One Blood Drop: History of Racism

Uploaded on

History of racism of State: Nazi, USA, Brazil, India, Singapore, South Africa, Malaysia, Rwanda, Burundi, Sierra Leon and other countries

History of racism of State: Nazi, USA, Brazil, India, Singapore, South Africa, Malaysia, Rwanda, Burundi, Sierra Leon and other countries

More in: Education , Spiritual
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads


Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds



Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

    No notes for slide


  • 1. DEMÉTRIO MAGNOLIOne Drop of Blood: History of The Racialist ThinkingEnglish version of:Uma Gota de Sangue: História do Pensamento Racial. São Paulo: EditoraContexto, 2009How to cite this book: MAGNOLI, D. Uma gota de sangue: história dopensamento racial. São Paulo: Editora Contexto, 2009. 385p.Since the book was published only in Portuguese, this is a guide for the nonspeakers to understand it, thus references cited by the author are not listed.
  • 2. About the authorDemétrio Magnoli is a sociologist, PhD in Human Geography by the University of SãoPaulo and member of the Group of Analysis of the International Conjuncture(GACINT) of the University of São Paulo. He writes columns to newspapers such asFolha de São Paulo, O Estado de São Paulo and O Globo. He was the editor of thebooks History of Wars and History of Peace, both published (in Portuguese) by theEditora Contexto. You can e-mail him at
  • 3. SummaryINTRODUCTION – EXCESS OF COLORPART I – THE WHITE MAN´S BURDEN A history of blood The science of races A mission in Africa Classifying the natives Nation as a lineage Hitler and the crisis of race In the beginning it was the Volk A perfect Volk Laws of Nuremberg Victory in defeat The rejected race Revolution in Soweto Apartheid as norm Norm as an exception Afro-Americans The sense of citizenship The confusion of races Triumph of multiculturalism Ford Foundation and the policies of differences Nations inside the nation Meeting in Durban Minorities from all over the world, unite yourselves!
  • 4. PART II – ONE DROP RULE Loving Day Melting pot Jim Crow Equality and difference The whole and the parts The vote of Anthony Kennedy Barack Obama: the speech Black into white Miscegenation as a solution The mixed in USA and in Brazil Freyre at Pelourinho The yarn of Durban Indio muerto indio puesto (dead Indian deposed Indian) The interrupted revolution The Tableland and the West The communitarian plurinational Estate Inventing the Camba nation Booty of warPART III – BACK TO AFRICA The empire against the traffic The principle of freedom A Christian home in Africa The real distinctions nature did From Zanzibar to Congo
  • 5. The Pan-African dream Africa as a metaphor: Du Bois Africa as a destiny: Garvey Pan-Africanism reaches Africa A speech out of place African mix Black Economic Empowerment Seals of authenticity We had to teach how to hate The three sons of Gahanga From one myth of origin to another Hutus in power The gears of the genocide The evil namesPART IV – ORIENT Restoration of castes Caste makers The castes and the nation One million mutinies The sons of the soil Malay supremacy A racial nationalism The social contract in crisis A country for all?
  • 6. PART V – INDUSTRY OF IDEOLOGIES Diseases of blacks A Pan-African disease? The import of a speech Aids in the racialist pot Health against miscegenation Abolition of abolition An African homeland? Palmares, the metaphor War and peace among races Pedagogy of race Racial hornbooks The color of poverty Statistics on the perch The talented 10% Racial tribunals A young lady of clear skin and blue eyes Rivers that never meet Redemption without return Naturally ambivalent beings Starting again?
  • 7. INTRODUCTION – EXCESS OF COLOR Frederick Douglass was born as a slave, in a poor house in Maryland in 1818.His mother died when he was 7 year-old. Probably, she was born from the union of anAfrican and an American Indian. The boy never knew his father, but he had theinformation that he might be a white man, probably the owner of those lands and ofhimself. Anyway, when his presumed father died, he was 12 year-old and wastransferred to the Auld family in Baltimore. Sophia Auld, the wife of his new owner, was not just somebody. Without tellinghis husband, and disobeying the law, she alphabetized the boy. Through Sophi,Douglass discovered The Columbian Orator, a collection of patriotic speeches andpoems where he found the idea of equality among the human beings. In the followingyears, he had several owners and even taught some slaves to read the New Testament atSunday classes in a black church. In 1838, in a second trial, he succeeded in escaping,dressed as a sailor, through train and vapor, to New Bedford, Massachussets, where hebecame one the most important leaders of abolitionism in USA. Douglass´ speech of 4th July was pronounced in 1852, at Corinthian Hall ofRochester city, New York, a place nowadays transformed in a parking zone where otherabolitionists presented their speeches, such as Ralph Waldo Emerson, Charles Dickensand William Lloyd Garrison. Between the escape from slavery and the invite to speechat the American national date, Douglass collaborated with the Antislavery AmericanSociety, wrote his precocious autobiography that was a great success, visited Irelandand Great Britain and edited abolitionist journals. In his overseas trip, he legalized hiscondition of a free man, bought by British friends, and had a meeting with ThomasClarkson, the greatest British abolitionist, who would die some months later, at the ageof 81 year-old. The North Star, one of the journals he created, had as label the phrase„the Law doesn´t have sex – the Truth doesn´t have color – God is the Father and we allare siblings‟. The pathway of Douglass towards the abolitionist movement was open by ameeting with Garrison, the editor of the journal The Liberator, who spoke to anabolitionist audience. The ex-slave was then 23 year-old. Invited to tell about his life, hemade such an impression in the respectful abolitionist, who was also a reporter and areformer, son of Canadian immigrants. These two men worked together until aphilosophical divergence took them apart. Garrison considered the American constitution as an abominable slaverycontract and in 1854 he even fired it publically, provoking an animated fuss. Douglassreflected deeply over the matter and, under the influence of Lysander Spooner, ananarchist-individualist, concluded that, in opposite to Garrison, the constitution was
  • 8. basically an anti-slavery document. In the constitutional text, the institute of slavery wasimplicit in sections 2 and 9 of the 1st article that mentions “all the other persons” (theslaves) or the import of persons (the slavery traffic). However, it is only explicit in afailed proposal of 1861 that aimed to prohibit the congress to interfere in anti-slaverystate laws and in the famous 13th proposal of 1865 that abolished slavery. Douglassextracted from this and mostly from the constitutional principle of equality the reasonsfor his appraisal to the fundamental text of the American nation. Douglass accused, at the 4th July of 1852, not against the fundaments of theUSA, but against its betrayal. The abolitionism of Douglass represented an adhesion toUSA, not the country of slavery, but the one of the freedom as announced in the Declareof Independence and in the Constitution. He tried to convince the radical abolitionistJohn Brown to not put into action his plans to organize an armed revolution in the Southand disapproved the attack to the federal weapons of Harpers Ferry, in WesternVirginia, the first and unsuccessful act of this abolitionist project. With the beginning ofthe civil war, partially started by Brown´s attitudes, Douglass claimed for all the blacksto adhere to the federal troops and in 1863 he spoke to Abraham Lincoln about thetreatment that was given to those soldiers. After the war, he defended the universal voting and the women´s rights. Duringthe years of the reconstruction, a short period of liberal changes in the states of the oldconfederation, Douglass was the chief of a federal bank devoted to the development ofthe black communities of the South, gave support to the repression against the Ku KluxKlan and served as a diplomat in Haiti and Dominican Republic. In 1876, hepronounced his most touching speech in the inauguration of the Memory toEmancipation (also known as the Memorial to Lincoln) in Washington. The reconstruction ended in 1879, when the old Southern elites conquered backthe control of the government of the states. As a reaction, a movement claiming theblacks to leave the South appeared. Douglass strongly reproved this initiative and tookthe word in the reunions of this movement to dissuade the blacks, under a booingaudience, from the idea of physical separation. He claimed for resistance and under theworst conditions he believed in the dream of the single nation. Anna Murray Douglass, the wife with whom Frederick lived since he escaped,died in 1882. Two years later, he married Helen Pitts, a white feminist of New York,defying the taboo against interracial marriages. In 1888, in the Republican Convention,a member voted in Douglass as a candidate for the Presidency. In an event inJacksonville, in Florida, 120 years later, one day before the presidential elections,Barack Obama concluded his speech citing Douglass: “ You don´t imagine for a singleminute that the power will give anything without a fight”. From Douglass to Obama, passing by Martin Luther King, an anti-racial cordgoes through two centuries of the history of USA. These three men, under differentcircumstances, were raised as the announcements of the principle of equality andinsisted on see the American nation through this point of view. However, a powerful
  • 9. side of the American history was born around the myth of the races, which means, theprinciple of the difference, not of the equality. Douglass fought against the slavery andwon, but, even before his death, he lived to see the first segregationist laws be edited.Luther King fought against these laws and also triumphed, but at the moment he waskilled, the myth of the races reappeared with its plenty vigor under the paradoxicalforms of reverse discrimination policies. Obama got apart from these racial preferencepolicies and defined himself as a mixed man, in a country that classified its citizensaccording to racial criteria. At the time of Douglass, both science and common sense believed that thehumankind was divided into races. This belief had lost credit when Luther Kingconducted the march for civil rights. Spite this event, the idea of race was re-introducedin the law a few years after the murder of the leader that not only preached for equalitybut also nourished the dream of a nation where nobody would be judged by their skincolor. At the moment when the congress and the Supreme Court adopted theinterpretation of the constitution as wanted by Douglass, the political doctrine ofmulticulturalism re-emerged and again challenged the principle of the equality. Sincethe decade of 1970 and under the approval of black leaders, they reactivated the motorsof programs that make the skin color criteria for distinguishing the candidates andgovernment contracts, public jobs and admission to universities. „Afro-Americans‟: an expression created together with the multiculturalism, isnothing more than a post-modern reflex of the old vision of Africa as a patria of a race.It was precisely this vision imported from the classical racism that guided the main draftof the black movement in USA, before and after Luther King. It is this vision thatsustains the projects of policies of political racial preferences in Brazil. The relationshipbetween skin color, geographical and racial origin is present in Africa. Mia Couto, a Mozambican writer, discuss the disapproval of the young people ofhis country regarding the identity of the famous soccer player Eusébio da Silva Ferreira,born in Mozambique and hero of the Portuguese selection of the World Cup of 1996.He affirms himself as being Portuguese of nationality and heart. According to MiaCouto, „the example of Eusébio reveals many other phantoms. Is there a reason for theblack Africans can´t be converted into „something else‟? If there are whites who areAfricans, blacks that are Americans, why the black Africans can´t turn into Europeans?‟ The writer proceeds: „There are nowadays many blacks who were born inEurope. They studied, grew and absorbed values. They are citizens of the countrieswhere they were born. They will have European kids and grandkids. They shall neverfall into a trap of claiming a ghetto, a species of a second-class citizenship named asAfro-European‟. Race is, precisely, the vindications of a ghetto. The name of this ghetto isancestry. The life of a person who defines their place in the world in racial terms isorganized by loops, either real or fictitious, that connect them to the past. But modernitywas inaugurated by an opposite perspective that is mixed with the rights of the
  • 10. citizenship. The citizens are equal in front of the law and they have the right to createtheir future, spite of their family origins or blood relations. The racial policies are,however, a denial of the modernity. However, the multiculturalist denial of the modernity is a recent event. Thescience of the races appeared at the end of the XVII century, together with the Frenchrevolution and the consolidation of the concept of citizenship and continued intoextremely depraved practices of the Second World War. The policies of racialpreferences were disseminated in the post-war, not much after the Universal Declarationof the Human Rights and the worldwide repudiation of the Nazi racism. The message ofthe multiculturalism is that the principle of the equality can be a beautiful declaration,but the real truth is formed by the essential differences of the human groups. The scientific racism planted the races in the soil of nature, defining them ashuman families separated by their biological essences. When science demolished thisbelief, the multiculturalism replanted the races on the soil of the culture. The argumentof the multiculturalists is that the races are social and cultural entities. Based on this, theracial policies, that seemed to disappear at the time of the opening of the Nazi fields, re-appeared triumphantly in many points of the Planet. The production of races does not make an exigency of differences in skin color.It is enough, as the Nigerians, Kenyans and Rwandese know it deeply, the elaborationof a historical narrative organized as starting from ethnic paradigms and, mostimportantly, the inscription of racial groups in the texts of the law. The distribution ofprivileges according criteria of ethnicity or race records in the consciences the sense ofracial pertinence. Race is a self-succeeded prophecy. The races were presented as very old entities, with roots attached to the spring ofthe times. In fact, they are modern identity constructions or, at least, recent re-elaborations of diffuse identities of a deeper past – as well known by Indians, Malaysand Bolivians. Race is the fruit of the power of a Estate that rejects the principle of theequality among the citizens. The American affirmative policies based on race served as model for SouthAfrica and Brazil. In South Africa, the principle of the racial difference, glued in thelaws and consciences since the colonization until the apartheid regime, gave the logicalscenario for the new policies of preferences of the black economic empowerment. InBrazil, in the contrary, the principle of the political equality finds support in thepowerful identity speech of mixing, which has blurred the frontiers of race. Even so, inname of the multiculturalism, the government of Fernando Henrique Cardoso tried todivide the citizens between blacks and whites and the following government of LuísInácio Lula da Silva supported the introduction of the first racial laws of the Brazilianhistory. In the last year of the XX century, the scientists who sequenced the humangenome declared the death of the races. The myth of the races, however, instead of
  • 11. dissolving as an anachronistic belief, something comparable to the old belief in witches,persists or re-sprouts in the political spheres, denying the ideas of equality. Like if theykeep saying Douglass that the 4th July will never be his day.PART I – THE WHITE MAN´S BURDENA history of the blood Classify is to put objects or ideas in order. Mankind has classified since itsremote times. The most general rules of classification, exposed by Aristotle, are knownby almost everybody. One: the items must be grouped in classes the most homogenousas possible. Two: each new specific item must be grouped to the class to with it sharesthe most similar characteristics. Third: a new item with too many differentcharacteristics must originate a new class. Order requires hierarchy. When the classes are considered as items, they can begrouped into sets bigger and bigger. The superior set is the Universe. Below it, there areless and less heterogeneous groups until the most inferior level, where the classesremain. All hierarchical levels receive names, as well as the sets and classes. Order isdone. In Biology, classification is named taxonomy, a word that has spread out intoother fields of knowledge. The taxonomical hierarchy of the life beings is organized intoeight principal levels, since the kingdoms to the species. Classifications obey to rules,but always use a snooze of subjectivity. In the biological taxonomy, ordering all levelssuperior to species contains some degree of arbitrariness. But the species, the mostinferior level, was given a special characteristic: according to the dogmas of the conceptof biological species, each species represent a real unity from nature. Regarding the animal kingdom, a species is a group of organisms that can crossnaturally and give raise to fertile descendants, according to the usual definition. Thus,the species are not a product from the mind of the taxonomist, but of the nature itself.The frontiers among the animal species are clearly defined, and it is enough for thetaxonomist to collect enough data from nature. However, this gets too complicatedwhen developing a complete classification that comprises the extinguished life beings.The biota reflects the end points of innumerable branches of the evolutionary tree. Theextinguished organisms are related both among themselves and the living biota. Howcan science classify the fossils that are in intermediary positions? So, through this pointof view, even the taxonomical level of species is somehow impregnated by
  • 12. arbitrariness, since the classification is derived from a human act –and human-centered-of making a temporal cutting and put in order only the recent biota. Below the species, there are only sub-species or geographical races. Thissecondary level of classification is deeply arbitrary. The frontiers among sub-species arenever static since, by definition, individuals from one sub-species can cross with theothers. Also, to the biological classification, it is not needed to subdivide the speciesinto sub-species. The imaginative fabrication of sub-species is an act for theconvenience of the researcher and even this practice has been more and morequestioned. One species is separated from the others by the abyss of the reproductiveisolation. One sub-species is separated by the others only by morphological orphysiological differences or by living in a particular geographical area. The sub-specieswere defined starting from the identification of some characteristics clearly differentinside the same species. When just a few characteristics are seen, it is not easy to definethe differences inside the population, so, the term race is used. The appearance of the computers and sophisticated multivariable analysis hasenhanced the spectrum of characteristics investigated. The scenario has changed, notdue to any natural modification, but to the greater power of investigating it. So, thescientists saw a continuum of variations inside each species, not only superficialcharacteristics. The imposition of sub-species makes such screening even more difficultand leads to that important information get lost. So, again, naming geographical raceshas lost popularity among the biologists. The first trials of ordering humanity by classifying it into races are dated fromthe end of the XVII century. 100 years later, starting from analysis of the skull, theGerman doctor Johann Friedrich Blumenbach proposed a classification of the humanbeings in the races Caucasian (white), Asiatic (yellow), Malay (brown), Ethiopian(black) and American (red). Although classification is an Aristotelian attitude,Blumenbach did not apply classificatory rules to compose his racial picture. Instead, theused the Platonic notion of ideal type. From this notion, abstract models would serve asicons of the races and all the real persons would be grouped according the similaritieswith those icons. One more century has passed until this theme of racial classification derived toappreciations that connected Biology and History. At the times of Charles Darwin, it gotusual to think about racial hierarchies in terms of intellectual abilities and explain thecultural and economical features of the societies as being related to the racialpotentialities. However, in the XIX century nobody understood their own racialclassification. Georges Cuvier reduced the races into 3, James Prichard found 7, LouisAgassiz enhanced them to 12, Charles Pickering said 11 and Thomas Huxley suggested4. Things even got worse at the XX century with the discoveries of the explorers and theanthropologists. Joseph Deniker numbered 29 races in 1900 and Egon von Eickstedtlisted 38 in 1937, while other systems proposed more than one hundred of races. Even
  • 13. before these systems collapsed, Darwin had registered the difficulties of identifyingclear differences among the human races, although he somehow seemed to believe inthe racial superiority of the Europeans. Biology recognizes mono-typical species (species with only one race) and poly-typical species, where there are many distinct races. Human species is monotypic, andthat´s why it was historically impossible to reach to a consensual racial classification.Modern genetics has shown that individual differences inside the continentalpopulations can be even greater than the differences among the populations. Also,revealed that so-called differences among the races are just superficial physicalcharacteristics, controlled by an insignificant portion of the human genome. The skincolor, the most iconic feature of the racial characteristics is a mere evolutionaryadaptation to different levels of ultraviolet solar radiation, expressed in less than 10genes from a total of more than 25 thousands of genes of the human genome. Out of Africa is the name of the model predominant in Paleoanthropology toexplain the origin of the anatomically modern humans. According to this model, all thehuman beings descend directly from the same African population, which was formedaround 200 thousand years ago. This population of Homo sapiens expanded quickly,colonizing Asia and Europe and substituting the precedent human sub-species, which bythe way were also originated from older African migrations dated of around one millionyears ago. The human genetic variation is greater in Africa and decreases as the distancefrom this continent enhances. This supports the model of Out of Africa, since it is inaccordance to a small migrant group came from a broader stock of genetic variations.The arrival of the modern humans occurred around 60 thousand year ago in Asia and 40thousand years in Europe. In the scale of time of the human evolution, this means„yesterday‟. Anyway, the human groups never stopped migrating. “Regarding thehuman diversity, the absence of races can be explained precisely under the lights of thefact we are a young and mobile species, while it is required time and isolation fordistinct genetic groups appear. When the contemporaries of Darwin experienced innumerable human racialclassifications, there were already enough scientific data to at least put into doubt theseefforts. Spite of it, the idea that the human beings were divided into races had anincontestable hegemony. This willing to impose a natural order in mankind needs anexplanation external to the sciences of the nature.The science of races Aristotle nourished an elevated evaluation of the Hellenic race, endowed withspirit, intelligence and ability to govern. The Europeans also had the attribute of the
  • 14. spirit, but the cold climate made them with low intelligence and a weak ability togovern. Inversely, the Asiatic were smart, but they had no spirit and lived permanentlyunder slavery. Ethnocentrism is a trace common in all peoples and eras. The ancient Egyptiansnamed themselves as „men‟ while their neighbors were rustic, ignorant and were nomore than „Libyans‟, „Africans‟ or „Asiatic‟. Herodotus, the Greek, described theethnocentric system of the old Persians, who used concentric circles. In the China ofMing dynasty, between the XIV and XVII centuries, it was consolidated a conception ofa system centered in own China similar to the Persian one. The graphic representationof this conception put in a nuclear position the “Empire of the Center”, which wassurrounded by an inner circle of vassal Estates –such as Japan, Korea and Vietnam- andfor an external ring of barbarians habiting non-civilized areas. The European version – the eurocentrism- got articulated at Renaissance underthe mode of a historical thinking. At that time, the Europeans made the notion of ClassicAntiquity and converted the Greco-Romanian civilization into the fountain of a singularand superior European tradition. But many analphabet peoples, such as the PuebloIndians of New Mexico and the Siberian Ostiaks of the Yenisei river draw ethnocentriccosmic diagrams and the Inuit of Greenland believed in the beginning of the XXcentury that the European explorers were sent from backward peoples to learn withthem their virtues and good manners. The Inuit, of course, didn´t know that thoseEuropeans had pejoratively called them as Eskimos, which means, „eaters of crudemeat‟. Throughout history, in the most diverse ethnocentric contexts, the word race hasbeen used with descriptive finalities and senses associated to type, variety, ancestors.However, this word got its modern sense, of a general division of mankind supported inphysical characteristics, under the eurocentrism of the XVIII century. The burst of theconcept was the campaign against the traffic of slaves and the institute of slavery. Since old times, the societies enslaved persons as a result of wars or debts, butthis act never needed a legitimization based on physical or mental differences. TheBible, with its insistence over the essential unity of the mankind, seemed to condemnthe slavery of Africans, largely practiced by the Europeans since the colonization of theNew World. To overcome such difficulty, it was told that the slaves were pagans or thatNoah had thrown a malediction of the slavery over the descendants of his son Ham,black. Another further step was given by the English colony of Virginia, when itdecreed in 1667 that the converted to Christian could be kept under slavery as apayment for the paganism of their ancestors. The scenario deeply changed with the philosophy of the Lights that postulatedthe natural equality among the humans, a principal that became the center for theabolitionists. If the human beings are born free and equal due to a destination at thesame time divine and natural, how could the institute of slavery conserve?
  • 15. The first scientific theories of the division of mankind into races offered ananswer to this dilemma with deep economic implications. Carolus Linnaeus, the fatherof the biological taxonomy, suggested in the XVIII century a division of the Homosapiens into four races, based on the geographical origin and skin color: Americanus,Asiaticus, Africanus and Europeanus. Obviously, the Europeanus race was the mostintelligent, gentle and creative, while the Americanus were stubborn and choleric, theAsiaticus suffered from inborn difficulties of concentration and the Africanus were notable to escape from laziness and laxity. Linnaeus had a fertile imagination, as he alsodescribed fantastic persons, such as the Homo anthropomorpha as the troglodytes, theHomo monstruosus as the Alpine dwarfs and the Patagonian giants and the race of theHomo ferus, of men created and nourished by wild animals. Thomas Jefferson, in Notes of Virginia State, in 1787, thought that theunfortunate differences of color and even of talents are a serious obstacle to theemancipation of the blacks. He waited from science a conclusive word about the races,but recommended that, when free, the blacks should be kept away from mixing. Among the naturalists of the XVIII century, an acid debated was raised about thecommon or separated origin of the human races. The defenders of the first hypothesis,monogenic, used as an argument the definition of species proposed by Georges-LouisLeclerc, where the individuals of one given species could never fertilize representativesof other species. The defenders of the second idea, polygenic, contested this definitionand pointed out fertile hybrids generated from the crossing of wolves, jackals and foxes. A crucial book in the articulation of the racialist thinking is the Essay on theinequality of the human races, from the French aristocrat and diplomat Arthur deGobineau. Published between 1853 and 1855, the Essay said the history was derived,foremost, from the racial dynamics. Mankind would be divided into three great racialcomplexes – white, black and yellow – and the historical progress would dependdirectly or indirectly from the white races. All the great civilizations would have theorigin, directly or indirectly, in the white races and particularly in the Arian family.Mixing the races would degenerate the mankind, with disastrous impacts on thecivilizations and empires. This Gobineauish notion of racial purity inspired the anti-mixing laws of USA and the Nazi Germany. Gobineau called the science, but he never forgot to support his conclusions onbiblical interpretations. In his book, he said that „Adam is the founder of our whitespecies, this must be certainly admitted. It is clear that the Texts want us to understandlike this, since from him the incontestable white generations has descendant‟. The ideathat the human races were originated by different ancestors inspired the AmericanJosiah Clark Nott, translator of the book of Gobineau from French to English, to supportthe polygenists in the scientific environment of the United States. Being a disciple of the French Cuvier, the greater adversary of the pre-Darwinistevolutionism, the Swiss naturalist Agassiz migrated to USA in 1846, where he quicklywas converted to polygenism. Agassiz was among the stronger defenders of abolition,
  • 16. but was also a strong enemy of miscegenation. He, more than any other, wrote as ascientist, claiming for objectivity and being away. However, the never censored himselfregarding political opinions. Referring to the future of the blacks in USA in letters sentduring the Civil War, he wrote: „Social equality, I consider impracticable at any time. Itis a natural impossibility, derived from the inherent character of the black race‟.Science, this way, gave the answers to the questions of Jefferson. Agassiz was fluent but he never carried out the hard work of grouping empiricalproofs of his theory. The working scientist was the doctor Samuel G. Morton, thefounder of the American school of ethnology. Morton dedicated to collect andinvestigate skulls of the different human races. He died in 1851 and left a collectionwith more than one thousand skulls and two main studies: Crania Americana (1839) andCrania aegyptiaca (1844). Agassiz saw in those studies the evidences for thepolygenism. Although Morton refused to adopt the thesis that could shake the biblicalmyth of the creation, his disciples Nott and George Gliddon became enthusiastic ofpolygenism. In both the Crania, Morton started from the principle that the size of a skull is anindirect indicator of intelligence and gave himself to prove his previous thesis of racialhierarchy. The works don´t reflect a conscious intention of falsifying results, but ratherconstitute on an illustration of how an illusion is capable of directing the procedures ofthe scientists towards the wanted conclusions. Using selective methods, analysis andstatistics unsustainable, the most applauded empiricist of his time produced detaileddraws in which the Caucasians had the greater skulls and the blacks divided with theAmerican Indians the inferior positions. The division of the races into subgroups gaveto the scientist even the opportunity of showing the Teutonic family of the Caucasiangroup in the top of the list of skull abilities. Revising his collection of skulls andoriginal tables, Stephen Jay Gould evidenced the many mistakes committed throughoutthe work and proved that the differences were statistically insignificant. The pioneer essays of a science of the races were placed in a picture purelydescriptive that excluded the concept of evolution. The scientific racism was borntogether with the modern evolutionism, at the second half of the XIX century, when thediscussions between monogenic and polygenic lost interest. The publication of theclassical book of Darwin in 1859 practically cancelled the creationist arguments andestablished the concept of unity of human species. The triumph of the monogenism wasthe basis over who was developed an anthropology that confirmed the inborndifferences among the races and insisted on the racial hierarchies formulated by thenaturalists from the previous era. Measuring the skulls continued to be a fundamental practice for the science ofthe races. The French doctor Paul Broca, who left important discoveries in neurologyand was also a pioneer in the physical anthropology, elevated the measurements ofskulls to the apex of glory by applying sophisticated methods of statistical analysis. Inthe Anthropological Society of Paris that he founded at the same year the book of
  • 17. Charles Darwin was published, Broca defended the study of skulls as a mean to identifythe differences among the races. He concluded as: „in general, the brain is bigger inmature adults than in elders, in men than in women, in eminent men than in ordinarymen, in superior races than in inferior races…‟ Other equivalent conclusions, there is anoticeable correlation between the development of intelligence and the brain volume. Contrary to other colleagues, Broca did not manipulate numbers and liked topresent himself as an example of scientific objectivity. His zeal to rigor led him toaccuse a German anatomist who sustained the non-existence of differences in the skullvolume of blacks and whites on being left by his pre-formed ideas. It was precisely thiszeal that provoked on him an extreme difficulty: indeed his researches had shown thatthe skull of the blacks was smaller than those of whites, but they also showed that theskulls of Eskimos, Lapps, Malays and Tartarians were bigger than any of the others,included the „most civilized peoples of Europe‟. The solution to not dismantle a work ofyears and years was to select the data that were convenient to the previous thesis,denying value to the other data. Broca then concluded that „the skull volume doesn´ttake a decisive part in the intellectual rank of the races‟, but also that „a small brain sizeis a mark of inferiority‟. Broca measured everything possible in the skulls, keeping himself loyal to bothhis numbers and his prejudice. Many times, his measurements contradicted his theories– and invariably he concluded that it was needed to measure other more relevantfeatures. His pathway as a scientist is a model, in an individual scale, of the generalpathway of the science of the races that demonstrated all the times a previouslyelaborated thesis.A Mission inside Africa Alexis de Tocqueville published The Democracy in America between 1835 and1840. Like his contemporaries, he believed that mankind was divided into races, whichwas not an impediment for him to register acute observations regarding racial prejudicein USA. By a comparison between old and modern slavery, he noticed that inmodernity, the immaterial and ethereal fact of slavery was combined in a more fatalmanner with the material and permanent aspect of racial differences. The modern slave is a foreigner and a stranger in racial terms, explainedTocqueville. The abolition of slavery does not abolish this essential difference that is anatural fact. The smart traveler understood that, in the contrary, the idea of segregationtended to get stronger – and not get weaker- with the progressive dissolution of slavery:„the prejudice that repels the blacks seems to enhance in the proportion that the blacksare not slaves anymore and the inequality gets worse in the manners as the differencesget blurred in the laws‟. This observation should not be exclusive of the reality of USA.
  • 18. The imperial adventure in Africa started with the expeditions financed bygeographical societies and other private (but supported by the governments) entities, atthe second half of XIX century. The reports of their discoveries, spoken in newspapersor also personally in conferences that were great political and intellectual events,hypnotized the European public opinion, giving support for the colonial enterprises. The starting point of the so-called division of Africa was the Conference ofBerlin (1884-1885) that was carried out under the sign of the complete elimination ofslavery and black traffic. In the following decade to the Conference, the Europeanpotencies draw, through mutual treatises and treatises with African kingdoms, thefrontiers of the colonial territories. The scientific racism reached the apex exactly onthis period, working as an important ideological function of legitimating theimperialism. The science of races gave the first steps toward abolitionism. But it consolidatedafter the slavery thematic got behind, substituted by the imperial annexation of Africanand Asiatic peoples. The concept of intrinsic inequality among races could conciliatethe illuminist principle of equality and the imperialist principle that could not workwithout the support of the European public opinion. The civilizing mission of theEuropean countries was the „white man´s burden‟, in the famous title of the poem ofRudyard Kipling, published in 1899. In the words of the French diplomat and colonialadministrator Jules Harmand, wrote in 1910: „it is necessary to accept as a principle andstarting point the fact that there is a hierarchy of races and civilizations and that we arefrom the superior civilization. The basic legitimacy of conquering the native peoples isthe conviction of our superiority, not only our mechanical, economical and militarysuperiority, but foremost our moral superiority. Our dignity is based on the principle ofequality and it founds our rights to direct the rest of mankind‟. Evolutionism indicated to the scientists what they should search for, if theywanted incontestable proofs of racial hierarchy. In 1866, the German zoologist ErnstHaeckel, a noticeable scientist and a broadcaster of Darwin´s ideas, formulated thetheory of recapitulation, under the what the embryonic development of the mostcomplex animals reflected the whole life tree. „Ontogeny remembers phylogeny‟ wasthe synthetic expression of that time. This theory experienced a great success andjumped the walls of Biology and invaded the lands of Psychology, even being adoptedby Sigmund Freud. The scientific racism converted immediately into recapitulation, saying that theindividuals of the inferior races walked incompletely the paths of the evolution of thespecies. So, if the embryonic stages of human beings recapitulated the reptiles, fishesand inferior mammals, the adult stage of individuals of an inferior race reflects theinfant stages of the superior races, and the infant stages of the inferior races reflected theadult stages of our monkey ancestors. So, it was drawn the objectives to the scientistsdevoted to measuring skulls and skeletons: to identify in samples of the inferior racesthe aspects corresponding to the children of a superior race or also of the simians.
  • 19. Like in many other examples, practice anticipated theory. The atlas of naturalhistory and geography of the XIX century brought, routinely, comparative illustrationsof facial and cranial aspects of African blacks and monkeys. Types of Mankind, themost common manual in USA, published in 1854 by the polygenic Nott and Gliddon,compared heads of chimps, orangutans and gorillas with black Argelians. At this time,under the travels of the explorers, an excitation about the races run through Americanand European public, as reflected in the febrile great interest in the „human zoos‟. The human zoos were ethnologic expositions of exotic human types. The oldestexhibition of this gender was the one of Saartjie Baartman, the „Hottentot Venus‟, aSouth African Khoi slave exposed in London and Paris between 1810 and 1815.However, a broader consumer market for the exhibition of „inferior races‟ configuredaround the decade of 1870, when London, Paris, New York, Amsterdam, Antwerp,Hamburg, Milan and Barcelona started to have expositions that attracted two to threecents of thousands of visitors and offered attractions such as African and New Zealandpygmies, Nubian blacks, Apaches, Eskimos and natives of Samoa or Surinam. In thepeak of the colonial run to Africa, the Universal Exposition of Paris of 1889 offered tothe visitors the contact with four hundred Indian peoples and a walk inside a blackvillage. Parallel to it, the editors published innumerable encyclopedias and illustratedatlas that presented the diversity of human races, with their possible intellectual andcultural hierarchies. Even in 1958, the human zoos survived: at the UniversalExposition of Brussels, there was a Congolese and an African village exposed.However, with recapitulationism, those popular figures of scientific racism got a moreelaborated evolutionism structure. At the entrance of the Natural Academy of Sciences of USA, in Philadelphia,there is a plaque in memory to Edward Drinker Cope, the most celeb Americanpaleontologist of the XIX century. Cope identified dozens of species of dinosaurs andgot involved in the „war of bones‟, a dirty dispute for scientific primacy with his rivalOthniel Charles Marsh, which extended from 1877 to 1892, exhausting resources andenergies from both. Cope was a Lamarckist in a time where Darwinism was triumphant.He started from recapitulation to formulate some of the most common arguments for theimperialism. In Cope´s vision, women, the Southern Europeans and the poor personsrepresented inferior human forms whose evolution was cut at earlier stages from the oneof the Nordic whites. The basis of the pyramid of human evolution, however, wasoccupied by the blacks, whose inability to create complex civilizations was written in animmature anatomy with weak legs and lacking of „those important elements of beauty:nose and beard well developed‟. The proofs of the infantilism of these inferior humanswere never limited to anatomy, but had diverse branches in psychology. Emotionally,women, blacks and others were similar to white children or teens. The pre-historic artwas similar to the draws of children. The esthetic sense of the wild peoples wasreflected on children´s conceptions of beauty.
  • 20. The British Herbert Spencer had an important paper in broadening theideological field of the scientific racism. Although he was known as the champion ofsocial-Darwinism, Spencer derived this philosophical system from the concept ofcharacters inherited by use or disuse. In Spencerism, not only the biological evolution,but also the development of civilizations could be explained over this Lamarckist basis.According to him, the superior social organisms – which means, the complex industrialsocieties – were fruits exclusively from the white race and pointed to something as afinal stage of evolutionary equilibrium. As a rule, the philosophers of that time had amodest influence over the great public, but Spencer was a noticeable exception: whenhe died, in 1930, his books sold more than 350 thousands of units in USA and anotherso in the United Kingdom, contributing to the popularity of the explanation of the socialquestion in biological terms. The idea of a straight social evolution, through successive technological andcultural stages that conducted mankind from wilderness to civilization, gained acomplete anthropological model with the American Lewis H. Morgan. In the chapter ofopening of his classic book of 1877 he wrote: „the same way we can´t deny that portionsof the human family existed in wilderness stage, other portions in barbarism and othersstill in a civilized stage, we can´t also deny that these three distinct conditions areconnected in natural and necessary sequence of progress‟. The positivism of Morganoriginated the theory of cultural development that had a long impact over anthropologyand inspired Marx and Engels. In the triumphant march of Morganian progress, theArian and Semite families detached from the others starting from a mild period ofbarbarism and the Arians got the leadership of the civilization period. The febrile interest of that time of the themes of evolutionism and heredityreached the field of criminality with the Italian Cesare Lombroso, the creator of thedoctrine of the uomo delinquente. The criminal anthropology founded by Lombrosoaffirmed that the tendency to crime was not only inborn and inherited but also that couldbe discovered by the investigation of the anatomical features of the persons. Thecriminal behavior reflected the gross instincts of beasts that had perpetuated asevolutionary defects in some persons. The external signs of uomo delinquente – astigmata – included the „enormous jaws‟, the „high molar bones‟, the „extreme size ofthe orbits‟ and „the ears in form of loop‟. In his theory, Lombroso postulated that the inferior animals had criminalinstincts and that criminality was the norm among the wild human groups. With suchideas, the criminologist arrived to Africa and, in an ethnological work of 1896,identified the stigmata of the Sudanese Dinkas of Nile. At those years of end of century,the peoples of Africa and Asia had been extensively classified by the Europeanethnology.
  • 21. Classifying the natives Writing in 1851, the French anarchist Pierre-Joseph Proudhon defined: „beinggoverned is to be watched, inspected, spied, directed, subordinated to law, numbered,regulated, listed, indoctrinated, controlled, examined, evaluated, censored and rewardedby creatures that don´t have neither the rights nor the sapience nor the virtues to dothat‟. The generalized intrusion of the Estate in the private life of people is a recentphenomenon that is coincident to the beginning of the industrial era and comes togetherwith the modern census. Being governed – Proudhon didn´t say, only suggested – is tobe surveyed. The imperialist powers brought the modern census to the colonies. At thismoment, they made collective identities based on concepts of ethnicity and race. Investigating the census conducted by the British on Malaysia, the sociologistCharles Hirschman registered progressive changes in the categories used to classify thepopulation and a general sense that guided such changes: „as the colonial period wentfurther, the surveyed categories became more visibly and exclusively racial‟.Throughout the process, the religious identities tended to disappear or to getsubordinated by the racial identities. The racial identities acquired a increasingstandardization and less ambiguous meanings. Something similar occurred in theneighboring Oriental Dutch India (the nowadays Indonesia). Malays and Indonesians used fluid identity systems, referred in many distinctcriteria and with a broad local variability, such as the social position, the occupation andreligion. In the pre-colonial census, the governors were moved by a practical sense: toidentify the lieges available to be taxed and military listing. The consolidation of thecolonial administrations provoked the introduction of regular and broad census, focusedon the classification and quantification of the population. With dissemination of thescientific racism, the categories were organized around race and ethnicity. By the logicof the colonizers, which had nothing to do with their lieges, stereotyped identity labelswere imposed to all. Among other repercussions of this, there are the appearances of the„Chinese‟ from Malaysia and Indonesia. In the British colonies of Malaysia, around 1870, explains Benedict Anderson,„one non-taxed Southern Asiatic could have their own life, happy or not, without theweaker perception that they were named like that from the superiors‟. But this situationwould not last long. In the following decades, the new systems of education, health,justice, security and migration were organized in the basis of the categories of thecensus, making from the invented labels a quotidian element in the life of the persons.Soon, the imagined identities of the colonial administrations filtered into theconsciences and coagulated under the form of racial and ethnical communities. The academic usage of the word ethnicity began in XIX century. In general, thisword was meant to indicate a social group defined by the ideas of ancestry and commonculture. However, the cohesion of ethnical communities is not supported by any
  • 22. objective similarity, but, as the anthropologist Siegfried Nadel explained more than ahalf century ago, „it depends on a theory of cultural identity that ignores or discharge asimmaterial the existent variations and ignores or neglects the uniformities presentedaway from the selected borders‟. Thus, according to Nadel, the ethnic communitiesderive from „a similarity accepted as a dogma‟. Ethnologists participated together with militaries and bureaucrats for the colonialconquest of Africa. Their ethnical descriptions and classifications didn´t reflect the localloyalties that were very relevant to the communities, but resulted only from ananthropological dogma. In the southern Africa, the hunters and nomads from theKhoisan language were named as „bushmen‟ in opposition to the „men‟ properly said. Inthe colonialist mind, those primitive beings were more than a single race, they were anew species, placed somewhere as intermediate between humans and monkeys. Among the natives considered to be humans, there are many examples ofcommunities invented by the European knowledge men who were entrusted to put inorder the diverse ethnological view of the continent. The explorer Henry MortonStanley, during the establishment of a private colony in the Belgian Congo for the kingLeopold II, discovered the Bangals, a very developed tribe. That sign was enough for, in1907, the different clans of that region had gained the status of a new ethnicity, in anofficial work of the ethnography of the peoples of Congo. The Dinks of the SouthernSudan, in fact many distinct clans, were accidentally converted into an ethnical group,due to a mistake of an explorer that took the personal name of a local chief as thegeneric denomination of a group. Similarly, sixty clans of the Luo language form thenorth of Uganda became the Acholi ethnicity because the word shooli was used byArabian traders to refer to those clans. The imagined order of the administrators tended to become as a real order, feltand lived as the ethnical classification entered in the census and the laws. In the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan, since 1924, the British administration physically separated the northernMuslim southern population from the southern rural groups, prohibiting the circulationof natives among the two parts of the territory and promoting Christian in the south. TheDinks started to act as an ethnical community at the time of the independence of Sudan,in the decade of 1950, in opposition to the Islamic and pro-Egyptian placed in Cartumand they kept acting like that throughout the Sudanese civil wars, ended by a fragilenegotiation in 2005. If, in Sudan, the Dinka were raised as a British desire to Christian the south, inthe protectorate of Uganda, the Acholi recognized themselves as an ethnical group inopposition to the British policies of favoring the old kingdom of Buganda in the south.Due to the British policies for recruiting workers, the Acholi and other northern groupsgave labors to the Ugandese colonial army, which became a military ethnocracy andseeded the land for the many successive coup d´états of the independent Uganda. Since1987, Acholiland is the focus of war of the Resistance Army of the Lord, a bloodyChristian guerrilla that aims to establish a theocracy based on the Acholis traditions.
  • 23. The colonial ethnogenesis in Africa reflected the conceptions of world of theEuropeans, but also had a pragmatic objective to gain the support of the traditionalchiefs. The British, with their system of indirect government, created the severalethnicities that served for their intention of imposing order. Referring to the modernTanzania, colonized by Germans and transferred as a protectorate to United Kingdom,the historian John Iliffe explained: „the idea of tribe was already present in the nucleusof the indirect government of Taganica. Refining the racial thinking common at thetimes of the Germans, the administrators believed that all the Africans came from atribe, the same way as all the Europeans belonged to a nation‟. This mistake, however,worked as a prophecy: „The British believed (wrongly) that the natives of Taganicacame from tribes; the natives created tribes to work inside the colonial context”. The ethnologists devoted to the classification of the natives imagined that theethnicities constituted a variety of great racial families and that each one was singled byan old, immanent and closed culture. Under the lights of the theory of cultural evolving,they tried to situate each group in a specific point of the line of the progress, identifyingthe more developed and the more underdeveloped ethnicities. All these beliefs sufferedthe fire of the critics of the German-American Franz Boas, who dissociated culture frombiology and created a new floor for Anthropology. Boas started his conceptual revolution inspired with the contact with the Inuit ofBaffin Island, in an ethnographic research started in 1883. This experience revealed tohim the risks to try to understand different cultures from the occidental point of view.He early perceived that the theory of cultural evolution did not clarify anything abouttheir objects of study, but said a lot about the inefficiency of methods and predominantconcepts in Anthropology filled up with the notion of racial superiority. He concludedthat the elements of a culture have a genuine meaning only inside their own culturalcontext. Ethnology considered the culture as something inherent to a human group. Boaswas against this essentialist approach, showing that culture is a dynamic notion, referredin defined situations and local contexts, hence subjected to a continuous process of re-elaboration. His anthropological program was based on the historic method, as herecognized the singularity of the phenomena and the compromise of articulatingnarrations based on empirical data. The objects of study of the modern anthropologyshould be seen as historic subjects: agents capable of act creatively inside their culturalcontext, modifying it and giving new meanings to their social existence. In the vision of Boas, the concept of race had no relevance. Truly important wasthe eye that creates a race. The following text was written in 1928: “We are easilybetrayed by general impressions. The Swedish are blond, with blue hairs, tall and withlong heads. This idea makes us to create our ideal model of a Swedish and forget thevariations found in Scandinavia. If we speak about a Sicilian, we think about a dark andshort person with dark eyes and hairs. People different from this type are not in ourminds when we think about a typical Sicilian. The more uniform is a people, the
  • 24. stronger we get impressed by the typical. All countries are shown to us as inhabited by acertain type, whose facial characteristics are determined as of the most commonoccurrence. However, this nothing says to us in respect to their hereditary compositionand the extension of their variations. The type is formed subjectively, based on ourquotidian experience.” The anti-racist anthropology emerged from the peak of the imperial racism. Ithad to wait for two decades, Nazism and the Holocaust to occupy the center of thepolitical arena.Nation as a lineage The French constitution of 1793 lasted for only a few months, but it was retainedas the most important legal document of the Revolution. It defined citizenship as acontract of the inhabitants of a territory and conceded the rights of citizenship to theforeigners living in France for at least one year and to „any foreigner considered by thelegislative body to be in need of human treatment‟. But the romantic reaction to Lightsconnected nation to blood and imagined a national community as linked by loops ofancestry. The Prussian philosopher and poet Johann Gottfried Herder is the originalfountain of this reaction. Together with the young writer Johann von Goethe, he startedthe movement of Sturm und Drang, an angry shout against the French universalism anda literary platform to the expression of emotion and national specificity. Speak German,you German: this calling was supported by the idea that the poet creates his surroundingnation when he confers voices to the ancestral turbulence of the feelings and thinking ofa people. In the thinking of Herder, culture is a hallmark of differences. The appeal to apast of traditions glued in the national soul, spoken one century before the unification ofthe German Estate, worked as the cultural mark of a territory: „It was like that thatcertain German intellectuals, without any power as class and any union as a nation,responded to the illuminist apostles of a universal civilization (without forgetting thethreaten of industrial domination), through the celebration of the indigenous Kulturen oftheir nations‟. Since the Germany of Herder was not an Estate, the philosopher substituted itfor the political-juridical concept of nation, formulated by the illuminists and sacred bythe French Revolution, by the concept of „folk nation‟. Nation would be a naturalorganism, born in old times and that needed protection and nourishment. The culture,not the law, embraced the nation so that the national survival would need theconservation and glorification of its culture. The spirit of the folk (Volk), expressed in
  • 25. the folklore, would occupy the center of the national organism. A German is a Germanbecause they share a culture; a foreigner could never become a German by agovernment decree. The right of the blood raised against the rights of land of theFrench. Herder was far away from being a fanatic. He never opposed the feelings againstreason, but tried to incorporate the second into the first. He didn´t mix the German Volkwith the Prussian nationalism. He abominated the absolutism and, for the surprise ofmany, declared his support to the French Revolution. Although he shared the anti-Judaic prejudices, he believed in the essential unity of mankind. The romanticnationalism of the XIX century selected fragments of the Herderian thinking and mixedthem with new ideas – markedly the concept of race. In the diverse panel of the romantic production of nation, under the impulses ofthe editorial industry and the public system of education, the modern national languagesappeared, as well as the paradigms of national literatures and also the national historicnarratives. The imagined community by the nationalism anchored its legitimacy in animmemorial past and in a natural territory. Not all romantic nationalism was racist, butthe notions of races and ethnicity developed crucial papers in the delimitation ofnational and foreigner. In Europe, the anti-Semitism gained a new meaning: the Jews,who were religious foreigners, converted into ethnical foreigners. Richard Wagner saidin 1850 that they were intrinsically unable to compose the true German music. In USA,with the abolition of slavery, it was consolidated the idea that the Republic of theEquals, the brilliant city in the top of the hill, in the celeb phrase from the speech of thepuritan John Winthrop, was a nation of whites. The senses of nation and race mismatched in the French Revolution and re-approached in the romantic naturalism. In the volume 13 of the Encyclopédie de Diderote D´Alembert, published in 1765, the entry for race defines: extract, descent, lineage;those referring both to ascendants and descents form a same family: when it is noble,this word is synonym of „being born‟. The entry for nation, which is in volume 11,refers to the popular dictations that highlights peculiar characteristics of each nation(licentious like a French, jealous like an Italian, serious as a Spanish, malicious as anEnglish, proud as a Scottish, drunk as a German), but essentially it was placed in thefields of the rights to the land. The decisive part is: „a considerable amount of personsthat inhabits the extensions of a country, bordered by certain limits and that obeys to asame government‟. In its medieval meaning, nation was an aristocrat lineage, articulated by bloodloops. In the beginning of XVIII century, the French Charles Montesquieu applied theword to designate only the aristocracy and the high clerk, not the common people. Butthe illuminists cut the cord that linked the nation form naissance or „blue blood‟ and therevolutionary irruption of the Third Estate connected it firmly to the ideas of a politicalcontract and of a territory. The separation between nation and lineage is evidenced inthe Encyclopédie, a French work and an expression of the current conceptions of the
  • 26. XVIII century. The romantic nationalism restored the old cord, but in new words. Theromantic nation was not aristocratic, but was an ethnical lineage: the Volk, the wholepeople, looped by an organic culture deeply in the blood. The Germany of Hitlerconducted this notion to its ultimate and tragic consequences.Hitler and the crisis of the race In the Putsch of the Brewery, 16 Nazis were killed at the failed trial of coupd´état of Adolph Hitler of November 1923, but only one of them was a member of thehigher circle of the Nazi Party. This man was Ludwig Maximilian Erwin vonScheubner-Richter, a German from the Baltic who was born in Riga, Latvia and thathad fought together with the counter-revolutionary of the Russian Revolution and wastransferred to German in 1918. The intellectual influence of this man, who was side byside with Hitler when he was shot, was filtered in the book The Myth of the XXCentury, written by his comrade of migration Alfred Rosenberg, also a German fromthe Baltic and also a counter-revolutionary. Furthermore, the book of Rosenberg suffered influences from the eugenicistthinking of the American Madison Grant, but drank directly from the ideas of the bookThe Foundations of the XIX Century, published in Germany in 1899, from the BritishHouston Stewart Chamberlain, a follower of Gobineau. In the vision of Chamberlain, aline of continuity unites, through the German peoples, the classic Europe to thecontemporary: „these barbarian, that threw themselves naked to the battles; these wildpeople that suddenly raised from the forests and dumps to inspire a civilized world andcultivating the terrors of a violent conquest reached by the solely strong hand; they werethe legal heirs of the Helens and of the Romanians, blood of their blood and soul oftheir soul‟. The Europeans, fountain of the Western civilization, would pertain to only onesingle great racial trunk, the Arians, the most advanced amongst all. The main axis ofthe Arian trunk would be constituted by the Nordic or Germanic peoples that hadrescued the classical civilization from the destruction of a decadent Romanian Empiresubmitted to the domination of the Jews and other non-Europeans. In Chamberlain, thescientific racism of the XIV century became the racist nationalism of the XX century,that found a complete and extreme expression in the Nazi German. The idea of the superiority of the Arian race was not new and had beendeveloped, noticeably, by Gobineau. The anti-Semitism was very old and suffered adeep transformation by the racial thinking of the XIX century. The novelty was in thearticulation of those notions to a philosophy of history that gave to the Germanicpeoples the fundamental paper of guaranteeing the continuity of the classical traditionby separating it from the degrading Jewish influences. The eugenism was expressed in a
  • 27. very broad way that escaped from the vials of Biology and invaded the sphere ofculture. The racial thinking of that time did never contest the mixture of races itself.Chamberlain imagined that all racial trunks, included the Arians, was generated by amixture of original races. However, the elements of the pot could not be excessivelydistinct, under the risk of producing mongrels, a concept parallel to cur dogs. The Jews(Homo judaeica, in his denomination) was inside this category, since they would bederived from the low viable crossing of the true Semitic, the Bedouin Arabian, theHitite or Syrian. This miscegenation would have resulted in the reunion of the worsttraces of the first, such as the „Jewish nose‟ and the attraction to usury and from thesecond ones, the anti-intellectual inclination. Without the leadership of the Germans, theArians could not have escaped from the sick miscegenation and following degradation. The book of Chamberlain was received with many praises form the British pressand scholars. In the other side of the Atlantic, however, the critical voice of theAmerican president Theodore Roosevelt lifted up. In a summary written in 1913,Roosevelt predictably concurred with the generalized idea of the superiority of the whiterace, but considered ridiculous the German ideology: „All he says about this forced useof the word humanity could be, in a greater proportion of truth, said in relation to thewords named as Teutonism and Arianism. The way he uses these words are equivalentto his personal likes and dislikes‟. The repulse of the Jews and the idea that they were incompatible to the Germanculture were central elements in the essays of the musician Richard Wagner.Chamberlain moved to Austria, married Eva Wagner, daughter of Richard and became avery active German nationalist. He supported German against the country where he wasborn and even took part in the Nazi Party. Hitler and Joseph Goebbels visited him a fewtimes in his residence and almost all the Nazi umbrella went to his funeral in 1927. Twoyears before, the newspaper of the Nazi Party qualified his books as a gospel of themovement. The Myth of the XX Century was published in 1930. As Chamberlain,Rosenberg believed that humanity was an empty concept: only races had soul. Also ashis muse, he insisted on the corruption of the Arian blood by miscegenation of the otherraces and the historical contrast between the Nordic-Arian race and the Jews. He wasinterested in the degradation influences of the Semites over culture and art, rejected thetraditional Christianity and defended the idea of a religion of the blood that expressedthe nobility of the Arian character and had expressions in the Indo-European paganism,in Brahmanism, in Zoroastrism and in the primitive Christianity. The ProtestantReforming was an advance, though limited, towards the correct point. The racism of Rosenberg promoted the Nordic theory, where the axis of theArian race was made up by the group of the Nordic peoples: the Germans, the British,the Scandinavians, the Dutch and the Baltic. The Arian race was something broader,including the peoples of the south of Europe, the Berbers of the north of Africa and
  • 28. even the Slavic of Eastern Europe, which for Hitler formed an inferior race. The blacksand the Jews occupied the lowest places of the pyramid of the races. In the historical interpretation of Rosenberg, the cosmopolitism, the democracyand the Bolchevism – the three, emanations from Judaism – threatened to destroy thecivilization. Only the myth of the blood (the race-nation) could restore the order in theworld. “Chaos was placed as an almost conscious programmatic goal. As the finalconsequences of a democratically disintegrated, the anti-natural messengers of anarchyannounced their presence in all the great cities of the Globe. The explosive material canbe seen in Berlin as well as in New York, Shangai or London. As a natural defenseagainst this worldwide danger, a new experience spreads out as a mysterious fluid overthe Globe. This idea places concepts such as people and instinctive race and consciouslyin the center of their thinking. It is linked to the supreme values organically establishedin each nation, around their feelings develop, determining the character and the color ofculture starting from the past. What was partially forgotten, partially neglected issuddenly recognized by millions as their work: live a myth and create a character‟. Rosenberg called the German people to action. It needed to retake the long andglorious tradition of the „Nordic-Arian race‟ and lift a Estate, a Empire based on themyth of the blood. The racial mysticism of Heinrich Himmler was not supported by the network ofphilosophical and historical references of Rosenberg. The all-powerful chief of the SS(a paramilitary organization of the Nazi Party) who supervised the system of fields ofconcentration and extermination reached to be the number 2 in the Nazi hierarchy.However, he was never a scholar, but rather a fanatic bureaucrat and his ideas of racewere not original. Himmler entered very young to a mystic fraternity of followers of Ariosophy, anesoteric system that grew from a late reappearance of romanticism movement and wasinspired in the medieval German paganism. The idea of superiority of the Arian racewas written in Ariosophy. Himmler studied Agronomy in Munich and spent some timein an aviary, getting interested in animal crossing. These experiences left him toimagine a scheme of physical improvement of the German population by a directedselection that would make it completely Nordic. According to a biographer, Himmler told that he always held the Bhagavad Gita,an Arian text written in Sanskrit extracted from the Indian epic Mahabharata. This oldtext allowed him to place himself in the position of the Hero Arjuna and conductwithout fear nor guilty the Holocaust procedures. In his order of ideas, exterminatingthe Jews was a crucial element of this eugenic work based on mystical reasons.
