I-SJ)nAn llo nlto

.k,- coi t^^s

AND HISTORYSOCIAL MEMORY

Anthropological Perspective

EDITED BY

JACOB J. CLIMO AND MARIA G. CATTELL

ALT MIRA

ALTAMIRA PRESSA Division of Row,nan & LittlefuW Publishers, Inc.

Walnut Creek • Lanham • New York • Oxford

Symbolic Violente and LanguageMexico and Its Uses of Symbols

ADINA CIMET

8

THE NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL SURPRISE that ensued after the Zap-

atistas-Chiapas indigenous groups, radical students, and others-de-clared war on the government of Mexico in 1994 needs to be explained.

Most people think of these groups as lacking in economic means; indigenous

groups exist precariously in Mexico and their socioeconomic and political status

in the country is very low. Yet , there has never been a lachrymose reaction on their

behalf by the majority. The federal government suggests that it has addressed some

of the pressing issues of these groups, seeking to mitigare some of the inequali-

ties that plague their daily life. Clinics , roads, and makeshift schools have beenconstructed . While never enough , these efforts were undertaken to give some at-

tention to the needs of the indigenous population.1

It was education that was expected to bring real change to the indigenous

groups. Since 1926, a variety of experiments have been launched . These have re-

flected different ideologies and objectives , from total acculturation , which did nothappen , to more effective participation in the economy of the country while ac-

knowledging cultural differences . In the regions of Michoacán, Oaxaca , Guerrero,

and Chiapas, schools were established to train teachers for the indigenous people.

The first artempts failed ; then , after other partially successfui initiatives , the need

for bdingual teachers was recognized .Z During the past twenty -five years, bilingualteachers have been trained . Perhaps inadvertently, the process also trained leaders,

leaders who brokered their way between the two cultura ] worlds that had previ-

ously lived in relative exile from one another.

Yet, therc is another side to this history, one that is informed by other facts that

do not stress development and accomplishment , but rather enormous frustration,

poverty, distante from the dominant culture, and failure to achieve econornic bet-

terment for these minority groups 3 There are about ten million indigenous people

in Mexico, comprising more than one hundred linguistic groups and dispersed all

over che country. Given this reality, che precarious survival for alrnost five hundred

years of these identifiable cultures, different from the national one, suggests re-

markable resilience and resistance . For them, there has not been acculturation,

adaptation , or a merger of the rwo worlds into mestizo culture. While the ideology

of mestizaje is part of the dominant nationalistic narrative for unification , che real-

ity one observes differs (Bonfil Batalla 1981). From chis perspective, the Zapatista

war initiated in 1994 should come as no surprise . This is a story of survival against

all odds, using group memory as a resource, but with no economic base to support

it and no tradition of active political ideology to protect it. Drawing perhaps from

the protests of some minorities in our globalizing world, che Chiapas Zapatistas

have merged with the international processes of political change with an extra-

ordinary dexterity that has placed them, to a measurable extent, at che forefront of

political transformations. Given the fierceness of che Zapatistas' will, che only sur-

prise about their declaration of war should be che surprised reaction of the domi-

nant groups in che country.

Some scholars, reflecting the opinion of part of che population at large, protested

che support and sympathy to che indigenous protest. Alter all, the cause of the con-

flict in this arca of che world harks to a distant past, five hundred years ago, during

the Spanish conquest. According to this view of history, much has changed and much

has happened that cannot be accounted for. This viewpoint uses memory as a balen

to assuage guilt and to creare distante from any possible sociological links that past

history may impose. According to this view, the governing elites today are Mexican,

not Spanish; they Pace problems and new intentions, and the government has invested

much effort to help economically and culturally validare che indigenous groups as de-

prived groups. If they have not integrated, they must pay che consequences of their

choices. So how can they legitimately complain? And why should che economic com-

plaint be combined with a cultural complaint now? And, most of all, how long will

we, the mestizo population, need to feel guilty, responsable, and dissatisfied with che

political efforts that Mexico has opted for, while che indigenous people magnify our

share in their plight?

According to this view then , over the last two centuries Mexico has attempted

to recast itself, taking finto account the complex issues of che time, and nobody

has intentionally left these groups out of anything. Nobody would dare to clatm,

so the logic of this argument continues, that Mexico's path of political and eco-

nomic self-definition has been easy and successful; yet the problems that che coun-

try faces are enormous problems, complex ones. To center all or much on the

indigenous groups seems simplistic, limited , and plan wrong . In che midst of new

globalization , the Chiapas uprising seemed to some distracting , self-centered, my-

opic, and misguided.4

One can acknowledge the benevolente that che mestizo culture and the gov-

ernments of chis last century in Mexico have had towards the indigenous peoples.

