mobilise people in response to circumstances which are themselves cyclical. Fuentes and Frank, Op. cit, p.182.

[42] Becker, Op. cit.

[43] For example, the Shuar-Achuar tribe was geographically divided between Ecuador and Peru.

[44] Ibid, 1992.

[45] Wray, Op. cit, p.79.

[46] Ibid, p.82.

[47] Ibid, p.83.

[48] Colonisation of Shuar territory didn’t begin until about fifty years ago. At the same time, the increased need for trade goods led to more peaceful relationship among the Shuar people and as war decreased, the population increased. The present population of about 45.000 people is a significant factor in their survival as a group, inHendricks, Op cit, p.53.

[49] Salesian missionaries, who had established a permanent mission and boarding schools for Shuar children, saw the increase in colonization as a threat to their economic and religious interests. Ibid, p.56.

[50] Wray, Op. cit, p.83.

[51] Ibid, p.86.

[52] Ibid, p.90.

[53] Becker, Op. cit.

[54] Bebbington et.al, Op. cit, p.13.

^[54] Becker, Op. cit.

[55] Ibid.

[56] Becker, Op. cit.

[57] Matos Mar “Grupos etnicos de America”. Anuario Indigena. Mexico.Marzo 1993, pp.165-203.

[58] ONIC; Primer Congreso Indigena Nacional. Organizacion Nacional Indigena de Colombia: Conclusiones y Documentos. Febrero 27 de 1982, p.75.

[59] The 1968 publications of Siervos deDios y Amados de los Indios discussed the relationship between the state and the missions in Putumayo. At this juncture, the protagonists were not indigenous people; they were the “nationals” seeking changes in the relationship in their society between church and state. Findji Teresa “From resistance to Social Movements; the indigenous Authorities Movement in Colombia” in Escobar Arturo and Alvarez E. Sonia (eds) The making of social movements in Latin America. Indentity, strategy and democracy, Westview Press 1992, p.114.

[60] The terrajeros are those indigenous people who must pay the landowner with their labour for the right to set up their homes and have subsistence plots on the hacienda. A resguardo is a proportion of territory that is recognised as the inalienable, permanent common property of an indigenous community. In economic terms resguardos are lands segregated from the market. In sociopolitical terms, they are managed by a small council according to specific legislation. Ibid, p.13.

[61] Ibid, pp. 116-8.

[62] Ibid, pp.120-21.

[63] Ibid.

[64] Ibid, pp.129.

[65] Ibid.

[66] Tarrow Sydney “Struggle, Politics and Reform: Collective Action, Social Movements, and Cycles of Protest” Western Societies Program Occasional Paper no21 Center for International Studies, Cornell University.1989, p.71.

[67] Lowi Theodore “The Politics of disorder”. New York; Basic books 1971.

[68] Munck Gerardo “Identity and Ambiguity in Democratic Stuggles” in Foweraker and Craig (eds), Popular Movements and Political Change in Mexico. Lynne Reinner. Boulder 1990, p.37.

[69] Escobar and Alvarez, Op. cit, p.325.

[70] Scott, Op. cit, p.152.

[71] Escobar and Alvarez, Op. cit, p.328.

[72] Wilson Frank “Neo corporatism an the rise of new social movements” in Dalton, Rusell J. and Manfred Kuechler (eds) Challenging the political order. New Social and Political Movements in Western Democracies. Oxford University Press. New York 1990, pp.67-83.

[73] Findji, Op. cit, p.328.

[74] Several important case studies - Jenkins and Perrow, 1997; Mitchell,1979; Oberschall,1975 - provide thebasis for hypothesizing about the combination of resources that are most promising for a movement’s success. quoted in Tarrow, Op. cit, p.73.

[75] Gamson William“The strategy of social protest”.The Dorsey Press 1975, pp.28-29.

[76] Ibid pp.29-30.

[77] Ibid, p.19.

[78] Landman Todd “ Toward Formalising Social Movement Theory”, paper prepared for the Ph.D Colloquium at the Department of Govenment at the University of Essex. 1995, pp.20-21.

[79] Correa Rubio Francois, Op. cit, pp.9-30.