  • 29. “In the beginning it was the Volk” The celeb phrase of Benito Mussolini – everything for the Estate, nothingagainst the Estate, nothing out of the Estate – is an adequate synthesis of the fascistdoctrine, but it doesn´t serve to characterize Nazism. The Nazi totalitarianism, incontrary of the fascists, did not start from a celebration of the Estate, but from theglorification of the people (Volk). One year after he reached power, in 1934, Hitlerexplicated once more his position: “Foreigners perhaps say that Estate created us. No!We are the Estate! We don´t follow the orders of no powers except of God, who createdthe German people! The Estate depends on us!” In the Fascist Manifest of 1932, Mussolini wrote that it is not the people thatmake the Estate, but the Estate makes the people. In Mein Kampf, published 7 yearsbefore, Hitler wrote that the authority of the Estate can never be a final itself, because ifit was true, any type of tyranny would be sacred and inviolable. „We must never forgetthat the highest objective of the human existence is not the maintenance of a Estate, butthe maintenance of the race”. In 1938, this theme reappeared in a speech in Salzburgand Führer said: „in the beginning was the Volk and after that the Reich appeared‟. Hitler was a romantic revolutionary whose vision of history was in conflict withthe institutions created by modernity – among them, the Estate. However, his north hadnot been always described in the same way: sometimes, he used the word Volk, othertimes, race. One should not conclude that he identified Volk with race. The historyresearcher John Lukacs showed that, in Hitler´s thinking, the Arian race was neverclearly defined and was never defined as the German people. Also, Hitler did not likevery much the primitive and mystic racism of Himmler and he had his suspicions on theglorification of the immemorial past of the Germans. There are significant registers of Hitler´s denial to the book of Rosenberg, whichhe considered unintelligible and contaminated with mysticism. Rosenberg tended tocompare the Volk to the Nordic-Arian race, while Hitler distinguished clearly theseconcepts. In a piece of the speech he pronounced to officials in Platterhof hotel, inBayern, in 1944, he said that „Volk and race are not the same thing. Race is acomponent of blood, while the Volk is not composed by a single race, but two, three,four or five different racial nuclei.‟ In the same speech, he denied that existed, from thegenetic point of view, a Jewish race, but he declared that „we use the expression Jewishrace as a matter of convenience. Politically, Hitler was foremost an extreme nationalist – the more fanaticamongst all. The race, as everything else, was subordinated to the conveniences of thisnationalism. If the racial advertisement was able to contribute to awaken the passions ofnationalism in the German people, it was in fact just an instrument for the supremefinality. But Nazism can´t be seen as a legitimated heir of the racial thinking of the XIXcentury: in fact, it evidenced a crisis of the hierarchical system of the races.
  • 30. The hate nourished the thoughts of the Nazi chief. He knew the efficiency of thehate as a powerful political instrument. Hitler hated the Jews. He believed in thehistorical anti-Semite myths, reproduced in similar version in many books, such as theones of Chamberlain and Rosenberg. He had no doubts about the truth in the Protocolsof the Sapiens of Zion, the famous fraudulent report of the worldwide Jewishconspiracy created by the political police of the czarist Russia of the first years of theXX century. But his anti-Semitism only got stained in another picture of references,personal and contemporary. The anti-Semite tradition converted the Jews in the representation of usury andcosmopolitism. In the narration of the Nazi leaders, the Jews were the incarnation of theinternational finances and, mostly, they were noticeable for the inability of creating atrue nation. All of this appears in Chamberlain and Rosenberg, as well as in MeinKampf and many other speeches of Hitler. But the Hitler´s hate against the Jews derivedbasically from his interpretation of the German lost of 1918. The surrender of the First World War conducted Hitler into the paths of politics.In his conceptions, the highest nation tasks were to overcome the traumatic loss and torestore the national proud. In his eyes, an imminent war was inevitable and it wasneeded to learn with the lessons of this first tragedy. The first lesson: the Jews were theculpable of the loss. To Hitler, the Jews controlled the politics of France, had a dominant position inthe USA and constituted a powerful group in the high circles of the British power.German had been curved in front of an enemy coalition organized by the Jews.However, the most important was the internal enemy: the Jews formed a fifth-columninside the German nation. The loss of 1918 could have been avoided since militarily thewar was not lost. Everything ruined when the fifth-column called the workers toinsurrection, destroying the German capacity of fighting. The humiliation of Germanyand the slavery imposed to the Germans by the Treatise of Versailles were direct fruitsof the actions of the Jews. Because of that, the destiny of German depended on theresult of the historical fighting against the Jews, which would only end with the totalannihilation of one of the sides. In general, the racism of Hitler was not more intense than many of contemporaryothers, either inside or outside Germany. His specificity was in his obsession against theJews, or, in other words, to the war without army, carried out inside the white race,between the Jews and the German Volk. The Jews, that had taken by assault the powerin the Bolshevist Russia, threatened to totally destroy the German nation. But, if so,how could the inferiority of the Jews be sustained? The explanation is present in MeinKampf: „although among the Jews the instinct of auto-preservation was not weaker, butmuch stronger than other peoples and although the intellectual abilities of the Jews areat least equal to other races, the Jews don´t have the most important requirements of acultivated people. In the Jewish people, the disposal to sacrifice doesn´t go further thanthe simple instinct of personal preservation. In their case, the racial feeling of solidarity
  • 31. is nothing more than a primitive instinct of aggregation, similar to many found in otherorganisms of this world.‟ Lacking of spirit of sacrifice and of a true racial solidarity, selfish and cowards,the Jews would go into endless conflicts one against the other if they were left alone inthe world. Because of this, they were not able to organize themselves in a territorialEstate and the Jewish Estate has absolutely no territorial border. The Jews formedEstates inside the Estates, being parasites of nations. The anti-Semitic racism of Hitler was not based on Biology, being distinct fromthe scientific racism that was in fashion. The incurable problem of them was ofhistorical and cultural order. Hitler in fact partially believed in the dogmas of thephysical and intellectual differences among the races and in the conventional racialhierarchy. But this was not his most important interest. Under the destiny of glory of theGerman Volk, his absolute reference, the essential was the war against the Jews. In thatwar, the advantage of the Germans was in the idealist spirit. It was the paper of Nazismto develop it to the ultimate consequences.A Perfect Volk In the time that many members of our Parliament of the Lords marry withdaughters of millionaires, it is reasonable to think that our Senate is characterized, astime goes by, by an uncommonly acute perception for business, and probably also for alower pattern of honesty than in the present. Francis Gaulton wrote this snappy evaluation. He really believed in what he wassaying. He created in 1833 the word eugenics and defended the legal delimitation of themarriages and the size of families related to the inherited virtues and defects of thecouples. In an intellectual atmosphere enchanted by the idea that the science haddiscovered the secrets of the division of humanity into races and of heredity, the„science of eugenics‟ soon gained followers and invaded the universities. The eugenicinvestigations received many funds from foundations such as Rockefeller andKellogg´s. Under the influence of Galton, the government of Theodore Rooseveltinstituted a commission of heredity in USA, with the mission of stimulating the physicaland intellectual perfection of the race. Laws for sterilization with eugenic aims werecreated in some American states after 1907. Other countries, such as Sweden andSwitzerland, conducted official eugenic programs. A first international conference of eugenics was carried out in London in1912und the presidency of Leonard Darwin, son of the celeb naturalist and a tirelessdefender of the science of eugenics and the adoption of public policies of eugenics. The
  • 32. following conferences were carried out in New York in 1921 and 1932. In this thirdconference, the Swiss psychiatric Ernst Rüdin was elected as the president of theInternational Federation of the Eugenic Societies. Rüdin was the chief of the mostprestigious scientific institutions in the fields of psychiatry and genealogy in Germanand soon became an enthusiast of Nazism. When the Nazis reached the power, theysupported on his international recognition and his intellectual authority to conduct thegreater eugenic program of History. Hitler disdained the mystic racialism, but glorified the science and passionatelyran after the ideal of purification of the Volk. Such idea had already been fullydeveloped in Mein Kampf: „the Estate is only the recipient and race is what it contains.The Estate can only have a meaning if it preserves and protects it. Otherwise, the Estatehas no value‟. As a consequence, the eugenic program occupied a central place inHitler´s thoughts: „it will be a task of the Estate of the people to convert the race into thecenter of the community life. The Estate should guarantee the purity of the raciallineage that will be preserved. It should proclaim that the children are not the mostvaluable resource that a nation can have. It should understand that only the healthychildren should generate children; and that there is only one blasphemy, named asparents that are sick or evidence inherited defects bring kids to the world and in suchcases, it is a great honor to avoid doing this‟. Germany was the first and only Estate officially eugenic with the promulgationof the law for prevention of the sick inherited descendant, in July of 1933. The lawconferred to the Estate the power of sterilizing the portrayers of diseases that weresupposed to be inherited, such as schizophrenia, epilepsy and maniac-depressiveinsanity. Blinds, deaf and other portrayers of other deficiencies could be also sterilizedif the official doctors diagnosed inherited causes for those problems. Also, the personsaddicted to alcohol were listed in the law. A complete judicial system was constituted to decide over requests forsterilization. In the basis of this system there were districts of eugenics courts, made upby a judge, a public doctor and a doctor specialized in eugenics indicated by the Reichand that carried out secret judgments. The sentences of these courts could be contestedin a supreme eugenics court that was part of the Supreme Court and was composedsimilarly to the district courts. The inspiring model of the Nazi law was the eugenics laws adopted in severalstates of USA. The American eugenicists saw in the German law a refinement becauseit had a national aspect, giving uniformity of criteria and applications that did not existin USA. A commission of American eugenics visited Germany to know the courts. Atthe end of this visit, the secretary of the American Eugenic Society, Frederick Osborne,saluted the German initiatives as maybe the „most important experiment ever tried‟. Under this judicial apparatus, in 1937 225 thousand of persons had beensterilized and at the end of the Nazi regime, the total reached 400 thousand, while inUSA there were about 30 thousand sterilizations. The courts worked in flexible criteria
  • 33. and political recommendations of not cutting the extension of the experiment. The goalto perfectioning the Arian race, freeing the German people from impurities, should notbe hijacked by scientific controversies of the inherited nature of some diseases. It wasbetter to prevent and, even though some individual injustices, to ensure the future of thenation. The processes were surrounded by meticulous scientific scenery and many timesthe courts submitted the individuals under threaten of sterilization to tests of intelligenceto clarify some doubts. One thing brings the others. Soon after the beginning of the experiment, Hitlerdetermined the sterilization of habitual criminals, what was carried out starting from theLombrosian hypothesis of a natural and inherited tendency to criminality. Since theprocess were carried out secretly, the law converted into a pretext for a general ethniccleaning. In 1937, they sterilized several children born from the union of Germans andsoldiers of the north of Africa that participated from the occupation of Germany at theend of the war. The scientific nucleus of the Nazi program was organized in the Institute KaiserWilhelm of Anthropology, Heredity and Eugenics, founded in Berlin in 1927 and of theHadamar Clinics, the principal psychiatric hospital used in the program of euthanasiaAction T4. As a general essay of the Holocaust, T4 functioned officially between 1939and 1941, period when it had fulminated more than 200 thousand people classified aspsychopaths, incurable paralytics, schizophrenic or mentally disabled. Hitler, directly,took the decisions for deflagrating the genocide operation. Initially, the victims were children under 3. Months later, as the war began, thekilling machine got developed, swallowing children and adults. In January 1940, insteadof the slow and expensive method of lethal injection, carbon monoxide started to beused. The corpses were incinerated. The families received false declarations of death,which were part of the camouflage strategy. However, due to the proportions that theprogram reached, the secret didn´t last too long and many protests multiplied, comingmainly from the religious men. In August 1941, T4 was suspended. The Nazi eugenism was not lifted in a vacuum nor was a simple import from theAmerican eugenics movement. It had roots in the peculiar evolution of the Germanmedicine during the second half of XIX century, from which the movement for racialhygiene appeared. The starting point was the diffusion, among the German psychiatrics, of thetheory of degeneration, formulated by the French Bénédict Morel in 1857. According toit, since the original sin of Adam and Eve, mankind divided, according to climate,feeding, habits, in a normal and healthy variety or an abnormal and sick one, bothreproducing. The transmission of the abnormal characteristics would make theindividuals more and more sick generation after generation, until the extinction ofcontaminated groups or families. The German psychiatrics removed all the religiouslanguage and connected it to brain and nervous system. This way, they created a strongnexus of the theory of Lombroso to the inborn delinquent.
  • 34. In the beginning of the century, the theory of degeneration had overcome thedomains of psychiatrics, being converted into a medical dogma of generalized use. Thehealthy bodies resisted to infections, but the abnormal bodies would receive the agentsof the diseases. The notion of inherited transmission completed the explicative model,giving almost a magical diagnosis of the individual diseases. The next step was carriedout by the gynecologist Friedrich Wilhelm Schallmayer, who published in 1903Heredity and Selection in the Process of the Life of the Nations, the foundation book ofthe German movement of racial clearance. Schallmayer transferred the idea of heredityfrom a Lamarckian context to a Darwinist conception. Also, under the impact of thesocial-Darwinism at that time in fashion, he destroyed the borders that separated suchparadigms to medicine and opened a horizon for the interpretation of the social questionthrough the biological concept of degeneration. “The mad men constitute an enormous burden to the Estate”. The diagnosis ofSchallmayer, a dogma of the German eugenism from what the Nazis extracted terribledeductions, had a double meaning. By one side, it wanted simply to say that theefficiency of a nation was reduced by the deviation of resources destined to the care ofthe inborn abnormal persons. By other side, that the cares were a waste of work, since,instead of reducing the abnormal population, it stimulated its enhancement as itprolonged the life of the sick people who would then generate more sick children. Schallmayer should not be seen as a racist of the school of Gobineau. Hisprincipal book suffered strong criticisms of social scientists and specialists in publichealth. In the debates he carried out, the founder of the movement of racial hygiene gotclearly distinguished from the ideologists of the supremacy of the Nordic-Arian race, ashe expressed doubts regarding the superiority of the white race over the yellow race.Actually, he considered that a policy of a racial superiority lacked of scientificfundaments and could only lead to a political and moral anarchy. Also, it is not correct to draw a line of direct continuity of Schallmayer and theT4 program. In the vision of the fanatics of Arianism, eugenism represented aninstrument for the perfection of the race of Volk and should be concentrated inenhancing the Nordic element in the German population. Schallmayer never agreed withthe idea that the mental ability of a person had anything to do with their racialpertaining. His movement of racial hygiene was based on inherited differences amongthe individuals, not in cited differences among racial groups. The Nazi eugenism hadelements from both conceptions. The German Society for Racial Hygiene was founded in 1905. In 1911, eightyears before the death of Schallmayer, a group of eugenicists aligned to the Arianismcreated secretly a Nordic Circle inside that institution. Slowly, the German eugenismgot the colors of the Arian supremacy, in a process concluded only after the arrival ofthe Nazis to power. In this trajectory, the concept of racial hygiene gave place to theword Rassenhygiene, of markedly racist connotations, never employed by Schallmayer.In its letter, the eugenicist law of 1933 confirmed the conventional ideas of racial
  • 35. hygiene that hadn´t became a policy of Estate before the appearance of Nazism. But inits practical appliance, that law served perfectly to the specific finalities of Ariansupremacy. The Institute Kaiser Wilhelm worked as the scientific center of the Nazieugenism. His most detached scientists were Fritz Lenz and Eugen Fischer. The first,old colleague of Schallmayer and one of the founders of the Nordic Circle, defendedsince long time before the renewal of the German Volk through the implantation of ruralcolonies in fields to be conquered from Russia. Such fields would be freely given tomodel couples that would be obligated to form a family with at least five children. Thesecond researcher, affiliated to the Nazi Party since its beginning, was named by Hitleras the chancellor of the University of Berlin. Under Nazism, the biologist Otmar von Verschuer assumed the direction of theKaiser Wilhelm, in place of Fischer. Verschuer was the academic orientator of the post-doctoral thesis of Josef Mengele, the angel of death, official of SS and medical chief ofthe extermination field of Auschwitz. Recent researches indicate that Mengele was alinking chain between the field of death and a network of centers for research wheremany scientists worked orientated by Kaiser Wilhelm. By the monster of Auschwitz,human samples obtained in the gas chambers were sent to the Berlin institute and tomany high standard university departments. Verschuer never suffered a process and in1951 was gifted with a title of merit of the University of Münster, where he was thechief of an important laboratory on genetics.Laws of Nuremberg In the last page of Mein Kampf, Hitler articulated his racial program to hisexpansionist project: “An Estate that in a time of racial adulteration is devoted topreserve the best elements of the racial stock shall be one day the Lord of Earth”. But toturn into the Lord of Earth, the Nazi Estate must resolve the Jewish question. Theanswer to this problem provoked the most terrible genocide of History. The seeds of the Holocaust can be found, all of them, in Mein Kampf. Hitler´sbook, differently from the anterior tradition of the racial thinking, inserts the notion ofrace in a coherent geopolitical picture, around the Nazi Estate created the decision of thefinal solution (Endlosung). One side, the theme of the Arian race was subordinated tothe imperative of the German nationalism. Other, the Jews were identified as the mortalenemies of Germany. The extermination machine was put into functioning starting fromthese two considerations. However, it is equivocated to consider the final solution asdirect or inevitable fruit of the doctrine of Hitler.
  • 36. The process that culminated into the decision of the final solution was notdeveloped in the plane of the ideas, but the one of a policy of Estate. Intellectually, theattitude of Hitler in front of the Judaic question didn´t change between 1919 and 1945.But, in the beginning of this trajectory, his ultimate objective was not to physicallyexterminate the Jews, but rather expulse them from Germany. Throughout time, diversepolicies for the Jews had been defined, according to the international situation. Theextermination was only decided when the world war assumed a threateningconfiguration to the future of the Nazi Estate. The program of the Nazi Party of 1920 was to reserve the German citizenship tothe Arians, exclude the Jews from public jobs and from the press and expulse the Jewsthat had immigrated after the beginning of the First War. Additionally, that programsaid that, in case of necessity, the Estate should expulse all the foreigners. Thiscombination of tactic and transitory decisions lasted until the Nazi Party reached thepower. In the end of 1928, the starting point of the successive crisis and elections thatconducted him to the government, Hitler declared that the Jews could only be toleratedin German under the condition of foreigners. In the perspective of Hitler, the Jews did not essentially represent a problem ofinternal politics. The Jews were the worldwide enemies of Germany and, thus, thesolution of the Judaic question was embraced to the question of the place of the Germannation in Europe and the world. Apparently, during many years the Nazi leaderrestrained his tendency of expulsing the Jews from Germany imagining that they wouldbe valuable as hostages. In this order of ideas, the Nazi control over the German Judaiccommunity would help to dissuade the enemies to attack Germany before its warmachine got fully consolidated. Hitler saw with good eyes the Zionist project of creating a Jewish Estate, but hedidn´t believe this could be ever concreted. In the same order of ideas, the evaluated thepossibility of deportation of all the Jews of the world to a reserve, but discharged it as itwould need an improbable international cooperation. The spectrum of the exterminationhad never got away from the declarations and confidences of the Nazi leader. However,his genuine hate was always subordinated to the reason of Estate, hence to the nationaland international political situation. In Mein Kampf, Hitler offers an analysis of situation of the beginning of theFirst World War that clarifies his approach to the Judaic problem. Remembering theexplosion of patriotism that was typical of that moment of the conflict and the sacrificeof the soldiers in the battle fields, he evaluated that moment as the time to removeeverything that might oppose to the national spirit. The fire of his criticism was directedto the Kaiser because of the omission in destroying the criminals and the worms (theJews) that acted as fifth-columns of the German nation. A future opportunity such asthat could not be wasted. As explained by Phillippe Burrin, this moment is crucial tounderstand the mind of Hitler: “Writing after the loss, he gave retrospectively a doublevalue to the quick decision he intended to apply. An imaginary value, since this
  • 37. decision, showing a desire to fight until the end, maybe favored victory and saved thelife of many precious German soldiers. And also a value of revenge and what iscreepier: the death of thousands of Jews, although would never change the result of thewar, would be plentifully justified because it would revenge the death of the Germansoldiers in the battle fields”. It is important to understand the historical meaning of the evaluation of Hitlerfrom the point of view to the repercussions for the Nazi policy. Hitler considered thatGermany would be totally doomed to fail if the situation of the previous war wasrepeated, in where the country fought a broad coalition in a prolonged armed conflict.The planning of a war he elaborated, since he reached the power, foresaw a quickconflict in the Western frontier, the neutralization of the United Kingdom and theconsolidation of the German victory, everything before opening a war against URSS, inthe Eastern border. It is reasonable to imagine that, in this scenario, a solution for theJudaic problem would be deportation and the creation of a reserve policed by Germanyand its vassals. The extermination of the fifth-column would only get imperative in theworst hypothesis: the reproduction of a prolonged war. The solution for the Judaic problem and the conquest of the vital space to theGerman Volk were the two historical great goals for Nazi. They hat equivalentimportance, but occupied distinct strategic places. The vital space could be obtained bythe victory in war and nothing would interfere with this. If things worked as Hitlerwanted, the restored Reich had under its disposal the means to expulse the Jews fromEurope and confine them forever in a surveyed place. While the war didn´t start, theGerman Jews would be terrorized and neutralized as a political factor and used ashostages. However, if things got an unwanted direction, the Endlossung could beanticipated and assume the draws of a genocide. The Nazi regime conducted tirelessly an anti-Semite policy. But this policy didnot obey, until the beginning of the world war, to any coherent central plan. Betweenthe nomination of Hitler to compose the cupola of the government in 1933 and thedeclaration of war in 1939, different agencies of the Nazi power adopted their ownpolicy of persecution of Jews. These initiatives did not have always the same sense andreflected the correlation of changing forces inside a block constituted by the Nazis andby the traditional conservative right. In this context, Hitler acted as a judge of the lastinstance, favoring ideologically the more radical Nazis but at the same time prohibitingacts of imprudence considering the international situation of Germany. The first national anti-Judaic law, adopted in 1933, forbade to non-Arians theaccess to public jobs. The texts destined to clarify the law defined the Jews as those whohad at least one quarter of Jewish blood (a Jewish grandparent). By pressures of theconservatives, an exception was opened to the ex-combatant Jews. Similar laws fromthe same year forbade the Jews to practice medicine and Law. Almost at the same time, it started a co-operation between Himmler, chief of SSand police, and the Zionist movement. The aim of Himmler was to achieve a quick
  • 38. emigration of the German Jews. This was coincident to the efforts of the Judaic Agency.Following this logic, several decisions were adopted in order to create a distinct Judaicidentity, and the Zionists were authorized to open schools of Hebraic and professionalcourses for candidates to the transference to Palestine. Another second cycle of anti-Judaic laws was completed in 1935. Pressuresstarted from Goebbels, the minister of Announcements, and from the Nazi Party, thatinitiated acts of vandalism against Jewish traders. In the Nazi congress of Nuremberg,Hitler personally solicited to Bernhard Lösener, worker of the Ministry of Interior, theelaboration of discriminatory norms related to marriage and citizenship. The two Lawsof Nuremberg were quickly approved. The law for protection of the German blood andhonor prohibited marriages and sexual relationships between Jews and Arians.Additionally, this law prohibited the Jews to lift the German flag, but in coherence withthe Zionist movement, they left them to lift the white and blue Jewish flag with David´sStar in the center. The law of citizenship of Reich cancelled the citizenship of the non-Arians and introduced a distinction against citizens and nationals. Only the citizen ofReich, class that excluded the Jews, had complete political rights. The debate that wasfollowed, about the half-Jews or mixed Jews clarifies a lot the attitude of Hitlerregarding the racial question. The Nazi Party intended to preserve the broader definition where a singlegrandparent defined somebody as a Jew, but the conservatives of the cupola wanted amore restrict definition. By surprise and consternation of the Party, Hitler decided bythe point of view of the conservatives, declaring that the solution to the mixed would bethe assimilation, after a few generations. Walter Gross, chief of the agency for racialpolicy of the Party, explained that the Führer didn´t adopt a tactical maneuver, butannounced an orientation of principles. Goebbels even tried that at least the half-Jews(two Jewish grandparents) were considered Jews, but Hitler didn´t break and the finaldecree considered them as Germans, excluding those married with a Jew. The approach of Hitler can be interpreted as a circumstantial regression aimingto keep the unity of the government and to calm down the international opinion, but thearguments of the Nazi leader point to another direction. They indicate that the centralpoint of view was not racial, but political. The cohesion of the German Volk would beaffected if a layer of the population divided their loyalty or had no security about theirnationality. The theme of blood purity, important to the racist mystics, was not trulyimportant. The hate against the Jews had a strategic value. The restrictive definitionhelped to concentrate the hate in a focused target. At this time, the Southern states of USA were in plentiful vigor of anti-mixinglaws based on the rule of one blood drop that defined as black any person with a blackancestor. Some historic researches sustain that the laws of Nuremberg were inspired inthe American model. However, an important difference should not be forgotten. Thesegregationist American laws excluded totally the figure of the mixed and in this sense,they were in accordance to the racial thinking of the XIX century. The decision of Hitler
  • 39. to recognize the half-Jew German admitted the provisory existence of mixed persons,thus signalizing a significant rupture with the traditional racism. The ambivalence of the Nazi regime about the Judaic problem persisted until thewar began, but the tension among the initiatives destined to expulse the Jews and thepolicy of conserving them as hostages peaked in 1938. With the annexation of Austria(Anschluss), followed by the conference of Munich, the international situation ofGermany changed deeply and the freedom of action for the Nazis was enhanced. InVienna, under the supervision of Reinhard Heydrich, chief of intelligence of SS, OttoEichmann created a system of massive Judaic emigration where the confiscation of thegoods of the rich Jews financed the migration of the poor ones. In Berlin, Goebbels triedto force the walk and in November, he deflagrated the great attack (pogrom) in theNight of the Cristal. The Night of the Cristal marked the beginning of the systematic expulsion of theJews of the Reich. Between 1933 and 1937, 130 thousands of Jews left German, onethird of them toward Palestine. In 1938 and 1939, 118 thousand left. In September of1938, Hitler communicated to the Poland ambassador that he wanted to articulate withthe countries of Central Europe a plan for transferring the Jews to a colony outsideEurope. The idea was repeated to many speakers of the countries under the sphere of theGerman influence in the first semester of 1939. In January 30 th, in front of theReichstag, Führer explained that international strategy and reaffirmed more clearly thanin previous opportunities, the premonitory threaten: if the Jews once more pulled thenations of Europe to another war, they would be annihilated as race.Victory in defeat The program of euthanasia T4 worked strongly during the first two years of war,but practically did not reach the Jews. In this phase, the best hypothesis of Hitler hadbeen frustrated by the British decision of keeping fighting, but the alliance with URSSensured a perspective of triumph to Germany. The division of Poland between Germansand Soviets and the quick victories of the German army in the Western front formed thescenery for the anti-Judaic policy of the Nazis. The war impeded, obviously, a sequence of the project of Hitler of general co-operation for removing the Jews from Europe, but at the same time, having conqueredPoland opened the paths to a creation of a Judaic territorial reserve outside the Reich.This idea apparently sprouted from Rosenberg, but was announced by Heydrich soonafter the beginning of the hostilities. The reserve would be in the south of Poland,between Kraków and Lublin, in a territory not annexed to the Reich, and would alsoreceive the Gypsies expulsed from Germany. This was, in the view of the Führer, atransitory solution, adapted to the international situation.
  • 40. The ambitious project of the reserve did not go further, because there were nologistic means to carry this out and there were many other military priorities and alsothe reinstallation of the Germans that were coming from the Soviet influence of theEastern Poland and the Baltic countries. Months later, with the fail of Himmler´s effortsto evacuate the Jews from the annexed territories, the Führer lost interest on the Polishsolution. However, the destiny of the Jews oscillated in the waves of the evolution of thewar. In the spring of 1940, after France was beat and when rumors were circulating thatthe British would firm the peace, Hitler reassumed the idea of expulsing the Jews fromall of Europe and transfer them to the French colony of Madagascar. Soon, however, itwas clear that the United Kingdom would keep fighting and the project was postponedto an unknown future. The expression „final solution‟, termed in the last months of1939, appears in Nazi documents about the Judaic question, but until the invasion ofURSS it meant „deportation‟. The invasion was imagined in the end of July 1940, decided definitely after there-election of Franklin Roosevelt in November, but deflagrated in June 1941. In thisinterval, it was persistent in the Nazi horizon the expedition of expulsing the Jews fromEurope, and Eichmann worked actively in the Madagascar Project, sending anti-Judaiccounselors to the countries under the German influence to discuss the question. The situation radically changed with the beginning of Barbarossa Operation, inJune 22th 1941, when the German forces advanced over URSS. In the back, they startedwith massive shooting and annihilation of hundreds of thousands of Soviet Jews. Theexterminating actions, conducted by the Einsatzgruppen (task force of SS), had as thegoal the communist employees, the Jews and everyone that could resist to the invasion.Hitler´s guidelines said to the commandos to stimulate pogroms of Jews by the localpopulations. The extreme violence in the invasion of URSS was destined in the formulaof Hitler to eliminate the driving layer Judaic-Bolchevik. It didn´t correspond to adecision of a systematic extermination of the Jews of Europe. The fatal decision came in early September, after the punch represented by thesignature of the Letter of the Atlantic, between Winston Churchill and FranklinRoosevelt at the August 11th at the same time Hitler knew about the defeat of theBabarossa Operation. The campaign in Russia was supposed to last a few weeks ormonths, but the enemy had greater military reservoirs and fought strongly. In August,the Führer evidenced to speakers that he lost the expectations of a rapid triumph. In thefollowing weeks, he even chewed the sour memories of 1918. The conclusion of thosechews conducted to the greater planned genocide of History. The Jews were condemnedto the gas chambers while the victory escaped from his hands, what converted theultimate objective into immediate priority. Germany could win or lose, but the Jewswould not survive to testify the results.