One cannot ignore che government 's sporadic attempts to remedy the inequalities

and hardships of che indigenous groups. One can recognize many examples of

good intentions on che parí of the government over che past twenty-five years;

indeed , these have been noticed by most , induding che indigenous groups.s But

good intentions are not enough ; they often fall short of their goals. Furthermore,

the arguments now are not about the good or bad intentions of che dominant

groups, but about che misplaced philosophical premisos that guide the action and

power in che interrelationship with these minorities . The never-changing situa-

tion of che minorities promotes inevitable questions, but these need not be about

them and their culture; rather, these questions need to be directed to the domi-

nant culture and its sociological product. This undergirds the protest of che Chi-

apas Zapatistas.6

Having devoted myself to che study of diverse facets of cultural minority

life in Mexico and being a member of an ethnic minority there, 1 found a

mechanism that hinders cultural minorities from maintaining their distinct

identities. This mechanism of "incomplete allowance" (Cimet 1997) is im-

plicit and unacknowledged, and it is activated by parís of che dominant soci-

ety. I consider chis a violation of human rights as well as a forro of cultural

destruction. In Mexico, indigenous groups have become, by the irony of his-

tory, cultural minorities. They are rhus accorded the same status of incom-

pleteness that che dominant groups impose on immigrants from other parís of

che world. In the case of indigenous groups, however, these processes of sub-

ordination are obscured by layers of history going back to the Spanish con-

quest. Since 1 use language and symbols to find che mechanisms of control and

am a Spanish-speaking member of Mexican society, 1 become, unwittingly,

part of the dominant group. Making explicit some of these complexities can

help us all understand the dominant group's unrecognized contribution ro cul-

tural ruination.

We need to explain the ongoing tensions berween che cultural groups and the

ongoing differences between cultures and their polities. The existente of indigenous

groups today is the result of intense resistance at many levels; their opon protests are

examples. These are groups that have survived by virtue of their historic and cultural

memory, a memory that articulates their plights and quiet successes and identifies

che groups and behaviors that shaped their story (Gruzinski 1993; Todorov 1982).

It is a constructed memory that is fed by che social situations that provide material

to renew its meaning and activate it in che people (Foucaulr 1977 ). But where is this

memory? Where or how can one see che reactivation of oid thought? How can we

address che ongoing activities that accompany cultural memory?

SYMBOLIC VIOLENCE AND L.ANGUAGE 147

Language, Memory, and Power1 argue that the original clash of power groups, to be mamtained as it is, is reen-

acted again and agam as the old confrontation of the Spanish and the Indians.The

characters that confront each other must still be polarized in a representational

opposition that pictures the past, even when these are renewed actors at each pomt

in time. We have a situation, a habitus, that prepares the reenactment of the same

loes as agents of the old ideologies. This kind of argument and view of society

and history, although a macro perspective, reduces the historical distance from the

original flash and helps locate che activated psychoculrural memory of a group in

an ongoing quotidian structure that maintains difference.

One of the best areas to study this juncrure of memory, confrontation, and

power differentials is language. Language and cultural confrontation provide the

locus for historical formations and meanings that are encoded and reenacted by

the users in what turns out to be a naturalized structure. Thus, even though these

historical meanings are activated, they are not apparent to many users. Many miss

che historical message. Language and the many symbols encrusted in it work to-

gether in a process of contextualizing. Because Spanish language use in Mexico be-

longs to the historical formative period of the conquest, in Spanish we find codes

and symbols that contain fossilized historical information that by virrue of its

constant usage is repeated and reactivated into che present. Speaking or not speak-

ing Spanish is a tool: for one group it is domination, for the other it is resistance.

The last fifteen years have displayed worldwide social triumphs of inclusion:

regions have been economically globalized, politically linked, and culturally inter-

connected (Bauman 1998). In Europe, America, and intercontinentally, we have

alliances that seem to call for a renaming of the definition of the groups involved.

The old dreams for a common universal language (Burke 1991) (Esperanto for

instance) or another pan-cultural dominant style took root precisely in a century

characterized by the sharpest and most violent exclusionary ideologies, policies,

and practices. But finally, the process of taking in rather than taking out (although

one implies the other by definition) is being implemented even when we lack la-

bels for these changes. But, as with all social processes, the erasing of boundaries

has made people regain consciousness of other boundaries. Perhaps these bound-

aries serve as a defense against the anomic feelings that world changes unleash. We

have a simultaneous worldwide attempt by many groups—culrural, ethnic, lin-

guistic, religious, or combined-to protect their differences. Minorities of many

kinds and nuwnbers are demanding to be politically recognized. Language plays a

special role in the changes studied. Distancing from the ethnic language, loss of

the ethnic language, and taking on the majority language are al] social phenomena

addressed. Language is not only the barometer, che tool, and che window to these

changes but the locus of much of what is going on. Language is then not only thc

symbol but also the means (Joyce 1991 ). It is with language , the choice of lan-

guage and its use, that we can start noticing these redefinitions of identity within

a society.