[80] Political parties in Ecuador reject the notion of a pluriethnic or pluricultural State in Frank, Patino et.al. Op. cit, 1992.

[81] ONIC, Op. cit,p.15.

[82]Legislation. Anuario Indigenista.Vol XXXII. Mexico. 1992, pp.179-184.

[83] Fuentes and Frank, Op. cit, p.187.

[84]Latin American Weekly Report. 1994, p.13 and p.221.

[85] Tarrow, Op. cit, p.74.

[86] Ibid.

[87] quoted in Tarrow, ibid.

[88] Ibid, p.86.

[89] Jenkins and Perrow (1977:257) quoted in Tarrow, ibid.

[90] Tarrow, Op. cit, p.76.

[91] Pizarro Longómez Eduardo “Elecciones, partidos y nuevo marco institucional: En que estamos?”. Revista Análisis. Univerisdad de Bogota, 1994, No.22, mayo-agosto, p.86.

[92] Ibid, p.87.

[93] The 30% of

the Afro-Colombian population includes sambos and mulatos poeple, Ibid.

[94] Ibid, p.90.

[95] Ibid.

[96] Ibid, p.89.

[97] Cesar Augusto Marulanda, “Las elecciones de la circunscripcion especial, apoyo a las minorías?” Cine dias vistos por el CINEP, No.25, enero- marzo de 1994.

[98] Diekonja et al. 1978, quoted in Whitten Norman E. “Cultural transformation and ethnicity in Modern Ecuador”University of Illinois Press. 1981, p.9.

[99] Velasco Leon “Las elecciones en el Ecuador; concejales- cantonales, 1978 y 1990”. Quito CIESA 1992, p.110.

[100] Ibid pp.113-119.

[101]Latin American Weekly Report 1990, no.16.

[102] quoted in Whitten, Op. cit, p.10.

[103]AngladeChristian “Democracy and the rule of law in Latin America” in Ian Budge and David Mackay (eds) Developing Democracy: a Comparative ResearchLondon: Saga Publications 1994.

[104] Escobar and Alvarez, Op. cit, p.9.

[105] Tarrow Sydney“Modular Collective Action and the Rise of the social Movement: Why the French Revolution was not enough”, Politics and Society, Vol.21, No.1. March 1994, p.85.

[106] CONAIE, Achievements of the indigenous people. Diciembre 1992.

[107] Escobar and Alvarez, Op. cit, p.7.

[108] Chavez R. Leon “Seguir adelante: La etica empresarial y el comportamiento político entre los tejedores comerciales de Otavalo” in Jeffrey Enhreich (ed) Antropologia política en Ecuador, prespectivas desde las culturas indigenas. Abya-Yala. Quito (Ecuador).1991, p.214.

[109] Findji, Op. cit, p.131.

[110] Landman, Op. cit, p23.

[111] Matos Mar, Op. cit, pp. 165-203.

[112] Hendricks, Op. cit, p. 53.

[113]During the First National Indigenous Congress, organised byONIC (Organizacion Nacional de Indigenas de Colombia), in 1982, they still recognised their fight as a class conflict. Conclusions about general outline of the indigenous movement. Op. cit, p.20.

[114] The notion of“Indigenismo cósmico” was developed by some indigenous movements in Bolivia and Peru. This concept rejects any influence from Europe and emphasises traditional indigenous values as the solution. Moreover, these territories which were part of the Inca Empire aspire to create a second Tawantinsuyo.

[115] Ibid, p.74.

[116] Look at CONAIE, Achievements of the Indigenous Movement. Dec.1992.

[117] “In Colombia, the degree of destruction and assimilation of indigenous communities has been very unequal. There are some communities with 10.000 inhabitants whereas others have no more than a dozen families. Also, the degree of acculturisation has been very varied; some isolated sectors remain with their own language and style of life, others has been completely integrated into modern life.” ONIC, Op. cit, pp.75-77.

[118] Marc Becker, Op. cit, 1992.

[119] ONIC, Op. cit, p.74.

[120] Findji, Op. cit, p.127.

[121] Evers, Op. cit, p.64.