  • 41. The rejected race Less than four years after the opening of the Nazi fields of extermination and theplentiful recognition of the Holocaust, UN pronounced the Universal Declaration ofHuman Rights. The first article of this historical document starts with the celebsentence: „All the human beings are born free and in equal in dignity and rights‟. Thesecond article cites the word race, to affirm that „All the people are the titular of rightsand freedoms announced in this Declaration, without any distinction of any type, suchas race, color, sex, language, religion, political opinions or others, national or socialorigin, property, born or any other condition‟. Nineteen months later, in July 1950, Unesco broadcasted a declaration entitled„The Question of the Race‟. The declaration was reported by the British-Americananthropologist Ashley Montagu, born as Israel Ehrenberg from Jewish parents in thepoor suburb of East End in London, and also was assigned by another seven influentspecialists in the fields of anthropology, biology and psychology. Written under thebrutal impact of the fields of death, as remembered by one of the original assigners,Claude Lévi-Strauss, in the 60th anniversary of Unesco, the text starts as: „Theimportance that the problem of race acquired in modern world difficultly needs to beemphasized. Mankind shall never forget the injustices and the crimes that conferredtragic resonances of the word race‟. Some years before of the start of the War, political and scientific leaders hadsolicited an international conference to denounce the racism. However, in the name of apolicy of peace, the initiative was aborted. Unesco brought it back after the unbelievablehuman catastrophe produced by the union of extreme nationalism with racism. In effortsfor a political clarifying, the declaration characterized racism as a depraved and ignorantexpression of the spirit of caste, that is sustained by the belief in an inborn and absolutesuperiority of one human group arbitrarily defined over other groups also arbitrarilydefined and that instead of being based on scientific criteria is often kept in oppositionto the scientific method. The question of race is a document written by scientists. Denunciation of racismwas not fruit of any spectacular advance in the scientific knowledge over the theme ofrace. In the same way the belief in the race of the scientific racism predominant sincethe XIX century was supported by cultural attitudes, the denunciation of the post-warreflected much more the new political context than any sudden emergence of solidscientific proofs able to destroy old prejudices. The spectrum of Auschwitz flew over
  • 42. the world, imposing a revision with repercussions on both sides of the Atlantic. Aspointed out Stephen Jay Gould, in a comment about the position of science regardingthe theme of race: „some topics have an enormous social importance but at the sametime they have little trustable information. When the relation between empirical dataand social impact is low, a history of scientific attitudes can be a little bit more than amere registration of social changes. The historic of scientific views over race, forexample, reflects the social dynamics. This mirror continues to reflect in good times andin bad times, in periods of beliefs of equality and in the eras of exultant racism. Thebells of the dead of the old eugenism in USA rang more likely due to the singular use ofHitler of arguments that were accepted before regarding sterilization and racialpurification rather than advances in the genetic knowledge‟. At the moment the declaration of Unesco was written, Genetics had still notshown the nature literally superficial of the differences among the so-called races.Wisely, the specialists wrote that „the biological fact of race and the myth of race mustbe distinguished. For all the practical social proposals, race is less biologicalphenomena and more a social myth. The myth of race created an enormous human andsocial loss‟. Supported by the sciences, the specialists indicated that the human groups arenot distinguished by their intellectual abilities, that the genetic differences have noimpact in the interpretation of social and cultural differences among human groups andthat there was no scientific evidence showing any malefic effect of miscegenation. In its last paragraph, the declaration eulogized the ethics of universal fraternity,ensuring that this is sustained on the results given by the biological investigation. Theintention was to firm a definite obituary of the race. Few people at that moment couldimagine a triumphant return of race in the fields of the social and political speech…REVOLUTION IN SOWETO Pieter Willem Botha, PW or the Big Crocodile, governed South Africa between1978 and 1989 as Prime Minister and after as a President. In an interview, he explained:„Apartheid, as far as we know about it, existed in South Africa since the previouscenturies under the British domain. The colonial paternalism had a racial connotationand for some hundreds of years, the whites governed the blacks all over the world.South Africa inherited the colonial paternalism and as a consequence, the governmentof the blacks by the whites. The interview was carried out in 1986 and the situation should be interpreted inan international context of crescent diplomatic pressures against the regime he leaded.In the autumn of apartheid, which was completely abolished with the elections of 1994,
  • 43. the South African president searched for passing an erasure over the singularity of theracial Estate implanted almost four decades before an, to do that, placed the origins in afar away past. In this walk, he divided the responsibilities of the official system ofsegregation with the United Kingdom, the old colonial power that subordinated theBoers colonizers in the bloody War of the Boers (1899-1902). Boer is the Dutch wordthat describes rural persons. Historically, this word got related to the protestantcolonizers that came from Holland and that established in the south of Africa since thefoundation of the Colonia of Cape, by the VOC – Dutch company of the Western Indiesin 1652. PW had a clear political interest in placing the racial situation of this country inthe broader scenario of the European colonization of Africa. The United Nations hadmade several resolutions condemning apartheid in the international conferences againstracism of 1973 and 1983. South Africa already suffered cultural and sportive sanctionsand in the decade of 1980 suffered from the loss of international investments.Internationally, the government of the white minority received only the constructiveengagement from Margaret Thatcher of United Kingdom and Ronald Reagan fromUSA, who saw in South Africa an anticommunist guardian in the south of Africa, buteven this irregular and ambiguous support stopped with the end of the Cold War. The interpretation of PW was contrary to the historical narrative organizedsurrounding the singularity of the apartheid regime. According to that narrative, thepolitical regime was established in 1948 with the electoral victory of the National Party,the political organization of the Afrikaners over the United Party that represented theinterests of the population with British origin. The word Afrikaans refers to the group ofdescendents of the Boer colonizers and who speak Afrikaans, a dialect derived from theDutch of the XVII century. The Afrikaner power represented a deep deviation of thenorm of the British colonization of Africa and also expressed an extreme ethnicalnationalism, with clear Nazi inclinations. The chain of events that conducted the Afrikaners to power seems to sustain thecanonic narrative. The United Party, which governed the country from 1934 to 1948,was born from the fusion of the South African Party of Jan Smuts, the statesman whoincorporated the loops between South Africa and Great Britain, and a faction of theNational Party directed by the General James Barry Hertzog, one of the Afrikanerleaders in the War of the Boers. At the time of the British declaration of war to the NaziGermany, South Africa engaged into the war in the side of the British, while Hertzogconducted his political faction back to the National Party, which had survived under theultranationalist direction of Daniel François Malan. This reunited and anti-BritishNational Party implanted formally the apartheid regime. There are more evidences to support the idea of the South Africanexceptionality. In 1918, 4 years after the formation of the National Party of Hertzog, theYoung South Africa, soon renamed as the Broederbond Afrikaner (AfrikanerFraternity), appeared as a secret society, composed exclusively by men and of protestant
  • 44. religion, devoted to promote the supremacy of the descendents of the Boers. Later, JanSmuts classified it as a dangerous fascist cell, but when it was constituted, it lackedclear objectives and was seen by its first members as a cultural network destined topreserve the Boer traditions and the Afrikaans language in a world in a fast mutation. Broederbond was born in reaction to the humiliations imposed to the Afrikanersafter the British victory in the War of the Boers and to the policy of turning SouthAfrica similar to a British place conducted by the British governor Alfred Milner,especially in the old Boer colonies of Orange and Transvaal in the inland plateau ofSouth Africa. But this society was organized doctrinally around the romantic concept ofan Afrikaner Volk, an intellectual bridge that would connect many of its leaders to theNazi thinking. According to a declaration of Hertzog of 1935, Broederbond was thesubterranean face of the National Party and the National Party was merely the publicexpression of the Broederbond. Notwithstanding, almost all the members of the cabinetsof the government posterior to 1948 pertained to this secret Afrikaner society. Functionally, the legislation of the apartheid were idealized in 1947 inside of theSouth Africa Office of Racial Questions, a governmental agency infiltrated by membersof Broederbond and progressively implanted from the elections that conducted Malan tothe chief of the cabinet in the following year. Malan pertained to Broederbond as wellhis successors Johannes Stridjon, Hendrik Verwoed, John Voster and… PW! Thedirectors of Broederbond constituted the South African financial conglomerate AbsaGroupe and other detached South African companies in the fields of finances andproduction of military material were raised from the cupola of this secret society. The official system of apartheid took form in the same year UN wrote theUniversal Declaration of the Human Rights and two years before the celeb anti-racistdeclaration of Unesco. It is not difficult to tell the history of the South Africa ofapartheid as a narrative of a deviating event, literally reactionary. This version, that gotdominant, would place the diagnosis of the Great Crocodile Botha to the drawer of atrial to a late justification of a horrendous regime. But PW was neither a sophisticatedideologist nor a smart statesman. He spoke what he really thought and in his historicalevaluation there is part of the unease true.Apartheid as a norm The Cape was colonized initially by a few thousands of people from Holland,Germany and Scandinavia. In the majority they were Calvinists and two hundreds ofFrench Huguenot escapees. Together with the free colonizers, several slaves tookparticipation in the local economy and they came from other parts of Africa and evenMalaysia, but mostly they were native Khois, named as Hottentots. There was asignificant miscegenation between colons and slaves, from which resulted a mixed
  • 45. population, the so-called coloreds, who represent nowadays at least 9% of the 44millions of South Africans. Throughout the XVIII century the border of the Boer colonization moved to aNorthwest direction, in successive waves named as treks (journeys), promoting theoccupation of the fields by cattle breeders. The treks promoted the encounter of theBoers with the Bantu rural peoples of the interior. The Bantu resistance against theinvasion of the colons degenerated into the first Kaffir wars, in 1779 and 1789, soonbefore the invasion of Holland by the Napoleonic forces and of the end of the control ofthe Dutch company of the Western Indies over the colon in the far extreme southernAfrica. Kaffir was the name of a particular Bantu tribe, but it got used by the colonizersas a generic term. The sovereignty over the Cape colony passed formally to the British crown in1814, as a consequence of the treatises of the Congress of Vienna. In these transitionslay the roots of the political fragmentation of South Africa in distinct colonies. Thecollision between the British power and the Boer way of life was manifested as anopposition of English and Afrikaans languages and between the Anglican clerk and theDutch Protestant Church. But, mostly and more importantly, the tensions came from theBritish project of re-colonizing the country. With the finality of standardizing the tributes, the Colonial Ministry of Londonregulated the rights of property of lands and created reserves for the Bantus, restrictingthe possibilities of land expropriation from the natives. The crucial rupture occurredwith the general abolition of slavery in the British domains, by decision of theParliament in 1833. In Cape, around 35 thousands of slaves gained freedom and theirowners were indemnified in a total of 20 millions of pounds. The action of abolishmentwas the burst for the Great Trek, the journey that would occupy the place as thefoundation myth of the Afrikaner nation in South Africa. The precedent treks had formed a continuous carpet of colonies, connected to thecolonial basis of the Cape. In the Great Trek, between 1834 and 1838, thousands ofcolonizers departed in successive waves, with their cattle and oxcarts, followingreligious and military leaders and going to the high inland plateaus. In the spirit of thosecolonizers, the journeys remade the Biblical epopee of Exodus and signalized thepathways toward the Promised Land. The episode, an act of revolting against the futureand of a radical denial of modernity, molded for a long time the vision of world of theBoers. Isolating themselves from the evolutionary process, the colonizers refused atechnical and ideological environment in a rapid transformation and devoted themselvesto the adventure of reaffirming indefinitely their way of life and their traditional mentalmodels. Winning uphill steeps, the trekkers reached the lands covered by grass andsavannahs. Many of them crossed the Orange River and founded the Free Estate ofOrange with capital in Bloemfontein. Others went further, crossed the Vaal River andfounded the Transvaal, with capital in Pretoria, named to honor Andrés Pretorius, the
  • 46. Boer leader who commanded the extermination of more than 3 thousand Zulus in thebattle of Blood River in 1838. A third Boer flux tried to establish a republic in theoriental portion of Natal but the colonizers were repulsed by the British, receded andunited to Transvaal. The British recognized the autonomy of both Boer Estates, but in 1877 theydeclared the annexation of Transvaal. The act started the first Anglo-Boer war in whichthe colonizers, under the direction of Paul Kruger, the greatest Boer chief, imposedthemselves over the British troops. In their isolated republics, based on the Bible and tothe manners of the antecessors, the Boers completed a trajectory of Africanizing. Withtheir old leaders of long white beards, cattle, slaves and numerous families, theyconstituted a new tribe in the interior of austral Africa. The venerated Paul Krugerillustrates, in an exaggerated scale, the pattern of the Boer families. Along his life,among sons, grandsons and grand-grandsons, he had 156 descendants. The successive discoveries of diamonds in 1876 in the confluence of the riversOrange and Vaal, in an uncertain limit between the Cape and Orange, and of gold in1885 in Witwatersrand (or simply Rand) close in the south of Pretoria in Transvaal,disrupted the geopolitical equilibrium in South Africa. The run for diamonds make thecity of Kimberley grow from nothing, surrounded by nuclei of black immigrants thatworked to the white diggers. A run for gold even greater left thousands of Uitlanders(foreigners in the expression of the Boers of Pretoria) to Rand, where in the desolatingplateau was born the city of Johannesburg, nowadays the greatest commercial, financialand demographic center of South Africa. The exploitation of diamonds soon fell in the monopoly of De Beers, companycreated by the celeb British imperialist Cecil John Rhodes, who diversified his businessand under the approval of the Colonial Ministry, assumed concessions for railways andtelegraphs. De Beers expanded to the gold mines of Rand, where it faced theconcurrence of the German businessman Ernest Oppenheimer, who ended to assume amajor position and found in 1917, the giant Anglo-American corporation, the symbol ofthe mining capitalism of South Africa. The War of the Boers started from a series of incidents between Kruger,representative of the Boer power in Transvaal, and Rhodes, the symbol of the newmining capitalism. The first, attached to his utopia of an isolated rural republic, deniedpolitical rights to the Uitlanders, strongly taxed the mines and transports. The secondturned into the prime-minister of the Cape, wanted to eliminate the barrier to businessrepresented by the Boer political entities. The conflicts, of a singular violence, startedwith quick triumphs of the forces of Kruger and made necessary that 400 thousandBritish soldiers took part in the war, transferred even from Canada and Australia. In1900, the British got imposed and Kruger went to Europe to search for alliances. Hewould never return to his country and when he died, in Switzerland in 1904, he wasburied with honors of Estate in Pretoria. In 1902, Rhodes, his nemesis, died in Cape
  • 47. and, according to an express desire, was buried in the granite peaks of the Matoposhills, in the so-called South Rhodesia (nowadays Zimbabwe). The Boers kept a war of guerrillas under the leadership of men such as LouisBotha and Smuts, who later promoted the conciliation of the Afrikaners with the UnitedKingdom. The tenacious resistance was overcome by the combination of use of force,firing farms, massive lockdowns of Boers in fields of concentration and of persuasionsuch as massive distribution of British citizenship to all colonizers and guarantees ofautonomy of the South African Union inside the British Empire. In the area of diamonds of Kimberley, since the beginning, a system of visasimpeded the independent access of blacks to the fields of fortune. In Rand, in scalebigger than in Kimberley, the African natives were recruited to work in the mines andconstituted in the periphery of Johannesburg the vast agglomeration of Soweto. Thename Soweto is the abbreviation of South Western Townships, indicating the blackghettos that constituted around the white city of Johannesburg. In 1983, the whiteminers protested against the concurrence with native workers, and the Boer governmentof Transvaal imposed a norm of color, limiting the hiring of blacks by the conglomerateof Rhodes. The rigid separation between whites and natives certainly hindered thebusiness, but was certainly not a novelty in the British colonial Africa. The historiography of the European imperialism in Africa distinguished betweenthe assimilation, a mark of the catholic Portuguese colonization, and the segregation, amark of the protestant British colonization. In an inspired essay, the anthropologistPeter Fry observed that such distinctions should never be interpreted as a contrast ofimmutable and fixed attitudes, as he registered the significant miscegenation betweenprotestant colonizers and natives of the Cape and signalized that both colonial powersinvocated either one or another principle, in different situations. As he points out: „Onlyin the end of the XIX century the segregation became the dogma of the British colonialgovernments. In the same period, Portugal kept its compromise with the assimilation,but amended it with the informal operation of the racial prejudice, the institute of theforced labor and the partial lockdown of the native people in circumscriptions,equivalent to reserves”. Along his analysis, Fry showed that the historic approach was impregnated bythe classic anti-Portuguese inclination of the British. But, foremost, evidenced thefollowing paradox: the civilizing mission of Africa, such as claimed by the British,associated the denouncement of slavery by the underdog of miscegenation. It is not byoccasion that different persons such as the first minister Palmerston, the explorer DavigLivingstone and the colonial administrator Frederick Lugard revealed, between thesecond half of the XIX century and the beginning of the XX century, the same feelingof moral superiority regarding the Portuguese colonizers and used expressions such as„moral delinquency‟ and „lewdness‟ to refer to miscegenation in Mozambique. In the British South Africa, the principle of segregation was imposedprogressively after the second half of the XIX century. In the middle of the century, as
  • 48. occurred in other parts of the British colonial system, parliaments were created in Capeand in Natal. In them, contrary to the Boer´s parliaments, blacks could vote and beelected. However, the rules for educational and economical qualification impeded in thereality the presence of colored or Bantu representatives. Anyway, in the municipalparliament of Cape, the doctor Abdullah Abdurahman, leader of the African PoliticalOrganization, was a representative. APO was the first non-white party of South Africa.It was created in 1902 and its affiliated members were exclusively mixed persons fromthe Cape. Such rules, which varied locally, were standardized by promulgated laws inthe decade of 1890. In 1905, a law delimitated the lands reserved to the Bantus andcreated the system of pass (pass laws) that restricted the rights of circulating of thenatives. In the following year, the ethnical register and the internal passport for theAsiatic persons of Natal were implanted. The young lawyer Mahatma Gandhi, who migrated to Natal in 1893 and stoodthere until 1915, started his long career as an activist defending the political rights of theIndian community of his colony. He founded the Indian Congress of Natal andorganized protests against the ethnical register of the Asiatic. When a war between thecolonial administration and the native Zulus of Natal began in 1906, Gandhi negotiatedwith Smuts the incorporation of an Indian troop to the British armed forces. The northof his policy was to achieve the statute of British citizens with plentiful rights to theIndians, so that ethnical community would not be confounded with the Kaffirs. One decade before assuming the government of South Africa, Smutspronounced, in Oxford, several speeches in the memory of Rhodes. In theseconferences, this guy, who was a symbol of the conciliation between British andAfrikaners, criticized, from his point of view, the British attitudes that prevailed inAfrica during most of the part of the XIX century. During a lot of time, under the influxof the principles of French Revolution, it was drawn a mission of transforming theprimitive Africans in good Europeans. This goal offered the natives an appearance ofequality with the whites from which they got no use and also destroyed the basis of theAfrican systems that were their most important good. The true civilization mission,which was already being plentifully applied, consisted in preserving the Africantraditions and institutions, keeping them away from the European ones. The BritishEmpire does not symbolize the assimilation of the peoples to a same type, does notstandardize anything, but rather promotes the development of the conquered peoplesaccording to their own specific wishes. The Asiatic community of South Africaoriginated from immigrant Indian workers in the British Indies to cultivate sugarcane inNatal since 1843. Much time before the formal implantation of the apartheid, Smuts wereexplicitly defending the institutional segregation and the territorial segregation. In 1909,a constitutional convention with British and Afrikaners healed the scars of the War onBoers and established the basis for the unification of the colonies of the Cape, Natal,Transvaal and Orange in the South African Union. The Law of South Africa, raisedfrom that convention, created a parliament with two chambers located in Cape Town
  • 49. and determined that senators and deputies would be considered as British subjects ofEuropean ascendance and defined the electorate in racial basis. As a concession to amore liberal past, the constitutional law gave the rights of voting to the colored of theCape and to the scarce Asiatic and Bantus that had this right before the unification ofthe colonies. The building of segregation grew relentless. In 1913, the Law of the Lands ofthe Natives reserved earths to each racial community, giving to the Bantus 8% of thetotal of earths and allowing the expulsion of a million farmers. In 1918 and 1923, twolaws of residential zoning delimitated racial ghettos (townships) in the white cities. In1926, the Law of Barrier of Color interdicted the hiring of non-whites to the qualifiedjobs in mines and industries. In 1936, the Law of Representation of Blacks cancelledimmediately the rights of voting of the blacks and created a separated representation forthe colored of the Cape. After ten years, almost before the electoral victory of theNational Party, the cabinet of Smuts approved the Law of Lands of Asiatic thatprohibited selling lands for Indians.The norm as an exception The original constitution of Transvaal, of 1858, said that it was out of cogitationthe equality between whites and non-whites both in Church and in Estate. The Boershad no doubts regarding the principle of racial separation, in a time when the Britishoscillated between the conflicting ideas of the equality among humans and thepermanent differences among races. However, as soon as they consolidated their controlover South Africa, the British thought very similarly to the Boers regarding the questionof race. The segregationist law anterior to 1948 derived partially from the necessity ofconciliating the colonial administration and the Afrikaners. There was not anunconditional rendition at the end of the War on Boers, but an ambiguous agreementthat only allowed the unification of the colonies after years and years of complicatednegotiations. The governor Milner exposed with disgust in 1905 the receipt to form theSouth African Union: „it is only needed to sacrifice the niggers and the game becomeseasy‟. The niggers (blacks) were sacrificed step by step in the altar of the Britishgeopolitics. But it was not difficult to sacrifice them in those times of glory andscientific racism, of fusion of paradigms of nationalism and race and the internationalenthusiasm for eugenism. In the South Africa of the mining capitalism, the thematic of race crossed sincethe beginning with the one of the rights of the workers. Before the War on Boers, DeBeers of Rhodes wanted the freedom to hire blacks to reduce the costs of its deep minesand since those times the white workers resisted to this strategy. The explosive growth
  • 50. of the mining sector and of industry, together with the urbanization of the Afrikaners,amplified the tensions. When the First World War ended, the businessmen of theMining Chamber reacted to the inevitable fall of gold, increasing the recruitment ofblacks. The initiative deflagrated a wild strike movement in Rand that degenerated intofield battles between the white workers and the governmental forces. More than 250strikers were killed and the leaders of the Red Revolution were hung. The idea of therevolted, based on the Communist Manifest of 1848, was: „workers from all over theworld unite for a white South Africa”. The young South African Communist Party,founded in the year before, occupied key positions in the leadership of the movement.The South African communists defended the limitation of hiring blacks until 1924. Inthat year, following an order from the International Communist, they rebuilt theirprogram defending South Africa as nation to be pertaining to the natives, Africanizingthe party. Soon after that, they changed position and defended a nation for all SouthAfricans and a government based on the wishes of the majority. The Red Revolution signalized the beginning of the inflexion that would getconcluded in 1948. Two years after the bloody riots in Rand, Smuts lost the elections toHertzog. The new government reflected both the nationalism of Broederbond and theinterests of the white workers and the poor Afrikaners of the cities. The Law of ColorBarrier and the creation of state industries destined to guarantee employment for thewhites put in practice the wishes of the revolted people of 1922. The world warimploded completely the coalition between the pro-British elite of Cape and theAfrikaners of Pretoria. Some leaders of the National Party expressed openly theirsupport to Hitler and the Ossewabrandwag (OB), a clandestine group of extreme right,promoted sabotage acts against the government of Smuts. The young John Vorster, whowould become prime minister after one quarter of century was a militant of OB and dueto sabotage acts were put into jail in the province of Orange. In the canonic narrative that was established when the apartheid regimestruggled the international isolation, the National Party victorious in 1948 is shown suchas an almost-Nazi political draft and the white South Africa as a pathologic deviationremnant from the Germany of Hitler. Such interpretation hides the most important: thecoalition that implanted apartheid was not a direct interpretation of the romantic elite ofBroederbond of Transvaal, buy mainly from thinkers from the Cape, influenced by thepredominant racial thinking in the Western and organized around the leadership ofMalan. The persistent impact of Broederbond in the center of the South African power issomething well documented, but the secret organization worked as a more or less fluidnetwork of ideas and business. Malan belonged to it, as much part of the Afrikanerpolitical elite, but his crucial connections were found in the Cape. The decisive thinkerson the formulation of the plan of the apartheid, inspired in the colonial paternalism ofthe missionaries of the Dutch Reformed Church and on the system of segregation of thesouth of USA, imagined it as a modernization of the already existent segregation lawsof South Africa. These intellectual founders of apartheid, N.P. van Wyk Louw and
  • 51. G.B.A. Gerdender, delineated in the decade of 1930 the outlines of the general programof racial separation conducted in the post-war period. Gerdener wrote a biography ofSarel Cilliers, preacher and companion of Pretorius in the Battle of Blood River. Cillierswould have sworn in honor of the battle that if God conceded the victory to the Boers,they would construct a church and that day, 16th December, would be forever and evercelebrated as a religious holiday. The date was not celebrated in almost all the XIXcentury. The biography of Gerdener, published in 1919, seems to have a decisive paperin the diffusion and consolidation of the Afrikaner holiday of the Day of Swearing. Wyk Louw, academic and poet, had as the greatest authority in Afrikanerliterature, tried to conciliate the idea of apartheid with the principles of liberalism. Hesaw in South Africa a civilizing bridge between Europe and Africa and preached theadaptation of the liberal thinking to the South African peculiar conditions. Gerdener, ahistory researcher on the Dutch missions of the University of Stellenbosch, in Cape,narrated the epopee of the Boers in order to show the separation of the races as acondition for keeping both the freedom of the whites and the culture of the natives. Bothof them would criticize the cruel traces of the apartheid that they interpreted asdeviations of a benign norm. The National Party of Malan had 402 thousand votes in the elections of 1948,while the United Party of Smuts had 524 thousand votes. However, the at the timepresent district system amplified artificially the representation of the rural areas, so theNational Party got 70 chairs and the United Party, 65 in a parliament made of 150representatives. Under the cabinets of Malan (1948-1954), Strijdom (1954-1958) andVerwoerd (1958-1966), the Afrikaner party established the so-called small apartheid. In1961, stimulated by the British policy of concession of independence to its Africancolonies, Verwoerd ruptured the loops with the British Community and proclaimed theSouth African Republic. The juridical building of apartheid was grown over the Law of Registration ofthe Population of 1950, which classified the South Africans based on racial criteria. Thelaw defined the four great racial groups: whites, blacks, mixed (colored) and asiatics.Also, it divided the blacks into linguistic groups (Nguni, Sotho, Venda, Shangaan-Tsonga and Ndebele) from which emanated nine ethnic groups: Zulu, Xhosa, Swazi,Tsonga, Venda, Tswana, Northern Sotho, Southern Soto and Ndebele. The classification operation was supposedly based on ethnology, but could neverhide its fragilities. Some Bantu groups were distinguished by a past of military conflicts,while others represented only small language differences related to the geographicaldistance. Anyway, the sapient classifiers had not a single drop of shy to invent theNdebele ethnical group, even Ndebele being simply a word of the Sotho language torefer to the Zulus. Ethnological suppositions served to classify the blacks in ethnical groups, buthad absolutely no utility in the case of the mixed persons of the Cape, from variableorigins and who spoke English, Afrikaans or both. To distinguish them from blacks and
  • 52. whites, they invented such embarrassing practical tests, such as the test of the comb,where the agent of the census determined the degree of curliness of the hairs. Naturally,as a result of this test, members of the same family were labeled in different ethnicalgroups. Submitted to the classification of the apartheid, the colored developed a feelingof ethnical cohesion that hided the cultural diversity of the mixed of the Cape. Thehistory of segregation put them in an intermediary position between the Bantus and thewhites. The Afrikaner Estate curiously defined them as a nation in formation.Throughout time, the colored political leaderships oscillated between the trial to bedistinguished from the blacks (so they could preserve some privileges) and the adhesionto a project of a South Africa democratic and non-racial. The small apartheid started to be settled over the Law of Group Areas, voted in1950 and emended in 1966, which consolidated the urban residential segregation. Thelegal document was complemented by the Law of the Natives of 1952 that regulated theold internal system of pass laws. The verification of the passports by the policeprovoked a rising number of detentions for the regulation of the passing books. In someyears, 600 thousand transgressors were arrested. The segregation system got completein 1959, by the Law of Bantu Self-Government, anchored in the old Law of the Landsof Native, which consolidated the tribal reserves. According to this law, these reserveswould give to the Bantu ethnical groups the means to develop autonomous manners ofpolitical organization, restoring their identities and cultures. The legislation of self-government had its roots in the Law of Bantu Authorities of 1951 that allowed thecreation of traditional tribe authorities in the reserves. The Department of Native Issues,an essential agency of the building of apartheid, was tasked to supervise the tribalchiefs. Side by side to the main legislation, several laws of the stingy apartheid werecreated and erroneously taken as less significant. The Law of Prohibition of MixedMarriage of 1949 and the Law of Immorality in the following law, directly inspired inthe anti-miscegenation laws of the south of USA, prohibited the unions and the sexualrelations between whites and non-whites. The Afrikaners wanted to preserve the purityof their white nation, avoiding the reproduction of the mixing that generated the coloredof Cape. The stingy apartheid closed its circle in 1953, with the Laws of SeparatedPublic Services, which segregated the libraries, restaurants, parks, beaches, transportsand public restrooms and the Law of Bantu Education that racially separated thesystems of education in all the levels and defined distinct curricula to the natives. The Law for Registration of the Population, basement of apartheid, waspromulgated in the year Unesco broadcasted its declaration over race. The anti-mixinglaws of South Africa came in the same year when California finally abolished its ownanti-mixing law and an American judge related it to the Mein Kampf of Hitler. Spitethis, throughout the first decade of apartheid, South Africa suffered only scatteredcriticisms from UN.
  • 53. The international relationships against apartheid took body after the Massacre ofSharpeville of 1960, when the South African police opened fire against black protestorsagainst the pass laws that concomitantly inspired the fights for civil rights of USA. Thenorm that was the segregation finally converted into a deviation to the eyes of the West.South Africa became an exception and the apartheid system was seen as a singularityand an aberration. In this compass, the proud Afrikaner leaders who saw themselves as alegitimated integrants of the civilized nations started to be pointed out, for their surprise,as heirs of Nazism.Afro-Americans Facing the international isolation, the governments of Vorster (1966-1978) andthe following Crocodile Botha expanded the engineer of the social segregation toward adaring target. Instead of an Estate of a white minority, they tried to transform SouthAfrica into an Estate of white majority, through juridical suppression of the presence ofblack South Africans. This project (that ended failing) was named as the GreatApartheid. The vertex of the project established with the laws of Citizenship of the BantuNations of 1970 and of the Constitution of the Bantu Countries of 1971, whichdelimitated the way to the creation of ethnical Estates (Bantustans) in the lands reservedto the different native groups. Before, with the law for the Bantu Self-Government,Verwoerd was satisfied in creating ethnical territories covered by a caricature ofautonomy in which tribal institutions of power would work. Now, Vorster opened thecurtains to the fabrication of sovereign ethnical micro-estates that would gravitate assatellites in the orbit of a triumphant white South Africa. In the arrival point, the apartheid regime suppressed the nationality of the blackswho would compulsorily transformed into citizens of „their‟ ethnical entities. With this,it would be viable to conciliate, once and for all, the inclusion of the blacks in the workmarket with their exclusion of the political life of the white Estate. In the condition offoreigners, the natives could work but never think on getting the statute of electors. According to the law of 1971, the tribal reserves were transformed into Bantucountries, each one designated to a specific ethnical group, except the Xhosas who wereplaced in Bantustans separated from Transkei and Ciskei. Seducing tribal leaders, fourBantustans (Transkei, Bophutatswana, Venda and Ciskei) were declared independentbetween 1976 and 1981, but none of them got international recognition. The others wereadministrated as semi-autonomous territories by tribal leaders. The efforts of apartheid involved crucially the fabrication of ethnical nations. Inthe same manner the Afrikaner intellectuals narrated the history of the Boers they
  • 54. produced academic narratives about the ethnical native groups defined by the racialEstate. Historians, anthropologists and linguists made efforts to describe singularcultures of the natives, starting from the romantic paradigm that culture is an essentialpass, an attribute almost biological of groups regularly delimitated. The census and themuseum carried out parallel functions in the policy of racial separation in South Africa.The first fixated in statistics the demographic presence of the ethnicities, the secondexposed the material evidences of the singularity of each one of them. The Kaffrarian Museum, actual Amathole Museum, was named in reference tothe land of coffee and was abandoned in 1999. This museum was founded in KingWilliams Town in 1884 and figured as the most important institution on the ethnologyof the South Africa of the apartheid. Its collections of handcrafts and ethnicaldocuments reveal much more about the way of thinking of the white researches than ofthe cultures and their native object of study. The cult to the ethnical traditions wasdisseminated by the successive Afrikaner governments. The law of Bantu Educationwas destined not only to segregate the white institutions of education but also tostimulate the use of the native languages by the different ethnical groups. As aconsequence of this law, the University of Fort Hare, founded in 1916 in Western Capeas a liberal institution for the superior education of the blacks, was subordinated to theethnical paradigm and transformed into a university of the Bantustans. Before that,figures such as Nelson Mandela and Thabo Mbeki, leaders of the anti-apartheidmovement, passed in the benches of Fort Hare, as well as the Zulu chief MangosuthuButhelezi and Robert Mugabe, who directed the fight against the white minority ofSouth Rhodesia and became the dictator of Zimbabwe. In the beginning of the decade of1960, they edited laws for the education of the colored and of the Indians that createdseparated school systems for these groups. Inside the Bantustans, under the influx of Pretoria, a policy of re-tribalizationopened the ways for a tireless invention of traditions. Ciskei was an extreme example ofthe strategies of production of false ethnicities. In the independent Bantustan,anthropologists serving to the Department for Native Issues judged the qualification ofthe candidates of local tribal chiefs based on genealogic studies. The candidates mustdemonstrate that they pertained to clan lineages from the old Xhosa chiefs. Typicallyhundreds of candidates could demonstrate the adequate qualifications, such a way theresult depended on the network of political relationship carried out with the bureaucratsand anthropologists. Apartheid became exhausted because the black majority did not incorporate theethnical narrative articulated by the Estate. In spite of the immense efforts of police andadministration, the attraction exerted by the cities sabotaged continuously the territorialsegregation. In the government of Verwoerd, a policy of industrial decentralizationconducted by fire and iron against the business logic provoked a wave of transference ofindustries to the limits of the tribal reserves. In the decade of 1970, with the GreatApartheid, forced transferences pushed out nothing less than 1.2 million of blacks to theBantustans that reached to have 11 millions of habitants, around 55% of the total of
  • 55. Bantus. Even with this, the deep tendencies of the market economy pointed out towardintegration, not segregation. The signs of the crisis walked under the superficial apparent calm. In theBantustans, a confusing tribal politics predominated, but even in those ethnical reservesmany influences infiltrated from the urban world, of which many migrant workersparticipated. In the townships, mainly in the mining area of Rand, English was thecommon language of the blacks and since the first half of the XX century the Americanjazz was the predominant musical expression. An invisible and silent avalancheprojected against the Afrikaner Estate. The theme of language catalyzed the Revolution in Soweto, which signalized theprolonged crisis of the apartheid. The law for the Bantu Education reduced the resourcesfor the black segregated schools and the government gave priority to the construction ofschools in the Bantustans. The tensions got higher with a regulation of 1974 thatamplified the use of Afrikaans in the Bantu educational system. According to this newregulation, English would be used in Sciences, Afrikaans would be the language inMath and Social Studies and the native idioms would work as languages for Music andReligion. Anti-apartheid activists such as the bishop Desmond Tutu as well as thesyndicate of the Bantu teachers protested saying that Afrikaans was the language ofoppression. In April 1976, high school students from a township declared strike andwere followed by other schools and formed a committee on action. The revolution started in the public manifestation of 16th June. The pacificprotest degenerated into confrontation when police used dogs and tear-jerking gasbombs. The students re-acted throwing stones. Police opened fire. In a complete day ofviolence, 23 persons died. In the following day, the Protestants took the streets and werereceived by a police force armed with automatic rifles, guns, tanks and helicopters. Thetotal of dead people reached 500 persons. Soon after, revolts in Cape Town and PortElizabeth appeared. Black workers declared strikes of protest and a march of 300 whitestudents indignant with the repression took part in the streets of Johannesburg. The young fellows won. The norms about teaching in Afrikaans were cancelledand the spark of the popular fight against apartheid had spread out. But, foremost, apolitical message was given: the urban blacks of South Africa said they didn´t want tobe Xhosas, Zulus, Tswanas, Sothos or Tsongas, but simply South Africans. Not onlythis: claiming to learn English, they were defining their identity with the relationshipsthey had with the external world, outside the limits of Africa. Those students of Soweto,who heard jazz and rock and whose parents had seen the marches for the civil rights ofMartin Luther King defined themselves, in the deep, as afro-Americans.
  • 56. The sense of citizenship The National African Congress was born in 1912 uniting political activists,religious leaders and tribal chiefs to defend the rights of the blacks of South Africa. Theorganization got a new impulse with the formation of the Youth League in 1944 andmainly with the inauguration in 1952 of the Campaign of Challenge, a movement ofpacific resistance against the unfair laws of apartheid. But the program was delineatedby the Letter of Freedom, approved in a football field around Johannesburg in 1955 andthat started with the words: „we, the people of South Africa‟ and proclaimed: „SouthAfrica pertains to all who lives here, blacks and whites, and government can claimlegitimate authority unless it is based in the wishes of all the people‟. Inspired in the paradigm of equality, the program defined the citizenshipreferring to the territory, not in race or ethnic group. The people of South Africa wereblacks and whites equally together and siblings. In 1961, without the consent of thepresident Albert Luthuli, a traditional but combative Zulu chief, the NAC formed amilitary aisle, Umkhonto we Sizwe (arrow of nation) that conducted acts of sabotageand attacks against targets of the regime. Soon later, the regime localized and arrestedNelson Mandela, the new NAC´s president. In the Judgment of Rivonia in 1964, thepersecutors characterized the Letter of Freedom as a Marxist document and Mandelawas sentenced to perpetual prison. The true goal of the program of NAC – a united Estate, democratic and non-racial – provoked the first significant dissidence in the black coalition anti-apartheid. In1959, under the leadership of Robert Sobukwe, old member of the Young League ofNAC, formed the Pan-Africanist Congress. Influenced by the Ghanese Kwame and theKenyan Jomo Kenyatta, Sobuke defended the geopolitical unity of Africa and the ideathat the continent belonged to the blacks. He did not accept the non-racial principles ofthe Letter of Freedom and deplored the collaboration between NAC and the whites ofthe South African Communist Party. Anticipating a planned campaign of NAC, PAC directed the protest thatdegenerated into the Massacre of Sharpeville and as a consequence into the officialbanishment of the two organizations. Sobuke was sentenced to prison in Robben Islandand was kept in a solitary for 8 years. Renamed as the Azanian Pan-AfricanistCongress, PAC created an army that never carried out an effective guerilla. Azania,word of uncertain and old origin, was the name proposed by Nkrumah to substituteSouth Africa and baptize the future black nation. In the political emptiness produced by the repression of NAC and PAC, theMovement for the Black Consciouness (MBC) emerged. The movement sprouted frominside of the exclusively black Organization of the South African Students, founded bythe medical student Steve Biko in 1968. Soon after, he originated a national politicchain, the Black People Convention (BPC). Biko defended the Pan-Africanism of
  • 57. Nkrumah and Sobuke, but was involved by the anti-colonialist philosophers FrantzFanon, Aimé Césaire and Léopold Senghor. Also, his activism was influenced by theAmerican black nationalism of Malcom X and the Black Panthers Party, constituted twoyears before the foundation of Saso. Black man, you´re by your own: the phrase of BCM had a clear racial sense, butthe theme of the race appears weaker than in PAC or the American black movement.The conception of blackness gained a translation in the thinking of Biko as a fight fordignity and for the consciousness of the blacks: the personal freedom should walktogether with the political freedom. BCM and PAC rejected the non-racialism of NCA,but defined as blacks all of the non-white South Africans. The definition was destined,tactically, to make coalitions with the colored of Cape and the Indians of Natal, but hada deeper meaning. The negative term non-whites should be abolished, as it implicated inconverting the whites in a general reference of identities. In its place, the word blackswould designate not a race, but an oppressive condition shared by the majority of SouthAfricans. Biko approached to the political fight under a flexible and pragmaticperspective. He didn´t believe in the efficacy of guerilla as prescribed by PAC, and usedthe pacific methods of resistance of Gandhi. His movement was organized ondecentralized basis and stimulated the appearance of local leaderships. BCM was themain political force in the articulation of the Revolt of Soweto, but Biko didn´tparticipate personally form the movement, since he was forbidden to speak in publicand submitted to restrictions of circulation. Soweto sealed the destiny of Biko. In 1977, the leader of BCM was arrested andtortured until he died in the floor of a prison hospital in Pretoria, just 30 year-old. AfterSoweto, all the organizations linked to BCM were banned and the majority of theactivists went to NCA that again got stronger. The political legacy of Biko originatedthe Azania People Organization (Azapo), constituted in 1978 from Saso. In the lastdecade of apartheid, Azapo tried to conciliate the idea of black consciousness withMarxism and got involved in bloody underground fights with NCA. At the end point, the fight against the Afrikaner Estate was polarized betweenthe United Democratic Front, a broad coalition anti-apartheid formed in 1983 by thereverend Allan Boesak and closely linked to NCA. UDF adopted the Letter of Freedomand attracted the support of social organizations, syndicates and personalities from allover the country. In a situation of a strong retrocession of the Black Nationalism andintensive repression to its organizations, the aim of a united non-racial Estate foundopposition only the local Zulu political elite. The sense of cohesion of the Zulus was consolidated only in the beginning of theXIX century, with the formation of a power empire in the region of Natal, centralizedby the authority of the king Shaka. The subsequent conflicts against the Boers, thetragic battle of Blood River and the Anglo-Zulu war of 1879 destroyed the sovereign ofthe empire and reinforced an ethnical identity that is nourished by a narrative of blood
  • 58. and honor. In the white South Africa, the majority of the Zulus stood in the vast reserveBantu of KwaZulu that would be converted in an autonomous Bantustan. Gatsha Mangosuthu Buthelezi was born in 1928 in the Zulu royal clan, studiedin Fort Hare and took part of the Young League of NCA. Oscillating between amoderate opposition to the white regime and a pragmatic ethnical policy, he waspointed out as chief of KwaZulu in 1970, suffered tireless accusations of collaboratingto the whites but refused the offer of Pretoria of the concession of independency to theBantustan and kept loyalty in defending Mandela. The Inkhata Party of Freedom,founded by Buthelezi in 1975 on the basis of an old Zulu cultural organization rupturedwith NCA 5 years later due to the opposition of Buthelezi to the armed resistance tactic. In the years of 1980 the militias of NCA and Inkhata fought several times,conducting campaigns of murders and intimidation. Fraternal friend of HarryOppenheimer, son and heir of the founder of Anglo-American Corporation, the Zuluchief was seen by the Afrikaners as an instrument of the English-speaking SouthAfricans and, effectively, he had a diversified network with businessmen from Nataland Cape. However, as Anthony Sampson said, Buthelezi admired the Afrikaners andsaw in the Boer tribe a reflected image of the Zulus. Inkatha was considered as tribalist by NCA and worked as an ethnical partycontrolled by the government apparatus of KwaZulu, although it was open to theaffiliation of any person. His persecutors accused it to promote a decentralized SouthAfrica, composed by ethnical autonomous entities, which would be simply a re-configuration of the Great Apartheid. The accusation, an element of the faction fights ofthe autumn of apartheid, has no documental supports. Buthelezi and his party invocatedthe singular identity and culture of the Zulu nation not aiming to break the country intoethnical pieces but to negotiate the place that would be occupied by the regional Zuluelite in the post-apartheid scenario. The efforts of Buthelezi reached a significant success. The constitution of 1966defined South Africa as a united Estate, but weakened the centralization of power byconceding a significant degree of autonomy to the provinces. In the post-apartheidelections of the province of KwaZulu-Natal, where Zulu is the mother language of 80%of the population, Inkhata got consolidated as the second big party, few before NCA.The confusion of races Frederik Willem de Klerk was elected leader of the National Party in February1989 and assumed the presidency of South Africa some months later, when the BigCrocodile suffered a heart attack and in Europe the great manifestations put down theBerlin wall and the communist regimes of the Soviet countries. He was born in a familyof Afrikaner politicians of Johannesburg and had a long carrier in the parliament and
  • 59. was minister of Botha, always exhibiting perfectly conservative credentials. Hisconversion started only at the time he became the leader of the directing party, when hepronounced a surprising speech proposing negotiations with NAC for the edification ofa South Africa free from racism. The reforms conducted by De Klerk began by freeing Nelson Mandelaculminated in multi-racial elections in 1994 and the end of apartheid. But the signs thatan era ended came before, in 1986, when the Dutch Reformed Church, the main columnof the segregation regime and that reunited two fifths of the white South Africans,opened to people from all the races and adopted a document that defined the racism as asin that no one could defend nor practice. At that moment, many people thought that theapartheid was in a terminal crisis, but only a few persons foresaw a pacific end of a soold and tangled regime of the history and institutions of South Africa. Margaret Thatcher and the British conservatives resisted to follow theinternational sanctions against apartheid and did not hide their firm conviction that theimplantation of a regime of the majority would degenerate into a dictatorship a massivebreakout of the whites of South Africa. Gloomily, respected analysts prophesiedworsening of ethnical conflicts between CAN and Inkhata, as well as among thedifferent ethnical groups divided by the apartheid laws. Outside segregation, therewould be only the alternative of a civil war – this was a generalized opinion before thenegotiated collapse of the Afrikaner Estate. The prophets made a mistake. They could not evaluate the repercussions of theeconomic and social modernization of South Africa. Apartheid was able to distort andretard, but not reverse, the process of urbanization of the black people of South Africa.In 1978, only one fifth of the urbanized blacks had parents or kids in the Bantustans andhalf of them had been born in the white urban areas reserved to the whites. In 1985,from 25 millions of blacks, 10 millions lived in the townships of the white cities. InSoweto, 95% of the families lived in the township for more than three decades and evenin a mining city such as Kimberley the proportion of temporary migrants had fallenmore than 85% in 1970 to close to 35%. The integrative logic of the capitalist economyproduced an identity pot where the ethnical frontiers, so carefully described in law, gotdissolved. The sharp racial frontiers also suffered the impacts of modernization. Since thedecade of 1970 the syndicates of black workers of mines and industries had modernizedthemselves. The Congress of South African Syndicates (Cosatu), created in 1985 byNCA and the communists, had one quarter of white employees in their regionalsecretaries and so reflected the emergence of a multi-racial proletariat. In that year, theblacks represented 32% of the qualified workers and more than 40% of the universitystudents were black. A black medium class already lived illegally in some of the whitesuburbs of Johannesburg. BMW opened a store in Soweto and a black colonization ofthe commercial centers of Johannesburg and Cape Town took place.
  • 60. At the same time small groups of black medium class lived in the white urbanareas, black favelas were formed outside the townships. These illegal invasions startedin Cape Town, there the Crossroads favela appeared in 1975 and successive removalswere unable to prevent it to grow. Ten years after, when the habitants conquered theright of permanence, there were illegal favelas in Pretoria, Johannesburg, Durban andPort Elizabeth. The residential segregation of the cities got down, slowly butirreversibly. Apartheid was dismantled pacifically because among the inhabitants of thecities of South Africa a non-racial identity was diffuse and had political correspondencein NCA. Exactly three decades separate the elections that ended the apartheid to thespeech of „I am ready to die‟ pronounced by Mandela in the opening of this defense atthe Supreme Court in Pretoria, 20th April 1964. The final phrases of that speech had notlost actuality: „Above all, we want equal political rights because without them ourprivations will last forever. I know that this sounds revolutionary to the whites of thiscountry because the majority of the electors will be Africans. This makes the white mento fear democracy. But it is not allowed this fear to close the way to the only finalsolution that will guarantee harmony and freedom for all. It is not true that theemancipation of all will result in racial domination. The political division based oncolor is totally artificial and when it disappears, the domination of one color group bythe other will also disappear. NCA fights since a half of a century against the racialism.When we triumph, we will not change this policy‟. Mandela concluded: „In my whole life, I devoted myself to the fight of theAfrican people. I fought against the white domination and I fought against the blackdomination. I nourished the ideal of a free and democratic society where all the peoplecan live together in harmony and equal opportunities. It is an ideal for I want to live andI want to reach. But, if necessary, this is an ideal I am ready to die‟. In the elections of 27th April of 1994, NAC received 62% of the votes and twoweeks later Mandela was named the first black president of the country. However,racialism would turn to figure as a government policy in South Africa, at the hands ofNAC.THE TRIUMPH OF MULTICULTURALISM Why do you bother us? – She asked to the policeman who was approaching herinside the bus. „I don´t know, but law is law and you are arrested‟. Rosa Parks was bornin Tuskegee, Alabama, from black, Indian and Irish ancestors and was 42 year-old in1955 when she disobeyed the order of the driver who wanted her to give her seat towhite passengers in Montgomery, the capital of the State. Her gesture was notspecifically programmed but also didn´t derive from a simple personal impulse. Parks
  • 61. was a member of the local section for NAACP – National Association for theAdvancement of Color People, whose president was searching for an emblematic caseof racial segregation in the public system of transport with the finality of deflagrating aprotesting movement. NAACP was an influent organization for the promotion of civil rights. It wasfounded in 1909 by the black academic of Harvard William E.B. du Bois. It for a longtime was concentrated in fighting the American segregationist laws in the tribunes. Inthe post-war, however, stimulated by the new international situation, it started toorganize public protests. Edgar D. Nixon, the combative president of the local section,could never imagine that the boycott to the buses of Montgomery that started after thearrest of Parks would represent the appearance of the movement for civil rights in USA. The boycott was organized by Nixon and by the young Baptist pastors RalphAbernathy and Martin Luther King Jr. who founded MIA – Montgomery ImprovementAssociation. During 381 days, the black population, attending to the call of MIA,stopped to use buses. Walking, riding, taking lifts, using taxis that in solidarity chargedthe same prices of the buses, they attracted the attentions from all over the country.Black activists suffered attacks, the houses of Luther King and Abernathy were attackedwith Molotov cocktails and the first was arrested for a fortnight. A Federal Court of thedistrict judged as unconstitutional the segregation in the buses of Alabama. At the endof 1956, the Supreme Court pronounced a judgment against the appellation so themovement conquered a historical victory. In the following year, together with other local organizations and segregatedSouthern churches, MIA formed the Southern Christian Leadership Conference(SCLC). Under the presidency of Luther King, SCLC converted into the motor of thenational movement that knocked down the segregationist laws. Under the influx of thatmovement, the congress approved in 1964 the Law of Civil Rights that banished racialsegregation in schools, jobs, equipments and public places and approved in 1965 theNational Law of the Rights of Vote that prohibited discriminatory qualifications thatlimited the right of the blacks to vote. This law was sent to the congress by the presidentJohn Kennedy and voted in the government of Lyndon Johnson, who was a greatpromoter. According to a narrative, the Southern Johnson commented that the lawwould cost the South to the Democrats. He won the presidential elections of that yearbut lost in five Southern states to the Republican Barry Goldwater. In 1968 thesegregationist George Wallace, running independently, divided the South with theRepublican Richard Nixon. By the voice of Luther King the movement of civil rights lifted the flag ofequality of the citizens. In his most famous speech, in front to the Memorial to Lincolnin Washington, August 1963, the leader of SNLC invocated the Declaration ofIndependence and the Constitution that formed the basis to the ideal that people werenever judged by their skin color. The concept of equality of rights is in the nucleus ofthe National Law for the Rights of Voting, which is a regulation of the 15th
  • 62. Constitutional Amendment adopted years after the Civil War to protect the rights ofvoting against racial discrimination. This same concept served as the basis for thejudgment of the supreme court of June 1967 that knocked down the last anti-miscegenation laws still existing in USA. The victories of the movement for civil rights corrected a historical deviation,aligning finally the country to the principles proclaimed formally in the internationalarena in the immediate post-war. The triumph of the principle of equality in USArepresented a valuable direct stimulus the anti-apartheid fights that started in SouthAfrica. However, paradoxically, soon after those speeches that the citizen couldn´t bejudged due to their ancestry or skin color, USA turned around and promulgated lawsand regulations destined to distribute rights according to racial categories. The expression of affirmative action entered into the legal American language in1961 when the president John Kennedy published the Executive Order 10925 thatcreated the committee for equal job opportunities and ordered that the projects financedby federal funds should adopt affirmative action and hire freely from racialdiscrimination. In the version of the heralds of the policies of reverse discrimination,this document is shown as the beginning of everything. However, this is not true, as theExecutive Order of Kennedy was placed in the fields of the fights againstdiscrimination, anticipating one of the sides of the Law of Civil Rights. In the text, thedocument associated the notion of affirmative action with the obligation of hiringpeople without considering race, religion or nation. The same false version consecrated in the next step the Executive Order 11246of the president Lyndon Johnson in 1965. Once more, however, the legal text waswritten in the format of the principle of equality. Its concepts reproduced, literally, thoseof the order of Kennedy. The novelties were a more detailed formulation of obligationsand the penalties for infractions. The goal was to win the strong resistance ofdiscrimination, rooted in old habits and attitudes. The executive orders of Kennedy and Johnson participated of the conceptuallogic of the Law of Civil Rights that in the subsection 703 of Title VII declared that itwas not required from an employer to concede special treatment to any individual orgroup based in any differences that may exist in relation to the employees of that groupand the rest of community, city, State or country. In the American law, the affirmativeaction acquired the meaning of reverse discrimination with the plan of Philadelphiaannounced by the president Richard Nixon in 1969. Philadelphia was selected because the companies and the syndicatescontinuously broke the Law of Civil Rights, denying equal opportunities to blackcandidates of jobs in the civil construction of the city. This plan provided goals andchronograms, provoking the reaction of the Democrat senator Sam. J Ervin: „it is clearlike the sun of midday in an open sky that these percentages are quotes and that they arebased on race‟. In the polemic that was lighted, Nixon denied he tried to impose quotesand the congress supported the position of the president.
  • 63. The Republican Party is the real initial point of the policies of reverse racialdiscrimination in USA. In 1970, under the inspiration of the plan of Philadelphia, thefederal government referred to procedures guided for results. The conclusive act of thistrajectory occurred in 1973, when ministries and federal agencies published the letterGuide of practices of local and state employments. The document took care in affirmingthat rigid quotes were unacceptable but sustained a system of quantitative goals to beverified. The language was in the contrary of the spirit of the Law of Civil Rights,opening the way for employment policies based on the concession of preferabletreatment. The employment policies ran parallel to the promotion of what Nixon qualifiedas black capitalism, in 1968. By the Executive Order 11458 of 1969, the presidentstimulated the mobilization of activities and resources from the Estate and localgovernments, companies, commercial associations, universities, foundations, professionorganizations and voluntary organizations and so on for the growth of companies ownedby minorities. In 1917 in the sequence of such initiative the executive order 11625demanded the federal agencies for plans and goals to the program of inclusion ofbusiness of minorities, which favored racial criteria in contracting suppliers for thegovernment. The brain behind these racial policies of Nixon was Arthur Fletcher, black, bornin Arizona in 1924 and activist for the movement of civil rights. He was named asassistant-secretary of the Department of Work. The Republican Fletcher, known as thefather of the affirmative initiative in USA, served in the governments of Gerald Ford(1974-1977), Ronald Reagan (1981-1989) and George H. Bush (1989-1993), henceensuring the continuity of the policies inaugurated by Nixon. The precedence of the republican is an historical uncontestable fact. However,the concept of black capitalism and the policies of affirmative action based on racialcriteria evolved as a program of both parties, so that these action were kept andamplified in the government of Jimmy Carter (1977-1981) and Bill Clinton (1993-2001). Under the impact of the federal initiatives, there was an outbreak in state andlocal policies of reverse discrimination regarding employment and schooling. At thistime, race converted into a relevant aspect in the admission to universities thatdeveloped their own programs of quantitative goals and quotes destined to minorities. The legal statute of policies of racial preferences was never clarified. TheSupreme Court reluctantly offered support to these policies until the end of the decadeof 1980. However, to pass the judicial evaluation, the programs were hidden under themask of anti-discriminative procedures. A new Law for Civil Rights that was approvedin 1991 banished notorious methods for concession of racial preferences, as well as thecreation of distinct patterns for minorities in selection exams. However, the practices ofreverse discrimination continued, but more dissimulated. The publication in 1971 of „A Theory of Justice‟ by the American philosopherJohn Rawls was coincident to the conclusion of the rapid process of attribution of a new
  • 64. meaning to the expression „affirmative action‟. This book, considered as the intellectualbasis for the policies of preferences for „disadvantaged groups‟, investigates solutionsfor the problem of distributive justice and formulates the theory of justice as equality.Concerned with the discrimination against minorities in his country, the philosopheraggregated the „principle of the difference‟ to the „equality of opportunities‟. Accordingto this principle, the positions of prestige and influence should be used for the greaterbenefit of the members of minorities in a situation of disadvantage. A strong defender of liberalism, Rawls suffered the intellectual influences of thephilosopher Isaiah Berlin and of the lawyer Herbert L. A. Hart. His books can be seenas a tentative of conciliating the liberal doctrine with the modern democratic masssocieties. Although he has never written directly about the theme of affirmative action,his theory gave to the heralds of the preference policies as a legitimate way to useinequalities of rights to produce a greater social equality. The reinterpretation of thesense of the expression „affirmative action‟ between the Law for Civil Rights and thefirst initiatives of the government of Nixon probably influenced Rawl´s thinking. Butthe triumphant marches of the policies of reverse discrimination have no casualrelationship with his books.The Ford Foundation and the „policies of the difference‟ The United States were intellectually and morally ready to receive the policies ofaffirmative action based on race because the paradigm of difference occupies a centralsymbol in the American history. In spite of the formal declarations on the equality ofrights on the foundation documents, the American nation saw itself, since the beginning,as a nation of whites. Few years separate the end of slavery to the production ofsegregationist laws that converted the blacks in second-class citizens. These laws keptworking during almost a total of a century. In the legal sphere, the notion of race can only work effectively if everybodyknows with no doubt who is who. USA was the first country to adopt anti-miscegenation laws. These laws were supported in the named one drop rule, by whichthe presence of a single non-white ancestor excluded a person from the category ofwhite. This rule appeared together with the anti-mixing laws and allowed to the censusto classify the Americans into white and non-whites and to classify the non-whites intodiverse minorities (blacks, Indians, Asiatic and more recently, Hispanic). The policiesof affirmative action grew on this ideological, administrative and legal construction thatwas not abolished even with the victory of the movement for civil rights. The reverse discrimination didn´t sprout automatically from the predominantconceptions of the American society. It appeared in the political environment by theeffort of many actors. Although many leaders of the movement for the civil rights had
  • 65. foreseen the risks of the policies of racial preferences, others considered that theyconstituted the logical subsequent step to the conquest of the legal equality. Fletcher isthe key figure in the republican side. In the democrat side, the name is Jesse Jackson,friend of Luther King in SCLC. Jesse Jackson ruptured with Abernathy, the new leaderof the organization and became the articulating point between the Democrat Party andthe black electorate. The Democrats became hegemonic among the black electorateduring the governments of Kennedy and Johnson. When Nixon with the Philadelphiaplan tried to restore the space lost to the Republicans among the blacks, the Democratsadopted the policies of affirmative action and claimed they were pioneers in the waythey interpreted the Law of Civil Rights of 1964. The movement for civil rights mobilized crowds. In contrast, the policies ofreverse discrimination never were sustained by any massive movement. But theirdiffusion further on the limited federal programs was supported by intellectuals andacademics that implanted systems for admission to the universities guided by racialcriteria and articulated initiatives of racial equilibrium in the public schools andformulated a multiculturalist explanation of the American society. Nothing of thiswould have been possible without the intervention of the Ford Foundation, the mostdetached actor in the triumphant marches of the racial policies. Edsel Bryant Ford, son of Henry Ford, founder of Ford Motor Corporation, wasthe president of the giant of Detroit between 1919 and 1943. In 1936 he and his father inthe philanthropic American tradition created the Ford Foundation and defined as itsmission to administer funds for the educational and scientific development and forcharity. After the death of the two founders in 1947, Henry Ford II, son of Edsel,became the president of the company and Ford Foundation received a fortune in papersfrom Ford Motor. In 1955 due to decision of the counsel of curators the Foundationstarted to sell its papers and in the decade of 1970 it hadn´t no relation with Ford Motor. The American journalist Dwight McDonald described in 1956 the FordFoundation as a „great body of money totally surrounded by persons who want some‟.The financial patrimony left by the founders transformed the Foundation in the biggestphilanthropic entity of the world and its mission was redefined in terms of promotinginternationally the freedom, democracy, peace and education. In the golden years of the Cold War, the Ford Foundation acted as a hiddententacle of the American external policy. Paul Hoffmann, one of the most importantarchitects of the Marshall Plan for Europe left the American government to be thepresident of Ford Foundation between 1950 and 1953, when it started to expandoverseas. Richard M. Bissell Jr. worked as a high executive of the Foundation soon afterserving in the administration of the Marshall Plan and soon before officially enteringinto CIA. John J. McCloy was secretary of War between 1941 and 1945 and after,successively, president of the World Bank, high commissary of USA in the occupiedGermany, CEO of Chase Manhattan Bank and CEO of Ford Foundation. In the sevenyears he governed the Foundation, since 1958, he kept the habit of defining, in informal
  • 66. visits and talks to members of the National Security Council, the projects overseas thatwould get the greatest financing of Ford Foundation. McGeorge Bundy was only 30 year-old when he participated with Bissel in agroup of formulators of external policy that wanted to articulate the Marshall Plan withCIA to help anti-communist groups in France and Italy. He reached the governmenttogether with the team of academics made by John Kennedy and served as a counselorof the National Security Council in the governments of Kennedy and Johnson until1966, when he became president of Ford Foundation. In the thirteen years with Bundyas president, the Foundation discovered the minorities, developing a crucial paper in thediffusion of the policies of race in USA and in international environment. Such policycould not be more radical: in 1960, the item „rights of minorities‟ represented 2.5% ofthe budget; in 1970 it reached 40%. At the end of the decade of 1960, Ford Foundation was facing a scenario ofpolitical crisis that worsened in the first mandate of Nixon, when the social coalitionsarticulated in the movement for civil rights went against the War on Vietnam. Theexecutives of Ford Foundation interpreted the radicalism of the protests as a symptomof an ill functioning of the political pluralism and formulated the concept ofmulticulturalism as a tool for restoring the normality in the engines of democracy.According to the logic of multiculturalism, the broad social coalitions should be placedby to organizations and specific movements delineated according to the interests of eachminority. The Foundation would help to sculpt these movements, offering to thempolitical platforms and funds capable of sustaining groups of pressure. The introduction of the policies of difference - or diversity in the officiallanguage of Ford Foundation- had a powerful effect in congregating leaders andintellectuals. Investigating the philanthropic foundations, the sociologist Craig Jenkinsregistered that they worked as doorkeepers, financing movements and initiatives thatthis way are able to convert their flags into public policies. In the process, they alsoselected the new organizations that became permanent traces in the political scenario. Itis precisely what happened in USA after the intervention of Ford Foundation. The strategy was started by the argument of public interest devoted to theminorities. Ford Foundation financed organizations for the process defending theAmerican Mexicans (Maldef), Porto Ricans (PR-LDEF), native Indians (Native-American LDEF) and women (WLF). These organizations hadn´t a basis of associatedmembers and totally depend of the donation offered by companies and foundations,especially Ford Foundation. As natural, the executives are activists linked to theFoundation. However, these activists showed themselves in the public sphere aslegitimate representatives of the respective minorities and due to the financial resourcesthey had they had significant institutional influence. Obviously, all of theseorganizations created on such basis acted in promoting the policies of reversediscrimination, acting as professional pressure groups.