But language not only illuminates che inner individual struggles of the self

with society, it also offers a perspectiva from which to examine society at large and

the forces that mold individual choice. 1 attempt ro analyze Mexican minor-

ity-majority relations from the perspective of indigenous groups and seek to show

that che violent, unequal power between the groups dates to che Spanish conquest

five hundred years ago and remains embedded in society and in che language of

che society today. Language is an ideological marker that reinvents and reinstates

violence within social relations in its everyday use. 1 will focos on communications

between the two groups, in che persons of minority and majority representatives

of the groups, at rwo moments in which signs and language played a key role.

In its ideological representation of itself, Mexico boasts to have attempted in-

clusion since its Independence War. After all, the mestizos, che group resulting

from the mixture of Indian and Spanish culture, took over the reins of che coun-

try. It is through language and the elaboration of what it meant to be of one tin-

ture rather than another that this new hybrid identity was created. Spanish, the

language of che original conquerors, became and has remained the dominant lan-

guage of society (Kiernan 1991). Relations of power and domination could not

have been established without certain discourses of socially established truth. Spe-

cific values, concepts, goals, norms, hierarchies, and divisions were taken from the

arsenal of the Old World to reconstruct a social world that sought to separate po-

litically from its intelectual root but never succeeded in being different. Other fac-

tors joined in this process, of course, leaving also their mark in language : religion,

politics, technology, and extinction were all part of che process.

There is no doubt that the mediating role of language ideology in organizing

power was exercised to perfection in chis case . It also helped establish a tone in al¡

ideological issues of che country. Within the boundaries of New Spain, che Span-

ish language became not only the territorial marker of conquered space, the de-

ployer and facilitator of the imposed practices, but also che principal symbol of

what it helped to create: the myth of belonging to a new nation , unified, horno-

gencous, and rightcous.

Spanish language continued to rule with an ideology that defined as right

what it was doing in che new territories and what it wanted che indigenous other

to do as well. Some ideas canee from religious behavior and belief while others

were hidden in interaction within the day-to-day reenactment of accepted dif-

ferential interrelationships a nong the people. Language was the historic vessel

containing the ideologies that structured che renewed country. Language was

che repository of che ideas and values that were to constitute che new society.

SYMBOLIC VIOLENCE AND LANGUAGE 149

inherited from the old world. By retaining the language and many of the insti-

tuted values and norms that are set in the language even while so many social

arrangements changed within the society, we have retained for five hundred

years-albeit largely unconsciously-an inheritance that is based on the con-

quering mentality that reigned then. The War of Independence (18 10), the Rev-

olution (1910), and al] the other upheavals that Mexico has experienced have

not ruptured the continuity of a sustaining pattern of domination.6 Language

is therefore an embodied habitus of ideology that reinforces the dominant styles

of dominant groups and legitimizes power differentials.

It would be useful, but impossible within the space of this essay, to examine

how the boundaries of inclusion were established, that is, to summarize how in

1521 che Spanish gained absolute control of the conquered within thrce months.9

For our purposes, the issue of the interrelation between groups and the making of

new minorities can be approached by looking at the fossilized patterns that otear

in language as tools to tell vis who we are and how we behave. Much, of course,

has been lost. For example, the exact narre of the last Aztec emperor is not known

to us: Moctezuma, Motecuhzorua, and other forros are variations of a narre that has

been so obliterated from the social memory as to be lost phonetically.10 Even when

we cannot recover the culture, we can recover knowledge of how some of that

obliteration was accomplished and how, after many bloody fights, the conquerors

continued to stamp their dominion in societal relations. The Spanish language can

serve as the locus of multiple memories of dialogues that rediscover for us these

historical struggles (Foucault 1977:203).

Language was the essential tool through which a new definition of the situa-

tion was established. Through che practices that language named and helped es-

tablish, the patterns of inclusion and exclusion-of what and who counts and

what and who is expendable-were engraved, encoded, and turned into a habitus.

The conquering language, the most basic and most grounding tool of the new so-

ciety, became the new cultural capital, legitimizing further control of the local

population. In the violente that did not disappear and achieved further regenerar-

ing patterns through recnactrnents, language is the catalyst for the process as it es-

tablishes a practice and its truth as rules by which groups must live. This specific

language, Spanish, embodied che power asyrmnetry and social differential that was

reproduced again and again in this society. Here, we find the ideologies that are

deployed as a resource for the status quo. 11

reenactment of domination and resistance .12 The two historical moments are

distant in time from each other, yet similar in their meaning. One took place in

1790; the other in 1994. The first moment, which 1 calla dialogue of one voice,

is a kind of conversation between the authorities and two monolithic stones that

were uncovered in 1790. The stones were remnants of the indigenous cultures,

and the rediscoverers, the power elite of che time, were friars and educated lay-

men, representatives of both Catholic Church and Spanish Crown. 1 call it a di-

alogue in one volee because only one party spoke aloud; the Indians seemed to

accept or tolerare che decisions and actions of the authorities, leaving what may

be erroneously taken as evidente of their thinking. Yet however imbalanced the

dialogue is , it is a dialogue in which the differential power of the interlocutors

becomes very apparent.

The second moment, which 1 refer to as a voiceless dialogue, is another repe-

tition of old argumenta between che sarne rwo groups: the indigenous minority in

Chiapas and che controlling government representatives from che local and na-

tional levels. It is a voiceless dialogue because the analysis is of che encounter of

che two groups and the symbols they used to engage in a dialogue. Their material

disputes are not described, not because they lack relevance or importante, but be-

cause it is in the language and the symbols used that we find che rules of the in-

teraction between the minority and majority.The asvmmetry is thus present at the

very beginning of the encounter between the groups, and it signals che habitus

that some wotrld like to break.

Neither moment is a dialogue in the convencional sense of the term. In che

first case, we have only the representatives of the dorninant majority speaking, yet

much of their communication renewed the terms of the old dialogue that was ini-

tiated in 1521. The remnants of the old cultures and the cultures they represent

were treated as objects. No person of those cultures appeared to have a voice; nev-

ertheless, some of che indigenous actions attempted to show defiance and tesis-

tance . In che second case, the extraordinary aggressive encounter of 1994 between

indigenous groups (specifically the EZLN or Zapatista Arrny) and government

representatives is a reenactment of similar previous representations. Here che dia-

logue Cakes place even prior to any parry expressing itself with a volee. Even more

than five hundred years from che first encounter, almost all of the same dialecti-

cal definitions that established the relationship seem to be at play.13

Reenacting Domination and Resistance1 will now describe two moments of interaction and analyze what they convey

in tercos of asynunetric power relations between che groups. Each example is a

Dialogue in One Voice: The Commandment To Not SeePart of the prerogative exercised by the dominant groups was to achieve che great-

est visibility for themselves while dirninishing the visibility of the minorities. A

demand that they imposed on themselves and on others was to not see, that is, not

150 CHAPTER 8

to acknowledge the existente , the value, or the importante of any element of the

minority societies that could conflict with their ideology. In a way, it was a mea-

sure to harness all loyalty to the selected symbols, discharging any others that

could possibly function as a challenge.

On August 13, 1790, during construction in an arca of what is today Mexico

City's Plaza Mayor, Viceroy Revillagigedo, who was heading the construction, was

told that a strange, scary-looking sculptured stone had been found. In the next few

months , there were quite a few other recoveries, and specialists carne to assess their

meaning. The first stone was established to be the Coatlicue, symbol of the mother

of gods in Indian culture. Strange to western eyes, the stone depicted a decapitated

head already a skull, hands like claws, and streams of blood on the sides.14 On De-

cember 17 of the same year , a huge second stone was found, the well-known Piedra

del Sol or Sun Stone. Within three months of the fall of Tlatelolco in 1521, the two

main cities of antiquity were destroyed at a speed unimaginable , and all cultura]

items found to be venerated by Indians were dcemed by the Spanish to be works of

the devil. The reaction of the masses to the discovery of these pieces more than two

hundred years later showed their old resistance and resilience but offered no direct

challenge to the imposed definitions of the situation. Over two centuries after the

conquest, a renewed symbolic encotmter challenged the terms of their relationship.

Although the two stones fared differently, the message was consistent and simi-

lar. The Sum Stone, or Aztec Calendar as it is also known, seemed to thc eyes of the

people of the 1700s a fine technological instrument. Familiar in its esthetic form, it

depicted a far less barbarous Other than that originally portrayed by the Europeans.

After all, diminishing the efforts in conquering New Spain was not in their own in-

terest. So by showing the conquered as more sophisticated than previously presented,

the stone gave greater status to the conquerors. The stone was hung in one of the

towers of the cathedral for all to see as a trophy of the old war and as an object

brought under the dominant religious-philosophical worldview of the time. The un-

pleasant Coatlicue complex, ondear and awesome, was taken to the campus of the

university to be seen by specialsts who might decipher its inscrutability.

Although the stone was kept from the public for the use of specialists only,

Indians nevertheless learned of its location. When large groups of Indians

searched it out and visited it with lit candles, the friars became worried about a

possible rebirth of a c ult and ordered that the stone be buried again .'S This uni-

lateral decision clearly attained the quality of dialogue: one group talked, acted,

and established dominante; the other reacted, resisted, and remained resolute in its

apparent silente . Although the commandrnent to not see was enforced, the mi-

nority's memory had not been lost. While the dominant ideology and power

groups controlled the speaking social environment , the dominated groups main-

tained their memory in silente.

SYMÍ OLIC VIOLENCE AND LANGUAGE 151

The only conversation with the past spoke of conquest, dominante, and con-

trol. In its reenactment , hierarchy, status , and value were also reestablished. The

visibility and knowledge of the ancient time, symbolized by the calendar stone,

were superseded by exhibiting it as a trophy. It was not seen as emblematic of

artistic and intellectual sophistication, but rather as an award for the winning side,

prodaiming the message of the victor. Meanwhile, the inscrutability of the

Coatlicue was used to negate it by denying its existence .1ó Before Chis emblem

could be understood and the emotions it elicited could be constructed as symbolic

loyalty, it was entombed.