  • 67. The approach of Ford Foundation to the blacks started with financing of ahistoric organization that developed relevant papers in the fights for civil rights.NAACP gained educational and law support but lost the independence. Although it keptmore than 600 thousand affiliates, it got dependant essentially from the greatphilanthropic entities and engaged in the racial policies. The process peaked in 1994,when this venerable organization, which was almost undergoing bankruptcy, receivetwo contributions from Ford Foundation in a total of 600 thousand dollars, aftersubstituting the executive director by the candidate selected by the Foundation. Ford Foundation didn´t limit financing previously existent organizations.Militant movements of „chicanes‟ were transformed into ethnical organizations with thesponsor of Ford Foundation. The Council of Southwestern of La Raza (SWCLR) wasborn in Phoenix, Arizona, in 1968 since three leaders from the community were hiredby Ford Foundation. Five years later, SWCLR began a national organization, changedthe headquarters to Washington and the name to National Council of La Raza. The wordraza in this context has a paradoxical meaning, since is the result of mixing. It refers tothe mixed people created by the meeting of Spanish men and Indian women in thecolonial America. The origin of this expression can be found in the book of the MexicanJosé Vasconcelos, La Raza Cósmica, published in 1925. Soon after, the Foundationentered into friction with the unionist Henry Santiestevan, who was the president ofNCLR, and demanded his substitution, threatening to cancel to finance the organization.Raul Yzaguirre assumed the presidency, aligned completely the organization to thepolitical schedule of the donator and converted the organization into a powerfulinstitution, financed by the federal government and by great companies and otherphilanthropic entities. The speech of victimization and the financial resources of Ford Foundationlinked together to create what the journalist George Will properly named as theproliferation of groups nourishing sufferings and claiming rights. As Joan Roelofsregistered, one of the results of the process was to co-opt independent leadersmassively: „activists of social movements are this way transformed into researchers,administrators and claimants. The social movements are fragmented into identitypolicies‟. In the origin, Ford Foundation already presented the modern tendencies ofphilanthropy that doesn´t intend to give donation to the poor but make use of the socialsciences to transform the societies. Since the review of its mission in the post-war, theFoundation had fixed in the goal of influencing public policies and promotinginstitutional reforms not only starting from convincing governments but especially bythe mobilization in the basis. The multiculturalist adventure of the Americanuniversities derived from the combination of these two paradigms. The basic approach of the Foundation consisted in supporting the adoption ofsystems of admission guided by preferences by minority groups. The pragmaticinstrument was to offer big donations with the condition of implanting quotes for
  • 68. minorities. However, the ambitions of Ford Foundation overcame the mere changing ofthe admission systems. The finality was to reform from up to down the academicperspectives, the political attitudes, the curricula and the practices in the universities.Actually, the aim was to implant the principle of the multiculturalism inside the geneticcode of the academic practice. Once more, the tool of persuasion was the conditionaloffer of generous donations. The annual reports of Ford Foundation describe, sometimes minutely, the modusoperandi of assaulting the universities. One single example: in 1989, 200 universitiesand faculties were invited to concur for donations of 100 thousand dollars to „revise ordevelop academic programs to a maximal attention to culture and experience of ethnicalminorities and make the perspectives of multiculturalism weigh in all aspects of thecurricula.‟ One of the 19 winning institutions was the University Brandeis ofMassachusetts, which compromised to organize a summer course on the oral traditionsof Africa and the African Diaspora and, broadly, to incorporate African and derivedfrom Africa disciplines in the nucleus of the curriculum. The political scientist Harold Laski (1893-1950), with his long experience inHarvard, Yale and in the London School of Economics, knew the impact of thefoundations on the universities: „the foundations don‟t control simply because in thedirect and simple meaning of the word, there is no necessity to do this. They simplyhave to indicate the momentary inclination of their minds so the university worlddiscovers the pointed sense and quickly tend to that angle of the intellectual beat‟.However, Laski didn´t live enough to appreciate the audacious operation of FordFoundation in the American universities. The Foundation wasn‟t limited to distributeconditioned institutional donations. It created vast programs of scholarships destined tolecturers and to post-graduating and graduating students. To have greater changes ofsuccess, the candidates should form multicultural teams and define multiculturalistthemes and approaches. From the theoretical point of view, multiculturalism lays on a firstpresupposition that is not dramatically distinct from the article of faith of the scientificracism. This presupposition can be expressed as the notion that mankind is divided intodiscrete and well defined families, named as ethnicities. The scientific racism made thefamilies –races- derive from nature. The multiculturalism makes the races derive fromthe culture. The second presupposition of multiculturalism is that culture corresponds toan essential attribute, immanent and ancestral to each ethnical group. This naturalizationof culture put into evidence that the concept of ethnicity occupies in the multiculturalistnarrative a methodological place parallel to the one of the concept of race in thenarrative of the scientific racism. Under the influx of the millionaire budgets of Ford Foundation, the universitiesimitated the patterns of urban segregation and created their own ghettos in the forms ofnew fields of study: Black Studies, African-American Studies, Mexican-AmericanStudies, Native-American Studies, the studies on race relations, the women´s study and
  • 69. innumerable specific ethnic studies. In the first initial five years, more than 500programs of black studies were implanted in USA. This way, the presuppositions of themulticulturalism got life and reality as component of the consecrated academicknowledge. Not satisfied in producing objects of study, the curricular transformationinjected race, ethnicity and gender in all the departments and disciplines, investigating,for example, the Afro-American sight of the urban landscapes, the feminist themes incontemporary art and the misogyny written in the Nine Symphony of Beethoven. Universities running after money and academics running after prestige definedtheir academic priorities in the terms suggested by the donator. The University ofChicago, following the general tendencies, implanted a Center of Studies of Race,Policy and Culture that in the beginning of 2005 received from Ford Foundation andother philanthropic entities more than a million dollars in donations. Cathy Cohen,director of the Center explained that „receiving donations shows that innovativeresearch is being carried out‟, a thought supported by the curious idea that the owners ofthe money are the best judges for the pertinence of a knowledge. The greatest of the donations received the Center directed by Cohen came fromFord Foundation, in the value of 600 thousand dollars, and was destined to the researchline of „Young Afro-Americans and their sexual empowerment: sex, politics and race‟.It is obvious that this line of research would never exist without the intervention of theFoundation. But there is something of a great relevance: the mere enunciation of theacademic program means that according to the adventitious institutional knowledge,Afro-Americans constitute a perfectly identifiable group distinct from the others tocultural aspects related to sex and politics. The march of multiculturalism in the university campuses not always counted onthe volunteer adhesion of the researches, but the Foundation always knew how tohandle efficiently its means of persuasion. Robert Steele, professor of Psychology of theUniversity Wesleyan, of Connecticut, carried out the paper of coordinator of one of thesessions of the conference „Intensification of the cultural diversity‟, sponsored by FordFoundation in Pasadena, California, in 2004. He explicated the receipt: „people will notpacifically be assimilated to the multiculturalism by the means of the truth and of thedialogue. You give to them assistant researches, post-graduation supervisors‟. The goalis not simply inculcate ideas, but put the researches linked to the Foundation in thecommand seats and effectively assume the control of departments and wholeuniversities: „we´ll have changed the university when women and colored people candirect the place‟. Henry Ford II left the presidency of Ford Foundation in 1950 but kept involvedwith the direction along another quarter of century as CEO and after as curator.However, he experienced a crescent disillusion with the ways of the philanthropic entityand in 1977 he renounced to his position in the council. The Foundation is a creature ofcapitalism as he observed, but it was difficult to identify any trace of capitalism inanything it does. It is even more difficult to understand this in many of the institutions,
  • 70. particularly the universities that are beneficiary of the subvention program of theFoundation. The heir of the founders was a conservative of the old lineage and didn´tunderstand the sense of the policies conducted by the Ford Foundation after the end ofthe decade of 1960. But under the perspective of Bundy and his successors,multiculturalism was a vital remedy for the political system of capitalism – and not onlyinside USA.Nations inside the Nation The policies of preferences of jobs and quotes in the universities could onlywork if they had a uniform and broad classification of the citizens. USA had a longtraditional of ethnical classification expressed in the census. Also, the one drop rulecancelled the existence of mixed, avoiding difficulties in labeling citizens. As legallymaking equal the citizens, the Law of Civil Rights made the ethnical policy to becomeinnocuous. However, soon after, the initiatives of affirmative action restored thepolitical use of classifying people. Multiculturalism made the rest, conferring a newlegitimacy to these racist traditions. In general, the multiculturalists engaged in the defense of the rigid Americanclassification of the census, which describes a society fragmented in ethnical groupsperfectly delimitated. The organizations that spoke in the name of the Afro-Americaninterests converted into defenders of the one drop rule, which was transformed insomething as an article of national consensus. In the resume of the historian DavidHollinger: „the black model as understood in the beginning of the years 1970 – either byAfro-American organizations of pressure and public administrators and tribune – wasbased on the interpretation of clear limits of groups as irreversible facts of life anddidn´t challenge these limits by characterizing them as occasional historic constructions.In fact, proceeding in other manner would be, potentially, to deny the victims of thewhite racism the benefits that they had rights. If the one drop rule defineddiscrimination, it naturally defined the anti-discrimination laws. When an ethnical label has potential repercussions in practical life, the personscreate new identities or select, among more than one possible identity, the most adaptedto its interests. The number of America Indians and natives of Alaska enhanced 259%between the census of 1970 and 1990, spite of a very low birth rate in the group. In thefollowing decade, the expansion was 26.4%, much superior to the vegetative growthand much bigger than the population growth of whites and blacks. In the census of1970, the group represented 0.4% of the population. In the census of 2000, after threedecades of reverse discrimination, it reached 0.9% of the total. However, probably due
  • 71. to the singular stigma that marks the black identity of USA, it was not registered asimilar movement of whites classifying themselves as Afro-Americans. The cultural essentialism has not a compromise of the scientific racism withBiology, which confers it a wide flexibility in the fabrication of ethnical groups. Thispolitical advantage was largely exploited by the multiculturalists in the relation with the„Hispanics‟. In the beginning, the Mexican-American won the statute of ethnicity. After,the ethnical group experienced an enlargement, circling all the community originatedfrom Latin America of Spanish language. However, the Mexican-Americans keptfiguring as a sub-group inside the broader minority, with their own organizations ofpressure and ethnical centers of studies. José Angel Gutierrez, lawyer, activist and university lecturer, founded theUnited Raza Party, a regional chicane party, and in 1970 the Center for Mexican-American Studies of the University of Texas in Austin. „We are a nation inside thisnation‟, explained Gutierrez in a radiophonic debate. In the view of multiculturalism,the American nation is a confederation of ethnic nations, each one with its singularculture and interests also singular. The concept of nation inside nation inspired the bilingual educational systemthat worked in California for more than three decades. The legal basis of the systemcame from two laws of bilingual education published in 1968 and 1974 that offeredsupplementary funds for schools interested in promote special programs for studentswith limited proficiency in English. One year before the approval of the first of thesefederal laws, the governor of California, Ronald Reagan, knocked down a law thatimposed the exclusive use of English in public education. In 1974, a state law ofbilingual-bicultural education established educational programs in Spanish for studentswith low English proficiency. After seven years, a new state law detailed the obligationsof the schools with the bilingual system. In South Africa of apartheid, the Batu languages occupied central places in theeducation of black children. In the USA of multiculturalism, children whose genealogictrees had roots in the Spanish America should basically learn in Spanish. As wanted bythe organizations that pressured for the adoption of bilingual education and thesyndicates of teachers directed by multiculturalists, the Californian bilingual educationbecame an education exclusively in Spanish. The result was the configuration of aneducational ghetto in which 400 thousand students only listened to English half an hourin a school day. In 1998, in the broad mold of the decline of the reversal discriminationpolicies, the electorate of the State approved with 61% of the votes the Proposition 227that imposed the education in English, except in the cases the parents solicited bilingualclasses. This Proposition was largely supported by the Hispanic electorate, spite anaggressive campaign of the multiculturalist organizations and after its approval it wasregistered a low demand for classes in Spanish. Richard Rodrigues, son of Mexican immigrants, born in San Francisco,California, became an acclaimed writer with the publication of the autobiographic book
  • 72. Hunger of Memory, which narrates his development as an American student ofHispanic origin in a school composed by kids of high money. The book appeared in1981 in the zenith of multiculturalism and provoked noise. Comments from bothextremes of the political spectrum accused the author to have got benefits from theaffirmative action to minorities, which now he was putting into contest. The traditionalconservatives bombed him to criticize the restrictions to immigrants, while themulticulturalists execrated him by his opposition to education in Spanish. None of these criticisms hit Rodriguez´s positions. Much later, in an article forthe review Dissent he observed that in the initial years of the affirmative action inHarvard or Berkeley it was common to hear „many words about exemplar personalitiesand go back to help their people. It was an embarrassing question because the firstpersons to receive benefits came from medium class. And worse: inside the university,these persons gained the label of minority due to their supposed relation with a greatnumber of persons outside‟. In the logic of the multiculturalism, the beneficiaries of the programs of reversediscrimination would constitute directing elites of „their‟ ethnical groups. The graduatedand post-graduating students should assume the compromise of continuing themovement, becoming activists in the organization of minorities. In this process, asRodriguez registered, the guilty played its paper: „the graduating of medium class knewthey were gaining over the back of the poor‟. Ford Foundation participated in all the aspects of the multiculturalistentrepreneurship in USA. But, foremost, it acted as the most important hub ofarticulation among university, organizations of pressure and organs of publicadministration. By the work of the Foundation, researchers found the ways to directionseats in the organizations of minorities and to governmental positions tasked toaffirmative programs. In the inverse sense, activists were inserted into universityprograms of post-graduation under the guidance of lecturers financed by theFoundation. As a consequence of this circulation of brains, a tentacle multiculturalistweb was raised, organically decentralized but sharing the same view of the world. Since its origins, Ford Foundation saw itself as a global player. The financialpower of the Foundation conferred it a capability of projecting influence much furtherthan the American frontiers so it organized itself to aggressively act in the Exterior. In1952, it inaugurated the first regional office in New Delhi, India, soon followed byJakarta (Indonesia), Cairo (Egypt, 1957), Lagos and Nairobi (Nigeria and Kenya,decade of 1960), City of Mexico, Rio de Janeiro, Santiago (Mexico, Brazil, Chile,decade of 1960). In a posterior phase, with the Chinese opening, the end of the ColdWar and the collapse of apartheid, it implanted offices in Beijing (China), Moscow(Russia), Hanoi (Vietnam) and Johannesburg (South Africa). In 2005-2006 thedonations of the regional offices represented 30% of the total budget of the Foundation. The world office is at New York and has 13 curator members and the regionaloverseas offices hires a permanent body of 600 persons. Money was never a problem. In
  • 73. the fiscal year of 2007, Ford Foundation was among the riches philanthropic entitieswith a patrimony of 13.7 billions of dollars. In seven decades, it distributed more than15 billions of dollars in donations to thousands of institutes and individuals. In 2001, inits greatest single subvention in its history, it used 280 millions of dollars to create aprogram of scholarships destined to post-graduate „emergent leaders of marginalizedcommunities outside USA‟. Obviously, it was a tool to co-opt community leaders inlarge scale. With about 4.3 thousands of people receiving a scholarship all over theworld, the program received in 2006 an addition of 75 million and was extended until2014. Multiculturalism organized practically all the aspects of Ford Foundation inUSA since the 1970. In the exterior, the new paradigm had to be adapted to the variousnational scenarios and to other priorities in the schedule of the Foundation. In India, theregional office defined diversity in the terms imposed the old system of castes, whichhad been re-activated by the British colonial policies and directed resources to thedefenders of affirmative action in benefit to the unfavored castes. In Mexico and CentralAmerica, Ford Foundation concentrated on the promotion of ethnical identities ofAmerindian groups, which were classified as marginal minorities. In Africa, the offices of Lagos and Nairobi subsidized organizations forprotection of rights of minorities, which in many cases, but not always, means thepromotion of exclusivist interests of regional and ethnical elites. With the end ofapartheid, the policy of black empowerment conducted by the South Africangovernment gained the approval of Ford Foundation. The influence of the Foundation insome African countries was evidenced more than once by the presence of the „Fordmen‟ in ministries and high governmental administration. The most notorious case is theone of Nigeria, whose ex-dictator Olusegun Obasajno became a member of the councilof curators of the Foundation, directing its Committee for International Issues, job heabdicated to be elected president of his country by the popular vote in 1999. AfterObasanjo assumed the presidency, Ford Foundation helped him to finance the officialcommission to write a new constitution. The international diffusion of multiculturalism was interpreted by the newFrench sociologists Bourdieu and Wacquant as a true globalization of the Americanproblems. The action of Ford Foundation in Brazil reflects the accuracy of thisdiagnosis. The subsides of the Foundation multiplied in Brazilian universities themodels of ethnical studies and of racial relations applied in USA and consolidated achain of racialist organizations that started to reproduce the speeches and demandstypical of the Afro-American ones. By this way, the polarity white/black thatcrystallized in USA with the one drop rule was imported by the activists from Brazil, acountry crossed by very different social inequalities and whose traditional identity isarticulated around the idea of miscegenation. From the inauguration of the Brazilian office until 2001, Ford Foundation gave347 millions of dollars in donations, in values adjusted by the inflation. In the first
  • 74. years, the annual values of the donations were around 11 millions. Since 1975 thedonations fell down dramatically, to the lowest value of 2.1 millions in 1978. Acontinuous recuperation started in the 1980 years and in 2001 the donated value hadreached 16 million dollars. After 1995, the mean values reached the platform of 13millions. The profile of financing in Brazil experienced a changing of another nature,expressed in the clear historical tendency of enhancing the annual number of donations,which jumped from less than a dozen in the initial years to more than one hundred at theend of the 1990 years. The original strategy of concentrating donations in biginstitutional receivers, especially universities, was placed by an orientation ofpulverizing the money into innumerous NGOs (non-governmental organizations). Thenumbers prove the scale of changing the ways: the Brazilian NGOs received only 4% ofthe total of donations in the decade of 1970 but jumped to 54% in the beginning of XXIcentury. The popular turn-around of the Foundation followed its decision to giveprivileges to a definition of a more instrumental Social Science and gifted especially theAfro-Brazilian activist organizations engaged in policies of race and in the demands ofreverse discrimination initiatives. In a complimentary movement, the donation destinedto universities, although directed to various programs, started to give privilege toinstitutions that figured as models for the diffusion of system by admission by racialquotes. The University of State of Rio de Janeiro received a donation of 1.3 milliondollars, one of the biggest from the regional office, in 2001, when it implanted itspioneer program of racial quotes. The University of Brasilia implanted its program in2004 and in the following years received successive donations. The Federal Universityof Rio Grande do Sul resisted until 2007, when instituted racial quotas and received 130thousand dollars. The Federal University of São Carlos, another „lazy‟ one, got anexceptional donation of 1.5 million dollars in 2007 when it adhered to the system ofquotes. In Brazil, there were no traditional organizations such as NAACP. Also, therewere no black organizations of relevance, except the Unified Black Movement thatparadoxically rejected the American model of black capitalism. Because of this, thepopular turn-around of Ford Foundation resulted in the appearance of a chain of racialistNGOs constituted around academic activists. The new NGOs cultivated their relationswith the Foundation and imported the multiculturalist language elaborated in USA. However, the multiculturalist doctrine incorporated in the genetic code of theregional office of Ford Foundation and was converted into a transversal axis ofarticulation with the total of the donations. The sociologist Edward Telles, chief of theprogram of Human Rights of the Foundation in Brazil between 1996 and 2000,explained the methodology used by the selection of candidates since the end of the 1990years: „Ford-Brazil wants a scheduling of diversity and this explains all its donations inall the fields it works. This includes more than one hundred supports per year from
  • 75. which less than 20 are mainly about racial questions. Such scheduling list all the team indifferent levels according to criteria of gender, race (whites/non-whites) and theexplanation induces the candidates to explain why they reflect (or not) the localdiversity regarding gender and color and what they intend to do to ameliorate this‟.Meeting in Durban In the session of 1997, the General Assembly of UN invoked the half of acentury of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to call for a World Conferenceagainst Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerances that wouldbe carried out in Durban (South Africa) in 2001 under the coordination of the HighCommission for Human Rights. Mary Robinson, the high commissioner and honorificpresident of Oxfam, one of the most powerful international NGOs, promised in theoccasion to make a conference of action, not only words. Indeed there would be actionand a torrent of words. In the origin of the convocation there were hundreds of NGOs engaged in thepromotion of human rights. Many, if not the majority, adopted the multiculturalistperspective and saw the Conference as a unique opportunity to introduce their conceptsin the official language of UN. Ford Foundation was far to be the only financer of theseorganizations, but figured in the list of sponsors of a significant portion of them. The choice for Durban as the host of WCAR obeyed to a symbolic imperativeand a political arrangement. Durban not only was in the country that had become freefrom the apartheid but also is a center of diversity where the black majority lives withthe whites and with the numerous minority of Indian origin, a social environment wherethe young Mahatma Gandhi started his career. Also, the South African governmentconducted the biggest program of affirmative action in the world and kept a strongcooperation with the high commissioner of Robinson and with the regional office ofFord Foundation inaugurated in 1993 in Johannesburg. The action started in preparative regional meetings in 2000 and 2001 inStrasbourg (France), Santiago (Chile), Dakar (Senegal) and Teheran (Iran). In thedemocratic countries, the national delegations included in important positions therepresentatives of the civil society, which means, the directors of multiculturalistsNGOs and collaborators of these organizations originated in the universities. Theprevious texts indicated beforehand the surprising ideas that would get consecrated inDurban. In the meetings of the Asiatic countries in Teheran, NGOs engaged in thePalestine question presented strongly anti-Israelite proposals, associating Zionism toracism. The American diplomats imagined that those NGOs were financed by thegovernment of Saudi Arabia. After some time they discovered that the money camemainly from the regional office of Ford Foundation of Cairo and reached those
  • 76. organizations by means of umbrella entities. Among these entities there were thePalestinian Committee for the Protection of Human Rights and of the Environment,operating under the acronym LAW and the Web of Palestinian NGOs (PNGO). The first diplomatic disaster of our new century was drawn when, in its officialresolution, the intergovernmental meeting of Teheran accused Israel to practice racialdiscrimination against the Palestinians in the occupied territories and the Syriandelegation seemed engaged in the trial to reactivate the Resolution 3379, approved inthe General Assembly of UN in 1975 but declared null in 1991, which qualified theZionism as a form of racism. The tense equilibrium was ruptured the parallel conferenceof NGOs in Durban, a planned forum in the official program of WCAR. In the middleof posters where Israelite images were mixed to Nazi icons, the NGOs presented adeclaration considering Israel as a racist Estate of apartheid and charging it for genocideand ethnical clearance. The episode poisoned the hard negotiations among governmentsand hurried the retirement of the American and the Israelite delegations. After this double retirement, the polemic parts of the project of resolution wereknocked down to avoid the retirement of Canada and of many European delegations,which would configure the collapse of the Conference. But a wound had been made.Due to the dispute with Israel, the texts of the Declaration and of the Program of Actionof Durban, which introduced in the official language of the international communitysome crucial notions of the Multiculturalism, had not got the assignment of the countrywhere this ideological doctrine raised. The final documents of the Conference of Durban constitute a tense compromisebetween the classic concept of political equality and of the concepts of ethnicity, raceand of Multiculturalism. Side by side to the reaffirmation and to the detailing of thegeneral principles proclaimed by the Universal Declaration of 1948, the Declaration ofWCAR qualified the values of solidarity, respect, tolerance and multiculturalism as themoral terrain and inspiration for our fight all over the world against racism andcharacterized the cultural diversity as a valuable patrimony for development and welfareof mankind. The introduction of the principle of cultural diversity in the international lawserved as the basement for the construction of a building with deep practicalimplications. The Declaration turned official the concept of afro-descendents and askedfor the recognition of the culture and identity of the afro-descendents in the Americansand, in general, in the regions of the African Diaspora. Using these words, the documentrecalled the concept of a Diasporic nation, constituted based on ancestry and culture.The proclaimed nation in the Diaspora would be composed by populations scattered inmany countries and would have the rights of indemnity. It is on the war rights where a concept of indemnity appears as a collective right.Historically, the indemnity in money or goods took the place of the pillage of the loserby the winners. In the case of the Diasporic nation of the Declaration of Durban, theblacks of the Americas are presumed descendants of the African slaves transferred by
  • 77. the traffic on the Atlantic and in this condition they have the rights of beingindemnified. According to the tortuous logic of the demand, the indemnity must be paidby the whites, who figured as the supposed descendants of the owners of slaves. Tryingto operate the concept of racial repair, the Program of Action of WCAR asks to theEstates to implement positive or affirmative action in communities of primarily Africandescendant. The incorporation of the concept of Diasporic nation of afro-descendant insertedthe categories of Afro-Americans and Afro-Brazilians, among others, in theinternational law. The repercussions of this step are evident. The countries of theAmericans that signed the documents of Durban were implicitly adopting by themselvesa definition of being poly-national Estates. This means to confer to the minority –orAfro-descendants- the statute of a nation. In consonance with this, the multiculturalistNGOs started to require from the governments the incorporation of laws of specialcollective rights for the Afro-descendants. In Brazil, particularly, the Declaration andthe Program of Action of WCAR got a strong political impact. Durban represented an inedited ideological triumph for Multiculturalism, butFord Foundation could not celebrate for a long time. American Judaic organizationsexposed the sense of the donations of the regional office of Cairo, charged theFoundation by the attacks to Israel in the preparatory documents and accused it topromote anti-Semitism. Parliamentarians talked about requiring an investigation of thecounts of Ford Foundation and threatened to approve laws enhancing the taxing ofphilanthropic entities. Susan Berresford, the president of the Foundation, an old friendof the council of Chase Manhattan Bank hurried to make new negotiations when thecrisis reached the sphere of money. She cancelled the donations to the Palestinianentities accused of anti-Semitism. The direction of Ford Foundation created new normsof control of the gifted with donations and went back to give money to Judaicorganizations that were out of the donation list, such as the Anti-defamation League, theAmerican Judaic Committee and the Center Simon Wiesenthal. The new norms were explicated in the beginning of 2004 by an internaldocument directed to the five thousands of gifted persons that said: „by signing thisdonation letter, you agree that your organization will never promote or engage inviolence, terrorism, bigotry or destruction of any Estate, nor will make donations to anyentity engaged in these activities‟. To avoid giving margin to interpretations, thedocument clarified that the interdiction refers to all the funds of the organization, notonly those originated by a donation of Ford Foundation. The language, extracted from the patriotic law approved by the government ofGeorge W. Bush in the war on terror, provoked protests from traditional receivers offunds of Ford Foundation, such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) andrectors of prestigious universities of USA. They said the term bigotry has a broadvariety of interpretations and imposed an unacceptable vigilance of the donators on themanifestation of lecturers and students. In the end, money shouted loudly and the
  • 78. universities surrendered to the terms of the Foundation. In 2004, however, ACLU keptthe position and refused donations that summed more than one million dollars. As a consequence of the incidents on the Judaic question, the diplomatic processof Durban suffered wounds and the reputation of Ford Foundation was hit in a sensitivearea. But Multiculturalism was confirmed in this world conference in documents thatregistered some of its principal concepts. UN renounced, at least partially, to the lineexpressed in the immediate post-war of the Universal Declaration of 1948 and of theanti-racist declaration of Unesco. After Durban, ethnicity and race could be invoked tothe legal creation of minorities to whom special collective rights could be given.Minorities from all over the world, unite yourselves! The Palace of Peace, in Haia (Holland) started to be built in 1907 from anarchitectonic project in neo-renaissance style signed by the French Louis Cordonnierand with integral financing of the philanthropist Andrew Carnegie who for that finalitycreated the Carnegie Foundation. The first inhabitant of the Palace was the PermanentCourt of Judgement created in the First Conference of Haia in 1899. Since 1946, it isthe headquarters of the International Court of Justice of UN. It seems improbable, but in the monumental Palace in 1991 a reunion wascarried out with entities that spoke in the name of 15 Indigenous peoples, minorities andoccupied nations such as the Australian Aboriginals, the Philippine natives ofCordillera, the Papuas of Western Papua the Tibetans followers of Dalai Lama, theCrimean Tartars, the Iraquian Curds and curiously even the population of Taiwan,represented by its government. From the meeting the Unrepresented Nations andPeoples Organization (UNPO) was born with the clear finality of supporting itsmembers in an effective international participation. Since its foundation, UNPO counted with the generosity of donators such as theEuropean Union, governments and public agencies of Taiwan, from Switzerland,Holland and Nordic countries and also from philanthropic foundations such asMcArthur and, markedly, Ford Foundation. Maybe because of this, the number ofmembers experienced a vertiginous growth, close to 60. Among the entities that enteredinto the organization there is the separatist government of Chechnya, Hungarianrepresentatives of Romania, Abkhazians of Georgia, Ahwazi Arabians of Iran,Assyrians of Mesopotamia, Baluks of Pakistan, mountaineers of Vietnam, Ogonis ofNigeria, Batwas of Rwanda, Masais of Kenya and Tanzania, the mixed Rehobot Bastersof Namibia, the Amerindians Nahuas of Mexico, Mapuches of Chile and Argentina, theNation Dene of Canada and even a small Afrikaner party of South Africa.
  • 79. UNPO does not promote separatism, although some of the associated entities areseparatist groups. The organization preaches the pacific resistance and defends culturaland political autonomy of the minorities congregated. There is nothing in common inthe heterogeneous collection of nations, but the entities that proclaim to represent themshare a vindication: the recognition of such minorities as distinct collectivities hencewith potential titles of special collective rights, which implies, almost directly, theelevation of such entities to the statute of representatives of the respective nations. The traditional nationalist movements want to establish a sovereign Estate for anation that is proclaimed as distinct. There are movements of that type inside UNPO,such as the separatist movements of Chechnya and Abkhazia and of two great parties ofIraqi Curds that use the organization as a platform for their fight on their sovereignty.However, the majority of members of UNPO are financial and ideological fruits ofMulticulturalism – and they want to create regimes of regional autonomy inside theexistent Estates. The strategy of these entities develops in the international diplomacyand consists on receiving the support of UN and other multilateral institutions to imposeto national governments, from outside to inside, the acceptance of their demands. There is a crucial difference between the traditional nationalist movements andthe minority multicultural ones. In the first case, the nationalist elites have onlypossibility of success if they can articulate a narrative capable of awakening the masses,which then are disposed to sometimes dramatic sacrifices in the name of flag of a newnation. In the second, multiculturalist elite don´t need popular support, as theirlegitimacy is conquered in the noble rooms of the international institutes. Differentlyfrom nations that grow from a complex process of creation of a history, a literature anda geography the minorities of globalization emerge simply from a superficial ethnicalpostulation. Nations can be sometimes interpreted as impostures, but they areimpostures in which a people believe. The minorities in contrast are impostures thatneither the impostors believe. The Indigenous peoples make a significant part of these minorities described bythe doctrine of multiculturalism. The international community gave a first step to therecognition of these minorities in 1982 when the Economic and Social Council (Ecosoc)of UN created the Working Group on Indigenous Populations (WGIP). The next stepcame in 1989 with the approval of Convention 169 about indigenous and tribal peoplesof the International Labor Organization. The Convention 169 substituted a previous one of 1957 with the same title. Theoriginal document was articulated around notions of equality facing law, non-discrimination and protection of earth and cultural rights. In the new version, theconvention flirts with the notion of political autonomy of indigenous peoples, especiallyin the articles referring to territory rights, institutions and traditional systems of justice.The 6th article of the documents calls on the governments to consult indigenous peoplesthrough their representative institutions over legal or administrative decisionsconcerning them. This provision means that the Estates must recognize traditional
  • 80. institutions of political power that are placed outside the constitutional situation.Additionally, the same article confer to the Estates the responsibility of stimulating withfinancial resources the total development of the institutions of these peoples, aformulation that has an uncomfortable parallel with the policies synthesized in the Lawof Authorities Bantus of the South Africa of apartheid. Everything got clear in the following years. In 1994, WGIP gave to theCommission of Human Rights (nowadays the Council of Human Rights) a sketch of aDeclaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. At the same time, the GeneralAssembly proclaimed an International Decade of the Indigenous Peoples of the World(1995-2005) during different agencies of UN engaged together with the traditionalpeoples in the formulation of projects in the areas of economic development,environmental protection, health, education and the rights of minorities. In that contextthe Permanent Forum of Indigenous Issues of Ecosoc appeared, composed by 16rotating members, 8 indicated by governments and 8 indicated by indigenous groups. The session of the General Assembly of 2004 proclaimed a Second Decadedevoted to the indigenous peoples (2005-2015). The governmental institutions andNGOs were called on contributing to the fund destined to finance the activities of theSecond Decade. Among the objectives of the Program of Action drawn for the SecondDecade, a political right of autonomy to these minorities clearly appeared: „Promote theparticipation complete and effective of the indigenous peoples in decisions that directlyor indirectly affect their ways of life, territories and traditional lands, their culturalintegrity as indigenous peoples with collective rights or any other aspect of their lives,considering the principle of free, previous and informed agreement‟. Things ran quickly. In 2006 the Council of Human Rights adopted the UniversalDeclaration of Rights of Indigenous and submitted it to the General Assembly of thefollowing year that approved it with only 4 votes in contrary and 11 abstentions. Thedocument doesn´t constitute a treatise and its application is not legally obligatory to theEstates that subscribe it, which helps to explain the large favorable majority. However,it constitutes an audacious step towards the incorporation of Multiculturalism into theinternational law. The Declaration cancels potentially the sovereign of the Estates onpart of their territories. The 3rd article proclaims „the indigenous peoples have rights toself determination. Due to these rights, they freely determine their political statute andfreely run after their economic, social and cultural development‟. The theme of political autonomy has, obviously, serious repercussions. In the 4 tharticle of the Declaration, destined to avoid the proclaimed article be used to supportsecession, the self-determination is translated as rights to self-autonomy or self-government in the internal issues. The 5th article indicates more specifically the mean ofautonomy: according to it, the indigenous peoples have the rights to preserve andstrengthen their singular political, legal, social, economic and cultural institutions.Through these articles, the assigned Estates are compromised to admit, for example, theabsolute jurisdiction of indigenous tribunes in the lands of these communities.
  • 81. USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand refused to sign the Declaration sayingit is against their national sovereignty. The document foresee the obligation of theEstates to restitute or compensate the indigenous peoples by the removal in the past oftheir lands, resources, cultural, intellectual, religious or spiritual properties. Under sucha generic form, the obligation can be applied to episodes happened centuries ago andoriginate endless juridical disputes. Under the point of view of sovereignty, the 30th and 36th articles are particularlysensitive. The first say that military activities can only occur in indigenous lands whenjustified by a relevant public interest. Even in this case, the assigned Estates areobligated to conduct effective consults with the representative institutions of theindigenous peoples before using their lands and territories to military activities. Thesecond recognizes the rights of indigenous peoples separated by international frontiersto develop co-operative activities, including political activities. Brazil voted aligned with the majority of the Estates and approved theDeclaration. Few months later, the Document converted into a crucial element in thedispute around the Indigenous Reserve of Fox Ridge of Sun in Roraima state. Thecontinuous delimitation of the indigenous land adopted by the federal governmentattended the dominating demands from inside the government, expressed in theindigenous groups of the Indigenous Council of Roraima and of the IndigenousMissionary Council of the Catholic Church. In the opposite side, the state governmentof Roraima, agriculture businessmen established in the indigenous lands, the ArmedForces and part of the Amerindians influenced by protestant missionaries. The polemicscame across themes such as indigenous identity and the relations between the Indiansand the rest of the Brazilian society. ICR is an entity financed by foundations and international NGOs and receivesmoney from Ford Foundation. In the arguments to keep the continuous delimitation, thecanonic concepts of multiculturalism and the Declaration of Rights of IndigenousPeoples emerged. The defenders of an alternative solution criticized the idea of politicalautonomy of the Indians that was hidden behind the model of delimitation adopted bythe government. Military commandants interfere in the debate pointing the threatens tothe national sovereignty of the 30th and 36th articles of the Declaration and insisting onthe exclusion of a stripe in the international frontiers of the indigenous land. The polemics reached the Supreme Federal Tribune under a petition that claimedthe demarcation of the indigenous land to be null and void. In March 2009 the judgmentwas concluded and by 10 votes against 1, the constitutional court confirmed thecontinuous delimitation, but submitted it to 18 conditions that are jurisprudence forfuture delimitations. It was prohibited to the Indians the economic exploitation of thehydrous, energetic and mineral resources of the area; the implantation of military,communication and transport structures don´t demand the approval of the Indians; thegeneral transit of Indians and non-Indians was free; researchers, as any citizen, have
  • 82. total rights to enter the area. This decision was criticized by the ICR and the Catholiccouncil as equivocated limitation to the rights of the Indians. The dissonant vote came from Marco Aurélio de Mello who highlighted thedegree of integration of the indigenous groups of the area with the surrounding societyand defended the thesis of delimitation in islands. The minister went deep into thepolitical basis of the theme, highlighting the crucial conflict between the UniversalDeclaration of Indigenous Rights and the principle of national sovereignty, rejecting theromantic view, based on the redemption of expired debts and emphasizing that Indiansand non-Indians are all Brazilian citizens. His vote together with the 18 conditionsevidences that the polemics is still open. The global diffusion of multiculturalism closed the cycle of post-war when theethnicity and race had been labeled as expressions of prejudice and residues of thegolden times of the burden of the white men. Under the influx of the experience ofUSA, the principle of equality broke down and the concepts of race and ethnicity werereborn triumphantly. The belief in the division of mankind into families separated byinborn differences dressed itself with a new language of exulting cultural diversity, butstill keeps fidelity to the past.PART II – ONE DROP RULELOVING DAY Seaborne Anderson Roddenberry is an obscure name in the American politicalhistory. He was born in Georgia in 1870 five years after the Confederation lost andduring the period of Reconstruction when a broad legal reform conferred social andpolitical rights to the Southern slaves. He became a lawyer, was elected to the statelegislative, was the president of the commission on education of the county of Thomasthen selected as judge in the same county and also became the major of Thomasville. Inthe apex of his career, he was elected to the Federal Chamber by the Democrat Party in1909 and reelected twice, dying in 1913. The only permanent sign of his passage by Capitol is a proposal of aconstitutional amendment that was rejected in 11 th December 1912. It said: „themarriage between blacks or colored persons and Caucasians or any other type ofpersons in USA or in any other territory under its jurisdiction stands prohibited foreverand ever. The expression of black or colored person should be employed as by all andany person with African ancestors or that have any African traces or black blood‟.
  • 83. The Reconstruction lost impetus in a few years and, articulated in theconservative draft of the redeemers, the old Southern elite retook control of the Stategovernments of the old Confederation. The reaction against the reforms peaked between1890 and 1908, with the approval of new state constitutions and laws that put someconditions to the rights of voting, to schooling and to property, excluding almost all theblacks and the poor in general from political participation. The amendment ofRoddenberry was a trial to expand the reaction in the federal plan. It didn´t pass, but thestates kept the privilege of forbidding inter-racial marriages. This privilege had the approval of the Supreme Court, established in the casePace versus Alabama in January 1883. The Code of Alabama punished with two toseven years of prison the crime of matrimony or life in adultery or fornication betweenwhites and blacks or blacks of third generation. A state tribunal sentenced the blackTony Pace and the white Mary J. Cox to two years of prison because they lived infornication and the supreme court of Alabama confirmed the decision. Pace contested,saying that no state could deny the rights of equal protection facing the consecrated lawby the 14th Emend and that the state laws previewed a smaller penalty by the crime offornication made by persons of the same race. The Supreme Court rejected theappellation under the hilarious argument that the state Code didn´t contain anydiscrimination, as it previewed equal penalty for both of the offenders, the black and thewhite. In a long story of judicial decisions, the prohibition to inter-racial marriagessuffered partial kicks until they were totally abolished in 1967. A judicial mark wasestablished in 1923, in a case not related to inter-racial marriage, when the SupremeCourt absolved an accused person to teach in German, which would be infringing thestate law banishing education in foreign language to children under the 8 th grade. Thejudges interpreted the sense of word „freedom‟ in the context of the 14 th Emend andconcluded that it „means not only physical freedom, but also the right of the individualto contract, engage in a common occupation, acquire utile knowledge, marry, create ahome and raise children‟. In California, the banishment of the prohibition to inter-racial marriages has onlyoccurred in the post-war, in the case Peres versus Sharp of 1948. Andrea Perez, whiteand Sylvester Davis, black, had denied a request of a license of matrimony by thecounty of Los Angeles, since the civil code of the state determined that „all marriages ofwhite people with blacks, mongoloids, Malays or mixed are illegal and null‟. Peresappealed to the supreme court of California arguing that she and Davis pertained to theCatholic Church that did never prohibit the matrimony between persons of differentraces and that the Code was against the religious freedom of the couple, protected in the1st Emend. The tribune received the appeal not only based on the 1 st Emend but also onthe 14th Emend, defining marriage as a fundamental right of free men, citing theinterpretation formulated in the case of 1923 and declaring that law against theconstitution because it was discriminatory and irrational.
  • 84. The vote of the judge J. Carter, in accordance to the majority, characterized thestate law as a product of ignorance, prejudice and intolerance, citing the Declaration ofIndependence, the Bill of Rights and the Letter of the United Nations. He also advancedover the eugenic arguments presented in the defense of the questioned law, comparing itto parts of Mein Kampf in where Hitler sustained the superiority of the pure races. Inthat year, less than three months after the judgment, the Universal Declaration ofHuman Rights appeared. Under the impact of the world war and the Nazi Holocaust, thenotion of race retroacted and the idea of equality of human beings was diffused in lawsand judicial decisions. Another step happened in 1964 in the judicial decision of the case McLaughlinversus Florida that cancelled a state law prohibiting the habitual sharing of a room atnight by a black and a white person. The law didn´t prohibit matrimonies, but the inter-racial cohabitation, and previewed punishment of prison for up to one year or a ticket ofup to 500 dollars. The disclaimer appealed based on the 14 th Emend against the decisionof the supreme court of Florida that sustained the constitutionality of the law based inthe precedent article of Pace versus Alabama. McLaughlin versus Florida was a more complex case, as the law in question waspart of a legal chapter entitled „Adultery and Fornication‟ that criminalized thesepractices for any couple. The difference was placed only that in the case of cohabitationbetween blacks and whites it was not necessary to prove sexual intercourse. TheSupreme Court gave won to the claimer and in the justification showed that theprecedent of 1883 had already been knocked down in other decisions. The verdictlimited to register the singular discrimination of the law and left pendant the question ofvalidity of state prohibition of inter-racial marriages. A few months before, theCongress approved the historical Law of Civil Rights. Even thus, vital elements of legalsegregation survived to scrutiny of the constitutional court. The final knock-down came in the case Loving versus Virginia of 12th June 1967when the Supreme Court declared invalid the restrictions of that state to inter-racialmarriages. Nowadays, 12th June is celebrated in many places of USA as the LovingDay. The commemoration often involves inter-racial couples and is organized as amodest civil project of exulting tolerance and equality. Loving is a surname, full of suggestive resonances, of the white Richard whomarried in 1958 with the black woman Mildred Jeter. The couple lived in Virginia andcontracted matrimony in the District of Columbia, avoiding the restrictions of theirstate, but they were imprudent to continue living in the county of Caroline. A statetribunal condemned them to one year in prison with suspension of the sentenceconditioned to the transference of couple to other state. In his argument, the judge said:„God created the races white, black, yellow, Malay and red and put them in separatedcontinents, so, if was not due to an artificial interference in this arrangement, therewould be no motives for such matrimonies. If He separated the races shows that Hedoesn´t want them to mix‟.
  • 85. The Loving couple moved to the District of Columbia and in 1963 they startedto appeal in the state courts of Virginia. But they faced a wall of anti-miscegenationlaws that described in detail and meticulously preview punishments to those whomarried in other states. In the nucleus of those laws there was the absolute prohibition tomatrimony or cohabitation of a white person to any other who was not white. TheSupreme Court of Appellations of the state confirmed the original decision by justifyingthe validity of the laws in the propositions of „preserving the racial integrity of thecitizens‟ and „avoid the adulteration of the blood‟. In the conclusive sentence, the Supreme Court strongly bombed thediscriminatory laws of Virginia and the arguments of their tribunals, considering themas „means destined to conserve the supremacy of the whites‟ and declaring against theConstitution all acts that restrict rights of citizens under the invocation of race. Thejudges considered the distinctions among citizens derived from their ancestors ashorrendous for a free country whose institutions are founded in the doctrine of equality.The sentence almost declared illegal the racial classifications, but they didn´t advancethis signal.Melting pot Literally, melting pot means a recipient where metals are liquefied and welded.In the myth of origin of USA, the American man is distinguishable from the British manbecause of a product of the meeting of immigrants from different layers who, together,engaged in the construction of a new nation. The concept appeared at the time of theWar on Independence and appears as an embryo in a travel report of 1782. „From wheredid all these people come? They are a mixture of English, Scottish, Irish, French, Dutch,German and Swedish. From this promiscuous crossing emerged the race now named asAmerican. What is, therefore, the American, this new man? He is not a Europeanneither a descendant of a European; so this strange mixture of blood that is not seen inany other country. The Americans were, one day, scattered in all Europe; here, they gotincorporated into one of the best population systems ever seen‟. The vision of a fusion of races had, in general, a clear limit. The Americansderived from a mixture of blood among Europeans, but not a broad mixture wherewesterns, Amerindians or blacks could be included. Throughout XIX century, with theconsolidation of the scientific racism, the melting pot got a diverse sense from theoriginal one – and in contrast to the literal meaning of the expression. It was not afusion of bloods, but a coexistence of different strains in a single political mold, definedby the values of the Republic of the citizens. Something closer to a fruit salad than to apot of metals.