Maintaining differentiations or oppositions in a society facilitates its reproduc-

tion. These define social boundaries without explicit elaboration. Again and again,

the boundaries of the induded and exciuded, politically, economically, and philo-

sophically, are determined and renewed by specific groups. This effort by the au-

thorities to see the indigenous artifacts as nothing other than objects within the

language and thought of the sociery they controlled, in practice had the effect of

perpetuating the exdusion of particular groups (Bourdicu 1984:471).

Where Chis dialogue took place was and is significant. Both stones were ex-

hibited in public arcas that appeared to be nonpolitical territory: the cathedral and

the university. Yet education has always been a tool for control and is therefore po-

litical by definition. Both the cathedral and the university are defined by their tute-

lage and instruction purposes. In eadi, acceptable behavior, thought, tradition, and

etiquette are taught. Contentions over these issues are always political and repre-

sent philosophical power struggles for fiurther control of the situation . In this

conversation in the 1790s, the message was that the elites could govern without

the need to obtain consent. Indigenous people were not induded as subjects but

only portrayed as passive objects within the new hybrid culture. By educating, de-

limiting, and absorbing selectively and calculatingly, definitions of time, space, and

social power were reproduced. The fact that the Coadicue was later exhumed again

and buried again , sent a dear message concerning the place of the old cultures in

the new world.The otherness of the Indian groups had to be recognized, but only

minimally, in a forro that could be accepted within the sociery. Any trespass be-

yond that was absolutely unacceptable. Here we see at work an official daim for

indusion of the indigenous cultures and people at the same time that they were

subject to practices that rendered them inscrutable and invisible (Mehta 1997:73).

The Voiceless Dialogue: The Command To Not Be Seenlf one of the rules of the interaction between the minority and majority is for

the majority to not see, then the next rule becomes for the minority to learn not

to be seen. Minority members had to learn to be quiet and not too definite as

they spoke their protests. In other words, they learned to adapt to the demands

152 CHAPTER 8

of the dominant society by finding innovative ways to express themselves within

the parameters of what is allowed and understood by the dominant society. The

asymmetry between indigenous groups and the governing elite has been a per-

sistent feature of their relationship . However , it is apparent that much of it has

been buried in che government proclamations of its achievements. Open dissat-

isfaction erupted in the struggle in Chiapas , ` but it carne packaged in socially ac-

ceptable terms.

The reencounter was different from che one described in the 1700s. Indeed,

much has changed . In 1994, there was a rebellious group fighting openly. Indigenous

groups had redefined themselves from peasants to Indians as they made their daims

known. And they had managed to organize nationally in a variety of organizations

and even linked up internationally with other indigenous minority groups.18

The last twenty-five years have represented a period of growth and consolida-

tion for the indigenous groups as in organization with congresses that starced in

Chiapas's San Cristobal de las Casas in 1974, 1975, and 1977. By 1989, che shape

of the indigenous organizations and che articulation of the specific issues they

claimed had already crystallized . The legal status that Indians obtained with these

organizations added to the legitimacy and awareness that accompanied che 500-

year celebracions in 1992 and contribuced to a reevaluation of their ethnicity. At

che same time, che dominant society also redefined its own myths , merging with a

variety of international groups and movements such as the International Pact for

Political and Civil Rights and che Universal Declaracion of Human Rights. All

Chis contributed to the refining of the inner policical rhetoric of homogenization-

unification (mestizaje) that the PRI government used to mollify its population.

Universal principies quescioned the validity of the perpetua] undermining of the

local minorities , thus igniting the flammable censions that existed in che polity.

The surprise element caught the government off guard , unable to respond to a set

of demands that had a ring of legitimacy and was now more difficult to deny.19

Here, 1 want to analyze the Chiapas reencounter itself . It represents the initia-

tion of an aggressive dialogue , since it was a preparation for a bellicose confronta-

tion between two distinct but very unequal parties . On one side was the government,

with a military force that , even if not updated to che arsenal levels of a belligerent

nation entering che new millennium , has a full active milicia with modern arms,

tanks, explosives , and planes; plus, che Mexican government is a partner in NAFTA

with its northern neighbor, defined as the mcst powerful nation in che world. The

opposing group , few in number and dressed in their usual folkloric attire, appeared

on che scene wearing dark ski masks, some armed with rifles of another era and

some with broomsticks , an infantry of wornen and men with no other military force

to back them , even though they had received well over $8 million from abroad. Most

of them were not able to speak che official language of the country . -1-hose who did

SYMBOLIC VIOLENCE. AND LANGU.AGE 153

speak Spanish and were mterviewed spoke as foreigners do, with interesting , unusual

metaphors. Yet they often appeared powerless in arguing in che grand elaborate style

of che country 's political establishment . This encounter , voiceless scill, is at the same

time a synchronic and a diachronic moment. It has che potencial for a fabulous

metaphor to bring out che surreal contrasts and the abysmal distance of the con-

tenders. How is this dialogue even possible?20 How loes che government respond in

che end of che twentieth century to a threat to its legitimacy and domination from

a group that looks so weak?

In defining some of che characteristics of Mexican society and specifically che

governmental policy towards minorities, 1 have elsewhere used the term incom-

plete allowance to describe the mechanism used by the government to deal with

the inclusion and exclusion of the minorities 21 The government places emphasis

on cicizenship (inclusion), while it has no room for representation and no per-

missible practice within che decision-making apparatus for groups (exclusion. In-

complete allowance toward minority members of the society, who are citizens,

allows che government to play with che definitions of inclusion and exclusion,

which in che end are a definition of itself. There is a tension between its official

representation and its misrepresentation . There are no policical channels for a mi-

nority to exert political power as a group , even though the Mexican constitution

was amended in 1996 to specifically recognize religious minorities.

How is it then that each of the two groups recognizes itself as che opposing

Other? Do che indigenous groups pretend to hide behind their masks? Do they

imagine themselves taking on the role as warriors challenging che basic tenets of

Chis society? At the same time, why has the government started to pay attention to

their speech and their symbolic arrny? Must che powerful government really re-

spond to chis strange , dissenting group? What inade che government respond co

che dialogue of the masked people and see them as a threat? Or are they just play-

ing their parí until che audience tires and abandons che cheater? In other words,

how is it that these cwo parties playing cheir respective roles have managed to en-

gage che Other to be taken seriously?

We have two parties that are unequal (in more than one way).The government

representatives are the known party. Their spokesmen are individuais whose names

and curricula we know; that is important information even though some of the

main negotiators have changed during che course of che dialogues. Yet, even when

they seem to be individuals known to us, we can claim that they hide under che

ideology of the ruling government, which pays lip service to the demands of che

Indians. Although chey are individuals, they represent socially defined positions

chat conceal themselves (Cahill 1998:131).

Over the years , in response to pressure , che government has created institutions

to monitor che cultural and economic conditions of che indigenous groups. Yet,

SYMBOLIC VIOLENCE AND LANGUAGE 155

political redefinitions of their condition have been totally avoided . In the current

intellectual climate of the country, however, the Chiapas uprising has touched a

chord that has vibrated very deeply. Perhaps it has to do with the international

awareness of cultures . Within the current international dialogue between minori-

ties and majorities , their abdiry to engage the government is a dialogue that has

opened up a space uncharted in Mexican history. The ability of the masked ac-

tors , the unknown participants , to remain unknown in terms of their individual-

ity and self, while being transparent in terms of their socially defimed personhood,

has unexpectedly put both parties on an equal footing in this dialogue . And the

dialogue itself has become an occasion for interaction , recreating and legitimizing

ipso facto the two agents as valid contenders . The fight then was and is on, but

most importantly for our argument, the language and the symbols of the con-

tentions have been understood by both parties . They are not surprised ; each side

knows what the Other is saying.

It is in this process that the treatment of the Other has been aired and mag-

nified . In its historical character , the parties mimicked the old positions .The mim-

icry of the indigenous groups, their posing as warriors , expresses the excesses of

the structure as applied to them22 But by playing the parí of equals, they unwit-

tingly posed an imminent threat to the power structure . By appropriating the style

of the Other, the power elite, they have exemplified for others the fact that the

power structure strangles them and have challenged the structure that claims to be

including them. The fact that this dialogue happened with such relative case at-

tests to the already ongoing normative debate that the groups engage in; the Chi-

apas Indians spoke , and the opposition understood.

The Indian groups had to speak the same language as the opposition to make

their protest known , yet not all spoke Spanish fluently nor easily enough to

undertake the national defense of their cause . They used an interpreter , Subco-

mandante Marcos, as their leader or spokesman (La Grange 1997). Marcos is a

left-oriented former student who has spent more than ten years in their midsr he

speaks with them and can speak for them. Historically, Indians may have adopted

a new identity of sorts, while at the same time retaining their cultural legacy. Be-

cause the intertwining of religions , cultures, and old ethnic knowledge is so tight,

language has remained at the center of their mythologyr their own languages em-

body the cultural elements of distinction . Language for them is nor just form but

also substance . It contains the persisting elements of the old culture , while it of-

fers a challenge to the new one. It is the base of the cultural, political memory that

they deploy to maintain their diverse identities . It is a way to look back as they

look forward . But it remains to be leen if their looking forward will be creative

enough to chance the opposite party. It is for them to forge that path , and while

cultural memory nourishes the process, it can also thwart it if nothing else appears

on thc intellcctual horizon.23

But why do they choose mimicry and evasion? Partly, it is an obvious military de-

fense strategy; yet their desire to appear authentic within a society that has always

buried them has allowed them only partial representation.Their chosen actions refract

the terms under which they are defined. It also refracts the incomplete allowance into

which they have been forced. That is why the power elite were ready to interact with

the masked warriors i.mmediately, never questioning this style . Unspoken rules had

been masterfully recognized by both groups: the inexistent silent challenger emerged,

coming without a Pace as the only way the power elite could recognize them. This par-

tia¡ presente is the counterpart to the partial vision that the power elite has of the