  • 86. Ralph Wando Emerson was a philosopher and a poet of transcendentalism, thepioneer of the American environment romanticism. He exalted the miscegenationbetween whites and non-whites but figured as an isolated voice. The theatrical pieceThe Melting Pot of Israel Zangwill was mounted in 1908. It registers the first exact useof this expression. It was an adaptation of Romeo and Juliet that celebrated the culturalassimilation of the immigrants in the new country. The pot of USA included Germans,French, English, Irish, Jews and Russians but not the races black, yellow and red. The law of naturalization of 1790 delimitated the racial frontiers of theAmerican identity. According to it, only the immigrants who were free white personscould request naturalization and citizenship. A new law promulgated after five yearsconserved the racial limitations. Only in 1870 under the effects of the Civil War theAfrican immigrants got the rights to ask for citizenship. The yellows from Oriental andSouthern Asia had to wait for the post-war. In the famous poem „The New Colossus‟ recorded in bronze in the Statue ofFreedom, Emma Lazarus describes USA as the port of immigrants, of masses indisorder, of poor and downcast persons who wanted the freedom. The assimilation,however, was never easy, even among the white Europeans. The Irish and the Italians,as well as the Jews faced prejudice and, only half a century ago, John Kennedy had toensure to the electorate that we wanted to be the president not as a catholic, but as anAmerican. The melting pot, however, was redefined effectively by the lines of frontierof race. The common sense suggests that racism is an antique phenomena that shouldweaken slowly and continuously, in a linear process as time goes by. The mistake ofthis idea is to imagine that the black slavery was a culminant point of racism. But thelegal institute of slavery has no relation with racism and didn´t need it to exist: the blackslaves were not slaves because they were black, but because they were converted intothe condition of products in the molds of a legal and political system that admitted theextension of the right of property of a human body. The racism got clearly organizedonly in the autumn of the slavery market that liked Europe, America and Africa. The state of Pennsylvania, placed outside the domains of slavery, abolished itsanti-mixing laws in 1780, before the end of the War on Independence and its examplewas followed by some states in the XIX century. However, between the end of the XIXcentury and the first decades of the XX century, nothing less than 30 states producedanti-mixing laws. The racial segregation enhanced as a reaction to the reforms of theReconstruction. The black segregated churches started to appear in 1816 when theMethodist African Church of Zion was established. This tendency only got the aspectsof a general movement between the Civil War and the decade of 1880 with thesegregation of the Black Baptists. In New Orleans, the creoles, old liberated slaves fromFrench ascendance, composed a modest medium class until the decade of 1880, whenthe worsening of segregation pushed them to close to the poor blacks –that helped the
  • 87. conditions of the appearance of the jazz music. As a manifestation of systematicsegregation in a context of crescent urbanization, between 1910 and 1914 the first greattheaters back to an exclusively black public such as the New Palace in New York thePeking and the State in Chicago and Booker T. Washington in St Louis, named in honorto a respected leader of the black community. In the idea of fruit salad, the melting pot describes the American society as acollection of racial groups with cultural identities essentially distinct. The urbanresidential segregation in the way it occurred in USA derived from the division of thesociety according to clear lines of race. The American urban ghettos contrast with thepattern of spatial segregation of Brazil, essentially linked to the income money andmade of racial mosaics. The classical model was developed in Los Angeles: the whitesgot separated by running away into the suburbs but in the central areas the Hispanic andblack areas formed separated groups with small delimitated ethnical regions of Chinese,Philippines and Koreans. In the center of the concept of melting pot there is the conviction that the spineof the nation is constituted by the white Protestants, the race configured by the originalfusion of European strains. The eugenic imperative to preserve the integrity of a whiterace inspired the anti-mixing laws. But the vision of a threatening to the white Anglo-Saxon Protestant identity of USA was not confined to the blacks. In 2004, undercrescent concerns regarding the flux of Mexican immigrants, the politic scientistSamuel Huntington, famous by his Clash of Civilizations, published Who Are We? TheChallenges to America´s National Identity. The book identifies in the Hispanicimmigration a corrosive acid acting over the American culture and gave arguments for aconservative articulation to restrict the rights of the immigrants. The arguments of Huntington are that USA is not a nation of immigrants, but ofcolonizers. The original European colonizers melted their identities and established thecultural basis of the country. In that origin it can be found the values of the constitution,the Protestant ethics, and the special place of religion in the social life. Everything thatcame after was only addition, so that the appearance of a massive immigration of LatinAmericans who are Catholic and adapted to a culture of dependence frazzles the rocksover the nation is erected. Who Are We? - As Alan Wolfe registered- is a nationalistshout, a cultural reaction remnant from the thoughts of Madison Grant than bring usback to the blacks and eugenics.Jim Crow In the judicial history that culminates with Loving versus Virginia, in anymoment it is posed the problem of knowing who is black. The claimant don´t questionthe racial label that defined them and even when a verdict such as Perez versus Sharp
  • 88. pointed notorious inconsistencies in the paradigms of eugenics, the judges never hadimagined the hypothesis of declaring null the system of racial classification on the legalsegregation erected. This conceptual clarity is due to Madison Grant, a lawyer who wasborn in New York in 1865 and who divided his attentions between eugenics and theenvironment conservation. Grant had friendship with the presidents Theodore Roosevelt and HerbertHoover, created national parks, formulated the first laws against the hunt of deer andhelped to create the Zoo of Bronx. Because of his insistence, in September 1906, OtaBenga, a pygmy from the Belgian Congo, was exhibited in the jail of the apes of thatzoo. After ten years, Grant published The Passing of the Great Race, an eugenic treatisethat delineated that the Nordic race was the responsible for the development ofcivilization of mankind. The book sold more than 1.5 millions of issues in two decades,something that serves as an index of the dimensions of the reaction against thecontamination of the country by the hordes of Asiatic and Catholic Europeans thatarrived in the summit of the greatest migratory wave of the history of USA. A visceral fight by the control of the American Association of Anthropologyopposed Grant to Franz Boas and ended with the victory of the second. The legend saysthat Grant refused to shake hands with the Jew Boas. Under the influence of the eugenicGrant, the German eugenic movement adopted the thesis of Nordic race, which the Naziideologist Alfred Rosenberg named as Nordic-Arian. The German Nazi governmentpromoted the translation and broadcasted official editions of the book of Grant, whoreceived from Hitler the compliments: „this book is my bible‟. After the academic loss to Boas, Grant founded with Francis Galton the GaltonSociety, the principal eugenics organization of USA and devoted to give legislativeform to his racial ideas. In 1924, USA approved the Immigration Law, whichestablished quotes for the entrance of Europeans from South and East and prohibited theentrance of Asiatic. Virginia promulgated a Law of Racial Integrity that became themost famous anti-mixing laws of the country. Grant advised directly the production ofboth of the laws. The state law of Virginia determined in the item 5 that „it is illegal that anywhite person marries to anyone who is not white or a person with a blood mixture ofwhite and American Indian. To the finality of this law, the term white person will beapplied only to who doesn´t have any trace other than the Caucasian; but people thathave 1/16 or less of American Indian blood and don´t have any other non-Caucasianblood will be defined as white. Many anti-mixing laws existed in USA before the law of Virginia of 1924.However, they used diverse fractions to define mixtures of blood that put somebodyoutside the domains of the white race. In some states, 1/16 or 1/32 of black blood werenot enough to maculate the white essence of person. In others, the term mulatto gavesome confusion in the racial classification. The law written with the help of Grantremoved ambiguities. With the very partial exception of the Indian blood, a single drop
  • 89. of non-white blood contaminated irreversibly the carrier, excluding them from the whiterace. One drop rule. The rule of the single drop served as a model to state laws thatsoon adapted their definitions to the paradigm of racial purity. Before the law ofVirginia, the miscegenation between people with European and African ancestry werenot welcomed but were seen as a matter of life the existence of mixed persons, usuallyclassified as mulattos. The law of 1924 had no interest in precisely defining the non-white races, although it determined a nominal classification of the inhabitants of thestate according to its racial composition. However, since it delimitated meticulously thewhite race, it produced the legal division of the population into whites and non-whites. The repercussions of the law didn´t stand restricted to the sphere of matrimony.Under the baton of Walter Plecker, chief of statistical registers of Virginia, the statesimplified the original classification in six races, emitting birth certificates that labeledall persons exclusively in the categories of white and colored. This way, the Indians lostthe privilege of generating white descendants for successive miscegenation and, mostimportantly, two entire generations of Indians were precluded to prove their ethnicalidentity to the effect of taking participation in federal programs. Before the Civil War, many American states, mostly in the South, created lawsof discrimination against blacks. The Constitution of Indiana in 1851 prohibited thatblacks and mulattos established in the state and the slavery states, without exception,had anti-mixing laws. The Black Codes, as these laws were named, were reinforced inthe time of the loss of the Confederation in 1865, but were removed soon by thegovernments of the Reconstruction. With the end of the military occupation of the oldconfederated states in 1877, the governments of the redeemers approved segregationistlaws, named as Laws Jim Crow. Jim Crow is a proper name used as an adjective withpejorative meaning, from unknown origin, and that refers to the black American. Theuse of this expression was documented since 1830. The one drop rule – in the beginningunder slightly distinct forms, but after uniformed by the model of Virginia – gave thestructure for the legal system of discrimination. In the states of South and Southwest, the segregationist laws embraced marriage,sexual relations, public transports, restrooms, schools, hospitals, hotels, restaurants,prisons, theaters, libraries, sports equipment and open areas. In North Carolina, a lawprohibited the interchange of books from schools for whites and schools for blacks:after being used by somebody of one race, the issue became of exclusive use of thatrace. Strictly, the Jim Crow laws didn´t expand further than the limits of the oldConfederation and states under the area of influence. However, the segregation in thebeginning of the XX century had a general aspect. The electoral bills and the necessityof alphabetization excluded almost all the blacks from the rights of voting, but manypoor whites could vote using breaches of the law. In the government of WoodrowWilson, the old Southern political elite found the way to again occupy high seats in the
  • 90. federal administration. The discrimination was intensified while the memories ofReconstruction got blurred in the past. In Washington and other cities, they erectedphysical barriers segregating black employees in offices, restaurants and restrooms offederal organs.Equality and difference The racial laws created after the Reconstruction immediately generated tensionsaround the principle of political and juridical equality consecrated in the 14 th Emend.The juridical law of the fight for civil rights is essentially the history of theinterpretation of the principle of equality. The first marked decision was adopted by the Supreme Court in the case Paceversus Alabama of 1883. Soon after, Plessy versus Ferguson in 1896 consolidated thejuridical doctrine of „separated but equal‟ that served as support to the segregationistlaws. In Louisiana, before the consolidation of the one drop rule, a state law separatedthe trains of passengers in cars for whites and cars for coloreds and blacks. HomerPlessy, citizen of New Orleans with one eight of black ancestry, participated in a smallgroup with disposition to defy in justice the Jim Crow laws. He entered in a wagon forwhites and no one impeded him. Inside the car, he declared to the employees his racialcondition and so he was arrested to not accepting the transference to a car destined tocoloreds. The case was taken to Supreme Court that decided against Plessy based on theargument that the accommodations were the same hence didn´t violate the 14 th Emend.In the single discordant vote, the judge John Marshall Harlan, previous owner of slaves,converted to the idea of equality in horror to Ku Klux Klan and to lynches, wrote thatthe Constitution refuses castes in the American society: „our Constitution is blindregarding color‟, as he anticipated the nuclear objective of the movement for civilrights. One year before the verdict, Booker Tagliaferro Washington conceded hisvaluable support to the idea that equality could walk together with segregation. He wasborn as a slave in 1856 and liberated in the end of the Civil War. He could study at auniversity in Virginia and became the rector of a new Normal School in Alabama thatbecame the University Tuskegee. In 1895, in front of a white audience of aninternational exposition of cotton breeders, he pronounced a speech where he defendedto hire black employees in the era of the great European immigration. This speech wasnicknamed pejoratively by Du Bois (the leader of NAACP) as the Concession ofAtlanta, since Booker Washington sustained that whites and blacks could progress
  • 91. together in segregation: „in all the purely social aspects we can be as separated as thefingers, but we have to be as united as a hand in all the essential things for the mutualprogress‟. The doctrine of the „separated but equal‟ proportioned a way to accommodatethe Jim Crow laws to the constitutional principle of equality. However, the tensionbetween separation and equality was present the whole first half of the XX century andsome decisions of the Supreme Court declared as against the constitution some aspectsof the segregationist laws. Brown versus Board of Education, the historic verdict of1954, was not a lightning in a clear sky, but ended the circle inaugurated by Plessyversus Ferguson and represented a fatal knock down in the doctrine over the legalbuilding of the racial separation had support. The case was organized by the local section of NAACP that convinced Oliver L.Brown to be the leader in a collective action of parents of black students against thesegregation in schools in Topeka, Kansas. The district tribune ruled in favor of thecouncil of education based in the precedent of Plessy versus Ferguson and arguing thatthe public schools for blacks had the similar quality of the ones for whites. TheSupreme Court linked the appellation of Brown to similar cases in other states, all ofthem sponsored by NAACP. However, with the exception of Topeka, the schools forblacks were clearly inferior. In 17 may by unanimity the Court declared that separatededucational installations are inherently unequal and violated the 14th Emend. It is false, however, the legend according the case of Brown versus Board ofEducation completely knocked down the doctrine of „separated but equal‟. The verdictwas confined to the sphere of education and the decisive argument was that thesegregation of children provoked on them a sense of inferiority in the blacks, withnegative repercussions in the motivation to learn. In the following years, cases such asNAACP versus Alabama (1958) and Boyton versus Virginia (1960) amplified thejudicial consensus against the segregationist laws. Even so, only with Loving versusVirginia the remnant columns of „separated but equal‟ finally ruined. Martin Luther King Jr. was 25 year-old and had just become a pastor in a BaptistChurch in Montgomery, Alabama, when the verdict of Brown versus Board ofEducation appeared. In the following year, he leaded the boycott to buses ofMontgomery that started the movement for civil rights. The political sense of themovement was „I have a dream‟, the famous speech he pronounced in front of theMemorial to Lincoln during the March over Washington in 28 th August 1963. „I have a dream‟ is a conversation with the ideals proclaimed by the founders ofthe American nation and that started invoking Abraham Lincoln: „One century ago, agreat American, whose symbolic shade we live now, assigned the Proclamation ofEmancipation. That momentous decree arrived as a great lighthouse of light and hopefor millions of black slaves. He arrived as a happy day rise to end the long night of theirslavery. But one hundred years after, the blacks are still not free. One hundred years
  • 92. after, the blacks still languish in the margins of the American society and they discoverto be exiled in their own land.‟ The exile, which reminded the Bible, had a deep programmatic objective. Theracial discrimination exiled the blacks, converting them into foreigners. The conquest ofthe civil rights meant a return from the exile, the return of the blacks to their own land.Against a tradition of black leaders who looked the world through the lenses of race,Luther King was saying that the black Americans were, first of all, Americans. Heprepared to connect the civil rights movement to the American Revolution: „when thearchitects of our Republic wrote the magnificent words of Constitution and of theDeclaration of Independence, they were assigning a promissory note and all theAmericans are heirs of it. This note was a promise that all people – yes, black peopleand white people – had a guarantee of the inalienable rights to life, freedom andhappiness. But instead of honoring this sacred obligation, USA gave to the blacks a badcheck, a check that came back with the inscription „no funds‟. I have a dream that oneday this nation will rise up and live the true sense of its creed: we sustain as a self-evident true that all persons were created equally‟. The climax arrives as a torrent of images where the scenarios of the Deep Southbecome visions of salvation and redemption. In the dream, „one day, in the red hills ofGeorgia, the sons of old slaves and of old owners of slaves will be able to sit together inthe same fraternity and there in Alabama, small black boys and small black girls willgive hands to small white boys and girls as brothers and sisters. In this day, all thevalleys will be elevated and all the hills and mountains will be lowered down and therough places will become smooth places and the tortuous places will become straight‟. The synthesis is very famous: „I have a dream where my four small kids will livein a nation where they will not be judged according to the color of their skin, but ofwhat is inside their character‟. The vision of Luther King, of a single American nation, was not in accordancewith other black leaders who wrote in the long and heterogeneous tradition of the blacknationalism. Malcolm X, born as Malcolm Little in 1925 in Omaha (Nebraska), was theprincipal representative of this perspective in the years 1950 and 1960, when the civilrights movement was boiling. Violence captured Malcolm in early childhood. Louise, his mother, wasgenerated in an act of rape by a white man against a black woman. His father, Earl, wasa layman Baptist preacher and member of an international organization founded by theJamaican Pan-Africanist Marcus Garvey. Earl died in an accident never well explained.Three of his brothers were murdered by whites, one of his uncles was a victim of lynchand his family lived for years under the threatening of hordes of Ku Klux Klan andother groups of white supremacy. In his adolescence, Malcolm was involved withrobberies and drug traffic in Boston and New York. In the years of prison from 1946 to1952, he entered to the Islam Nation, an Afro-Muslim denomination leaded by ElijahMuhammad who preached the black separatism.
  • 93. Malcolm X leaded the Islam Nation in New York based on the temple of Harlemuntil 1964, when he ruptured with the denomination due to the promiscuous behavior ofElijah Muhammad, converting into the traditional Islam and carrying out theperegrination to Mecca. Cassius Clay (Muhammad Ali) entered to the Islam Nationinfluenced by him and later also changed it to the traditional Islam. The intrigue thatmurdered the black leader in February 1965 was never totally clarified, but theevidences point to the denomination. Throughout most part of his political life, Malcolm X sustained the idea that theAmerican blacks are part of a Diaspora nation generated by the traffic of slaves. Hevisited Africa three times, meeting with government leaders, political and studentleaders. He defended in front of the Organization of African Unity the creation of theUnited States of Africa. During the period he stood in the Islam Nation, the sustainedkind of a black supremacy of ethnical and religious lines. After he ruptured with it, hereviewed this perspective of a racial conflict and lamented his previous opposition to thecoalition between blacks and whites. The March over Washington of Luther King was roughly criticized by MalcolmX, who saw it as movement controlled by whites and subordinated to the whitehistorical tradition of the American policy. In the speech „the ballot or the bullet‟ ofApril 1964, Malcolm X characterized the religion as a theme of the private sphere. Hedefined himself as a black nationalist fighting for freedom and appointed the followinggoals: „the black men must control the policies and the politicians in their owncommunity‟ and „we must command, operate and control the economy of ourcommunity‟. The black nationalism of Malcolm X, together with the left thinking of Lenin,Mao Tsé Tung, Che Guevara and Frantz Fanon inspired the foundation of the BlackPanthers Party by the young activists Huey P. Newton and Bobby Seale from Oakland,California, in 1966. Initially, the Black Panthers concentrated on the idea of self-defenseof the black communities and suburbs against the brutality of the police. With time, theParty expanded and substituted the doctrine of the Black Nationalism to the socialism.In this process, although conserving the characteristic of an exclusively black party, itpassed to condemn the black racism and to defend alliances with organizations ofMexican immigrants, pacifist groups and of the contra-culture. A dissidence of theBlack Panthers, leaded by Stokely Carmichael, restored the movement Black Power andthe concept of Black Nationalism. In the Olympic Games of the City of Mexico in 1968, Tommie Smith and JohnCarlos, gold and bronze medal-winners of 200 meters shallow, worn black gloves andmade the salute of the Black Panthers in the podium, during the ceremony of awards. Inthat year, the laconic director of FBI John Edgar Hoover classified the party as thegreatest threatening to the internal safety of the country. At this time, the Black Pantherswere divided into a political group and a group that used weapons, did demonstrationswith cars on the streets and got involved with fights against the police. Newton was
  • 94. arrested and condemned after a brawl transit where he involuntarily killed a policeman.Other activists were condemned under dubious accuses of conspiracy. In the subsequentyears the party fragmented into small fractions until it disappeared from the politicalscene. After the collapse of the organizations created in the years 1960, the heir ofBlack Nationalism fell down over the lap of Louis Farrakhan, son of Caribbeanimmigrants who entered into the Islam Nation inspired by Malcolm X and in 1978 hereconstructed the denomination that had got ruined by internal dissensions. Farrakhanwas a controversial figure, a brilliant speaker and author of homophobic and anti-Semitic comments. He leaded the March of One Million Men that reunited about half amillion of rioters in Washington in 1995. The march was invocated by Farrakhan as anexclusively masculine riot. However, other organizations shared the convocation,extending it to the women. Rosa Parks was one of the speakers. The speech hepronounced in that 17th October should be interpreted as a direct answer to the „I have adream‟ of Luther King. In the same way Luther King did three decades before, Farrakhan went back tothe figures of Lincoln, Jefferson and Washington, but to accuse them, not to rememberthe original promise of equality: „Abraham Lincoln saw in his time the great abysmbetween blacks and whites. When he saw this abysm, he pondered about a solution ofseparation. Abraham Lincoln never defended that we could members of a jury or wehad an equal statute of the whites of this nation. Abraham Lincoln said that, if it wasinevitable to exist superiors and inferiors, he preferred that the superior position wasoccupied by the white race‟. The accusation was that the founder fathers had lifted up an American nationanchored by the concept of the white supremacy. It was not, as wanted Luther King, torequire the meeting of the principles of the Declaration of Independence andConstitution, but to discharge the limited perspective of the founders, recreating thenation. Farrakhan didn´t have a program for this recreation but had one for the blacks.The first point of this program was the racial unity: „There is a new black man in theUSA today. There is a new black woman in the USA today. Now, brothers, from nowand forever we can never see us again with the narrow eyes of the limited frontiers ofour fraternal, civic, politic, religious or professional organizations. When you return toyour city and find a black man, a black woman, don´t ask them what is their social,political or religious affiliations. Simply know that they are your brothers‟. The threatening to the unity of the blacks came from the social assimilation thatFarrakhan described as a co-optation. The whites co-opted the blacks offering privilegesto a minority, sending the best athletes to NBA, to NFL and transforming them intocelebrities. The association of those blacks started to be with white men and women andassociation generates assimilation. The second point of the program of Farrakhan was tocreate a black economy and black policies, autonomous regarding the world of whites,starting from the individual efforts of blacks and of the general racial solidity: „Black
  • 95. man, you must not speak bad of white people. All you have to do is to go back homeand transform our communities in productive places. All you have to do is to make ourcommunities safe and decent places to live. And if we start to give the blackcommunities of companies, creating industries, defying us to be better than we are, thewhites, instead of driving their cars using the word nigger, they will say: look at them,they are wonderful; we can never say again that they are inferior‟. The preacher of the Islam Nation didn´t want to change society, as Malcolm Xor the Black Panthers nor obtain reparations for the slave past, as the preachers of theaffirmative action want. His speech was directed to a great black ghetto that should seeitself as a separated nation and progress separated. In the end, he proposed theconstitution of a fund for the economic development of the blacks, which would befinanced by a volunteer individual contribution of ten dollars monthly. In the view of Luther King, USA was born under a true promise of equality thatwas not honored by the governments. His fight was to recover that solemn promise of anation for all the citizens. This non-racial horizon definitely distinguished him from theBlack Nationalism in the versions revolutionary or conservative. The debate was overequality and difference. Contrary to Luther King, the Black Nationalism, over its manydissensions, converged into the creed that the race is the primordial fountain of identityand only the separation of the black and white nations could offer a solution for theproblem of racism. Ironically, the many groups of the Black Nationalism continueddeveloping the aims of the Jim Crow laws…The whole and the parts The policies of reverse discrimination started to be implanted in the beginning ofthe decade of 1970 in the government of Richard Nixon. The racial preferences wereaccepted without resistances as they molded in the consolidated notion of the meltingpot, helping the blacks to find to themselves a proportional place in the condominium ofraces of the American society. Together with the diffusion of these policies, the wordafro-American took the place of „black‟. The programs of affirmative action based in quotes for blacks didn´t demand theproduction of new concepts, as the one drop rule had made clear the limits of the races.This way, the federal and university initiatives of racial preferences didn´t need toconcern about the definition of the target-public to get the benefits. However, with thereverse discrimination, several judicial disputes were renewed over the sense of theprinciple of equality consecrated in the 14th Emend. University of California Regents versus Bakke, in 1978, was the firstopportunity for the Supreme Court to pronounce over the juridical nucleus of thequestion. The candidate do the medical school Allan Bakke, white, appealed to the
  • 96. tribunals after, in two occasions, he couldn´t get a matriculation even that he got betterresults than those to the approved in the reserve for blacks. The Court got divided andby 5 against 4 it deliberated that race could be used to determine programs ofaffirmative action, but not under an inflexible system of quotes. Bakke was admittedinto the medical school, but the constitutional tension persisted. In 1979, the Courtemitted a similar verdict in the case United Steel-workers of America, AFL-CIO versusWeber. In the following year, in Fullilove versus Klutznick, the Supreme Court was infront an appellation against a federal law that destined 10% of the budget of publicworks to contracts with companies owned by member of minorities. The law defined sixminorities with benefits: blacks, Hispanics, Orientals, Indians, Eskimos and people fromthe Auletian Islands. The verdict affirmed that the law was in accordance to theconstitution under the argument that it tried to remediate the discrimination in realitythat the owners of minority groups suffered in the process of sub-hiring. According tothe judges, in a context of a initiative for compensation, „it is not asked the Congress toact blindly regarding the color question‟. In those times of the peak of the racial preference policies, the Supreme Courtavoided verdicts of principles, trying to conciliate the principle of equality to thedemands of correction of the discriminatory heritage and the promotion of diversity. InWygant versus Jackson Board of Education in 1986, it was declared against theconstitution the district policy of, in case of dismissal, to fire firstly the white teachers.The argument of the judges concentrated in the difference between the act of hiringwhere the weight of the racial preferences are distributed diffusively in the society andthe act of dismissal, which touches the employment of single individuals. In the following year, in United States versus Paradise, the Supreme Courtsupported a decision of a federal court that had imposed racial quotes for hiring andpromoting inside of the Department of Public Safety of Alabama. The verdict supportedon the proof that the department of that state of old segregationist tradition keptpractices of persistent, systematic and obstinate discriminatory exclusion of blacks. From the juridical point of view, the generic concept of historic repair was neverconsidered sufficient to legitimate policies of racial preference. In City of Richmondversus Croson, in 1989, the Supreme Court judged as against the constitution amunicipal program to reserve 30% of the budget for public works to hire companiesowned by blacks. The judges argued that „an undefined allegation that there werediscrimination in the past can´t justify the inflexible use of racial quotes‟. The verdict inthe case Adarand Constructions versus Peña, in 1995, over a similar federal program,requested that the quotes were strictly cut to correct some specific distortions. TheCourt went further, questioned the federal policies based on race and determined that allthe racial classifications imposed by organs of government must by analysed by areviewer tribunal under strict scrutiny. Outside the tribunals, the debate organized around the poles of juridical equalityand universal policies at one side and of the racial differences and historic repair at the
  • 97. other. Anyway, the contenders put the heir of Luther King in the center of the polemicsand offers contrasting responses to the hard task to know what would be the position ofthe leader of the civil rights movement if he lived to see the development of the reversediscrimination policies. In an interview to the TV program Crossfire, the writer David Horowitz, one ofthe main voices of the American conservatism, provoked an international noise when hejudged Luther King as a conservative, since he believed essentially in the character, thevalue that the conservatives defend nowadays. It is necessary to completely forget aboutthe historic context that Luther King lived to classify him as a conservative, but hisfamous speech over the „inside character‟ raises legitimate questions about the sense ofthe civil rights movement. The essayist Tim Wise says that the criticizers of the reverse discrimination haveof Luther King only a line of a speech. As other activists of the affirmative policies, hementions parts where Luther King gets distance from the unconditional defense ofblindness in front of color. In fact, it is not difficult to harvest in the books of LutherKing phrases that contain the idea of racial compensations. In Why We Can´t Wait, heaffirms that it is not realistic to ask the blacks to only require equality in the law. In„Where do We Go from Here‟, he asks that, after such a long period of discrimination,the society makes something to favor the blacks to reach equality of conditions. In aninterview to Playboy in 1965 he used the expression „special compensatory programs‟and draw a parallel with the treatment given to the veterans of war. They were not only words. Luther King leaded the Breadbasket Operation, acampaign developed in 12 cities to press companies that discriminated blacks againsthiring to correct their postures. The idea of historic repair appears in the interview toPlayboy as: „for two centuries, the blacks were enslaved and robbed from any salary –richness potentially added to what would be the legacy of their descendants. All therichness of USA nowadays could not compensate the blacks for these centuries ofexploitation and humiliation. However, the Luther King of the heralds of reverse discrimination is as unreal asthe one of Horowitz and can only be sustained over careful fragments of his words. Infact, the leader of the civil rights movement tended to agree in a crucial aspect with theold texts of Du Bois, to whom the white workers had nothing to gain with thesegregation, except the psychological reward of pertaining to the powerful race and as areturn they conceded the political and economic power to the elites. In an inspiredexpression of Luther King, the poor whites were the derived victims of slavery and ofthe Jim Crow laws. This historical interpretation is a key to understand the extension ofpoverty among the whites of the south of USA. The Jim Crow laws depreciated thework in a generalized way, contributing to compress the salary of blacks and whites.The legal segregation divided the working class, reducing the power of the syndicatesand impeding the formation of reformist political coalitions. Soon before the Second
  • 98. World War, the enhancement of the electoral rates in eight Southern states excludedfrom the electorate virtually all the blacks and also two thirds of the whites. Luther King had everything of this in mind when he explicated that his Bill ofRights to the poor, inspired in the programs for the veterans of war, should give benefitsto both black and white poor. In Where do We Go from Here, his next to last book, hewent further. He registered that in absolute numbers there were twice white poor thanblack poor in USA and affirmed that instead of an excessive emphasis in the relationsbetween poverty and racial discrimination, it would be better to fight poverty thatkicked both whites and blacks. The Baptist minister, sociologist, theologist Luther King, son of a pastor wholeaded the section of NAACP in Atlanta, doesn´t fit in the trace of a caricature.Philosophically, he wasn´t aligned to the progressive liberals, who believed in humanperfection and interpreted salvation as a creation of a paradise in Earth through civicaction. Instead, he was aligned to the fundamentalist doctrine of his black church thathad roots in the notions of the original sin, the salvation in another world and in a Godintensely active, ready to forgive and also to punish. Politically, he markedlyparticipated in the progressive coalition in the fights for civil rights and against the Waron Vietnam, articulating a program of reforms targeted to the social inclusion of blackand white poor. In the months before his murder, the leaded the Campaign of the PoorPeople and traveled in the country to reunite a multi-racial army of the poor that shouldpress the Congress to approve the Bill of Rights of the Poor. At the time of Luther King, the affirmative action had not yet assumed the aspectof racial preferences and even less the numeric quotes for blacks. The „one line of aspeech‟ over inside of the character expresses his true convictions of a nation based onthe political equality. There is, of course, a black question in Luther King´s thinking. Itcouldn´t be in other way, as the laws of diverse states and a solid segregationist traditionmade the blacks citizens of second class. But the multiculturalist doctrine and the racialpolicies put into practice in the decade of 1970 represented a fundamental rupture withthe nucleus of the vision of Luther King. The heir of the civil rights movement and the judicial ambivalence as expressedin the decisions of the Supreme Court didn´t avoid the expansion of the policies ofreverse discrimination. During almost two decades these new racial laws took the placeof the Jim Crow laws, extinguished little time before. The substitution of one to theothers testifies the force of the paradigm of the melting pot and of the one drop rule.USA, even after the political storm of the 1960 years, still see itself as a wholefragmented into pieces that can be easily named by ethnical and racial references. Theblack leader Jesse Jackson, more than any other one, incarnated the persistence of thisconception. Jackson was 27 year-old and was with Luther King in Memphis, Tennessee, inthe fatidic 4th April 1968. He was born in South Carolina, son of Helen Burns, motherwhen she was 16 year-old, and Noah Robison, married to another woman. He took
  • 99. opportunities of sports scholarships to conclude university and entered to a theologicalschool, which he didn´t conclude, before devoting himself totally to the movementleaded by Luther King. In 1966, he directed the Breadbasket Operation in Chicago andsoon after he became the national director of the initiative. Three years after the murder of Luther King in Memphis, due to divergenceswith Ralph Abernathy, the new chief of SCLC, Jackson created his own organization,the Push Operation. His presidential candidatures of 1984 and 1988 stopped in theprimaries of the Democrats, but conferred him national influence and allowed him toarticulate the Rainbow Coalition. The two organizations were grouped together in 1996in the Rainbow/Push. Leading them, and in the molds of the Democrat Party, Jacksonconverted in the most salient herald of the racial policies in USA. The civil leader Jackson had few in common with the sectary preacherFarrakhan, his contemporary in the stage of the American black politics. The firstexpressed an integrative policy that depended on a network of politicians, economiccorporations and academic institutions. The second conducted a movement of autonomyfor the blacks whose vitality was supported by the popular adhesion to his leadership.Both were followers of anti-Semitic ideas (Jackson much less than Farrakhan) and bothshared the idea that the American nation is not composed by single individuals, but bycollectivities delimitated by the frontiers of race. Rainbow Coalition, the name of the political organization of Jackson, broadcaststhe concept of a multicultural nation. The speech he pronounced in front of theDemocrat National Convention in 1984 was very revealing: „our flag is red, white andblue but our nation is a rainbow: red, yellow, brown, black and white – and all of us areprecious to the eyes of God‟. Translating the sense of melting pot, which makes thewhole to be the mere exact sum of the parts, he constructed the adequate metaphor tomulticulturalism: „USA is not like a blanket – a single piece of fabric of the same tissue,same color, same texture, same size. USA is more likely a patchwork with many retails,many pieces, many colors, many sizes, all sewn and tailored by a uniform thread. Thewhite, the Hispanic, the black, the Arabian, the Jew, the woman, the native American,the small farmer, the businessman, the environmentalist, the pacifist, the young, the old,the lesbian, the gay and the invalid constitute the American patchwork. Multiculturalism, as expressed by Jackson, constitutes a conservative andintegrative option to the program of the Black Nationalism. At the same time, itrepresents a strategy different of the one of Luther King, as the logic frontally hit theuniversal principle. The high tide of the policies of racial preference was coincident tothe era Reagan, but started to ebb even before the Conference of Durban.
  • 100. The vote of Anthony Kennedy The verdict of Adarand Constructors versus Peña fell as a block of ice in theboiling pot of the programs of reverse discrimination, as the argument cited Lovingversus Virginia to question the legitimacy of the racial classification of the citizens.Reacting immediately the president Bill Clinton, a notorious defender of the policies ofracial preferences, established in July 1995 a series of parameters on affirmative action.The document of the White House basically asked to eliminate the use of numericalquotes but interpreted the words of the judges as a sign of reaffirmation the necessity ofaffirmative action. The Supreme Court used the first opportunity to contest the presidentialinterpretation. In 1996 in the case Hopwood versus University of Texas Law School, thedecision confirmed a sentence of a court of appellations that had cancelled the programof affirmative action to admission in that University. Entering into the field ofprinciples, the court of appellations declared invalid the use of race as one of the factorsamong many others in the selection of candidates, annulling the precedent of Universityof California versus Bakke. Under the impact of these decisions, states and universities reverted policies thatseemed to be consolidated. In the end of 1997, California approved the Proposition 209that says the state must never discriminate against or offer preferential treatment to anyperson or group based on race, color, sex, ethnicity or national origin in theadministration of the public jobs, public education and public business. One year after,the state of Washington approved the Initiative 200, similar to the Californian law,abolishing completely the programs of affirmative action. Behind the Proposition 209, there is the figure of Ward Connerly. Black,according to the one drop rule, but mixed into four equal parts – black, Irish, French andChoctaw Indian – in his own definition, Wardell Anthony Connerly was born inLouisiana in 1939 in times of uncontestable segregation, concluded Arts and PoliticalScience and reached the position of rector of the University of California in 1993. Inthis condition, the was noticeable to denounce the programs of affirmative action of theinstitution as equivalent to racial discrimination and convinced the direction of theuniversity to abolish the racial preferences, but keeping affirmative action based onsocial and economic criteria. Republican of liberty thinking, Connerly assumed the command of the campaignof civil rights in California, which was successful in approving the Proposition 209 with54% of favorable votes and against the opposition of the foundations Ford, Rockefellerand Carnegie and also ACLU and the syndicate of the teachers of the state. After, heextended the campaign to other states and succeeded in approving similar propositionsin Washington (1998) and Michigan (2006). In California, he defended a proposition,
  • 101. finally beat, that would have prohibited the state government to classify peopleaccording to criteria of race, ethnicity or national origin. In the Supreme Court, a solid majority was ready to stop the way to theostensive policies of racial preferences, but there was a fracture over the generalprinciple of race as accessory criteria in educational programs. The first battle wascarried out in Grutter versus Bollinger, a case about the system of admission to theFaculty of Law of the University of Michigan that had generated conflicting verdicts ininferior instances. In 2003, the dispute reached the constitutional court that by 5 votesagainst 4 invalidated Hopwood versus University of Texas and allowed the use of raceas one among many other criteria of selection. However, by 6 against 4 votes, thejudges declared as unacceptable the system of adding points with racial basis andrequired an individualized analysis of the candidates. The second battle was decided in 2007 and had a different end, but reproducedthe result of 5 against 4. Two distinct claims on programs of „racial equilibrium‟ insecondary schools were grouped together and appreciated in Parents versus Seattle. Theverdict prohibited the use of racial criteria in the admission of students. In theargumentation, the majority made a dialogue deliberated with the history of USA. Thecrucial fragment is: „Governmental actions that divide the people through the race areessentially suspicious, since these classifications promote notions of racial inferiorityand conduct to policies of racial hostility; reinforce the belief, sustained by so manypeople during a lot of time of our history, that the individuals should be evaluated bytheir skin color; confirm arguments based on race and a conception of a nation dividedin racial clusters, hence contributing for an escalation of racial hostility and conflict‟. The implicit mention, but very evident, to the „one line of a speech‟ of LutherKing exterminated any doubt about the opinion of the majority. For the first time, adecision of the constitutional court attacked frontally the center of the idea of racialclassification and with it, the conception of a nation divided in racial clusters. Thepresident of the court, judge John Roberts, went back explicitly to the letter and to thespirit of Brown versus Board of Education and wrote: „regarding the use of race todetermine the entrance of children in the schools, the history shall be listened‟. Hewanted to say that the inversion of the sign of discrimination, as it has been done in theracial affirmative action, consecrates the races in the domains of the law, destroying theprinciples of citizenship. His conclusion: „the way to finish discrimination based on raceis to finish discrimination based on race‟. The judge Anthony Kennedy dared even more than the majority, outrunning theextreme conceptual frontier. Throughout all its history, USA carefully defined preciselywho was and who was not white. The one drop rule that gained a definite formulation inthe law of Virginia of 1924 was propitious to the exact demarcation of the white nation.The questioning of Kennedy is equal to a program of rupture with the logic of racialism. Parent versus Seattle was the culminant point of a trajectory of crescent rejectionto the racial policies started by the supreme court more than one decade ago. This
  • 102. trajectory can´t be understood outside a broader context of changing in the perceptionsof the Americans about the theme of race. Historically, the American society looked itself through the predominant prismof the duality black/white. In the post-war, the fluxes of Asiatic and Latin Americanimmigrants speckled this contrast, introducing new variables. The Hispanic immigrationdeveloped a singular paper in this process, as they moved together their ownconceptions on the theme of race. These conceptions, originated from the socialexperience of Latin America, are much more fluid and comprehend noticeably thenotion of miscegenation. USA could not stand immune to a world incapable ofdescribing the world in two polar categories. At the same time, the patterns of urban spatial segregation knew a curiousevolution. The white suburbs of medium class, a happening that got diffuse since thedecade of 1950, had consolidated the residential segregation in the American cities. In2000 the majority of the population lived in the suburbs but they experienced notablytransformations due to the influx of non-whites. From 2000 to 2006, the whitepopulation of the suburbs of the biggest cities grew 7%, while the Asiatic populationgrew 16%, the black, 24% and the Hispanic, 60%. In the same time interval, Manhattanand San Francisco lost a significant number of blacks and Hispanics and Los Angeleslost a great portion of blacks. The residential segregation is not lowering down, it ischanging form. While the traditional suburbs get less segregated, the exurbs expand,inhabited by the high medium class. The exurbs are condominiums far from the urbancenters, sometimes in rural areas, but functionally linked to the cities by the swingingflux of the inhabitants between their work places and homes. Although these exurbs arepredominantly white, these communities reflect a segregation pattern by income, notrace. At the same time, in the same direction, it is verified subtle processes, such asthe clear tendency of the augmentation of interracial unions and, not less important, tothe social recognition of multiracial identities. In the census of 1970 it was declaredonly 500 thousand kids (less than 18 year-old) from interracial unions. Twenty yearslater, this number enhanced to two millions and in 2000 to around three millions. These social tendencies of long time took a form of a crisis of the classificationsystem adopted by the office of the American census. The census, reflecting the conceptof melting pot, imposes to people the choice of one among four closed options of racialpertinence: white, black, Amerindian, Asiatic or originated from Pacific Islands. In aseparated item, the declaring person must answer if they pertain to the ethno-linguisticgroup of the Hispanics. This crisis emerged in the census of 1990, when around 10million people answered to the option „another‟ in the item of racial classification. Thissignificant group surrounded mainly Hispanics, but also many descendants frominterracial unions. This happening stimulated groups of citizens to propose a new multiracialcategory destined to hold the declarers who don´t identify themselves with the other
  • 103. races of the census. In July 1996 thousands of citizens manifested in Washington in aMarch of Multirracial Solidity invoked to press the government to include this newcategory in the census. Connerly and his American Institute of Civil Rights joined thecampaign in the following year. The Multirracial Movement, as it is known, convertedinto an influent voice, expressed in publications such as the Interracial Voice of NewYork and the Multirracial Activist based on Virginia. However, the venerable one drop rule would never give up easily. In 1997 a taskforce composed of 30 federal agencies to evaluate the proposal concluded curiously thatcreate a multiracial category would enhance the racial tensions and deep thefragmentation of the population. Under intense pressure of organizations involved withthe defense of the policies of racial preferences, the office of the census decided to keepthe old classification, allowing that the persons can choose to describe themselves aspertaining to more than one race. Such solution created nothing more than 63 racial combinations for non-Hispanics and another 63 to Hispanics, as recognized by the federal government,evidencing the absurd of the argument of „avoiding a greater census fragmentation ofthe population‟. But the task force evidenced another argument, through which it ispossible to clarify its real motivations: it explained that a multiracial category wouldcause confusion because it would group together in an indistinct group the descendantsof whites with blacks and of whites with Asiatic, making it difficult to delimitate thegroups receiving benefits of the reverse discrimination policies. The census of 2000 was carried out under the definitions of the old categoriesbut according to the new rules. However, even the modest changes of rules weresterilized by the decision of registering the persons who marked more than one racialcategory in a minority specific group – the one in more social disadvantage. Thus, forexample, in the publications of synthesis, the ones who marked white and Asian wereregistered and Asian; white and black, as black; and black and Asian, also as black. Thisway, the Estate conserved the definition of the one drop rule to define who is exactlywhite. Also, it avoided the reduction of the black population, satisfying the basicdemand of the organizations engaged in the promotion of racial preference. In thiscensus, the option „another‟ was selected by more than 15 millions of people. Almostseven millions of people marked as pertaining to two or more races. More than 90% ofthese last described themselves as fruits of unions between blacks and whites. Anthony Robert Hale, student of Literature of University of California inBerkeley and defender of the adoption of multiracial category in the census found thatto majority of people, „mixed race means no race‟. Maybe this is another motive whythe census decided to preserve the integrity of its racial aquarelle.
  • 104. Barack Obama: The Speech „There is no United States of the blacks, the United States of the whites, theUnited States of the descendants of Latin or the United States of the descendants ofAsiatic. There is only the United States of America.‟ Barack Obama pronounced thesewords in the Democrat National Convention of 2004 as a young candidate to the Senateby Illinois. Four years later, the senator was indicated as the candidate to president ofUSA, winning Hillary Clinton in the primaries of his party. Jesse Jackson criticized in the presidential campaign of 2008 to not emphasizingthoroughly the theme of race and in the interval of an interview, imagining that themicrophones were off he confessed his desire in gelding the Democrat candidate.Deeply, Obama retook the lost ties since the murder of Luther King, highlighting theuniversal public policies. In a book published at the half of his mandate of senator, hewrote: „I reject any policy based only in race, sex, sexual orientation or victimization‟.Obama didn´t show himself as a black politician (as Jackson would like to) andsuggested as post-racial future for the nation. In the apex of the dispute with Hillary Clinton, the campaign of Obama wasconfronted to its most difficult defy, when the reverend Jeremiah Wright, pastor of hisblack church, the man who turned official his marriage and baptized his kids, in aresentful preach, blamed USA as a racist nation. The candidate needed to react to ascandal – an instead of dissociating from the old confessor, offered a balance of the„racial impasse in which we are immerged since many years ago‟. The speech, elegantand emotive, pronounced in Philadelphia in 18 th March 2008 is written in the pieces ofthe political oratory that mark an epoch. Obama examined the fountains of the persistence of the American racial schismand indicated the signs of its possible overcome. Layer by layer, he dug the soil thathides the signs of the sour of blacks in relation to whites, putting into evidence therelations with the long history of discrimination and segregation. As Luther King haddone a quarter of a century ago, he retook the principle of equality consecrated in thedocuments of the foundation of USA and showed the way they form a stepping stonefor the fight against racism. But, breaking a frontier that was not cut by Luther King, heintroduced a vision of a society culturally mixed. The courageous pass started from abiographical declaration: „I am son of a black man of Kenya and a white woman ofKansas. I was raised with the help of a white grandfather who survived the Depressionto serve in the Army of Patton during the Second World War and the help of a whitegrandmother who worked in an assembly line of bombardiers in Fort Leavenworthwhile he was overseas. I frequented some of the best schools of USA and lived in one ofthe poorest nations of the world. I am married to a black American woman who bringsin her the blood of slaves and of owners of slaves – an inheritance that we transmitted toour two precious girls. I have brothers, sisters, nephews, nieces, uncles and cousins of
  • 105. all races and all tons of skin, scattered in three continents and for all of the time I live Iwill never forget that in on other country of Earth my personal history would ever bepossible‟. He was describing himself as a mixed. In USA the word mestizo is importedfrom Spanish. Sometimes, it is used the compound words half-breed and half-blood,which remains to a blood division, but can´t translate the idea of fusion. This difficultyis not a problem in the language, but a testimony of the cultural Anglo-Saxonexperience and of the American history. The one drop rule still survives and according to it, Obama can´t exist as amixed: either he is black or he doesn‟t exist. The solution to this implies in a conceptualrevolution, which is the redefinition of the melting pot. This was what Obama suggestedas a conclusion of his personal and familiar description: „It is a history that didn´t mademe as the most conventional of the candidates. But this is a history that marked mygenetic personality with the idea that this nation is more than the sum of its parts – that,starting from many, we are only one‟. To be more than a simple sum of the parts: this is a formidable defy to USA.BLACK INTO WHITE „Morena‟, „nutty‟, „honeyed white‟, „tanned‟, „cinnamon‟, „chocolate‟, „sararah‟,„copper‟, „sun burned‟, „waxed‟, „brown‟, „half black‟, „honeyed‟, „parahyba‟, „burnedrose‟, „freckled‟, „toasted‟, „swarthy‟… In the National Survey by Samples ofDomiciles (PNAD) of 1976 the censors of IBGE (Brazilian Institute of Geography andStatistics) registered 136 different answers to the request of self-declaration ofcolor/race of the interviewed. The result was interpreted by intellectuals and activists of organizations of theblack movement as a proof of the insidious effects of a disseminated (but subterranean)racism that would live in the Brazilian society. The blacks don´t want to assume theirtrue identity, hiding it under the blanket of uncountable euphemisms: this was thediagnosis that they reached starting not from any relevant evidence, but from a pre-existent interpretation of the Brazilian history and of the social relations of the country. This diagnosis had consequences. Few after a decade, organizations of the blackmovement deflagrated a civic and educative campaign to persuade the blacks to declarein the census of 1991, their true color/race. The principal instrument of the initiativewas an outdoor of a beautiful young black woman and claiming: “What is your color?Answer with good s(c)ense. Do not let your color pass in white‟. The idea was to takethe opportunity of the census to confer visibility to the blacks since in the vision of the
  • 106. promoters of the campaign this group had virtually been eradicated from the nationalpolitical scenario. In the end, the aim was to promote an identity rectification. Censes have multiple utilities. Less visible, but not less important, than itsadministrative function are their identity functions. In the system of racial classificationof the American census, as a reflex of the one drop rule, there is not a multiracialcategory. The biological fact of miscegenation and the cultural notion of miscegenationare officially banned. The system of classification of the Brazilian census is doublydistinguished from the American one. Firstly, the concept of race appears as equal tocolor, which signs absence of objectivity. Secondly, there is a category expressivelydesignated to shelter the persons who identify themselves as mixed. This categoryappears under the curious label of „browns‟ (pardo) and has nothing of peripheral: in thedrawer of the browns almost two fifties of the population is classified. Neither whites, nor blacks: the idea of an intermediary category, mixed, sends tothe formation of the Brazilian national identity. Haddock Lobo, organizer of the censusof Rio de Janeiro in 1849 rejected to insert an item about color in the survey because heconsidered odious the racial classifications. The first national census was carried out in1872 and introduced this type of classification using the categories of whites, blacks,browns and caboclos (the slang for Amerindians). The following census of 1890 keptthe pattern but substituted the terms „brown‟ and „caboclo‟ to mestiço (mixed). The elites of the Empire of Brazil interpreted their mission as a creation of amodern civilization – which means, European – in the tropics. But Brazil could neveroccupy a detached place in the concert of the nations while it was a country of blacks.The dilemma found solution in the „whitening‟. The action started early, years beforethe proclamation of Independence, when the government of D. João VI financed theimmigration of some hundreds of Swiss and German colonizers, who founded the cityof Nova Friburgo. The new city, in the proximities of Rio de Janeiro should contributeto change the racial panorama of the headquarters of the court. Half a century after, thepromotion of the immigration of European workers to coffee was largely justified as adecisive step in the racial reform of the country. The idea of civilizing by a massive transference of whites got explicit in 1810,even before the arrival of the royal family, by the mulatto José da Silva Lisboa, theviscount of Cairu, who wanted to reduce the growth of the black and mixed populationafter the end of the traffic of slaves. José Bonifácio de Andrada disagreed with Cairuabout the deleterious nature of mixing but he agreed with the embryonic project ofwhitening. Soon after the Independence and aiming to influence the ConstitutionalAssembly, he proposed a gradual suppression of slavery and the governmental stimulusto the interracial marriages which would produce the so desired whitening of theBrazilians. Bonifácio, with his interracial marriages, was an exception. In general, mixingwas not an objective but a disagreeable intermediate step toward whitening. The goaldefined by the Empire of Brazil was very vivid in 1911 when João Batista Lacerda,
  • 107. director of the National Museum of Rio de Janeiro, presented to the I InternationalCongress of Races in London a thesis that prophesied a parallel extinction of the mixedand of the black race in Brazil in the beginning of the XXI century. This idea wasdominant two decades after, when Edgard Roquette-Pinto, anthropologist and anti-racialist, rival of the Arianist Oliveira Viana, foresaw that in 2012 blacks and Indianswould have disappeared from the country and the mixed would represent only one fifthof the population. However, the Brazilian society didn´t incline to the direction imagined by theimperial elites. The census revealed that it didn´t occur any whitening, but somethingthat could be named as brownization. The census of 1900 and 1920 eliminated the racialitem, in the second case under the argument that „the answers hid great part of the truth‟.Such item returned in the census of 1940, together with the word brown (pardo),delineating the pattern that would be conserved until the XXI century. Only in 1970 thecensus didn´t include a racial item. In 1940, 63.4% of the Brazilians declared to be white, while 14.6% self-declaredblacks and 21.2% as browns. In 2000, the parcels of whites and blacks had fallen to53.7% and 6.2% respectively, while the parcel of browns had grown to 38.5%. In onlysix decades the participation of the whites in the total of the population reduced morethan 15% and of the blacks, more than 57%. In the same time interval the participationof the browns improved in almost 82%. Obviously, these trajectories can be explainedin part by the continuity of the process of miscegenation of the Brazilian society.However, the dramatic nature of these changes can´t be a result of only this single fact. As it was noticed by the employees of the census of 1920 the answers given tothe surveyors are somehow molded by the predominant conceptions and ideologies ineach given historic moment. In the second half of the XX century, a significant part ofthe Brazilians stopped to identify itself as black and chose the identity of brown andanother part, although smaller, stopped to identify itself as white and also chose theoption brown. The migration of the answers of the two polar categories to theintermediate category shows the failure of the project of the imperial elites but puts inevidence that whitening is not the true difficulty that the organizations of the blackmovement have to face to confer visibility to the blacks. In the idea proposed by the racial thinking of the XIX century, brown was theproduct of the miscegenation of the races white and black. The argument used in thecensus of 1890 to substitute the word by „mestiço‟ was that the category could not berigorously applied to the product of miscegenation between whites and Indians andbetween Indians and blacks. The statistical success of the category of brown in thesecond half of the XX century has no relation to the meaning of the word or themeaning originally given to it. This success reflects, as the dozens of creativeexpressions of the interviewed people of PNAD of 1976, the paucity of the racialidentities in Brazil and the valorization of an intermediate identity that is not essentiallyracial. It is impossible to understand this without studying the failure of the project of
  • 108. whitening of the imperial elites, which ruined down with the kicks of the anti-racistthinking of the sociologist Gilberto Freyre.Miscegenation as a solution Arthur de Gobineau, one of the founders of the scientific racism, lived in Brazilless than a year from 1869 and 1870, contrary to his interests, as the diplomaticrepresentative of France and became friend of the emperor D. Pedro II. The theories infashion in Europe about the hierarchy of the races were seeded in Brazil with him, in thewinter of slavery and in the time of the debate that prepared the European immigrationin large scale to the coffee complex of São Paulo. The institute of slavery made the racial theories a superfluous item in the Empireof Brazil. The differences among people were defined by property, particularly theproperty of slaves. The primary distinction, between free men and slaves, and thesecondary distinction, between free owners and free non-owners, were enough to thesocial order. The slaves were legally able to buy their freedom as they could save somemoney in personal works during free times. It was obviously a high barrier to overcome,but many slaves reached it and many ex-slaves bought and had other (black) slaves.But as the end of slavery approached, the problem of the differences was put in newterms, opening space for the diffusion of the scientific racism. The racial thinking gave impulse, more than other aspect, to the action ofmassive immigration of Europeans. Under a direct order of D. Pedro II, Gobineau wrotein Sweden, three years after leaving his position in Rio de Janeiro, „L´emigration auBrésil: l´empire du Brésil à l´exposition universelle de Vienne‟, an essay destined topresent Brazil as an attractive destination to Scandinavian immigrants. The key word isScandinavian: the French guy, scared with the recent fires of the Commune of Paris, didnot only think in whites, but especially in a strong, laborious people withoutrevolutionary ideas. The theme of miscegenation soon reached a central position in the civilizingproject of the Brazilian elites in the transition of the XIX and XX centuries. The doctorand anthropologist Raimundo Nina Rodrigues, who was dedicated to the problems ofpublic health and registered many ethnologic aspects of the black culture, didn´t admitmiscegenation, since the three races that composed the Brazilian population were indistinct phases of the biological evolution. The mixture, as he argued, would generatephysically and mentally disabled. Euclides da Cunha qualified the mixed as a strong man, but also consideredthem disequilibrated. His opinion, expressed in Os Sertões in 1902, is coincident toNina Rodrigues: „the extreme miscegenation is a retrocession. The Indo-European, the
  • 109. black and the Brazilian-Guarani or Tapuia reflect different evolutionary stages thatborder one to each other and crossing them obliterates the qualities of the first andstimulates the revival of the primitive attributes of the others‟. The degeneration by miscegenation is one of the argumentative nucleus ofPortraits of Brazil, the masterpiece of Paulo Prado, published in 1928, that definessadness as the singular hallmark of the national character. The sad people of Pradoemanated from the inaugural luxury, which means, the unions of pure animalismbetween lascivious colonizers and sensual naked Indians, at first, and after between thesame colonizers and black Africans of an infantile passivity. If in Prado miscegenation constituted an irremediable original sin, to manypeople it represented a practical difficulty of distinction in the daily life. Around thedecade of 1930, the doctor and anthropologist José Bastos de Ávila, high employee ofthe Institute of Educational Researches of Rio de Janeiro, tried to solve the pressingproblem of identifying the black and the white students. He suggested using the index ofLapicque. Invented by the French Louis Lapicque in 1906, the index would give aration between the arms and other body parts and would give a doubtless racialclassification. However, even though this looked more scientific than comparing thetype of hair or the format of nose and lips, this index clamorously failed in tests carriedout by him in hundreds of children. The predominance of the scientific racism was large but not absolute. The doctorand psychiatric Juliano Moreira, black from Bahia of a poor family and director of theNational Hospital of Bedlamites from 1903 to 1930, gave opposition to the hegemonicpoints of view that associated the degeneration to racial constitution. He relateddegeneration to factors such as sanitary and schooling conditions, alcoholism andsyphilis, pointing ways to a psychiatric thinking free of the prejudice of race. Moreiratook part in the sanitary movement, which had Roquette-Pinto as an exponent personand who was a pioneer of the rural ethnography and implacable criticizer of the notionthat the problems of the country came from racial causes. In the traces of the sanitarymovement, the writer Monteiro Lobato invented Jeca Tatu that appeared as a metaphorof the chronically ill rural mixed man, but was converted into a victim of the Braziliandefeats in the fields of health and education. Manoel Bomfim, also a doctor, but devoted mainly to the cause of populareducation, was one of the pioneers of the criticism against the racialist thinking. In hisbook „Latin America: Problems of Origin‟, published in 1905, written in France underthe influences of the liberal Walter Bagehot, he denounced the scientific racism as avomiting sophism of egoism, a hypocrite mask of cheap science and cowardly appliedto the exploitation of the weak by the strong. Such words caused him a noisy polemicswith Sílvio Romero, a convict herald of the project of whitening and an intellectual ofgreat prestige at that time. The anthropology of Franz Boas early echoed in Brazil, breaking the racialdogma. The ideas of Boas as well as the thesis of the geographer Friedrich Ratzel can be
  • 110. found in the book „The Brazilian National Problem‟ of the republican Alberto Torres.The collection with articles published in the Jornal do Commercio in 1912 and apronounced speech in the Brazilian History and Geography Institute (IHGB) had thistext: „The idea of race is the one most abusively applied among us. The number of pureraces is very restricted. Only few persons, nowadays, can be considered as truespecimens of a race, virgins of any miscegenation. The modern man results much moredirectly from the environment he lives and principally from the surrounding societythan any congenital impulses of his race. Brazilians, our patriotic love must surround inan equal and complete fraternity, the descendants of Portuguese, blacks, Indians,Italians, Spanish, Germans, Slavs, of the all the other peoples that form our nation. Wehave only to recognize them as men, as our similar, beings of the same nature and of thesame spirit to whom our country had always opened doors and souls.‟ Gilberto Freyre had, however, something as an antiracial tradition before him.However, his books went much further and developed a singular identity function.Through them, Brazil moved from one paradigm to another, passing a page of itsintellectual history. The transition as well as the debt of the sociologist fromPernambuco to the sanitarians is stamped in the preface to the first edition of CasaGrande e Senzala: „I saw one time after more than three complete years away fromBrazil, a group of national mariners – mulattos and cafuzso – coming from I don´tremember if from São Paulo or Minas and walking in the soft snow of the Brooklyn.They gave me the impression of a caricature of men. And came to my memory thephrase of a book of an American traveler to Brazil that I had just read: the fearfullymongrel aspect of most of the population. Miscegenation resulted in that. Nobody toldme that, as in 1929 Roquette-Pinto and the Arianists of the Brazilian Congress did, thatthey were not simply mulattos or cafuzos the persons that I judged to represent Brazil,but sick mulattos and cafuzos‟. Soon after this part, Freyre attributes to Franz Boas his comprehension that therewas no intrinsic problem with the mulattos and cafuzos. In the library of Freyre, in thesuburb of Apipucos in Recife, there are the portraits of him, of the diplomat Manuel deOliveira Lima and of Boas. In the beginning of the years 1920, under the influence ofOliveira Lima, Freyre took part in the courses of Boas at Columbia University. Thecontact was kept through a common German friend, Rüdiger Bilden who travelled toBrazil receiving a scholarship in 1926. Boas taught Freyre to distinguish race fromculture. The learning was hard and tortuous. When he was a student of the Americananthropologist, Freyre wrote to Oliveira Lima suggesting him to read the eugenicistMadison Grant, the rival of Boas who helped to write the anti-mixing law of Virginia.At those times, the young student was aligned to the idea of whitening and in his MScidissertation he doesn´t mention Boas. According to Pallares-Burke, in „A Victorian inthe Tropics‟, the change occurred during the brief stage of Freyre at Oxford Universityfrom 1922 to 1923, when he took contact to the books of Chesterton and with a book ofthe Greek-Irish Patrick Lafcadio Hearn about miscegenation in the French Caribbean.
  • 111. Roquette-Pinto and Bilden concluded the intellectual meeting of Freyre withBoas. Reading his texts of the end of the years 1920, the guy from Pernambucodefinitely ruptured with the ideas of Grant. Reading the articles of Bilden at the samemoment, he identified the theoretical keys for an interpretation of the Brazilian society.Casa Grande e Senzala is the fruit of this long learning and an unequal tool in thediffusion of the antiracist anthropology in Brazil. It is a double way. In his Anthropology of Modern Life of 1930, Boas wrote,attributing the interpretation to information from Bilden: „the perception of race amongwhites, blacks and Indians in Brazil is totally different from the way we do it. In thecoast, there is a big population of blacks. The miscegenation with Indians is too marked.The discrimination among these three races is much less than among us and the socialobstacles to miscegenation or social advancement are not noticeable.‟ This is exactly the main idea of Casa Grande e Senzala. Freyre never hid theviolence of slavery, an accusation that was directed against him in the post-war. In hisfirst classic book the minutely exposed the sufferings that the slaves were submittedand, foremost, he ruptured with the scientific racism and its paradigm of the racialsuperiority of the whites. Published in 1933 at the same moment Hitler ascended topower, Casa Grande e Senzala signalized the divergence between Brazil and thepredominant racism of the West in the first half of the XX century. Freyre didn´t reject the existence of human races. He simply considered theraces as a biological factor. He strongly refused the notion of a racial hierarchy and,foremost, he refused the idea that the races should remain separated. The Brazil ofFreyre gravitates around the relationship among the polygamous white owners and aheterogeneous mass made by the slaves of the senzalas and by the aggregate personswho lived as vassals from the Great Houses. With the time, the sociologist refined hisobservations on miscegenation and recognized the strong presence of freed slaves andthe predominance of women among them. In the evolution of his thinking, from CasaGrande e Senzala to New World in the Tropics, published in 1971, he understood thatmiscegenation occurred even more intensely in the universe of free men and women. Asresumed the historian Manolo Florentino, in a certain phrase: „we result from themeeting of poor lovers‟. Sex has a detached place in the classic book of Freyre, but it is wrong tointerpret it as en eulogy to biological miscegenation. In Casa Grande and Senzala,miscegenation appears as a historic and cultural happening of multiple senses. Thedecisive part is: „All Brazilians, even the white with blond hair, brings in soul, or bothin soul and body, the shadow, or at least a dot, of the Indian or the black. In tenderness,in the excessive gesture, in the Catholicism in which our senses are pleasured, in music,in walking, in speaking, in baby singing, in everything that is a sincere expression oflife, we all bring the mark of the black influence‟.
  • 112. To Freyre, the cultures of the different components of the Brazilian nation existin each one of the Brazilians and in this sense he expressed in the language of Sociologythe modernist ideal of nation. Spite being a sociological pioneer, Freyre was part of a greater movement ofnational revision and recreation. Only five years separate Casa Grande e Senzala fromthe publication of Macunaíma, which was precedent and introduced a mixed hero in theimaginary of the country. It was not by occasion that Manuel Bandeira celebrated thebook of Freyre in a poem of 1948 where he also joked with the Arian madness ofOliveira Viana. In the intellectual history of Brazil, there is before and after Casa Grande eSenzala. Its conceptual revolution supported to overcome the image of the countryelaborated by the imperial elites who saw in the black population the principal obstacleto the construction of a modern civilization in the tropics. The conceptual fractureopened by the sociology of Freyre inspired historians and social scientists bringing tosurface a scenario of objects of study that were dug under the rubbishes of the racialthinking. One single example, plentiful of meanings: in the Fear of Magic, aninvestigation about the judicial persecution against the Mediumship religions, theanthropologist Yvonne Maggie evidenced that the judges and lawyers involved inprocess against the participants of candomblé shared the belief in magic and this affectspeoples of all colors, social classes and religious denominations in Brazil.The mixed person in USA and in Brazil Casa Grande e Senzala appeared less than one decade after the law of racialintegrity of Virginia, the most finished synthesis of the anti-mixing laws applied inUSA. The divergence was not exclusively between Brazil and USA: the project ofmiscegenation circulated in the whole Latin America since 1925, year of publication ofThe Cosmic Race, of the Mexican intellectual and politician José Vasconcelos. Vasconcelos occupies a detached place among the realist ambitious doctrinairesof the period still tumultuous when the powder of the Mexican Revolution was layeringin a bureaucratic and authoritative regime. Nationalist and vigorous defender of ageopolitical alliance among the Latin American nations, Vasconcelos directed theNational University of Mexico, served as minister of education of the government ofÁlvaro Obregón in the first half of the decade of 1920 and was a candidate for presidentin 1929. Later, drafted by a combination of anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism, heconverted into an admirer of Hitler and of the Nazi racism. The Cosmic Race is from a previous period, less shadowed, of his thinking andsuffered a direct influence of the experience of author in Brazil. In 1922 as a diplomatfrom Mexico, Vasconcelos lived in many countries of South America and participated
  • 113. in the commemoratives of the centenarian of the Brazilian independence. His booknarrates the impressions of these travels, prophecies the greatness of Latin America thatwould be modernized by science and generate a refined civilization. He also announcesthe appearance of the „fifth race‟, that cosmic race constituted by the Iberoamericanracial mixture. The conception of history of Vasconcelos was vicious with the idea of a conflictbetween the Iberian and the Anglo-Saxon civilizations. The Iberian fall and humiliationwere fruits of the non-union of the nations of this origin, which he contrasted with thegeopolitical alliance of the Anglo-Saxon nations. The restoring of the lost glory after theepopee of the Great Navigations would not be done from Spain, but from the NewWorld. The fundament of this restoring – our ethnical mission – could be found in theunion of all lineages of Latin America, through miscegenation. The miscegenation in Vasconcelos is a mystic tool of his anti-Americanideology, or, precisely, his anti-Anglo-Saxon ideology. Gilberto Freyre never nourishedsomething similar and never saw in the horizon any kind of „ethnical mission‟.However, deeply, to him, miscegenation had a positive spiritual value. In USA, in thecontrary, miscegenation meant degeneration and racial contamination. The law ofVirginia of 1924 layered in politics and in legislation the idea of racial purity. In this aprohibition was condensed – in USA, the mixed persons have no right to exist. The principle of the separation among races was predominant, in general, in theAnglo-Saxon imperial expansion. The biological fact of miscegenation of courseoccurred, in bigger or smaller scale, in all the places, but it was not incorporated to theidentity sphere. In South Africa, due to a particular history of region of the Cape, acomplete category of mixed – the colored – reached legal statute. However, theexception confirms the rule: legalizing the colored served to surround miscegenation byan iron ring, fixing it in the sphere of the exceptionality. In USA, large miscegenation occurred. However, even a peripheral admission ofmixed was denied. The word miscegenation, bringing a connotation of bad luck, wasintroduced in the English language by Americans during 1863, during the Civil War, anevent that brought the perspective of the end of slavery and therefore the augmentationof interracial unions. Before the war, the rare abolitionists who saw something positivein the mixture of races used the word amalgamation. The creators of miscegenation were two journalists who defended slavery, in thecourse of an electoral low blow to sabotage the reelection of Abraham Lincoln. Thesetwo guys used the word in a title of a pamphlet falsely attributed to the abolitionists inorder to associate the Republican Party with that unpopular idea. During the campaignthat ended with the victory of Lincoln, the republicans effectively believed in theartifice and some friction occurred between the direction of the Party and the minoritygroup of radical abolitionists.
  • 114. The American census included the word mulatto, but it was abandoned after1920 when the one drop rule got generalized in laws and consciences. Anti-mixing lawsexisted in the colonies of the South since the XVII century, with the principal functionof regulating inheritances. These laws, restored after the end of the Reconstruction,turned into bastards the unions between blacks and whites, cancelled their rights to heir.Due to this the dynamics of racial formation and of class formation was, in this crucialAmerican case, basically the same. The bipolar racial model of USA converts the mixed from unions of blacks andwhites into blacks. Inside the most notable effects there is the happening of passing, astrategy of identity re-invention under which a person gets „passed‟ as an integrant of asocial group where they wouldn´t normally be admitted. As a rule, in the Americanracial passing, a mixed person, socially classified as black, recreates their identity aswhite. One historical example is the one of Walter Francis White, executive-in-chief ofNAACP from 1929 to 1955, a mixed with 27 white ancestors of 4 th generation and 5black, but defined as black due to the one drop rule. Blond, with blue eyes and clearskin, White passed as white during his investigations on lynches in the South againstblacks. White carried out the passing by safety reasons in the course of a political action.But, in general, the strategy was used as a manner of social, professional and personalintegration to the dominant group. This was the case of several creoles of medium classof New Orleans, hit by the worsening of segregation at the end of the XIX century. Oneof them, the famous cartoonist George Herriman, whose parents were classified asmulattos in the census of 1880, moved with his family to Los Angeles, where he passedas white with Greek origin. To hide his hair, Herriman never took off his hat in public.Another famous créole of New Orleans who made the passing was Anatole Broyard, aliterature criticizer of the New York Times in the middle of the XX century who waspictured in a biography written by his daughter Bliss and probable fountain ofinspiration to the character Coleman Silk, of Philip Roth, in The Human Stain. Passing could be a short adventure as many mixed that passed by whites tofrequent segregated restaurants or stand for many years and even a whole life. Totransfer to other city, to rupture with old friends, to substitute the name, to destroypersonal documents, to hide from the kids (either temporary or permanently) the truefamiliar history were tactics used by many passers. Of course, there is no precisedemographic estimation of such happening. When he directed NAACP, White affirmedthat „each year, around 12 thousands of blacks of clear skin disappear into the whiteuniverse‟. In post-war, an academic estimation put the annual number of passers in thevalues around 2.5 and 2.750 and the total of white blacks in USA as around 110thousands. Parallel to passing in real life, it was developed in USA a peculiar literarytradition that takes this theme in inspiration. One of the first novels in this line is Clotelor the President´s Daughter, of William Wells Brown, published in 1853, that put in
  • 115. fiction the life of a supposed daughter of Thomas Jefferson with the young slave SallyHemings, she herself a mixed woman. In fact, according to some trustable narratives,Jefferson had many bastard kids with Hemings, among who were the girls Beverly andHarriet who was passed as whites in the decade of 1820 to escape from slavery. But theexplosion of both passing and the literary stories occurred in the transition from the XIXto the XX century, following the anti-mixing laws and the diffusion of clusters of theterrorist organization Ku Klux Klan. The first Ku Klux Klan was formed in Tennesseein 1865 by veterans of the Confederated forces and inspired similar movements in otherSouthern states. The Reconstruction suppressed them, but in 1915 a second Ku KluxKlan appeared as infiltrated in many places and it lasted until the Second World War. Frances Harper, black, abolitionist, poet and journalist, wrote in 1892 IolaLeroy, a novel that condemned the strategy of passing. The mixed Charles W. Chesnuttpictured the passing with empathy and softness in The House Behind the Cedars, in1900. In 1929 it was published Passing, of Nella Larsen, a talented mixed writer of theReborn of Harlem. Some years later, it appeared the famous journal Imitation of Life, ofFannie Hurst, adapted twice for the cinema. In a country that still identifies meticulously the race of the citizens the passinggoes working as an identity strategy. According to an extrapolation analysis on the dataof the census of 2000, per year, around 35 thousand and 50 thousand young adultspreviously identified by their parents as blacks redefined themselves as whites orHispanics. In the opposite direction, due to the reverse discrimination policies, it hasbeen registered cases of whites that passed by blacks. One of these cases, that reachedthe tribunals, was the one of the brothers Paul and Philip Malone. The Malones defined themselves as whites when they were candidates to workas firemen in Boston in 1975 but were rejected. Two years later, the Department ofFiremen of the city applied a program of affirmative action judicially imposed they re-showed themselves as blacks and were admitted. One decade after, in an occasion of apromotion, somebody denounced them as racial impostors. In the end of a judicialbattle, the Supreme Court of Massachusetts emitted a verdict contrary to the brothers.The verdict condemned them not because they chose to identify themselves as blacks,but due to evidences that they acted in bad faith. In an article published during thecourse of the polemics a proposal emerged to supervision the policies of reversediscrimination. The author defended the introduction in the birth documents a racialidentification based on the race of the parents and those „who falsely affirm the raceshall be object of criminal penalties‟. The biological amplitude of miscegenation in Brazil was clearly intuited bysociologists and historians, since the beginning of the XX century, but only a fewdecades ago the tools of molecular genetics and population genetics offered a moreprecise delimitation of this happening, in demographic terms. One research that soonbecame famous was conducted by the geneticist Sérgio Danilo Pena, of the FederalUniversity of Minas Gerais. The research investigated a representative sample of the
  • 116. population classified as white in the Brazilian census. As expected, it was found a largemajority of masculine lineages of European origin, but feminine lineages moredistributed: 33% Amerindians, 28% Africans and 39% Europeans. In the words of Pena: „the results obtained show the immense majority, probablemore than 90% of the masculine lineages of the white Brazilians is of European origin,while the majority (60%) of the feminine lineages is of Amerindian or African origin‟.In the same direction, extrapolating from information of the census, the geneticistestimated that among the 90.6 millions of Brazilians classified as white in 2000, therewere around 30 millions of African descendants and another 30 millions of Amerindiandescendants from the side of the mother. In Portuguese, there is not a word equivalent to the term passing. Brazil neverknew anti-mixing laws neither the one drop rule, a needful complement to those laws.The reality of miscegenation reflected in the incorporation of the mixed in the nationalimage, a process that has as mark the period of political and intellectual transitionbetween the Week of Modern Art of 1922 and the publication of Casa Grande eSenzala. Nina Rodrigues already protested against the repression to the candomblés, but itwas with the modernism that the intellectuals went back to the religion of African rootselaborated by the slaves in Brazil. At that time, it started a trajectory that culminated inthe transformation of the cult to the orixás in a multinational massive occurrence.However, the novelty of the years 1920 was the appearance of umbanda starting from asmall group of medium class spiritualists in Rio de Janeiro. This new syncretic religionassociated the Catholic saints and the orixás in the mold of the French kardecism andrefused the black magic of candomblé and its rituals of animal sacrifices. A purist interpretation of the racialists saw in umbanda solely the disfigurationand whitening of the African cults. However, this opinion is blind to the grater horizonof changes in the Brazilian religion panorama that abrades the traditional Catholicismand introduces a medium continuum between the extreme poles of kardecism andcandomblé. As the sociologist Antônio Risério explains, it is more appropriate torecognize umbanda as modern fusion of spiritualism in the fire of the lands ofmacumba. In the big domains of culture, the conversion of miscegenation as a definingtrace of the Brazilian nationality had many repercussions. The samba articulated as themusical genus in the beginning of the XX century in Rio de Janeiro, e Deixa Falar, thepioneer samba school was created in the hill of Estácio by Ismael Silva in 1928. Yearslater, the journal Mundo Sportivo sponsored the inaugural show of schools of samba.Football converted in a national massive sport in the years 1920 and in 1923, the teamof Vasco da Gama was the first club to hire black players. In 1929, the Nossa Senhorada Conceição Aparecida, a saint mixed as the Brazilians was declared the patroness ofBrazil.
  • 117. This change was expressed under many ways. Feijoada, formerly had as anoriginal invention of the slaves, was transformed in a national dish. Capoeira, bornamong the slaves, continuously repressed since the end of the XVIII century, written asa crime in the penal code of 1890, got a Sports Code in 1928, an official academy in1932, was officialized as a national sport in 1937 and declared as cultural immaterialpatrimony of Brazil in 2008. During the dictatorship of the New Estate, the terrains ofcandomblé and umbanda were protected from the police. Three decades later, the godsof candomblé were incorporated to the popular music and to the national electronicmedia. The president Getúlio Vargas, especially during the dictatorship of the NewEstate, made efforts to translate the miscegenation in the official language of thenational ideology. Samba schools and carnival parades started to receive public moneyin 1935 when samba was exalted as a national style. In 1939, it was created the Day ofRace in 30th May destined to celebrate the Brazilian racial harmony. The criticism toCasa Grande e Senzala, formulated in the post-war, presented the reconstruction of thenational identity around the idea of miscegenation as a fruit of Estate nationalism,hiding that this process occurred before the ascension of Vargas to power and evenbefore the publication of the book of Freyre. Anyway, this movement signs a rupturewith the racial dogmas at that time. According to dictionary, pardo (brown) can mean dirty, doubtful. In the courseof a study of racial identities and the imposition of binary categories in the census ofLatin America, a group of American researchers experimented to substitute the word„pardo‟ (brown) to the option „moreno‟. In a questionnaire applied among inhabitants ofRio das Contas, in the Diamantina Table, the option was marked not only by the self-declared „pardos‟ but for almost half of the self-declared „whites‟ and half of thepreviously declared „blacks‟. Few years after the publication of this research,organizations of the black movement in Brazil engaged in the promotion of the idea thatbrowns and blacks should be classified as blacks and the blacks should look themselvesas „afro-descendants‟.Freyre at Pelourinho Florestan Fernandes believed that the intellectuals have a paper in the socialtransformation and spite being a lecturer in the University of São Paulo he presentedhimself as a Marxist political militant rather than an academic. In his sociology he waseclectic and searched to be rigorous explaining that the sociologist doesn´t produce thereality they live in, but, sometimes, help to understand it. The evaluation has its sensesbut also distorts the vision a little bit, since the sociologist effectively creates realities.
  • 118. The thesis in Sociology of Florestan, defended in 1964, was published under thetitle The Integration of the Blacks in a Society of Classes. The black emerged as a socialgroup clearly defined and the sociological mission was to explain the modes thatcapitalism used to integrate the blacks into the society of classes. The work began in thebeginning of the decade of 1950 starting from a project financed by Unesco. Since theantiracist declaration of 1950, the agency of UN intended to use Brazil as an illustrationof a society where the racial tension had been largely softened. Besides Florestan, othersocial scientists such as Roger Bastide, Thales de Azevedo, Luís Costa Pinto and OracyNogueira took part in this project. In the perspective of the historic sociology of Florestan, a key to explain Brazilcould be found in the idea of incomplete modernization, which means, of permanenceof structural traces of the old order in the new order. This line of approaching conductedhim to see the black as the old slave, a view that highlights the economic exclusion andthe social prejudice, but doesn´t pay attention to a political construction of a racialidentity. Everything is his study occurs as if the black was a previous entity, anuncontestable data from reality – contrary to the mixed that would be only anideological construction. The studies of Florestan searched for incorporating the black in a Marxistanalysis of the Brazilian society of classes. The social inequality was his focus and heevidenced that the abolition of slavery left the large mass of the old slaves to ostracism.At the same time, in a line of argument separated from the principal points, hepostulated that Brazil is distinguished by a particular form of racism that is hidden andthat deny itself, but still discriminates. The idea converted in the paradoxical speech ofmany organizations of the black movement to sustain that the Brazilian racism isequivalent or even worse than the American racism with all the laws of segregation. Casa Grande e Senzala and The Integration of Blacks in the Society of Classesare two books that occupy two distinct points in the trajectories of trials to interpret theformation of the Brazilian society – and it seems reasonable to study both Freyre andFlorestan as speakers of the crosses of their own times. But in the context of theemergence of racialist policies, the first began a target and the second, a certain archer.The heralds of the new policies, originated from USA, painted the sociologist ofPernambuco as a voice of a conservative reaction and used the books from the one ofSão Paulo to sustain initiatives radically divergent from his revolutionary beliefs. The publication of the book of Florestan inaugurated a new period of a tirelessideological revision of Casa Grande when it got lost the view of the difference betweenmiscegenation and the ideology of social harmony. The theoretical confusion resoundedeven in the writing of the sophisticated analyst Lilia Schwarcz who, althoughrecognizing the double reality of miscegenation and of an invisible racism, saw inFreyre the sociologist who constructed the myth an in Fernandes the one who destroyedit. Thus, by a expedition purely theoretical, the identity project of miscegenation
  • 119. converted in myth, while another identity project – the one of the race – reached thestatute of reality. In the declaration of 1950 of Unesco, it was written that Brazil suffered less thanother nations the effects of racial prejudice and thus it was good to comprehend thereasons of the harmony that exists in Brazil. Even recognizing the presence of racialdiscrimination in Brazil, the Brazilianists of the middle of the XX century such asDonald Pierson and Charles Wagley contrasted the American panorama, characterizedby great social mobility and unpenetrable barriers in the racial system, with theBrazilian one, marked by obvious distances among social classes but with diffuse racialfrontiers. However, at the same time, in Brazil, a new sociological diagnosis started toget body. The contrast between the two countries was too obvious to be ignored, but thesociologists of the post-war were decided to bomb Freyre and miscegenation thatseemed to them as representations of an unfair social order. The offensive was done byimporting bipolar racial categories from USA. The jump of the cat was carried out byOracy Nogueira, an ex-student of Pierson and affiliated to the Communist Party, in anessay presented to the International Congress of the Americanists in 1954 in São Paulo. Oracy distinguished the racial prejudices „of origin‟ in the American panoramaand „of mark‟ in the Brazilian one. The first had by reference the ancestry and wasmaterialized by the one drop rule. The reference in the second was hidden anddissimulated and would be the appearance. In the terms of USA, the mechanisms ofsegregation worked openly, establishing rigid lines of separation in the domains of law,unions and urban space. The implicit Brazilian racism did not create a rigid segregationbut was always present and appeared in stressful situations. A crucial consequence ofthe distinction was that the black Americans got conscience of the oppression andreacted to it, while in Brazil, in the contrary, the racism deposited in the core of thesocial relations and was passively incorporated by the blacks. However, all the trustable explanation of Oracy was based on a total silent denialof miscegenation. The sociologist could only see blacks and whites, both in USA andBrazil. His political message is that the Brazilian racism is very cruel as it tends to sleepthe blacks. Deeply, he renounced to an ideal of a non-racialist society in the name of ahypothetical contribution to the blacks for the fight of the exploited against the capitalistorder. To reach to the desired conclusion as noticed by Ali Kamel in We Are not Racist,Oracy deviated the fact that in USA, as in any other place, the deflagrating light ofracial prejudice could only the mark (the appearance), as evidenced by the contrast ofthe occurrence of passing. After Oracy, it was time to Fernando Henrique Cardoso to use the importedcategories of USA to write Color and Social Mobility in Florianópolis (1960) andCapitalism and Slavery in Southern Brazil (1962). As Florestan did, Fernando Henriquemoved around the double modernization/past and highlighted the exclusionary echoesof slavery. In his present works in the South of Brazil, he didn´t see a degree of colors,
  • 120. but only blacks and whites. The sight of the intellectual is a sense derived from thetheory: one can only see what the conceptual glasses allow to do. The theory said the capitalist modernization tended to create a society of classesbut the old manners survived as obstacles and conserved the patterns of inequalitiestypical to feudal societies. Wrongly, the young sociologist imagined that the racialprejudice was inheritance of slavery and not a particular political and intellectualconstruction. In this line, he thought that the abolition of slavery reinforced the previousracial prejudice, converting it in a tool for the maintenance of a superiority of the whitesover the blacks. The prejudice reinforced the social exclusion of the blacks, avoiding orlowering the total incorporation of this group into the society of classes. Kamel called attention to an internal oscillation in the ideas of FernandoHenrique. In the stopped economy of Florianopolis in which poor blacks and whitesexperienced a similar insertion in the labor world, the racism would act as acompensatory element to sign the superiority of the firsts. In the more dynamic cities,racism would come from the economic superiority of the whites and would serve toreinforce such inequality. „Which means, there are no exits, since opposite situationsprovoke the same result‟. Without any convincing argument, Fernando Henrique explicitly denied thehypothesis that in Brazil the dominant prejudice is the one of class, not of race. Buteither he or Florestan stood faithful to the idea that the social exclusion of the blacksderived essentially from economic and historic factors: slavery and the way theabolition was processed. Writing years later, the sociologist Carlos Hasenbalg rupturedwith this idea. Discrimination and Racial Inequalities in Brazil, initially a thesis defended inUSA, was published in 1979. The work of Hasenbalg, who was born in the context ofthe emergence of the American multiculturalism, figures as the first sophisticatedstatistical study of the relationship between race and poverty. Basically, the action triedto prove that the inequalities of income and education in Brazil are strongly related toskin color rather than social classes. “Poverty has color and race” – the adage of manyorganizations of the Brazilian black movement originated from a piece of sociology thatwas intended to be empirical. There were only few things really genuine in the work of Hasenbalg. The spiritthat animated him was the opposition to the myth of miscegenation, whose effectsserved to explain the political lethargy of the blacks. Before and after, the sociologistreferred to Freyre as the responsible of the creation of the most formidable ideologicalweapon against the anti-racist activists, which was the concept of racial democracy.However, as he concluded that the inequalities observed between blacks and whiteswere not inheritances of slavery, but fruits of prejudice and discrimination, he was whosculpted a formidable ideological weapon to the leaderships devoted to import to Brazilthe American policies of racial reverse discrimination.
  • 121. From Florestan and Fernando Henrique Cardoso to Carlos Hasenbalg there wasa transition. To the firsts, capitalism and social classes were the decisive categories,while to the last one, the only existing thing are races and discrimination. Throughoutthis transition, a polar taxonomy of American inspiration got consolidated. The optionto such taxonomy should not be understood simply as mimicking neither as a simpleapplication of a sociological method. Yvonne Maggie observed that, in The Integrationof the Blacks to the Society of Classes, Florestan used the words black and whiteaccording to the desires of the black activists and their speakers. The academic offensive of three decades against Freyre buried what heeffectively wrote under thick layers of utilitarian interpretations. The main accusation,repeated as a mantra, acquired the shape of an unarguable truth: the sociologist ofPernambuco was the creator or, at least, the principal broadcaster of the racialdemocracy. Not only ideological adversaries of Freyre but also analysts that recognizedthe singular qualities of his sociology believe in that. The expression, however, doesn´tappear a single time in Casa Grande e Senzala and doesn´t occupy a relevant place inthe thoughts of Freyre. The formula „ethnical and racial democracy‟ appears in a small text of 1945 andthe ethnical democracy appears in a preface of 1954 where Freyre defended himselffrom the affirmation that he hid racism in Brazil and that his diagnosis came from acomparison to virulent forms of prejudice of other countries. The first essay where heliterally refers to a „racial democracy‟ was published in a British review of 1949. Henever affirmed the existence of a racial democracy in Brazil, but rather he pointed thisas an ideal to be followed. The racial democracy as desirable goal receives several interventions of Freyrebut doesn´t appear as a significant concept in none of his principal works. In aninterview of 1980, provoked by the interviewer, the sociologist extended on the theme,characterizing Brazil as the country more close to a racial democracy, but in thesequence he emphasized the prevalence of blacks among the poor relating to the wayBrazil did his festive and rhetoric 13th May (day of abolition). The conclusion: there isno pure democracy in Brazil: neither racial, nor social, nor political. The interview had no effect. It was decided that Freyre was the speaker of anidyllic racial democracy in the country. And that was an imperative to destroy thismyth so it could be possible to build over its ruins as conscience of race among theblack Brazilians. Soon before the translation of the thesis of Hasenbalg, appeared Blackinto White, of Thomas Skidmore. The Brazilianists of the XX century were inspired inBrazil to condemn the racial segregation of USA. Skidmore was inspired in USA toattack, with a mixture of violence and disinformation, the Brazilian national identity.The sociology of Florestan and Fernando Henrique illuminated significant aspects of thesocial engines of Brazil. The history from Skidmore illuminated only the emergingpolitical force of the American multiculturalism. As it was already observed, in it was
  • 122. transparent the idea that it would be intolerable that any country could have any form ofpride of identity that could turn it superior to USA. Skidmore went back his batteries against miscegenation, showing it as a failureof the previous project of whitening and formulated a curious comparison between theblacks of Brazil and of USA, concluding that the firsts were in a worse position. Thesetwo phrases of his book soon converted in discursive and intellectual keys of theorganizations of the black movements of Brazil.The Yarn of Durban The interventions of Skidmore and Hasenbalg are place in the point of origin ofthe academic import of the bipolar categories of the American multiculturalism. Inuniversities of Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo it was created some centers for studies ofAfro-Brazilian culture and studies of racial relationships. Under the influx ofinternational finances, in general canalized by the Brazilian office of Ford Foundation,they copied the model of the racialist movements of USA. The doors of the Estatestarted to open in 1984, when the governor of São Paulo state, Franco Montoro, createda council of participation and development of the black community, an initiative thatwas copied by other states and several cities. Universities, NGOs, public power. The triad of the new movement acquired amore complex format in 1998 with the institution, by the president José Sarney, of anadvice for Afro-Brazilian issues in the Ministry of Culture. In the speech ofinauguration of his first government in 1995, Fernando Henrique Cardoso mentionedthe relevance of the racial question and in 20 th November of the tercentenary of thedeath of Zumbi of Palmares he created an inter-ministerial task force for valorization ofthe black population. The task force was composed by eight representatives of the civilsociety, in fact, representatives of organizations of the black movement. The federal policies of affirmative action with racial aspect started with thenational program of human rights in 13th May 1996. Further than actions against racism,the program proposed to help the creation of councils of the black community in statesand cities, to support actions of positive discrimination of private companies anddevelop affirmative action to access of blacks to professionalizing courses anduniversity courses. In his presidential speeches, Fernando Henrique Cardoso alwaysoscillated between the recognition of the value of miscegenation and the suggestion thatthe skin color divided the nation in two polar groups. Due to this oscillation, theinitiatives of reverse discrimination didn´t prosper at that time. But they pointed a waythat later would have been followed.
  • 123. In the program of human rights, there was an item of big echoes and whoserelevance took some time to be realized. It was the order, dressed in quotidianbureaucratic language: „Determine to IBGE (Brazilian Institute of Geography andStatistics) the adoption of the criteria to considerate the morenos, pardos (browns) andblacks as integrants of the black population. Through this order, without anyexplanation, it was cancelled to official effects the identity message sent by the citizensat the time of the census. The sociologist who became president, using something less than a decree,symbolically blew up Gilberto Freyre. From that time one, if the wishes of thegovernment had taken a free course, the official Brazil would have left to recognize thesocial reality of miscegenation. This crucial element of the program was not applied dueto internal resistances of IBGE. In the institute tasked of the public statistics, they unitedthose who wanted to preserve a central component of the Brazilian identity to those whosimply reacted to a threatening of breaking long historic series. In the speech of installation of the task force group in 1996, Fernando HenriqueCardoso said the Estate would never tolerate any form of racism, neither the „racismdestined to valorize the race that is being discriminated because this would also result ina negative thing.‟ There was a tension between the presidential lines and the politicallines of the organizations of the black movements incorporated into the initiatives of theprogram. The tension reached its highest point in the Conference of Durban. In themeeting of UN, the positions of the Brazilian government were not in coincidence withthe proposals inscribed in the official document of the Brazilian delegation that wasconcentrated in policies of reverse discrimination. The second program of human rightsand the national program of affirmative action started in 13 th May 2002 represented asurrender of the government to the pressures of the organizations of the blackmovement. The new policies were aligned theoretically and practically to the Declarationand to the Program of Action of Durban. If the first program used the word blacks, thesecond one used Afro-descendants, a point of a large conceptual scope. Among thegoals of the second program it was mentioned the creation of funds for social repairdestined to finance policies of affirmative action, the implantation of the item race/colorin the public systems of demographic information and the review of didactic books torescue the history and the contribution of Afro-descendants for the construction of anational identity. Finally, with the verb „propose‟ instead of the previous „determine‟,IBGE was called to unify the blacks and browns in the contingent of the Afro-descendant population. The national program of affirmative action, instituted by decree, foresee theadoption of percentages of goals of Afro-descendants of the commissioned jobs of thesuperior direction and advise and the inclusion of a disposal of norms establishing theminimum percentages of Afro-descendants in the hiring of companies and techniciansand consultants providing services to the federal government. To resume, Brazil was
  • 124. mimicking, three decades after, the directives of Richard Nixon created under theconcept of black capitalism and added to them some portion of privileges in the highjobs of Estate. The government of Fernando Henrique resisted to the appeals of the racialistorganizations that had already disseminated and encrusted the adoption of racial quotein universities. But there was the university autonomy and a way had been opened. Inthe end of 2001, the State University of Rio de Janeiro adopted a system of racial quotesto selection of candidates, creating a precedent that would echo in the next years inother public institutions. Between the governments of Fernando Henrique and Lula there is continuity andrupture in the theme of racial policies. The continuity was expressed in the area of themulticulturalist concepts that weren´t created in Brazil but in USA. The rupture wasexpressed in the area of the political operation. The government of Lula conferred muchmore autonomy to the racialist organizations inside the apparatus of the Estate. In theinauguration of his first mandate, Lula created the special board for policies ofpromotion of racial equality (Seppir), directly linked to the Presidency. Through thisorgan, the racialist organizations negotiated consensus and printed guidelines withimpacts on many ministries. In the representative democracies, the apparatus of the Estate is seen as animpersonal and non-party administrative machine destined to support the execution ofgovernment policies and the obedience to law. The golden rule is the separationbetween the public sphere and the sphere of the private interests, from which take partthe pressure groups, the social movements and NGOs. This way, Seppir, idealized as acluster of organizations of the black movement and a factory of ideologies, defied thisrule. The secret of the political efficiency of Seppir was in the political place itoccupied, acting as an Estate pole of articulation of the multiculturalist academics andof the racialist activists of NGOs and social movements. This articulation was supportedby extended and diversified international connections, with the support of the financesof Ford Foundation and of multilateral institutions. In that context, it was not relevant tohave a modest official budget. Under the influx of Seppir, the racialist policies acquired a new scope. In thescope of the ministry of education, they ordered a compulsory racial classification of thestudents in all levels, motivated the adoption of systems of reverse discrimination forthe selection to public universities and the Program University for All (Prouni) wascreated with clear racial cuts. In the ministry of health, the initiative of health to theblack population was implemented with vast identity echoes. In the ministry for therural development, the program of identification and delimitation of terrains ofQuilombos expanded much further than the areas effectively occupied by remnants ofthe quilombos.
  • 125. The program conducted by Seppir was synthesized in the called Statute of RacialEquality, a project of law proposed originally in 2003 by the senator Paulo Paim andapproved in the federal senate without debates as the Project of Law 6264 of 2005. The5th article of the Brazilian constitution says: „all are equal facing law, withoutdistinctions of any nature‟. Without saying it, the Statute represented a newconstitutional column, as it virtually cancelled this article that is the central column ofthe republican contract. The Statute cancelled the principle of citizenship under which the citizens arenot distinguished according to criteria of race, religious beliefs of political opinion. Itdetermined the compulsory racial classification of all the people by the identification ofthe term „race‟ in all the documents generated in the systems of health, education, workand providence. The racial classification would not be based on categories of the censusbut instead would consecrate as a juridical figure the Afro-Brazilians, a layer thatincludes the self-declared blacks, niggers and browns. As in the Rwanda of the Belgiansor the apartheid of South Africa, the Brazilians would have an official label of race. The racial layer of Afro-Brazilians generated by the Statute figured as a holderof specific collective rights that would express by means of policies of reversediscrimination in the public service, public universities and in the labor market ingeneral. A particular emphasis was carried out in the introduction of racial quote in theexams of selection of candidates in the public universities and in the contracts of thefund of financing the student of superior education. The racial preferences in the privateeconomy would be imposed by means of expeditions such as directed governmentalcontracts of providers. In the terms of the Statute, it would be created a new politicaland bureaucratic structure, the Councils for Promotion of Racial Equality in the federal,state and city spheres. Such councils, financed by the Estate and composed by a jointnumber of representatives of public power and organizations of the civil societyrepresenting the Afro-Brazilian population, would concentrate particular governmentalpowers and a large autonomy of action. They would have an aspect of being permanentand deliberative and powers to formulate, coordinate, supervision and evaluate thepolicies of fighting inequality and racial discrimination. A new constitution – that was what the Statute aimed to be. Through itsdisposals, the nation would not be the fruit of a political contract among equal citizensbut would be converted into a confederation of races. Articulated as a bipolar structure,the confederation would have inside an Afro-Brazilian nation defined in law and animplicit white nation. The concept of historic repair, directly extracted from theDeclaration of Durban, would guide the relations between the two national componentsof Brazil. The triumphant legislative march of the Statute was contained, at least partially,by the criticisms that suffered from intellectuals, academic and activists after it wasapproved in the senate. However, the project became a central flag of the racialistorganizations of the black movement of the multiculturalist NGOs. The diffusion of the
  • 126. systems of quote to access public universities corroborated and stimulated the strategyof enlarging the scope of this kind of reverse discrimination policy to the publicfunctionalism and the labor market in general. Reflecting on the introduction of racial quote in universities, the sociologistIsabel Lustosa mentioned the dilemma of a young niece that was studying to thevestibular (the selection exams) of University of Brasília: „the policies of quotesreduced drastically the number of places to those who weren´t included in one of thelisted categories so she had little chances to be selected. My niece is from the team ofthe more dark of the family and has curly hairs, so she could easily assume his Africanor Indian origin. However, she doesn´t want to be a candidate among the quote. Shenever thought about herself as black or brown, but only as a common Brazilian girl ofmedium class who wants to study in a public university, not only because the cost of aprivate university would weigh in the familiar budget but also because she knows thatthe public universities are better‟. Nation, in the certain expression of Benedict Anderson, is an imaginarycommunity. The community of citizens is not equivalent to a community of races. Thefirst gives to all diverse identity experiences, either fluid or rigid, in the private sphere.The second officially marks each person with a label of race, incarcerating their privacyin an identity prison. In Brazil of the reaction against miscegenation, the niece of IsabelLustosa can only renounce to the label of black if she assumes the label of white. Shehas no rights to be simply „a common Brazilian girl‟.INDIO MUERTO, INDIO PUESTO (Dead Indian, deposedIndian) “Vale un potosí” (worths a potosi) in Spanish it means something that values afortune. Potosí, founded in 1546 in the altitude of 4090m in the Altiplano of High Peru(today, Bolivia) as a mining city, had more than 160 thousands inhabitants in thecolonial epoch, being one of the biggest cities of the Americas. Between the XVI andXVII centuries through the forced labor of Amerindians and African slaves, 45thousands of tons of silver were extracted from its Cerro Rico, a richness that sustainedthe adventure of the Spanish Habsburgs and went to the Dutch bankers, fertilizing thefloor over which the original capitalism raised. The fortune of Potosi got exhausted in the XIX century, when the Bolivianmining was fragmented in many centers and transited from silver to tin. One of thesecenters was Pulacayo, around 130 km southwest at 3170m height. In the place, hit bythe winds that cross the Salar of Uyuni, a silver mine had been exploited until 1780,when Indian warriors of the rebellion of Tupac Amaru II killed Spanish colonizers andclosed the mine. Tupac Amaru II was born as José Gabriel Condorcanqui in Cuzco. He
  • 127. adopted the name of last Inca governor and governed the regions of Tungasuca andPampamarca in Peru in the name of the Spanish general-governor. In 1780, the leadedan Indian rebellion that extended over the High Peru and was suppressed with hiscapture and quartering. A legend says that the forgotten mine was re-discovered in 1833by a Spanish colonizer who was benefited with the indications of an Indian woman andfounded the city of Pulacayo. The mine of silver of Huanchaca, opened in theproximities half a century after, became the center of the Bolivian mining and thesupport of the liberal Estate announced in the constitution of 1880. Huanchaca was property of the Bolivian warlord and president Aniceto Arseand, in the sequence, of Mortitz Hochschild, one of the three barons of the Bolivianmining (the others were Simón Patiño and Carlos Victor Aramayo). Around the mine,the first steam machines appeared in operation in the country and the silver financed theconstruction of the first railway that linked Pulacayo to the port of Antofagasta, whichwas annexed by Chile in 1879 at the time of the eclosion of the War of Pacific. Hochschild bought the mine in 1927, drained the hot water and the gases thatinundated it and modernized it, getting a higher production. After about two decades in1946 it occurred in Pulacayo an extraordinary congress of the federation of syndicatesof the mining workers of Bolivia (FSTMB), founded two years before, to decide aboutits position regarding the deposed and murdered president Gualberto Villarroel López.The directors linked to the Revolutionary Nationalist Movement (MNR), the biggerBolivian party, insisted on they should support the exiled heirs of the president who wasthe responsible for the legalization of the syndicates. But the executive-secretary JuanLechín Oquendo, who kept a close relation with the Trotskyites of the RevolutionaryLabor Party, convinced the majority to adopt the program of proletarian revolution,expressed in the so-called Acts of Pulacayo. Six years later, the miners took the streetsof the cities of the Tableland and armed with bananas of dynamite, they deflagrated theBolivian National Revolution. The Acts of Pulacayo are an application of the doctrine of permanent revolutionin the particular case of Bolivia. Bolivia was defined as an backward capitalist countrybut where „it predominated qualitatively the capitalist exploitation and the other socialand economical formations constitute inheritances of our historic past.‟ That backwardcountry of an exporting economy controlled by the cartel of the magnates of tinrepresented a simple bond of the worldwide capitalist chain. Such peculiaritiesexplained both the absence of a true bourgeoisie capable of „liquidating latifundium andother pre-capitalist economic forms and the absence of a predominating proletarianclass in the national politics. The way of the Revolution would be a consequence of those distinctive Bolivianaspects. The small proletarian, with a nucleus formed by the miners, was called to leadthe exploited masses in a democratic revolution that would be transformed, along thecontinuous process, in a proletarian revolution. The shadows of the dissident Bolshevik
  • 128. Leon Trotski, murdered a few years before, flew over the syndicate congress reunited inthe heart of the Bolivian mining capitalism. The Bolivian census of 1950 registered an Indian population of about 1.7million, 63% of the total. The category of Indians was based on the mother languageand surrounded Quechuas, Aimaras, Chiquitanos and Guaranis. But the Acts ofPulacayo passed away from the notion of ethnicity. In his language, the country wasdividede in a small dominant class defined as a feudal-bourgeoisie, in the proletariandemographically minority and in a great and heterogeneous small bourgeoisie,composed by small businessmen, small farmers, technicians, bureaucrats, artisans andrural workers. The rural population summed almost 2 millions, about 74%, with a clearpredominance of Indians. There was no Indian question in the Acts of Pulcayo. Theminers were, according to the census, mostly mixed and Indians and they sawthemselves as miners and Bolivians, not as Aimaras nor Quechuas and even less asAmerindians. In the revolutionary program of FSTMB, the mass of the Indian populationfigured under the labels of artisans and landsmen. In the march of the Revolution, thevanguard class – the miners – should lead that small bourgeoisie. The word Indiansappears twice in the document. The first time was to say that „the workers shouldorganize rural syndicates and work together with the Indian communities‟. The second,that, because they were analphabet, the Indians were excluded from elections that hadnothing as democratic. Under this aspect, the Acts of Pulacayo used the currentlanguage of the country, which converted in official language with the NationalRevolution. In a Bolivia of large Indian majority, they weren´t seen and didn´t seethemselves as political actors. Throughout the second half of the XX century, Bolivia experienced deep socialand demographical changes. The urban population was multiplied by seven and reached62% of the total. The Indians, - or collas, as defined by a combination of self-identification with the mother tongue – represented 60% of the population in the censusof 2001, but half of them lived in the cities. Spanish, before and exclusive idiom ofwhites and mixed, converted into the principal language of four fifths of the Boliviansand among the Indians is as spoken as Quechua and Aimara. The total of speakers ofIndian languages became to 60% of the Spanish speakers and in the age-group of 13 to18 year-old, to less than 43%. From 1976 to 2001, analphabetism among the Indiansreduced from 44% to 20%. The Indian traditions blurred more quickly in the urban environment and amongthe young. El Alto, the Indian city peripheral to La Paz had three thousands in 1950 andoutran 650 thousand, close to the population of the capital. The peripheral city, pulsingcenter of the Bolivian social movements, works as a political and cultural link of thetriangle constituted by La Paz, the Aimara communities of the Tableland and the globalfluxes of information.