Other. The mnni.cry then is by both groups, the challenger and the challenged The

partial representation and its recognition represent the old ideology in language anees

In the words of Bhabha (1997:156): "It is a form of colonial discourse that is ut-

tered inter dicta: a discourse at the crossroads of what is known and what is permis-

sible and that which is known and must be kept concealed ; a discourse uttered

between the liases and as such both against the Tules and within them . The question

of the representation of difference is always a problem of authority."

Yet as much as the Chiapas EZLN army has used metonymy as camouflage to

enter the scene, the government has responded with its own . But in this case, the di-

alogue is not pure repetition . Indians have struggled to innovate their ideology, as

the dominant groups have , for this dialogue. They have asked for completely new

political arrangements in their regions; these translate finto completely new ways of

dealing with minorities democratically. They do not want a return to the past, nei-

ther mere tolerante nor a more sympathetic response to their precarious condition.

They want no more false harmonization between the groups and no more silencing

of their demands in exchange for benefits . What they seek is a completely new pol-

itics. This challenge is what has made the uprising so terrifying to the government

and the society at large.24The Indians have articulated their demands in the language

of the conquerors, but they have spoken from the legacy of the language of the con-

quered, which is a culture and experience of resistance . Incomplete allowance, the

breach between what indigenous and other minorities can do in Mexico and what

the powerful think Mexico 's government and society is offering, has become (again)

apparent. By enacting the play and mimicking the reality they want to avoid while

keeping their identities alive , minority groups have unmasked the empty promises of

the elite who depend on a reified structure . The Zapatistas of Chiapas expressed

their goal very dearly: "a world where there is room for all the worlds"

Acknowledgements

1 would like to express my appreciation and gratitude to Jacob Climo. A chance

intellectual encounter opened the loor to the opportunity for collaboration in

this project. For the gracefulness with which he has welcomed inc, 1 thank him.

156 CHAPTER 8

Notes1. Natives of other countries that have had colonizing experiences like Mexico's-for

example, Canada and the United States-have also been bracketed and silenced. Nobody

hears their daims, not internationally nor nationally (Coombe 1995:265).

2. For a review of the historical changes in government policy on indigenous education

from 1926-1963 that led to bilingual and bicultural education in che 1980s, see Dietz

(2000) and Perez Enriquez (1989).

3. Most Mexican historians agree today that the Indians' story has not yet been inte-

grated into mainstream history, as is also the case for American historians (see Wood

1998). There is a group that works "to give voice to the historically silent" (Wood,

1998:41). Also see Bonfil Batalla (1989).4. Heading che group of academics and intellectuals that argue in chis fashion is the

historian Enrique Krauze (1999); for the controversy it stirred, see Guerrero (1998); La

Grange and Rico (1999); Lomniz (1998).5. We refer to che Nacional Plan for Bilingual and Bicultural Education, ANPIBAC

(1980).6. To get a more realistic and complex history of che actors involved (indigenous peo-

pie, government representatives, paramilitary guards of wealthy landowners, student sup-

porters, and Catholic and Protestant clergy), see che periodicals Chiapas, especially from

1996 ro 1998, Proceso, especially for 1999, and Jímenez Ricardez (1997); for a pictorial

representation, see Saramago (2000).7. "language has always been che companion of empire" is an aphorism attributed to

the grammarian Nebrija in 1492.

8. See che parallelisin in the latest argument of recent Nobel Prize winner Saramago

(2000).9. The work of Gruzinski (1993) andTodorov (1982) is basic to che understandings

used here.10. Two elegiac poems written by the cuicapique (surviving poeta), along with other ma-

terial from 1528 still in Nahuatl, and writing that used che Latin alphabet in Nahuatl still

exist. See León Portilla (1992, 1997) and Bonfil Batalla (1989).

11. The possibility and hope for a different future, following Raymond Williamss

words (1977), does open up. In searching che underlying ideologies of power found in lan-

guage, we elaborate not only on issues of language and its use but also on recomposing the

process by which rhe constant reaffirmation of interactions through language are making

their inark, which can be changed or controlled in new directions . That knowledge may

break the reified hold of these old ideologies within language and start up a process of

elaboration for a new political and ethical change of that society.

12. Other examples of this exist, for example, che invectivas that language adopted that

carne from signaling linkage to Indianness: Indians as lazy, stupid, polytheiscs, and value-

less; the changa of first name and last name from meanings in che local vernacular narre

style to European style (a changa that was registered within five years of the Spanish con-

quesc); and clothing as symbolic communication (see Los Mexicanos Pintados por si Mismos,

originally published in Mexico in 1853).