  • 129. However, ironically, at the same time the Indian experience dissolve in thecultural pot of globalization, the figure of the Indian emerges in the center of theBolivian politics. Evo Morales was presented as the first Amerindian president of thecountry and worn traditional Indian clothes in his speech of inauguration in 2006, whenhe thanked to the Pachamama divinity, the Universe-Mother in the Incan mythology,and to the Indian movement of Bolivia and of Latin America of the opportunity ofconducting the country. In the same speech, he qualified the Indian peoples as theabsolute owners of this noble land, of its natural resources and denunciated thehumiliation suffered by the Indians throughout history, comparing Bolivia to SouthAfrica and interpreting his arrival to power as a product of the campaign of five hundredyears of black-Indian-popular resistance. Morales, in the inauguration speech, saluted mythical figures such as the lordManco Inca and historical characters of the Indian fights such as Tupac Katari and hiswife Bartolina Sisa. Marco Inca was one of the last Incan lords who organized 200thousand warriors and beleaguered Cuzco during 10 months in 1536 before establishingthe last capital of the Incan Empire in Vilcabamba. Tupac Katari was an Aimara born asJulián Apasa who leaded the rebellion of Tupac Amaru II in High Peru and with anarmy of 40 thousand Indians he beleaguered La Paz in 1780. When he was captured hiswife continued in the command. The president didn´t forget the Argentinianrevolutionary Che Guevara, murdered in Bolivia in 1967, but he didn´t mention no heroof the National Revolution of 1952 and made only an oblique reference to it to say thatthe universal vote „cost blood‟. As a compensation, the listed a program of refunding ofBolivia since the original indigenous movement trusting in a central element – theconcession of autonomy to the indigenous peoples in the Constitutional Assembly thathe invoked to reunite in Sucre, the historic capital of the country. At the time of theinauguration of the Constitutional Assembly, the deputies of the major governor grouppresented dressed in indigenous clothes. That image signalized the political force of theprogram of restoration of an imaginary Indian, ancestor and original, which wasconsolidated in the constitutional project of the Assembly. The Bolivian Indians don´t use any indigenous clothes anymore. When they didit, in the times when Quechua and Aimara were more frequent than Spanish, there wereno Indians, but workers, landmen and artisans of Bolivia. Today, in the proportion itdisappears in the social life, the figure of the Indian becomes a giant figure in thepolitical imagination of Bolivia. The paradox needs an explanation.The interrupted revolution Founded as a nationalist party by Victor Paz Estenssoro and Hernán Siles Zuazoin 1941, MNR participated of the government of Gualberto Villaroel and was victim ofthe failure of its shy reformism. Harassed by the mobilizations of the mining workers
  • 130. syndicates, Villarroel responded with repression, getting away from his principal basisof popular support and becoming an easy prey for the conservatives that expressed theinterests of the barons of tin. Inside of the political crisis, the repressive organs killedintellectuals of opposition and the conservative parties reacted by calling a popularmobilization. In July 1946, the Plaza Murillo, center of La Paz, was occupied by acrowd that invaded the headquarters of the government, properly nicknamed as BurnedPalace, and captured and hanged the president. The conservatives then governed the country in the following years, while thedirectors of MNR conspired in the exile. A trial to take power with force in October1949 reached to a river of blood. In a second trial, the nationalists experienced the wayof the voting cabins and Paz Estenssoro won the elections of 1951 but the presidentrefused to transmit the power and constituted a military group of government.According their political instincts the nationalists machinated a coup d´etat, gatheringcommandants of the police forces of La Paz and taking the capital in April 1952.However, the swindlers found the state army empty and saw themselves as hostages ofan army of 8 thousand men who marched to the capital. When everything seemed to be lost, many militias or armed miners irrupted intothe city, under the direction of Juan Lechín and Siles Zuazo. During some days, thestreets were transformed into battle fields, but soon the recruits changed side, joiningthe miners. The military commandants surrendered and the capital fell in the hands ofthe revolutionaries. Power was offered to Lechín who had an enthusiastic support of theminers, but he opted to a legalist accord with MNR and gave the government to PazEstenssoro. Months after the revolution, the first MNR government instituted the universalvote and in the following elections, won by the government candidate Siles Zuazo, theelectorate jumped from 200 thousands to almost one million. In October 1952 the tinmines of the three companies of rosca were turned into state-owner and reunited underthe holding Bolivian Mining Corporation (Comibol). The new Bolivian Labor Center(COB), leaded by Lechín and under dominant influence of FSTMB, gained rights ofrepresentation in Comibol and of cancelling any decision of the state-owned company.In the beginning of 1953 a law of agrarian reform abolished the forced work anddetermined the distribution of latifundia and unproductive lands to the rural workers.Since the impulse of COB, several syndicates of rural workers were constituted as wellas rural militias that were armed by the government, as well as miner militias. The Estate that was born from revolution was supported by the syndicateorganizations and worked in a new populist political system. The Bolivian society asdefined in this new regime was composed of social classes, not ethnical groups. Fromthe point of view of language, the racial notions used at the bankrupt liberal Estate weredisdained. The census of 1900 had previewed the demographic decline of theindigenous race and the concomitant rise of the white race and the mixed race,originated from the mixture of the white with the Indian and named in Bolivia as
  • 131. cholos. But the decree of agrarian reform never mentioned „indigenous race‟ or„indigenous peoples‟, neither words such as Aimaras or Qechuas. The syntax of thenationalist Bolivia was ordered under the concepts of citizenship and social classes. The divisions inside MNR reflected the conflicts between the projects of thenationalist and communist groups and contribute for the weakening of the revolutionaryimpulse. The nationalists, leaded by Siles Zuazo, conserved a precarious hegemony,always contested by the communists, which got organized around Lechín. As apresident, Zuazo faced the leader of COB and in the name of economical stability,eliminated the privileges of the syndicates in Comibol, reduced the salary of the minersand took off the weapons of the militias. Re-elected in 1960 for a new mandate,Estenssoro continued with the policy of restoring order and directly faced Lechín, hisvice-president during the first two years. In the vespers of the military coup in 1964, thecommunist leader was expulsed from MNR. In the following two decades, Bolivia knew a first cycle of militarydictatorships, initially sustained by a pact between the Armed Forces and the ruralsyndicates and punctuated by the short left government of the General Juan José Torres.The military coup leaded by the General Hugo Banzer irrupted in the city of Santa Cruzde la Sierra in 1971, removed Torres and installed a dictatorship that lasted seven years.In that dictatorship, the pact with the syndicates was broken after bloody battles in theregion of Cochabamba in 1974. The battles opened the path to a pioneer irruption of themodern ethnical policy, under the form of the Katarist movement. The intellectual Fausto Reinaga, the father of Katarism, flirted with Marxismand nationalism before abandoning both in 1964. The notion of struggle of forcesserved to Europe, not to his Bolivia, divided into two: a black and oppressor and otherindigenous and oppressed. In Bolivia, there was a fight of races that would end with theabsorbance of the Indians as cholos or by the re-foundation of the country as anindigenous nation. In the speech of the National Revolution, „Indians‟ meant „rural‟. Inthe speech of Reinaga, summarized in the Manifest of Tiahuanaco, published in 1973 byindigenous organizations, „rural‟ meant „Indians‟, named Quechuas and Aimarás. „Thetrue development is based on culture. The systematic trial of destroying the cultures ofthe Quechuas and Aimarás is the fountain of the national frustrations. We don´t want torenounce to our noble integrity inherited in the name of a false development. We areforeigners in our own country‟. The manifest criticized the paternalist Estate, the MNR, the left parties and thecupole of the rural syndicates. It proposed a constitution of a rural party that should bean Indian Party. The speech of inauguration of Morales was inspired in the ideas ofReinaga. The Indian Party failed, corrupted since its origin by the factions and by the lackof support of the „Indians‟. However, the ideas of Reinaga fruited in Katarism, anethnical Aimará movement whose name evokes Tupac Katari. The Katarists soondivided into two drafts. Victor Hugo Cárdenas founded the Revolutionary Movement
  • 132. Tupac Katari (MRTK) together with the leader of the rural syndicate Genaro Flores,which would cooperate with COB, the left parties and MNR. Cárdenas was born in asmall village in the margins of the Lake Titicaca with an original Aimará surnameChoquehuanca that was changed during his childhood by his father to hide theindigenous origin. Cárdenas focused in the idea of conquering a place for the Aimarásin a unified Bolivia. In another direction, running after a radical ethnicity and withoutany compromises, Luciano Tapia and Constantino Lima, leaders of the „indianists‟founded the Indian Movement Tupac Katari (MITK) that excluded from their horizonany alliance with non-Indian parties and rejected since the beginning the existence of aBolivian nation. This fracture is relevant. MRTK participated on the coalition organized aroundthe MNR in the elections of 1993 and Cárdenas became the vice-president of GonzaloSánchez de Lozada, whose government continued the liberal economic policy started inthe previous decade. In 1994 the government of Sánchez de Lozada promoted aconstitutional reform based on the multiculturalist program of unity in diversity ofMRTK. The first article of the constitution was re-written and defined Bolivia as amulti-ethnic and multicultural country and conceded the ethnical organizations therights of participations in the local governments. The reform of Katarist inspiration wasthen retaken and made stronger in the constitutional project of Evo Morales. MITK fragmented and originated the Guerilla Armed Force Tupac Katari thatmixed the ideas of Reinaga to those of Che Guevara. The guerilla carried out somesabotages to electric structures in 1991 and was dissolved in the following year. Hisprincipal leader, the Aimará Felipe Quispe, passed five years in jail together with theyoung warrior Álvaro García Linea, an intellectual who came from a rich medium classof Cochabamba. When they were liberated, the ways of these two men diverged. Quispe became the leader of the Syndicate Confederation of Rural and re-organized the Indianist group of the Pachakuti Indigenous Movement (MIP) whose flagis the establishment of an Aimará Republic in Qullasuyo, an old Incan province thatextend further from the actual Bolivia, through the north of Argentina and Chile, southof Peru and the Brazilian state of Acre. Born in a small village of inland almost onedecade before the National Revolution, the leader of MIP presents the war name of ElMallku (the prince, title of supreme authority in Aimará language) and is saluted as DonFelipe by his parties scattered in El Alto and in a network of small indigenous peoplesof the Tableland. „Bolivia is an abstract fiction‟, as said by the warrior in an interviewconceded during his campaign to the Presidency in 2005, when he denounced EvoMorales as a betrayer and got 2.2% of the votes. Linera opted by the Katarist reformism who sees a future for Bolivia if not as asingle nation at least a confederation of ethnical nations. The intellectual who doesn´tspeak neither Quechua nor Aimará entered to the Moviment to Socialism, the party ofEvo Morales and in 2006 became the Bolivian vice-president, the most important figure
  • 133. in the external relationships of the country and the principal ideologist of the newgovernment. Katarism did not sprout from traditional indigenous social structures, but fromurban Aimarás working in universities, cultural organizations and schools for formationof teachers. The ethnicity proclaimed by the Katarists keep little relation with imaginedpre-Colombian roots and its movement, very active in El Alto, has scarce influences inthe villages of inland. Bu the emergence of a policy of restoration of supposedlyancestral identities signalized the failure of the ideals and the language of the NationalRevolution of 1952.Tableland and the Orient In the colonial times, there was nothing compared to the actual Bolivia. Thenorthern part of its territory pertained to the Vice-Kingdom of Peru. The southern partwas subordinated to the Vice-Kingdom of the Silver River and organized around thesilver mines of Potosí. The two capitals of Bolivia express this inheritance: La Paz inthe proximities of the Peruvian frontier is the headquarters of the Executive andLegislative; Sucre, close to Potosí, is the constitutional capital and the headquarters ofthe Judicial Power. Bolivia is a resume of the South American geography, circling Amazonian,Andes and Platino regions. The Tableland, in the Occident, is extended since the LakeTiticaca until the Argentinian frontier, crossing 800km of dry lowlands placed betweentwo parallel mountain chains and punctuated by salt mines and sometimes greenvalleys. The Orient is divided into a northern portion crossed by the rivers Mamoré,Guaporé and Beni that are part of the Amazonian basin and a southern portion cut bythe Pilcomayo River that is part of the Platino basin. The Bolivian demographic and historic focus is the Tableland, where the twocapitals are placed and also important cities such as Oruro, and old center of mining ofsilver and tin, and Cochabamba, founded in a fertile valley with the finality ofproducing food to the colonial mines of Potosí. But the biggest city of the country isSanta Cruz, the pole without rival of the low Eastern lands and the principal connectionbetween Bolivia and Brazil. The crisis of the National Revolution developed parallel tothe decadence of the mines of the Tableland and the economical emergence of the East. The Bolivian economic history can be spoken as sequence of cycles ofexploitation of mineral resources. In the colonial times, the exportations wereconcentrated in silver extracted from Potosí and Oruro worked by semi-slave Indians(under the regime named as mita) and by occasional free workers named mingas. The
  • 134. silver mining entered in a long decadence in the second half of the XIX century whenthe mining of tin started. At the end of the First World War, Bolivia became the second producer of tin,exploring mines that seemed to be inexhaustible around Oruro and La Paz andproviding raw material for the expanding automobile industry. Patiño, Aramayo andHochschild were local businessmen who entered in the list of the richest men in theworld and created the so-called rosca, a tentacle system of influence on the Bolivianpolitics based on the corruption of politicians and the aggressive work of lawyers andlobbyers. The tin miners who summed 40 thousand in the vespers of the NationalRevolution died early, before turning 50, devastated by the pulmonary diseasesprovoked by the gases of the deep mines. The technical modernization of the mines went practically interrupted with thestation-owning of the sector. In the two decades after the National Revolution, theminers had no risk of losing their job and a great complex of mines such as Catavi-SigloXX employed 5 thousand workers spite the decadent productivity. In the years 1970while the production of tin declined it was announced the discovery of reservoirs ofnatural gas and petroleum in the East. At the same time, with the development ofplantations of cotton and soy in the lowlands, Santa Cruz became a prosperouscommercial and finance center. The collapse of the state mining system was announced in the first half of thefollowing decade, during the government of Zuazo, when the uncontrolled inflation, thereduction in the familiar income and the intermittent strikes and miner protestsconducted the country to chaos. The Congress anticipated the presidential elections andin 1985 due to a dramatic fall in the prices of tin, Estenssoro won a fourth mandate. Atthe age of 77 year-old, the founder of MNR started a plan of liberal reforms named asNew Economical Policy. The main goal of this policy was to re-structure the miningsector by closing several mines, the privatization of others, the drastic reduction ofemployers from Comibol and the formation of autonomous cooperatives of miners. The legendary mine of Catavi, almost exhausted, stopped to produce in that yearand in 1987, Siglo XX went to the control of the cooperatives. Almost at the same time,Juan Lechín, 73, left the leadership of a COB that lived form the memories of a goldenera already finished. From 1986 to 1991 21,310 miners were fired, which left inComibon only 7 thousand miners. From the 35 state mines in operation at the beginningof the policy program, only 22 lasted, and still with insignificant production. Thereduction continued until in 1993 only 4,720 miners lasted in the state mines, 4thousands in the private mines, 2 thousands sub-hired and 18 thousands working bytheir own. An entire syndicate tradition went down together with the dissolution of thenucleus of the Bolivian proletarian. In the extraordinary congress of FSTMB in SigloXX in 1986, there were 725 representatives. Two years later, in Chojlla, they were 237and in 1991, in Tupiza, only 196. In the six years until 1991, 36 thousand people left themining villages and migrated to the cities, especially El Alto.
  • 135. Things don‟t end here. In the government of Sánchez de Lozada new mines wereclosed and in 1997 the number of workers of the state mines reached the historicalminimum of 1.5 thousands. A mine such as the Unificada stood with only oneemployee: the general-secretary of FSTMB who had stability in the job. The sadNational Congress of Miners of 1998, carried out in private mine of gold in Oruro,approved a resolution that claimed by nothing less than the „liquidation of the neoliberalmodel and from there of the capitalist system‟. Nobody gave attention anymore to thedeclarations of the miners and the Bolivian politics were organized under a newlanguage, free from the notion of social classes and contaminated by the ideas ofculture, ethnicity and ancestry. When Juan Lechín died in 2001 nostalgiccongratulations of a country that didn´t exist anymore were given. The decadence of the mining of tin was followed by discovery of reservoirs ofhydrocarbon in the lowlands of the Orient. In the beginning of the decade of 1970, theproduction of petroleum reached a peak of 47 thousand barrels/day but soon it declineddue to lack of investments and the inefficiency of YPFB, the state-owned company ofhydrocarbon. Only in the end of the 1980 years, when the sector was opened to foreigncompanies, big areas of natural gas were discovered in the eastern departments. Soonafter, negotiations for exportation of gas to Argentina and Brazil were carried out and inthe government of Sánchez de Lozada YPFB was privatized which attracted newinvestments. Since 1999 with the inauguration of the gas pipeline Brazil-Bolivia the gasfirmed as the principal exportation product of Bolivia. The transition from one cycle to another resounded violently in the internaldemographic and economic equilibrium. The migrations from the Tableland to theOrient went faster, following the decadence of the mining sector. From 1992 to 2001,the census showed that the population of the four departments of the Orient (Santa Cruz,Tarija, Beni and Pando) grew 44% for a medium growth of 22% in the five departmentsof the Tableland (La Paz, Cochabamba, Oruro, Potosí and Chuquisaca). But richnessmigrated even faster. In 1998 Tableland was 64% of the gross product and the Orientwas 36%. In 2006, the Orient with one third of the population represented more than45% of the total product. Under the impact of the long economic depression, the network of political andsyndicate relations that sustained the Estate originated in the National Revolution wastotally broken. The ethnic policy of restoration of the „original indigenous nations‟evolved in the vacuum of a legitimate power at the same time a regional influence of theelite of Santa Cruz raised, formulate its own ethnic politics.
  • 136. The Plurinational Communitarian Estate Juan Evo Morales Ayma was born in a small Aimará village close to Oruro in1959 and grew in small house made up of clay. Soon he started to help his father, aCatholic breeder of llamas who, as many other Aimarás, offered alcohol and coca toPachamama. When he was 20, he moved with the family to the region of Cochabambaafter a dry season that devastated the agriculture and the cattle of the tableland of Oruro. Cochabamba is 2.7 thousand meters high and is placed in the valleys of ChapareRiver, an affluent of Mamoré River, in a transition area between the Andes lands ofOruro and the Bolivian Amazonian region. Morales engaged in the cultivation oftropical fruits and coca in times of accelerated colonization of Chapare but also of fightsfor eradication the plantations of coca that were inserted in the war on drugs conductedby USA. In 1985 he was elected as a general-secretary of the local syndicate of cocaplanters and three years after, when the government reinforced the actions against coca,he became the leader of the rural regional federation. In this position, he leaded marchesof protest in La Paz and visited Europe explaining the difference between the traditionaluse of coca leaves and the handcraft of cocaine. In 1997 he was elected deputy in acoalition of leftist parties and soon later, founded the Movement to Socialism (MAS). The trajectory of Morales and of MAS towards power made steps in two wavesof popular mobilizations: the war on water in 2000 and the war on gas in 2003. The firstwas a victorious popular mobilization started in Cochabamba against an augment of200% in the price of water imposed the company Aguas del Tunari made of foreign andnational companies in the year before. A march of coca planters circled the city insupport to the mobilization. The protests went to Oruro and La Paz and blockage ofstreets appeared throughout the country until the concession to that company wascancelled. The second, bigger, started with a strike of hungriness of Felipe Quispe and onethousand rural directors against a pact of exporting natural gas to USA and Mexicothrough the Chilean port of Mejillones, in the old Bolivian department of Atacama, lostin the War of Pacific. The protests spread out to La Paz, Cochabamba and the Aimarásvillages, defying a violent repression of the government of Sánchez de Lozada. COBwas reborn from ashes and claimed for a general strike that stopped the country, whilerioters of El Alto blocked the accesses to the Capital. In October 2003 after agovernmental attack to El Alto that left 80 dead, the coalition of Sánchez de Lozadadissolved and the president renounced. These two crisis sealed the luck of the moderate Katarists who participated in thegovernmental coalition. Felipe Quispe denounced more than once the concept of unityin diversity and invested his interpretation of the Bolivian history as a multi-centuryconflict between two Bolivias, one indigenous and one white. Anyway, Morales becamea national leadership. Between one crisis and another in the presidential elections of
  • 137. 2002, his Movement obtained 21% of the votes against 22.5% fo the coalition headedby MNR and Sánchez de Lozada. In the following elections in 2005, the coca leaderwon with the consecrating support of 54% of the electorate. The Movement to Socialism was born from the syndicate movement of the cocaplanters and in the beginning its platform was the nationalization of the naturalresources, particularly the hydrocarbons. Morales thought himself as a rural Bolivian,never as an original Indian. However, when Morales reached to power, the program ofthe party proclaimed a goal of rebuilding the country as a plurinational Estate based onoriginal nations. The ideological diffusion was originated in Katarism, a movement thatdidn´t have the social force of MAS. To the Katarists, „rural‟ meant „indigenous‟. The equivalence more than anoption of language represented a political passport so the rural men would be able tobreak the limits of syndicalism and present in the national scenario as candidates topower, since in the condition of being Indians they could invoke the statute of being thenational majority and heirs of an ancestor country not maculated by the Spanishcolonialism. But the Katarists were urban intellectuals with scarce influence over therural mass. Morales, in the other way around, had behind him the coca planters, whichgave him vast access to the rural community. The Constitutional Assembly of August 2006 was the tool the new start of theBolivian history. The constitutional project voted by the majority aligned to thepresident in December of the following year and approved in a national referendum in2009 represented conciliation between a moderate Katarism of national roots and themulticulturalism in fashion in the international scenario. The Bolivian liberal Estate inscribed in the law the political equality of thecitizens but, as in the colonial times, the Indians were excluded from the rights ofcitizenship. Under an implicit apartheid, they travelled in crowded third-class wagons,were expulsed from the streets and until 1952, the vast majority of analphabets couldnot vote. The new constitution in its preamble announced a radical rupture: „we left inthe past the colonial Estate, republican and neoliberal. We assume the historic defy ofconstruct collectively the Social Unitary Estate of Plurinational Communitarian Rights‟.Throughout the text, the politicians compromised with unity and integrity of the countrybut substitute the principles of universal rights to the concept of singular collectiverights to the „indigenous nations‟ in the areas of political representation andadministration of justice. The plurinational aspect of the Estate gains expression in the 2 nd article thatproclaims the free determination of the nations and indigenous peoples conferring themthe senses of autonomy and self-government and guaranteeing the recognition of theirinstitutions and territorial entities. The logic of turning official the indigenousethnicities also turned official the Afro-Bolivian people that, according to the 32tharticle, has the same cultural, social, political and economic rights of the originalindigenous nations and peoples. The communitarian aspect is expressed in the 11 th
  • 138. article that describes three manners of democratic power: participation, representationand communitarian, this last one defined as the election, designation or naming ofauthorities and representatives by norms and procedures of the indigenous nations andpeoples. In the Europe of XIX century, the universal education worked as a tool for thetriumphant nationalisms. The schools served to the finality of promoting nationalcohesion, drawing in the mind of the children the borders of an imaginary community:the flag, the national hymn, the money, the territory, a shared past, a language and acommon literary patrimony. The new Bolivian constitution references to the identitytradition of nationalism not to promote the national cohesion but the plurinationalism.The article 80th attributes to education the mission of contributing to strengthening theunity and identity of all as part of Plurinational Estate as well as to the cultural identityand development of the members of each nation or each original rural indigenouspeople. In the schools the Bolivians will learn that there is not a single Bolivian nation,but a collection of distinct nations, each one proud of their own identity. The national language developed crucial functions in the production of nations.The plurinational act in Bolivia faces the difficulty represented by the diffusion ofSpanish as national language and by the progressive weakening of the indigenouslanguages, mainly among the young people. The 96 th article confers to the universitiesthe mission of recuperation, preservation and divulgation of the indigenous languages.The rebuilt Estate faces against a past that it judges to be poisoning of the true originalnations by the internal colonialism. Culture is the crucial concept in the Bolivian plurinationalism as it was in theEuropean romantic nationalism. The constitution makes official the original indigenousrural cultures when it proclaims in the 99 th article that the Estate will assume theexistence of these cultures and will preserve and broadcast them. The following articlesdescribe the elements of the original cultures: the views of the universe, the myths, theoral history, the dances, the cultural practices, the knowledge, the traditionaltechnologies, the handcraft, all of them classified as part of expression and identity ofthe Estate. Culture is understood as an essential product of the original nations and works asa fountain of collective rights in the political sphere. The 149 th article determines aproportional participation of these nations in the Plurinational Legislative Assembly andpreviews the delimitation of special indigenous circumscriptions that will not obey tocriteria of demography and territorial continuity as the other circumscriptions. In the212th article the project give the original indigenous rural nations the rights of electingrepresentatives according their own manners of election. However, the main collective right given to the indigenous nations it to establisha system of original justice carried out by traditional authorities. In the jurisdiction ofthe indigenous autonomous entities, according to the 192th article, the decisions adoptedby the original justice can´t be reviewed by the regular tribunals of justice. The
  • 139. duplication of the judicial system echoes in the done by the preview in the 198 th articleof a Constitutional Tribune composed equally by magistrates originated from thecommon justice and from the original justice. In the beginning of March 2009, the house of the ex-vice-president Cárdenas, atLake Titicada, was robbed by indigenous rioters. The wife and two sons of the historicKatarist were beaten with sticks and whips. The brutal attack derived from a decision ofcommunitarian justice taken by Indian leaders aligned with MAS and justified under theallegation that Cárdenas´ family didn´t fulfill traditional obligations such as theparticipation in parties and in the communal harvest. The new constitution was under validity and Cárdenas classified the act ofviolence as a punishment of his engagement in the campaign of the rejection of theconstitutional project. Evo Morales rejected the criticism of international entities ofhuman rights before pronouncing an evasive moral condemnation of the attack. Thevice-president Linera preferred to temper a even more mild condemnation with thesuggestion that the indigenous community had legitimate business to resolve withCárdenas. The Unity Estate of the new constitution will give autonomies to the diverseterritorial entities previewed: departments, provinces, cities and original indigenousentities. These last ones, according to the 295th article, come from an act of wishes ofthe original nation or people according to procedures of direct consultation. They startnot only to self-govern but also to dispose from the right of a system of original justice.The 297th article clarifies that the autonomous government of these entities will beexerted through their own proper norms and forms of organization. The crucial expression of all the text is „original nation‟. The proclamation of acommunity of such type by traditional authorities or political organizations of ethnicalprofile will have the power to install an autonomic statute that acquits a portion of theterritory from the obligations imposed by the general laws os political representationand administration of justice. In the end, the concept of citizenship gets empty fromuniversality and gets subordinated to the concept of ethnicity.Inventing the Camba nation „Evo Morales wants all the power, all the money and all the Indians.‟ These sourwords, of an unashamedly racism, were pronounced by Percy Fernández, the major ofSanta Cruz in December 2007 during an act of giving, by civic committees, of theproject of the Autonomic Statute of the Department of Santa Cruz. The same majorsuggested, some months before, the creation of another country by the separation of thedepartments of the Orient that forms the so-called Half Moon with the Tableland. The
  • 140. departmental governor, Rubén Costas and the powerful leader of the local CivicCommittee, Branko Marinkovic, dissociated prudently from the separatist suggestion,swearing fidelity to the principle of the unity of Bolivia. But those swearing, not thedeclarations of Fernández, should be attributed to a tactical political calculus. The Half Moon in the conception shared by them three is not a collection of fourBolivian departments but the expression of an ethnical nation: the Camba nation. Thegeographic country of the Cambas corresponds to the Bolivian lowlands, drained byAmazonian and Platine rivers and semi-circled by regions with affinities: the Brazilianstates of Acre, Rondônia and Mato Grosso; Paraguay and the intermediary departmentsof Chuquisaca and Cochabamba. The map of the Camba nation is broadcasted by theMovement for Camba Nation. The historic country of the Cambas is a myth of origincreated in reaction against the National Revolution. Until the revolutionary conquest of power by MNR, Camba was a pejorativenickname used to refer to the Indians, majorly Guaranis, of the Bolivian lowlands. Butbefore this, the elite of Santa Cruz already nourished autonomist ambitions that gotcolors of separatism during the War of Chaco (1932-1935). The war between Boliviaand Paraguay was accelerated by the discovery of small reservoirs of petroleum in thebasis of the Andes Mountains, in the Southern Chaco. The Paraguayans won easily,even having a smaller army, due to the nationalist fervor awakened in the country.Bolivia fought with an army of indigenous people recruited with violence, lost almostall the region and knew a national demoralization that figures among the causes of therevolutionary rupture of 1952. During war, intellectuals of Santa Cruz explained to an elite self-named Cruceñaand proud of their Spanish blood that history and geography traced a border between theOrient and the Tableland. The city of Santa Cruz was founded in the XVI century by theCapitain Ñuflo de Chávez who interiorized the Spanish colonization in a journey sinceBuenos Aires and with stop in Asunción. Santa Cruz also was naturally connected toChaco and to Pampa, not to Andes. The best result of the war, from that point of view,was the Bolivian lost and the secession of the Cruceña region. Camba gained new senses soon after the National Revolution, in a time when theowners of lands of Santa Cruz feared the expansion of agrarian reform to the lowlands.From this fear it was born a narrative of mixing of two noble races: the Spanishcolonizers and the Guarani Indians of the Bolivian Orient. The word Camba from apejorative nickname converted into a generic designation (and honorific) of theinhabitants of the Eastern regions. In this walk, the Guaranis started to be described asbrave warriors that, centuries ago, faced the imperial ambitions of the Incans. The new configuration of the Guaranis was supported in an old essay of theSwedish anthropologist Nils Erland Nordenskiöld published in 1917 but taken awayfrom obscurity only in the decade of 1950. The academic was son of a famous explorerof the Artic and narrated a battle of Guarani warriors against Incan forces in thebeginning of the XVI century. The modern historiography shows holes in the narrative
  • 141. of the anthropologist and lift up doubts about the sense of that remote battle, but theCrucenians historians of the middle of XX century didn´t hesitate in transforming it intoan epopee of triumphant resistance of the Guaranis and in a supplementary proof of themulti-century cultural opposition between the Orient and the Tableland. The history review had a clear ideological direction. Instead of a brutalsubordination of the Guaranis to the Spanish colonial power (as occurred to the Incansin the Tableland), it was a narration of a battle between strong men, with gloriesdistributed among winners and losers, finally resolved by a miscegenation thatsymbolized conciliation. The Cambas, product of such miscegenation, should not put inthe same drawer of the unvalued Cholos and Collas of the high lands. Two decades later, the Camba history added a new element in the narrative: thelast great Chiriguan rebellion (as the Bolivian Guaranis were nicknamed) in the end ofthe XIX century. The war produced a series of battles with the colonizers of thelowlands but only ended with the intervention of the troops of the central government ofLa Paz that massacred the rebels in January 1892 in the lowlands of Kuruyuki. In 1972,the Cruceño historian Hernando Sanabria Fernández published Apiaguaiqui-Tumpa:Biografia del Pueblo Chiriguano y de su Último Caudillo (Apiaguaiqui-Tumpa:Biography of the Chiriguan People and its last Leader). The book was a report of therebellion that, as observed by the anthropologist Kathleen Lowrey, developedideological papers essential to the Camba mythology. Fernández traced suggestiveparallel between the Guarani rebellion and the Sioux warrior of Sitting Bull of USA atthe same time, in order to emphasize the tragic heroism in the desperate fight of theweak against the strong. He also described the battles with the Indians as violent buthonor meetings that involved similar forces. But, foremost, he described theintervention of La Paz as an act of unnamed wilderness, carried out by forces outsidethe universe of the lowlands. Fernández, the most famous writer of Santa Cruz, was a combatant in the War ofChaco and months before his death, in 1986, he was condecorated with the Condor ofAndes, in the degree of Great Comendador by the last government of Estenssoro. Hedidn´t use a writing machine but only a classic fountain pen. His most important bookwas about the Guarani rebellion and had as target the Cruceño readers, when it onlybegan the great migratory wave of indigenous and Cholos from the Tableland to theOrient. The report was destined to sustain the Camba myth of the tragic but fructuousmeeting between the white colonizers and the Guaranis at the lowlands. The Guaranisshould be interpreted under the lights of the concept of resistance against the invader,which means, as pioneers of the Camba resistance to the Andes power of La Paz. In thewords of Lowrey, the episode of the Chiriguana revolution is an exulted code of theresistance against the invaders until the sour end. The book of Fernández appeared in the beginning of the dictatorship of theGeneral Banzer, a man from the Orient surrounded by associated persons from thelowlands. During his regime, while the migration to the Orient got bigger and bigger,
  • 142. Santa Cruz converted into a pole more and more important of political opposition to thepredominance of the Tableland. The Camba mythology was completed in this periodthat has as end point the multiculturalist constitutional reform of Sánchez de Lozada in1994. In the new multiethnic and pluricultural country then proclaimed, the Cambascould legally affirm their distinct aspect, their ethnic singularity and their autonomistambitions. More: the racism anti-Colla that followed all the construction of the power ofSanta Cruz started to figure as text very well masked by the Camba vindication ofcontinuity of the Guarani resistance. The rebellion of Kuruyuki was conducted by the Avas, the most numerous groupamong the more than 80 thousand Guaranis of modern Bolivia. The Avas weredispersed and assimilated throughout the XX century. The Isoseños, a minority Guaranigroup, leaded the foundation in 1982 fo the Confederation of Indigenous Peoples ofBolivia (Cidob) that gather diverse ethnic entities and presents as a representative entityof the Chiquitans, Ayoreos Guaranis and Guarayos of lowlands. Cidob is a place ofdispute among the Isoseños (organized in the Capitany of High and Low Isoso – Cabi)and the Avas, who control the Assembly of Guarani Peoples (APG), an entity financedby the Catholic Church. The book of Fernández was practically unknown among theindigenous of the Orient during two decades, but was transformed in the beginning ofthe decade of 1990 in the pole of articulation of a project of Guarani unity conducted byCabi. In the centenary of the massacre of Kuruyuki, the report of the Cruceñohistorician gave a mythical narrative of blood and honor that serves as a political tool inthe new scenario of the Bolivian multiculturalism. Cabi approached the Cruceño elite by the Movement Camba Nation in 2001 andthree years after,the organization of the Isoseños decided to participate in the CivicCommittee of Santa Cruz that soon gave the Medal of Cruceño Merit to BonifacioBarrientos Cuellar, the leader of Cabi. In the sequence, the Civic Committee formedinside a directory of ethnical peoples composed by representatives of the fourindigenous ethnicities of lowlands. Santa Cruz had a Ethnofolkloric Museum withcollections of indigenous handcrafts of lowlands, but the leadership of the Isoseños,supported by the autonomist elite of the city, established a Guarani Museum dedicatedto an ethnical history and to show the Guarani contributions to the culture of theBolivian Orient. Everything in the Guarani Museum is listed and disposed such a way to not onlystress the singularity of an ethnic group but mainly to distinguish the Guaranis from theIndians of the Tableland. Defying the prevalent modern models of the old Indians ofSouth America, the original site of internet of the Museum showed the peoples of Chacoand of Amazonia as descendants of oceanic migrations relatively recent, from about 5.4thousand years ago, when groups from Indonesia reached America. According to thisthesis, the Guaranis and the other groups of the Bolivian lowlands don´t share acommon past with the Indians of the Tableland, whose history began with older fluxesof migrants who crossed the Straits of Dade Behring at the end of the last glaciations.
  • 143. The thesis expressed in the internet was not limited to postulate distinct remoteorigins for the Indians of the Orient and of the Tableland, but went further and ensuredthat the ocean migrants brought with them techniques and culture more advanced thanthe one of the ancestors of the Collas. The proposition is the opposite of the notiondiffused in the middle of the XX century and adopted by the Marxist history thatinformed the predominant conceptions in the Bolivia of the National Revolution that theIncan civilization with its complex sociopolitical system would figure as a high culture,superior to the primitive cultures of lowland. In the decade of 1970, anthropologystarted to knock down these classic cultural hierarchies evidencing their anachronismand fallacies, but never suggested an inversion of the signs of value. As Lowrey pointedout: „Now in the beginning of the new millennium it is registered other cycle of noxiousstratifications resuscitated under new forms and with new finalities. Who wouldimagine that any indigenous Bolivian community would salute the XXI century with anew theory of distinct racial origin, separating itself from its Indian brothers of Andes?But, in the end, who would ever imagine that the multiculturalists of the 1990 yearswould create conditions under which the white separatism could flower in anindigenous nation?‟Booty of War In the new Constitution, Bolivia is defined as a Social Unity Estate ofPlurinational Communitarian Rights. Autonomies and communities are scattered in allthe text, but the unity aspect of the Estate is found established in the absolute monopolyon the natural resources. According to the 310 th article the economic state form is theresponsible for the administration of the owners of the natural resources and of thestrategic control of the productive chains and of the processes of industrialization ofthese resources. The 351st article determines that the Estate, through public, social,communitarian entities will assume the control and the direction on the exploitation,extraction, industrialization, transport and commerce of the natural resources. The true power of the central government is in the prerogative of distributingalmost as the way it wants the money generated by petroleum and gas that are thegreatest richness of the country. The 353rd country guarantees the Bolivian people anequal access to the benefits coming from the utilization of all the natural resources andaffirms that priority participation will be given to the territories where these resourcesare found and to the original indigenous nations and peoples. Finally the 368th articleensures that the department producers of hydrocarbons will receive 11% of the fiscalbudget and previews that the other departments will receive participations to beexpressed in specific laws. The resistance of the Orient to the new constitutional order isa consequence of the central control of the money from the hydrocarbons.
  • 144. The Constitutional Assembly suffered boycotts of the most part of theoppositionist representatives and transferred from Sucre to Oruro in December 2007after a series of student manifestations stimulated by the opposition against the textapproved by the majority in the government. The final text of the constitutional projectwas approved in a session that went through night and only ended in the morning of 9 thDecember. The marathon of the final voting practically didn´t have the participation ofthe opposition due to a circling of the building by protesters favorable to thegovernment. In the following months, it started the political battle on the popularreferendum of the constitutional project and the departments of Half Moon approvedautonomous statutes that were declared against the constitution by La Paz. In January2009, 60% of the electorate approved the constitutional project, but the new letter wasrefused by the electorate of four Eastern departments and of the ones of Chuquisaca. The principle of plurinationality is not a motive for friction between EvoMorales and the elites of the Orient. Six years before the voting of the constitutionalproject, the Movement Camba Nation published its autonomist proposal entitled „TheNew Pact with the Bolivian Estate‟. Point by point, extensively, the document containsa series of fundamental concepts that reappeared in the constitutional project. Accordingto it, the pluricultural and pluriethnic Bolivia should be reconstituted as a multinationalrepublic. The Campa proposal imagines Bolivia as a confederation of indigenousnations. The nations would arise from plebiscites or department referendums and wouldbe automatically recognized by the Estate. The governments of the autonomousdepartments would have sovereignty in the quality of representative of nations. The proposed pact by the Camba Nation would convert Bolivia in aconfederation Estate. The main difference with the new constitution is that in it there isno place for the complex combination between the concepts of unity Estate and ethnicautonomy. From the point of view of the Camba leaders, Bolivia would be in themaximum a territorial mold for the coexistence of sovereign nations. Under this logic,the nations would have controle over their territories and natural resources. One item of the Camba document confers to the department governments theright to prohibit initiatives of colonization and agrarian reform coming from La Paz.Another item of strategic importance attributes to the departments, regions and nationsthe original domain over all natural resources in soil and sub-soil. The autonomousterritorial entities would have ensured a participation in the money derived from theexploitation of their natural resources as equal as half of the participation of the CentralEstate. The elites of the Orient adopted the multiculturalist program in the governmentof Sánches de Lozada, much before the ascension of Evo Morales to the presidency. Butthey did it for their own wishes, especially the capture of the money from thehydrocarbons that are extracted basically in the departments of the Half Moon. The collapse of Bolivia coming from the National Revolution could not be morecomplete. Instead of a nation divided by social classes, all the relevant actors now speakin the name of a collection of ethnical nations separated by essential cultures. In the
  • 145. words of Wolfgang Gabbert, both the ethnical communities and the nations are typicallyimagined communities, as accurately named by Benedict Anderson. The structuralchanges in the economy and Bolivian society provoked a revolution in the politicalimage. From this revolution, not only ethnicities emerged, but ethnical communities thatself-declare as nations and require national rights. The Hispanic America, as in any other part, the definition of ethnic categories isnot an objective scientific act, but a political act that depends on mutating historicconditions. In Guatemala of the years 1930, the mixed (Ladinos) who were of high classand spoke Spanish defined the poor Ladinos as Indians. In a research conducted in theyears 1970 in the small city of San Jerónimo, close to Huancayo (Peru), a conflictingpatter of classification of urban population was verified. While a high employee of thegovernment, based on linguist and socioeconomic criteria, classified the enormousmajority as indigenous, a inhabitant with high schooling who spoke Spanish but wasson of a Quechua rural man, described the same population as mixed because they livedin the city and adopted a different style of life form the rural persons. The contexts are important to understand the actual fabrication of the Bolivianethnic image. In the Tableland, half a century agor, the category of Indian was appliedalmost exclusively over the rural workers who didn´t speak Spanish and in the politicallanguage the word „rural‟ came before and over the word „Indian‟. Today, the categorysurrounds a vast urban population who speaks Spanish and frequently don´t use anyindigenous language and comes before and over referenced in the concept of socialclasses, such as workers or landsman. Symmetrically, in the lowlands, the categoryCamba works as a surrounding totality that unifies elite and people extendingseductively over the Guaranis and excluding the migrants Cholos and Collas. The new Bolivia of ethnic nations that are official nourish new narratives ofblood and honor, cult to ancestor heroes and claims rights of self-government looks lessand less as a nation. The constitution of Evo Morales and the autonomist proposal ofSanta Cruz doesn´t present as a contract among citizen, but as a provisory treatise ofpeace of communities separated by impassable cultural abysms. However, even if it isfirmed, such peace among enemies will be unstable and precarious, since there is nonegotiation on the distribution of the richness offered by the exploitation of naturalresources, which is interpreted as booty of war.