13. The declining economy of che region, caused by falling coffee prices and elimina-

tion of coffee subsidies, played a great part in the decision of the Zapatistas to launch a

war. Perhaps three other elements also played a parí in this story: the end of che land re-

distributions that were seen as che end of the Long-promised goals of che Mexican revo-

lution; che privatization of communally held land that gave an advantage, again, to larger

landholders; and the signing of NAFTA, the internacional treary with che United States

and Canada. Other elements that carne to play a parí in che story induded leaders who

were formed by governmental organizations as they prepared bilingual teachers, and other

teachers trained by community deacons and catechists through che diocese of San Cristo-

bal de Las Casas hended by Samuel Ruiz. Sindicalization also played a parí, since it had

organized its members, who eventually became an important source of the Zapatista base.

For specifics of che confrontations, see Aguirre Beltrán (1992); Bonfil Batalla (1981);

Harvey (1998).

14. For the first analysis of these discoveries, see De León y Gama (1990).

15. As anocher caveat to chis story, in 1803 when Humboldt carne to New Spain, he

was granted permission to exhume che Coadicue for study. He obtained che piece for three

inonths, and then it was interred again.

16. Mehta (1997) makes an interesting distinction between the incomprehensible and

che inscrutable. The first can be reversed because che object may be comprehended through

studying che subject. Inscrutability is not the fault of the subject; it sends che message that,

defying description, che object requires rejection.

17. Indigenous groups in Chiapas have had a long and uneven confrontation with the

authorities over issues of work, economics, and development. Religious confrontations un-

der Catholic and Protestant banners have added to che political fire. By 1993, alter forty-

five mostiy non-Spanish-speaking Indians were arrested, che confrontation took a sharper

turn. Since these Indians did not get proper representation and translation services during

the judicial process, che outcome made che next confrontations clearer and the two groups'

separation became inevitable; che new organized groups anticipated che EZLN (Nacional

Liberation Zapatista Army) as a rebellious army. Today the EZLN has thirty-eight au-

tonomous municipalities under control from 111 that make up che arca (García Canclini

1995). In 2001 they went to Mexico City to negociare with che government in a march

chal has been compared to che civil right marches of che United States. The national con-

gress did indeed receive them.

18. It is not only che first minoriry war fought with che support of internet observers,

but by now, the groups get support money internationally from a variety of sympathizers.

19. Ernst Bloch used the term "surprise" and "asconislunent" as concepts that becray

che thought of che unexpected future that one may harbor. It certainly fits che situation

here described.

20. Part of che theoretical argument to undertake chis analysis is taken from Merleau-

Ponty's (1973) svork on language. He develops the notion of "silence" between language

and speech, where silence enables language to occur as speech.

21. The term is useful not only to describe che limits imposed on a minoriry but to

characterize che minoriry and che majority as they interrelate (Cimet 1997).

22. See the extremely suggestive article by Bhabha (1997). Although it is a very rich'

analysis of the action of the colonized, it ¡caves undeveloped the interaction between the

colonized and the colonizer . 1 suggest that my concept of incomplete allowance (Cimet

1997) addresses the interaction as a double osmotic process between two parties , creating

the possibdity of not only addressing the effect the interaction has on the exduded but

also on the exclusionist .This dialectic is crucial and has been noticed since Hegel and Nie-

tschze, among others, but was also recently made essential in the work of Bourdieu and

Foucault, for instante. There is no intent to diminish the integrity of any action when we

label some actions mimicry; this is a term used to signal that much of any action is part

of a learned repertoire, a habitus .That goes for all cides. It also does not imply that it can-

not change. But change of consciousness and language as well as action require efforts and

conscious intent that often involve a paradigmatic redirection.23. Nobel laureare Octavio Paz (1998), who did not always maintain an unambiguous

position towards indigenous cultures, has a poem that echoes some of what is said here

(transiation mine):

Mixcoacfue mi pueblo : tres silabas nocturnas

Un antifaz de sombra sobre un rostro solar.

Vino Nuestra Senora , la Tolvanera Madre.

Vino y se lo comio. Yo andaba por el mundo.Mi casafueron mis palabras, mi tumba el aire.

Mixcoac was my people: thrce night syllabies

A shadow mask over a solar face.Carne our Lady, the Whirlwind's dust Mother.

She carne and she ate ¡t. 1 walked through the world.My house was my words, my tomb the air.

24. Many intellectuals and individuals , even when they are not always active politically,

have become sympathetic to the EZLN group . Others have used the moment to affirm the

legacy of homogeneity . Trying to reject any guilt or shame because of the oíd process, re-

counting that it is an oíd battle and a settled barde , they do not see themselves as partic-

ularly contributing to the battle in any way directly, nor do they have any understanding

of the reproductive nature o'f the ideology of the conqueror in which sil citizens of the

country are coparticipants.