  • 146. PART III – BACK TO AFRICATHE EMPIRE AGAINST THE TRAFFIC The Castle of Cape Coast is a solid walled fortification with cannons pointingtowards a blue-greenish sea. It rises imposingly in front of a bay in half moon formadvancing over the sand of the beach and defying the high tide. The city of Cape Coast,165km west from Accra, the capital of Ghana, grew around the fortification, built inXVI century in wood and after redone in stone. The place changed of hands manytimes, moving from Portuguese, Swedish and Dutch until it was finally conquered bythe British in 1664, who again rebuilt the castle. Originally, the construction worked asstopping place of the commerce of wood and gold. Under the British, it was officiallynamed as a castle and dungeon, turning into a center of business administration and,foremost, the biggest among the more than three dozens of slave markets implanted atthe so-called Gold Coast and owned by all the principal European powers. The markets of the Gold Coast were placed in a neuralgic center of acommercial system that linked Europe, Africa and America, stimulating the firstepisode of economical globalization of history. In the so-called triangle commerce,slave ships lifted irons in the European ports with fabric, weapons and rum that wereexchanged by slaves in the African markets. It was followed by the terror travel overAtlantic, a way marked by the sounds of the iron chains and of the moans of thebasement, until the disembarkation of the human load, when the slaves were exchangedby sugar, coffee and tobacco. In the peak of the commerce of humans in the middle of the XVIII century,about 85 thousand slaves crossed the Atlantic annually. Throughout almost fourcenturies, more than 11.5 million Africans were embarked as slaves in the routes ofAtlantic and other 3.4 million went to Europe and the Arabian countries. The GoldCoast contributed with nothing less than 6.5 million of slaves destined to America. Dueprincipally to the traffic, the population of Africa was stagnated almost completely,coming from about 100 million people to 120 million people from 1650 to 1900. Thereis no way to minimize the political, social and cultural impacts of the slave market.Even today, in the villages of Ghana it remains a traditional architectonic structureoriginated in the times of human hunting: houses similar to miniaturized castles in thecenter of a circle of palisades configuring a shield of protection to communitarian life,which is carried out in the internal space. There is only one written register of the terrible experience of the thousands ofslaves who filled the dungeons of the Castle of Cape Coast. In a book published inLondon, the old slave Quobna Ottobah Cugoano reported the following way the
  • 147. moment of his transference to a ship that would go to America: „Our conduction to theship was the most horrible scene. Nothing could be heard except the sound of ironchains, the creak of whips and the moans and shouts of our companions. Some of uscouldn´t move from the floor even when they were beat in the most cruel way.‟ Reportsof the slaves in the dungeons of Africa and in the slave ships started to be broadcastedsince the end of the XVIII century. But the suffering of those unhappy guys startedbefore, in the time of human hunting that very few times involved directly the Europeanand Arabian traffickers. The production of the slave, the capture and the enslaving ofAfricans were carried out inside the African societies. Slavery existed in Africa as well as in many places of the world, much beforethe appearance of the international traffic of slaves. Beaten enemies were converted intoslaves as well as indebted people or criminally condemned people. Sometimes, thecondition of slavery was transitory. The principle of slavery was written in tradition,such a way the capture of slaves to selling to the foreign traffickers didn´t find anymoral resistance. Cugoano described that his capture by an African seller of slaves whenhe was kidding around his house: „I must admit for the shyness of the men from myown land, in the first place, that I was kidnapped and betrayed by somebody of my owncolor‟. In Ghana, when the Portuguese businessmen appeared in the end of the XVcentury, they exchanged slaves and other goods from Senegal by gold given by the chiefof the kingdom Ashanti. The new commerce stimulated the Ashanti expeditions forhunting people that brought slaves to the work in the gold mines. The next step was theentrance of the kingdom in the circuit of the transatlantic slave commerce. Selling slaves gave to the African leaders the access to weapons and horses thatwere decisive military instruments. The appearance of the transatlantic traffic stimulatedan intense political diversification in Africa with the formation of Estates and theconsolidation of elites that drained all the profits of the commerce and the configurationof ethnicities that were engaged in wars for obtaining slaves. The great slave kingdomscontrolled big slavery networks that branched into inland and including statecommercial partners and independent sellers. If the traditional African slavery act as a support to selling slaves to theEuropean and Arabian traffickers, it is also true that the slave traffic amplified slaveryin Africa. The slave population of Congo represented 50% of the total. In the vassalkingdom of Ndongo (in the actual region of Angola since chte XVI century), the classof the slaves was the fountain of power of the king and of the aristocracy. The Ashanti kingdom dominated the Gold Coast for three centuries and sellingslaves to the traffickers represented the most important fountain of their profits thatwere exchanged by goods sent by the Europeans. The places where the slave marketswere built were not owned by the traffickers but by the Ashanti govern that rented themby a monthly payment. The British paid for the use of the Castle of Cape Coast. In theGulf of Guinea, before the Ashanti kingdom (whose apex occurred in the XVIII
  • 148. century), the traffic business had as focus the Estate of Oyo in the actual Nigeria andlater was transferred to Dahomey in the actual Benin. The leaders of Dahomey keptclose relations of the Portuguese-Brazilian traffickers of Rio de Janeiro and when Brazildeclared its independence they even cogitated in adhering to the Empire of D. Pedro I asan overseas territory. The wars among African Estates became more common in the areas under theinfluence of the slave markets, as the capture and enslave figured out as essentialfountains of richness to the governments. The chronic wars between the Ashanti and theAcans gave to the governors of both sides many of the slaves who were sold as slaves inthe markets of the Gold Coast. From 1814 to 1816 the Ashanti conducted a bloody waragainst a coalition of the Akins and Akwapis to restore the access to sea ports and henceto the European traffickers. Soon before the end of the transatlantic traffic in 1840 theking Gezo of Dahomey declared that the traffic of slaves had been the guide principle ofhis people and that this was the fountain of their glory and richness. In 1872 much afterthe abolition of the traffic, the Ashanti king wrote a letter to the British monarchrequesting to reinitiate the human commerce. The African nexus of the international system of slave commerce weighs as arock of several African countries. „We don´t discuss slavery‟, says Barima KwameNkye III, a supreme leader of the Ghanaian village of Assin Mauso, while Yaw Bedwa,from the University of Ghana, diagnosis a general amnesia on slavery. The amnesiaconcerns especially to the paper developed by the Ashanti chiefs whose descendantsstill keep detached places in the Ghanaian society. An official history tries to absolutelydistinguish the traditional slavery, described as mild, and the international traffic that isexclusively attributed to the Europeans. However, in some African regions, thedescendants of slaves have no rights on inheritance. The Polish journalist Ryszard Kapuscinski lived long periods in Africa betweenthe decades of 1960 and 1970. He wrote: „Looking with attention to the African map,the coast is punctuated by islands. Some are so small that are only present in detailednavigation maps but others are big enough to appear in common atlas. This geologicalstructure had historical consequences, since for many times Africa was temptation andterror at the same time. Those who went there entered in an extremely dangerous gameof life or death. Still in the first half of the XIX century, the majority of the Europeanswho adventured inside Africa died from malaria. However, many survivors went backafter making quick and great fortunes with the traffic of gold, ivory and, foremost, blackslaves. To this the dozens of islands scattered in the coast helped a lot the navigators,negotiators and bandits from all nationalities. They became points of berthing, bastions,landing-states, trading posts. The coastal islands were separated enough to offer protection from attacks fromthe continent but close enough to allow the contacts, the interchanges and the business.Biocco, the old Fernando Pó, actual Equatorial Guinea, figured as a central market ofthe slave traffic from the Western Indian Company in the Gulf of Guinea in the middle
  • 149. of the XVII century that soon the Portuguese substituted by a market in the neighboringisland of Corisco. Around the same time, the Portuguese islands of São Tomé andPrince, hit by the trade of sugar of America got specialized in the function of slavemarket. In the opposite side of Africa, the archipelago of Zanzibar (actual Tanzania)went under the control of the sultanate of Oman in 1698 and became the most importantcenter of the Arabian commerce of slaves. The markets of traffic were also installed in the proximities of the mouth ofrivers that gave access to extensive inland valleys. The French established in 1659 thefortification of Saint Louis in a narrow fluvial island, 25 km before the mouth of theSenegal River with the finality of centralizing the commerce throughout the river.Slaves were the most lucrative commodity and in the end of the XVIII century the citythat appeared around the fortification had 5 thousand inhabitants and figured as one ofthe principal urban centers of the Sub-Saharan Africa. The British built in 1672 afortified castle in Bance Island, up close to the mouth of the Serra Leone River. In itsclimax since the middle of the XVIII century, they embarked from the dungeons of theislands many thousands of slaves destined to the West Indies and to the British coloniesof North America. During the three hundred years of slave traffic to America, the physical presenceof the European powers was restricted to the coast fortifications (with the exception ofAngola). In the decadence of this long historic period, Great Britain, the biggest navaland commercial power engaged in an international campaign against slavery and theslave traffic. British ships had transported 2.5 million of slaves in the XVIII century, orsomething as two fifths of the total. However in 1807 by the Law of Slave Traffic,Great Britain turned into illegal the slave commerce in ships of British flag and in theFinal Act of the Congress of Vienna of 1815 the British representatives succeeded inincluding a generic declaration condemning the traffic. The original proposal was asresolution of a global compulsory renouncement to the commerce of humans, but it wasnot approved due to resistance from France, Portugal and Spain. London and Rio de Janeiro were stages of the decisive kicks in the abolition ofthe colonial slavery and the human traffic. In 1833 the Law of Abolition of Slaveryfreed all the slaves in all the British Empire, with the exception of the territories of theEastern Indie Company, Ceylon and the island of Saint Helen, where the owners shouldreceive a reasonable compensation by the loss of the services of their slaves. In 1850 inBrazil the Law Eusébio de Queiroz, adopted after intense British pressures, prohibitedimporting slaves in the Empire of Brazil. Only after 1885 with the Conference of Berlin did the European powers startedan imperial running to Africa. In the fifteen final years of the XIX century by means ofa series of treatises among the powers and among them and the African governments,Africa was split in colonial territories. The so-called split of Africa in the reality unifiedthe thousands of autochthonous political entities in about half a hundred of colonies.The implantation of European administration in the African territories kicked the
  • 150. traditional institution of slavery that still remained even with the end of the internationalslave traffic. The imperial powers that had conducted the great business of humancommerce were now the agents of a modernization that dissolved slavery.The principle of freedom The transatlantic traffic of slaves in its three centuries was not a marginalbusiness, but the heart of an international commerce that seeded the floor over whichthe modern industrial economy would rise. Great Britain firmed after the Spanish Waron Secession in 1714 as the greatest commercial power of the world and in the decadesof apogee of the traffic, British ships transported more than 40 thousand slaves toAmericas annually, equivalent to all the other slave ships summed. The human commerce were the fundamental chain link of the greater business ofsugar and coffee, the most desired products in the European markets and the fountainsof accumulation of immense richness in America and Europe. In the British Islands thenaval construction and the handcraft of innumerable products developed as componentsof the economic system based on the transatlantic commerce hence on the slave traffic.But paradoxically the public opinion campaign that collapsed the traffic was firstlymanifested precisely in Great Britain. Thomas Clarkson, an Anglican who studied in Cambridge, discovered thehorrors of the slave traffic in the university in 1785 in middle of a research to a writingcontest in Latin. The revelation aborted his projected career as a priest of the AnglicanChurch and lightened a fire that would never stop. Less than two years after, the alliancebetween that tall and red-haired man obsessed by an idea and the Quakers religious menstarted a campaign that changed the world. The Committee for Abolition of Trafficcounted with the participation of the Anglican Granville Sharp, musician and maestro ofthe royal band, who kept connections with the anti-slavery Quakers of USA. In theBritish Parliament, his positions were represented by the voice of William Wilberforce,a conservative protestant ad friend of the prime minister William Pit, the Son. In the Great Britain of that epoch, only Anglicans could participate in thepolitical institutional life as parliamentarians or members of the cabinets. The Quakers,due to this exclusion, became businessmen and constituted very efficient networks andgroups of pressure. Their anti-slavery fight had humanitarian motives and theindignation against injustice was the flames that moved the interests of the committee.However, in that interval between the American and the French revolutions it wasalready present the concepts of natural rights and equality among men that not alwaysfound evident expressions in the petitions, conferences and publications of theabolitionists. In 1788 the committee broadcasted in logos of seals, books, pamphlets andbuttons the image of an African on his knees and fettered with hands up and the phrase:
  • 151. “Am I not a man and a brother?‟. The African of the image developed the paper of inertvictim and the appeal was humanitarian, but the phrase chosen was referenced in thenotion of natural equality of human beings. The abolitionist campaign, as Adam Hochschild observed, created techniques ofpersuasion of the public opinion that were consecrated and nowadays take part of thebasic armory of organizations and social movements. In 1789, Clarkson got a diagramof the slave ship Brookes with the basement crowed of slaves in a typical travel of theAtlantic. The image, redrawn and amplified, was published in leaflets, newspapers,reviews and books and provoked a strong impact. The committee had as an ultimate goal the eradication of slavery but, tactically,to not invest against the rights of property, concentrated on the explicit objective ofabolishing the traffic. Correctly, their members calculated that slavery would not resistwithout the permanent influx of new slaves. However, by conviction or opportunity,Wilberforce argued in the Parliament that the abolition of the slave market wouldconduct the owners of the Western Indies to treat with humanity their slaves, such away to perpetuate the colonial slavery by the normal reproduction of the slavepopulation. The approach had no effect during many years, as many of theparliamentarians were owners of plantations in the West Indies or of ships engaged inthe traffic business. London in the aurora of the Industrial Revolution had some thousands of blacks,mostly slaves freed by the British in incursions in North America during the War onIndependence of USA. In a period before the development of the scientific racism theAfricans figured more as target of curiosity than of victims of racial discrimination. Aproof is that „during more than five decades of defense of slavery in the Parliament, thelobby of the Western Indies almost never argued that the blacks were inferior by nature;instead, they spoke on how the plantations of the Caribbean were vital to the imperialeconomy‟. Among the blacks of London, Olaudah Equiano was remarkable. He had been aslave who bought his own freedom with his own resources, worked as a sailorman inthe Royal Navy, was successful in establishing in England and became a valuable allyof the abolitionist committee and one of the most famous publicists of those dates.Equiano published in 1789 a voluminous autobiography that was a great editorialsuccess in Great Britain and USA and was soon translated to German, Dutch andRussian. With rare exceptions, the British and American abolitionists didn´t approve theidea of miscegenation, something that was a supreme taboo for almost two centuries.But Equiano was special. In an open letter to an owner of slaves in the West Indies hereferred to the inter-racial marriage writing: „a fool prejudice like this never perverted acult mind. Why not establishing inter-racial marriages in our country and our colonies?And stimulate the open, free and generous love, of a broad nature, without distinction ofskin color?‟ They were not only words: to the bewilderment of public opinion, he gotmarried to a white woman.
  • 152. The project of law of abolition of the traffic presented by Wilberforce to theparliament were not voted in 1789 and was rejected by 163 against 88 votes in 1791.Inthe following year, supported by petitions carried out by almost 400 thousand Britishcitizens and defended in the parliament by Pitt, the project of immediate abolition wasagain refused. In its place, the House of Commons approved a gradualist law that thetraffic would be extinct in 1796, but the House of Lords rejected it. In 1793, soon beforeof guillotining the king Louis XVI, the revolutionary France conferred honorificcitizenship to Clarkson and to a Wilberforce who had never hidden his hostility againstthe French monarchists. The radicalization in the other side of the English Channelstrengthened the defenders of the traffic and provoked a new fail of the abolitionistproject. Wilberforce never gave up of abolition, suffering successive fails, year afteryear, until the end of the century. The anti-slave committee, feeling the effects of thegeneralized political effects, practically stopped with the activities. The elitistparliament system of Great Britain would be capable to resist indefinitely to the wishesof the public opinion that had adhered to the abolitionist principle. The impasse wassolved far away from the Parliament, in the Caribbean islands, with the eclosion of thegreatest slave rebellion, in the French colony of Saint Dominic (Haiti). François- Dominique Toussaint Louverture was born as a slave in the plantationof Bréda, around Cap François in Saint Dominic. As a driver coach, he had theopportunity to study, adopted Catholicism and became an avid reader of the Frenchilluminists and after being freed by the owner of the plantation he entered to Masonry.When he was 48year-old, in 1971 he took part on the leadership of a rebellion of slavesin the North of the colony. Soon after, the revolutionary France gave rights ofcitizenship to the mulattos and free blacks of the colonies and after the execution ofLouis XVI, the Jacobin government proclaimed the abolition of slavery. At the sametime in Saint Dominic the conflict between colonizers and slaves were happening,France was in war against Spain and Great Britain. In that disordered environment, Louverture revealed a genius military chief andyears later he got the nickname of Black Napoleon. Leading a guerilla force of 4thousand men, the firstly beat the French colonial troops that didn´t recognize theJacobin government and secondly the aligned to the French aligned to the ConventionGirondina and beat the Spanish invaders. The war continued against the British andLouverture was designated as commander of the French Republican Forces of SaintDominic. In 1798, the British left away the French colony. In the following step, theLieutenant of Louverture, Jean-Jacques Dessalines, conducted a ferocious campaignagainst the elite of mulattos of the South of the colony. Then, the Haitian revolutionaryirrupted in the Spanish Saint Dominic (Dominic Republic) that refused to free theslaves. In 1801, with the Spanish capitulation, Louverture invoked a ConstitutionalAssembly that edited a Constitution and named him as perpetual governor of the wholeisland.
  • 153. The Constitution of Louverture, as it was nicknamed, proclaimed the equalityamong the people and prohibited distinctions derived from the skin color. „No otherdistinction exists except the ones of virtues and talents neither any superiority except theone defined in law by the work in a public job‟. The same 5 th article concluded: „the lawis equal for all, either it punishes or protects. But Louverture was hostile to voodoo andbecause of it Catholicism was declared the official religion – the „only publiclyprofessed‟ and the divorce was banished. Furthermore, the slaves were fixated in theproperties as members of an active and permanent family of which the owner of theland or his representative is necessarily the father and the vicious habit of changinghome was prohibited. The government of Louverture lasted less than one year. Spite the declaredloyalty of the Haitian leader to the French Empire, Napoleon Bonaparte decided torestore the effective control of France over the colony and sent a great military force tothe island. Louverture was beat and assigned a conditional rendition and retired to hisfarm only to be arrested few days after and deported to France together his wife andthree kids. Confined and interrogated during months in a castle of the mountains ofJura, he died from pneumonia in 1803, weeks before the eclosion of the NapoleonicWars. Even so, the Haitian revolution didn´t stop. Under the leadership of Dessalines,the rebels beat the French troops and proclaimed independence. Haiti was the second sovereign nation in the Americas and the only of the worldthat came from a revolution of slaves. However, contrary to USA, it didn´t adopt therepublican system, but the monarchic. The Constitution of the Empire of Haiti of 1805was promulgated by Dessalines, self-named Jacques I, and previewed the succession tothe throne by imperial designation. The white colonizers were expulsed and with thefinality to reduce the political tensions among blacks and mulattos, the 14 th articledetermined that the „Haitians must be, from now and forever, named by the generic termof blacks‟. The provision didn´t work and in the following year, after the murder ofDessalines, the country got divided in a northern kingdom governed by the ex-slaveHenri Christophe and a southern republic directed by the mulatto Jean Pierre Boyer.Since then, the political conflicts of Haiti presented as frictions between blacks andmulattos. However, in the Haitian panorama, the skin color works much more asmetaphor to social classes than as an indicator of real or imagined ancestry. Accordingto a popular dictation, Nèg rich sé mulat, mulat póv sé nèg (rich black is mulatto, pormulatto is black). The Haitians got free from slavery, but couldn´t escape from a succession oftyrannies. Its revolution, however, accelerated the process of abolition of the black slavetraffic. In the Caribbean, during the years of the European wars against France, Britishsoldiers faced rebellions of slaves and ex-slaves that sprouted in many islands. Therioters, inspired by the abolition proclaimed in Paris, joined to French forces andthreatened the colonial interests in Guadalupe, Saint Lucia and in Jamaica. In fact, theBritish forces were seen in the position of defenders of a hated slavery system and lost
  • 154. innumerable men in those conflicts. The final end of the Haitian revolution evidencedthat it was time to choose between maintaining of slavery or of the colonies. The chose became easier by the incorporation of a geopolitical concept ofmaritime power. In the apogee of the Napoleonic Wars in 1805, James Stephen, anabolitionist lawyer and defender of the British supremacy in the seas, published a verywell divulgated book that exposed a thesis: France would only be beaten if theprosperity of its colonies in the West Indies were strongly kicked. The Royal Marinewas cleaning the Atlantic from the French ships, but the commerce of France with theislands of sugar persisted through ships of American flags. It was needed to interruptthose fluxes and the combat to the black slave traffic would be the most effective to this. Stephen knew that great part of the neutral ships of American flag were in factships owned by British, staffed by British and equipped in Liverpool. In its triangleroutes, they transported slaves from Africa to the French West Indies and USA, drivingto France full of sugar. In 1806 the new abolitionist project of Wilberforce was writtenby Stephen, with a text different from all of the previous ones. The project of the Law ofForeign Traffic of Slaves prohibited British people – persons, riggers, suppliers ofequipments and insurers – to participate in the transport of slaves to colonies and alliesof France. In the defenses in the plenary of the project, Wilberforce shut up and theabolitionists, instead of the common denunciations on the cruel aspect of the black slavetraffic, emphasized the insupportable costs of repression to the revolutions in theWestern Indies and the opportunity of isolating France from its fountains from overseas. One of the effects of the military project would be to eliminate two thirds of theown British black slave traffic that was carried out by ships of American flag. Theowners of merchant vessels were against the project, but the planter of the Britishcolonies of Caribbean interpreted it as a coup against their rivals of the French colonies.This division in the slave field allowed the approval of the law in the House ofCommons. A more hard battle, carried out with new petitions from a re-born abolitionistcommittee, was finally concluded with its approval in the House of Lords. The final phase of the campaign was coincident to the death of Pitt and theascension to cabin-in-chief of William Grenville, whose adhesion to the abolitionistcause was stronger than of his antecessor. In the elections of 1806 the theme of blackslave traffic concentrated the debate and following the tendencies of the public opinion,many candidates went to the abolitionist side. In the Parliament, military officials whotook part in the repression to the Caribbean rebellions and in the War of Haitipronounced as against the slavery system. Finally, in 25 th March 1807, for the joy ofClarkson and Wilberforce, it was approved the Law for Abolition of the Slave Traffic.The parliamentarians approved it forced by fear and the geopolitical calculus as well asthe shame. Soon it was sanctioned by the king George III. The law abolished, prohibitedand declared illegal the commerce of African slaves in the British Empire anddetermined a fine of 100 pounds for each slave captured with the transgressors.
  • 155. It is not possible to tell the history of the anti-slavery laws of Great Britainwithout visiting the history of the slave rebellions of the West Indies. Jamaica, a colonywhere the slaves were 20-fold the number of owners, served as a stage for manyrebellions. The biggest ecloded in the Natal of 1831 from a pacific strike leaded by theslave and Baptist preacher Samuel Sharpe. The repression of the owners provoked aradicalization of the rebels who put fire in the plantations of sugarcane. It was followedby two weeks of violent attacks of the colonizers militias that culminated with thehanging of many rebel leaders, including Sharpe. The named Baptist War ruptured thelast resistances of the slavists of Great Britain and less than two years after the Jamaicanrebellion the parliament voted the law of abolition of slavery.A Christian home in Africa The Serra Leon River is the estuary formed by the Rokel River and Port LokoCreek River. Around 28 km up from its mouth there is Bance Island, of a little bit morethan 500 m length. Placed in the limit of the navigation of the oceanic ships of the XVIIcentury, with many fountains of freshwater and protected by rock crags, the fluvialisland was converted into a principal slave market of the Occidental Africa. The initial operation failed but in 1750 the Londoner company Grant, Sargent &Oswald assumed the control of the enclave, rebuilt the fortification and restarted withsuccess the black slave market. The rice planters of Charlestown, in the colony of SouthCarolina became the best clients of the warehouse, importing slaves, ivory and wood.Few decades after at the peak of human commerce in Bance Island, a British anti-slavegroup bought the curious idea of implanting a colony of ex-slaves in the mouth of SerraLeon. London in the end of the XVII century had a community of about 5 thousandblacks, the majority of ex-slaves freed during the War on Independence of the ThirteenColonies. Almost all of them depended on a philanthropic committee of assistance tothe black poor sustained by the abolitionists. In this committee it was born the plan ofcreation of a village of ex-slaves in Serra Leon. Granville Sharp was an enthusiast of the plan that seemed to him to show achance of the ability of the blacks to prosper. Important abolitionists deposited in theproject the hope to broadcast Christian principles in Africa. Also, influentphilanthropists saw in the emigration of the ex-slaves a solution to apart the blacks andthe whites, avoiding relations „contrary to nature‟. However, many consulted blacksfeared to live so close to Bance Island and only accepted to participate when Sharppersonally guaranteed them that they would never be enslaved again. The adventure of Serra Leon lifted anchor in February 1787 in four ships of theRoyal Navy that went down Tamisa with 459 passengers including a handful of whites.
  • 156. Equiano, named as supervisor of supplies embarked with the group but didn´t evenleave England, as he entered in conflict with a white superintendent and lost hisposition. In Africa, the colonizers named as Granville Town, in honor to Sharp and soonthey realized the big size of the problem. The rains destroyed the first cultures, thediseases killed a significant part of the pioneer population and an attack of nativesdestroyed the village. Just a few time after, the survival of the colonizers depended onthe slave warehouse of Bance Island, which employed them as carpenters, dockyardsand even clerks. Serra Leon started again with the intervention of Thomas Peters, an Africancaptured in 1760 when he was 22 year-old and sold as a slave in North Carolina. In theWar on Independence of the Thirteen Colonies he escaped and fought in the side of theBritish forces, becoming a free man in New Scotland, In 1790 he travelled to Londonbringing a petition of ex-slaves for the British government executed the promise ofgiving them lands and found Granville frustrated by the failure of his African colony.From that meeting it was born the plan of transference of ex-slaves of New Scotland toSerra Leon. The philanthropists created the Company of Serra Leon to finance throughselling actions the restoration of the colony. The naval official John Clarkson, brother ofthe greatest abolitionist leader, was tasked to lead the action. Leading 1.1 thousand ex-slaves, Peters and Clarkson established in 1792 thevillage of Freetown. The business between them didn´t survive to the travel to Africa. InSerra Leon, the British guy accused the African one of pretending to govern the colonyand they publically debated their divergences. Peters soon contracted malaria and diedbefore the first anniversary of the village, converting into one of the mythic fathers ofthe nation and in celebrated figure by the Krios, the ethnic-linguistic group of the Afro-American colonizers. Slowly, in the middle of terrible epidemics and accepting the shame occasionalcontribution from the enslavers of Bance Island, Freetown started a business ofexporting flowers and pearls. In 1808, Serra Leon became a colony of the British crownand a place of reallocation of the freed ex-slaves liberated in Caribbean and WesternAfrica or rescued by the Royal Navy from Luso-Brazilian ships. During the first half ofthe XX century, it was conserved the original vision of Sharp of a Christian experiment,multiracial and approximately equalitarian, conducted by colonizers who represented inAfrica the virtues of the British colonization. However, the British attitudes towards Serra Leon changed in the last third ofthe century with the development of the scientific racism. The conception in partintegrative became segregationist and they dissolved the expectations that the colonywould represent a model for the rest of Africa. In the words of Leo Spitzer, author of thebiography of ex-slaves rescued from a small Brazilian ship and placed in Serra Leon,the black elite of the colony became a target of insults to imitate the white men and ofattitudes of discrimination and exclusion based solely on race.
  • 157. In the end of the XIX century, the British broadened their domains to the inlandof Serra Leon and imposed taxes on the natives. The initiative of colonial consolidationprovoked a rebellion leaded by Bai Bureh, chief of the Temnes, who had support fromother ethnic groups. The rebels attacked also the Krio elite of Freetown, seen as part ofthe engines of the British power and used smart tactics of guerilla that confounded theBritish for months. Bai Bureh was finally captured but entered in the pantheon of theLeones national hero. After the rebellion, the colonial administration tried to incorporatethe natives in the political life of Serra Leon, which reduced the power of the Krios. Serra Leon became independent in 1960 but didn´t escape from poverty, ethnicviolence and the lords of war. The politics of the country is around the endless disputebetween the Temnes of the North and the Mendes of the South. The Krios of Freetown,less than 5% of the population, conserve a distinct cultural identity and are theeconomic elite, but don´t develop a relevant political paper. From 1991 to 2002, thecountry was devastated by an inclement civil war started by the rebels of theRevolutionary United Front of Foday Sankoh, one of the Themne lords of war. But thistragic chapter of the Leones history has its roots in the neighbor Liberia, anotherphilanthropic experiment in Africa.The real distinctions that nature did In the Notes on the State of Virginia in 1787 Thomas Jefferson imagined a planof emancipation of the slaves born since then. The emancipated should be educated inUSA with public money until 18 in the case of women and 21 in the case of men andthen sent to be colonizers of a land to be chosen, with weapons, instruments, suppliesand couples of utile domestic animals. USA would declare them as a free andindependent people, being an ally and protecting them until they had got force. In an inverse sense, Jefferson intended to encourage the transference to USA asimmigrants of an equal number of white inhabitants. And why not incorporating theblacks into the American society? His answer: „prejudices deeply rooted among thewhites, ten thousand memories among the blacks of the injuries they supported; newprovocations, the real distinctions that natured did and many other circumstances willdivide us into parties and produce convulsions that probably will only end by theextermination of one or other race‟. The abolition of slavery in the Northern states and the augment of the number offreed blacks contributed to the diffusion of the idea of definitive geographic separationof the races. In 1800, the area of Richmond, Virginia, was shaken by a rebellion ofslaves who followed the leadership of Gabriel the blacksmith who had grown in aplantation of tobacco. Gabriel was gibbeted with 26 companions but the episodestrengthened the conviction that the blacks should be expulsed from USA. In a period
  • 158. when the British action was being more and more heard, the solution of Jefferson wasadopted by political figures of first line, such as the influent senator Henry Clay, thefamous lawyer Daniel Webster and the deputy John Randolph of Virginia. In December1816 in a hotel of Washington there was a meeting of the founders of the AmericanSociety of Colonization. The adventure of Liberia started. Randolph, an owner of slaves, believed in that the plan of the AmericanColonization Societywould reinforce the institution of slavery because it wouldeliminate the dangerous exceeding of blacks in USA. He, however, was not expressingthe medium thoughts of the members of a society composed by rich philanthropists andclerks who opposed morally to slavery, but they could not accept a multiracial societyof free men. The plan of emigration gained the approval of the president James Monroewho was an owner of slaves in Virginia. Even so, due to the resistance of the southernplanters, Clay was unsuccessful in approving in the congress a project of financing theemigration. Among the free blacks of the North, the idea got support of just a fewreligious leaders. In general, the American Colonization Societywas accused to conducta racist operation of deportation and in 1817 three thousand blacks protested against theplan. The choice of the place for the installation of the colony went over the Africancoast south to Serra Leon, where the British experiment started to firm. The firstcolonizers set sail in the ship Elizabeth in January 1820. They were less than onehundred ex-slaves whose freedom had been bought by the American ColonizationSocietyin the exchange of the compromise of the travel. They had no luck and due tothe refusal of native chief in selling lands, they were left in Sherbro Island, nowadayspertaining to Serra Leon. As a solution, representatives of the Society together with amilitary ship persuaded a native governor to sell them the area of Cape Mesurado in themouth of Saint Paul River, 360 km south from Freetown. During the following decade,more than 2.6 thousand American blacks were installed as colonizers. Liberia, land of liberated people, was officially established in 1824 when thevillage of Cape Mesurado was renamed as Monrovia in tribute to the president Monroe.The American Colonization Societynamed as the first governor the religious and socialreformer Jehudi Ashmun who gave the blacks participation in the administration. Theinitial of the people started from the creation of several separated colonies. In USA,many state companies of colonization appeared to promote the transference of blacks orex-slaves. Besides, American military ships disembarked in Liberia slaves rescued fromblack slave ships, many of which were Brazilian. Spite the crescent criticisms of theAmerican abolitionists the Liberian experiment won a broad support in slaving statesafter the violent rebellion of Nat Turner. Turner was born as a slave in Virginia and when he was young he gotalphabetized and became a fervor Christian preacher, nicknamed as The Prophet by hiscompanions. In 1831 the interpreted a solar eclipse as a divine signal that it was time ofthe rebellion. So, he joined a small group and commanded furtive attacks against white
  • 159. owners killing them with knives, axes and shovels and freeing the slaves. In two days,55 whites died in the attacks, but Turner was captured and gibbeted with other 56suspects. In the following weeks groups of whites hunted, tortured and killed 200 blackswho had nothing to do with the rebellion. After that, repressive waves reduced evenmore strongly the rights of the free blacks in Virginia and it raised among the blacks thepopularity of the action in Liberia. In 1850, the state created a fund to finance theemigration of blacks. Before this, the American Colonization Society had desisted on Liberia. Brokenby the financial weigh of sustaining the colony, the Society had forced it to declareindependence, which occurred in 1847. That declaration started with the words: „We,the people of the Republic of Liberia, were originally inhabitants of the United States ofNorth America‟. The Constitution, approved at a convention, was molded by theAmerican Constitution, started with a declaration of rights and concluded with a 5 tharticle that contained „diverse provisions‟. In the section 13 of the 5 th article, it waswritten: „being the great objective of formation of these colonies to offer a home to thedispersed and oppressed sons of Africa and regenerate and instruct this uncivilizedcontinent, only colored people shall be admitted as citizens in this republic‟. The section15 announced initiatives to implement the nourished objective of promoting theagriculture progress of the native tribes. The American-Liberians were tasked of a Christian civilization mission andshared the dominant concepts of USA and Europe about the backwardness and savageryof the African natives. In Pennsylvania in 1854 the Presbyterian John Miller Dickeyfounded the Institute Ashmun (thereafter University of Lincoln) with the aim of formingleaders to Liberia. In Africa, they kept the English language and made a question ofbeing distinguishable from the natives, defining themselves as Americans and importingthe aristocratic manners of the planters of the South and sending their kids to study inUSA. The first Liberian president, Joseph Jenkins Roberts, a free mixed of Virginia,inhabited a mansion with Greek columns in Monrovia and expanded the territory of thecountry by means of treatises with local chiefs and surgical armed offensives. The American-Liberian elite are around 5% of the population of Liberia. Theyorganized the oldest system of a single party of history, founding in 1878 the True WhigParty. The constitution, that originally limited the rights of voting to the male owners,gained amendments that restricted even more the electoral rights. The natives, excludedfrom the political life, rebelled several times, sometimes against the taxes on thecommerce with European ships. Slowly, although slavery was forbidden, the American-Liberian owners started to use compulsory work of the natives. In the decade of 1920,Liberia sold workers to white and black farmers of the Fernando Po Island, at that timeunder Spanish control. A commission of the League of Nations denounced the practiceand a commercial boycott of five years of USA and United Kingdom imposed theadoption of laws against the forced labor.
  • 160. Before the Second World War, Liberia was transformed by Firestone in a majorexporter of rubber and railways connected the producing areas to the oceanic ports. Inthe post-war, the country went back to the exportation of minerals and the cession of itsflag to ships of many origins. The regime, under crescent pressure, extended the rightsof voting to the natives, but conserved the monopoly of the single party, which was thefountain of power of the American-Liberians. However, with the fall off theinternational prices of the raw materials, the political stability was broken. In 1979, anaugment of prices of rice deflagrated riots that were repressed by bullets and left 70dead. Months later, by a coup of Estate, Samuel K. Doe knocked down the governmentof William Tolbert, murdered the majority of the ministers and ended the longhegemony of the American-Liberians. Doe, from the native group of Krahn, a sergeant trained by the Special Forces ofthe American Army, strengthened the relations with USA. Initially, his regime tried topromote a political opening, but soon was converted into an oppressive and corruptdictatorship. Each time more paranoiac, fearing real and imaginary articulations andcoups of Estate, the president defrauded elections, ordered the murder of oppositionistsand lightened the wick of ethnical conflicts. In 1989 it irrupted from Ivory Coast theguerilla of the National Patriotic Front of Liberia of Charles Taylor, who soon took thecontrol of part of the country. In the following year, in the middle of the civil war, Doewas captured by the militia of the military chief Prince Y. Johnson and crudely tortureduntil death. The war continued with the opposition of the groups of Taylor and Johnson,ended only in the middle of the decade of 1990 with an election carried out in a fearclimate that transferred the power to the leader of the Patriotic Front. Taylor, the man who completed the destruction of Liberia, was born in theproximities to Monrovia, in a family of mixed ascendance, partially American-Liberianand was formed in Economy in the prestigious University of Massachusetts in USA. Hesupported the coup of Doe and entered to his government until he was accused ofcorruption and ran to USA where he was arrested. Soon after, with other prisoners, heescaped from prison and reached Libya, being protected by Muammar Kaddafi andcreating the guerilla that conducted him back to power. In the elections of 1997 a slogansaid: „he killed my mother, he killed my father but I still will vote on him‟. The guerilla of Taylor was organized around the traffic of diamonds extracted inmany mines of Occidental Africa. The profits from the smuggling allowed him tofinance vast acquisitions of weapons in the clandestine market and sustain rebelledmilitias in Guinea, Ivory Coast and Serra Leon. In the scenario of the regional war ofthe blood diamonds, Taylor created a privileged connection with Foday Sankoh and hisRevolutionary United Front in Serra Leon. Sankoh recruited children, decapitated chiefsof villages and promoted campaigns of rapes and mutilations, devastating Serra Leonuntil he was captured in 2000, given to tribunal of the United Nations and sentenced bycrimes of war, crimes against humanity and genocide.
  • 161. In Liberia, the regime of Taylor represented the return to power of theAmerican-Liberian but in a new historic time that didn´t support the political monopolyof the old elite. The lord of war mobilized support of native clans and played the cardsof the ethnical rivalries. Foremost, his government used the secret services to terrify andmurder oppositionists. In 1999 a Liberian militia armed by the neighbor Guinea irruptedin the North and years later a second group, supported by Ivory Coast, appeared in theSouth. Taylor renounced and went to exile in Nigeria in 2003. Three years later, byrequest of UN, he was captured and put into jurisdiction of the Special Tribune for SerraLeon. In the 14 years of civil war more than 200 thousand people, or 6% of the totalwas killed and 800 thousands became internal refugees.From Zanzibar to Congo The Law for Abolition of Slave Traffic approved in 1807 in Great Britainassigned the beginning of a long decline not only of the black slave traffic but theslavery. After the war against USA from 1812 to 1815, the Royal Navy created asquadron of Occidental Africa with the attribution of suppressing the transatlantictraffic. The ships operated with the basis on the interpretation that any ship of any flagtransporting slaves were engaged in piracy acts. From the point of view of London, thecampaign against the traffic was destined to neutralize the advantages of the sugarproducers of Brazil and Cuba, competitors of the British producers of Caribbean. Until 1860, the squadron captured 1.6 thousand black slave ships and liberated150 thousand slaves, impressive numbers but that probably represented less than 10% ofthe total traffic of the period. Under the British pressure, expressed in the maritimeapprehensions and aggressive diplomatic initiatives, traffickers and clients wereconvinced that the traffic was condemned. A consequence of this was an expressiveaugmentation of the „preventive‟ black slave market. According to estimations of theBrazilian historian Manolo Florentino, Brazil received more than 40 thousand annuallyof Africans in 1838 and 1839 and an average of 50 thousand annually from 1846 to1850. The commandants carried out an additional mission, firming more than 50treatises on extinction of the commerce of slaves with African chiefs. Many of themwere obtained by an organized expedition that lifted the Niger River in 1841 losing onethird of their European members due to diseases contracted in the travel. But thecampaign was not limited to Atlantic and to economic motivations. In the middle of theXIX century when the transatlantic traffic ended, the hard denunciations of theexplorers Richard Francis Burton and David Livingstone against the Arabian traffic inthe Eastern Africa re-lightened the anti-slave fire in Great Britain. In the Somali Expedition of Burton, started in 1854, the tenant G.E. Herne,topographer and photographer, stood in Berbera during almost six months with manymissions, including investigating the traffic of slaves and make maps the routes of the
  • 162. caravans. Burton, masked of a Sind Muslim, infiltrated in the Ethiopian city of Harar,an Islamic religious center and intersection of caravans of slaves whose walls had neverbeen transposed by any other European. In the report of the expedition, he wrote inbenevolent terms about the Muslim domestic slavery but emphasized that the practice ofslavery must be abolished by a philanthropic people. And concluded: „I could adorn myrepot with many pictures of horror – kids abandoned to be eaten by wild animals,women that are submitted to extremes of brutality against their bodies, men whosetemper is managed by diabolic tortures‟. Livingstone, already a national hero, returned to Africa in 1858 conducting byfive years investigations to the British government. In his back, his conferencessponsored by the Geographic Royal Society had as focus the traffic of slaves in theroutes that conducted to the Indian Ocean. The immense success of public ensured himprivate finances to his last expedition from 1866 and his year of death 1873. Thisexpedition aimed to investigate the fountains of Nile and new reports on slavery. In aletter directed to the editor of New York Herald he explained that he considered theabolition of the traffic in the Eastern coast an objective more important than thediscovery of all the fountains of Nile. Even so, in this last travel, the famous explorerwas obligated to recur to the help and hospitality of Arabian traffickers. The traffic in the Indian Ocean suffered a lethal kick when, one year before thedeath of Livingstone, the United Kingdom sent Henry Bartle Frere, ex-governor inBombay, to the sultanate of Zanzibar. The Mission Frere was destined to persuade thesultan Barghash bin Said to firm a treatise of abolition of the slave commerce in thatprincipal remaining market. The British got support manifestations of Germans, French,Americans and Portuguese but in the last minute, a maneuver of the consul of Franceleft the sultan to imagine that he could keep the lucrative business standing under theprotection of France. This hope disappeared at the time British ships blocked the port ofthe island, imposing to the sultan the signature of the treatise. Burton and Livingstone acted as British secret agents in the anti-slave campaign.The British Henry Monroe Stanley, in a travel in service of the New York Herald, foundLivingstone disappeared and sick in the margins of Lake Tanganyika in 1871. Heaccepted the mission of implanting the colony of Congo, based on compulsory work(semi-slave), confined to him by the king Leopold II from Belgium. Stanley explored Congo River in an epic terrorizing adventure of one thousanddays, sponsored by this journal of New York in association with the Londoner DailyTelegraph since 1874. When he was back, he met the Belgian king who was organizingan African International Society, supposedly a scientific and humanitarian associationback to the diffusion of religion and fight against the human traffic. In 1879 the explorerreturned to Congo Valley in an expedition announced as of exclusively scientificinterest but with the true finality of firming treatises with the local chiefs and installmilitary and commercial houses.
  • 163. A fortified house constructed in the head of the great chutes, in the firstnavigable port of the river, named as Leopoldville, would become the actual Kinshasa.The king shiftily started to create a private colony. In an instruction to Stanley, LeopoldII clarified the sense of the act: „it is indispensable that you buy the maximal of landsyou can and put under successive suzerainty all the tribal chiefs, from the mouth ofCongo to Stanley Falls‟. The treatises obtained with chiefs incapable of reading a singleline of those papers, but ready to accept gifts, not only transferred the sovereign of thoselands but also ensured the exploitation of native work by the king of Belgium. The Conference of Berlin recognized the rights of the philanthropic society ofLeopold II to a Congo of 2.3 million square kilometers. Years later, a railwaysurrounded the chutes, completing the waterway served by vapors in Congo Valley. Atthe same time, it was implanted by violence and terror a vast system of compulsorywork through which the natives provided ivory and natural rubber to the Belgian king.The colonial administration kept women and children fettered in the villages as hostagesto obligate the men to enter the forest searching for rubber. The passive resistance wasbroken by exemplar murders and floggings. Hewed hands given to the officials attestedthe efficient use of the bullets used in the murders. Leopold II was the host of the Anti-slave Conference organized by the powersand inaugurated in Brussels in 1889. Throughout months punctuated by parties andbanquets he used the meeting to broadcast his humanitarian acts in Congo andsucceeded in obtaining the rights of, contrary to the resolutions of free commerceapproved in the Conference of Berlin, charge taxes of importation in his private colony.One year later, the horrors of Congo emerged for the first time by means of the blackAmerican George Washington Williams, a veteran of the Civil War who got engaged indenunciating the white supremacy of the South and the violence of Ku Klux Klan. Williams circled in the Anti-slave Conference, got fascinated by the Belgianking and showed him a plan to transfer black Americans to work in Africa. However,before continuing it, he decided to visit Congo and got the sponsor of an Americaninvestor of the railway of the chutes. In the travel, contrary to many other visitors, heinterviewed natives and missionaries, discovering to himself the Siberia of the Africancontinent. Wrathful, he wrote an open letter to Leopold II and a detailed report to theAmerican president Benjamin Harrison, exposing in details the slavery in the privatecolony. Stanley defended the king as well as the Belgian parliamentarians. Williamsdied in 1891 of tuberculosis and the scandal was forgotten after generating some articlesin liberal journals of Belgium. Joseph Conrad, still with his name of baptism Konrad Korzeniowski, shipped inCongo as an aspirant to captain in the vapor in the year when Williams registered inpaper his terrible discoveries. His six months in the river originated the Heart of theDarkness, published as a seriate in a British review of 1899. In this classic masterpieceof literature, the testimonial registers of Conrad transfigured into powerful images of anunlimited oppression and a routine genocide, in hopeless world.
  • 164. According a speculation of the writer Adam Hochschild, Conrad was inspired inthe Belgian official Leon Rom, chief of the Public Force of the Free Estate of Congo tocreate his character Kurtz. The brutal Rom published Le Nègre du Congo, a book thatsummarizes vulgarly the racial concepts diffused at those times. Describing the blackrace he wrote: „the main occupation of the black man and the one he dedicates most partof his existence is to extend a mat under the hot sun rays as a crocodile in the sand‟. The truth about Congo emerged at the second time under the pen of Edmund D.Morel who lightened the spark of the ultimate great anti-slave campaign in GreatBritain. He was born in Paris and naturalized British. He was an administrativeemployee of the navigation company hired by Leopold II to turn into reality, in a regimeof monopoly, the transport of handcrafts between Belgium and Congo. In the port ofAntwerp, analyzing the stuff from the embarkations and disembarks, he concluded thatCongo was an Estate founded on slavery. The ships arrived filled up with rubber andivory and went transporting weapons and ammunition. The effective charges were notcoincident with the fanciful registers on the books of the company and showed that theinhabitants of Congo received nothing in exchange to the richness they exported. From the discovery and wrath to action, some months had passed. In 1900 Morelengaged in the journalism of denunciation and in the following year he abandoned hisprosperous commercial career. With the sponsor of John Holt, honest businessman ofLiverpool, he founded his own journal, the West African Mail that would be theinstrument of a vigorous, precise and tireless campaign. Based on innumerabledocuments, in hidden fountains of the administration of Congo and in reports oftravelers and missionaries, he exposed the gut of the slave system imposed by aEuropean king to a whole African people. Nothing – subtle threatening, offers of bribes– stopped the cold and calculated furor of the journalist. The campaign fruited in books,pamphlets and articles to other newspapers, reaching parliamentarians of the UnitedKingdom, France and Belgium. The slave Estate of Leopold II started to ruin in 1903, when the British House ofCommons approved a motion requiring that the Congolese were treated with humanity.At the same time, the young consul Roger Casement in Congo was sent to inland withthe mission of producing an official report. The diplomat went passionately into theinvestigative task and soon, taken by wrath, he sent to London tons of uncontestableinformation. The Ministry of Exterior, under Belgian pressure, published a reviewedand diluted version of the report, but Casement insisted and joined Morel to found theAssociation of Reform of Congo. The organization created sections in the exterior,including in USA where it influenced the opinion of the president Theodore Roosevelt. Arthur Conan Doyle, Joseph Conrad, Mark Twain and Anatole France amongseveral writers gave literary support to the movement that involved missionaries,businessmen and political activists. In USA, Booker T. Washington joined the cause. In1908 the Free Estate of Congo left place to the Belgian Congo that would be governed
  • 165. by the parliament of Belgium. The horror stood in the past, but a new system ofimposition of work was implanted, based on the general charging of heavy taxes. The Irish Casement renounced to the diplomatic service and joined therepublican rebels that fought for independence of Ireland. In 1916 when he was 51 year-old he was arrested, accused on betrayal and gibbeted. Morel could not visit him beforethe execution because his pacifist activities during the European war gave him theaccusation of being a German spy and he was converted into a target of attacks. Oneyear after the murder of Casement, Morel was sentenced under vague accusations to sixmonths of prison that was played in the same Londoner prison of Pentonville. In 1920, two decades after the publication of The White Man´s Burden ofKipling, Morel published The Black Man´s Burden. The book aimed to reform theEuropean policies to Africa and contained an anti-colonization appeal to the League ofNations for the delivery of non-occupied lands to the control of the Africans. Facing andimperial dogma largely accepted that attributed to the superiority of the white race thepower of the imperialist Estates over the colonial populations, the author asked: „isn´t itmere hypocrisy to hide from us that we extended our march of subjugation from onehemisphere to another due to our superior weapons?‟ Morel observed that the Africans survived three centuries of slave traffic and tothe lethal impact of the diseases spread in the continent by the Europeans but he fearedthe results of the „modern capitalist exploitation, supported by the modern machines ofdestruction: from the bad effects of this last one, scientifically imposed, there is noescape to the Africans. Its destructive effects are not spasmodic, they are permanent. Inthis permanence there are its fatal consequences. It doesn´t merely kill the body, but thespirit. It breaks the spirit. It ruins their political system, detaches them from their land,invades the life of their family, destroys their natural activities and occupations, takesall their time, enslaves them in their own home‟. These evaluations came from what Morel knew about Congo and also aboutother colonies that far lived similar horrors to the private domain of Leopold II, such asthe British South Rhodesia, the German Southeastern Africa, the French Congo and thePortuguese Angola. He had reasons about many things, but not about everything. The effective imperial power on Africa lasted only a few more than half acentury. With important exceptions, the European administrations could not mold morethan the superficial surface of the African societies. The beliefs, the familiar structures,many traditional systems of rules stood in the margin of the changes promoted by thecolonizers. Africa survived as a plurality of social experiences and as a persistent racialmetaphor.
  • 166. THE PAN-AFRICAN DREAM Wilberforce, Ohio, Wednesday, 1st April 1896. Dear Mr. Washington: I havesearched, since some time ago, for a free hour to answer to your gentle letter of 17 thJanuary, but free hours are scarce here. I feel that I would like to work in Tuskegee ifthis would be utile to you. My idea is that it is possible, gradually, to develop there aschool of Black History and social investigations that could help to situate the problemof the blacks on a serious factual basis. I think that, at the correct time, manyuniversities of the North such as Harvard, Chicago, Johns Hopkins and the University ofPennsylvania would join to help this movement. What do you think about that? W. E.Bdu Bois. „Mr. Washington was Booker T. Washington, the ex-slave who became therespected rector of the Normal and Industrial Institute of Tuskegee, an institution forblacks with statute of university in Alabama. He was about to turn 40 year-old when hereceived the answer of the young Du Bois, 28. Months before, the rector pronouncedone of his conciliatory speeches to an audience of white planters and was preciselycriticized by Du Bois who labeled him as the great conciliator. Both Booker Washington and Du Bois had black and white ancestors but theAmerican racial code classified them as blacks. Du Bois however was born inMassachusetts of a family of Dutch, French and Haitian origin and his parents didn´tlive slavery. The academic business of the exchanged letters didn´t come to real becauseDu Bois was at that time a lecturer in the University Wilberforce and preferred totransfer to the University of Pennsylvania. The two men respected each other andcooperated in the organization of a black panel in the Universal Exposition of 1900 inParis. However, they were separated by an ideological fracture. Soon before the Exposition of Paris, Booker Washington published one of hismain books, in which he strongly defended the concept of emancipation througheducation. He called USA to promote the technical schooling among the blacks thatwould give an enhancement in the level of life of the population originated from theslave system and with time it would attenuate racism. „Haiti, Saint Dominic and Liberia,although they are among the richest countries in terms of natural resources, they aredisheartening examples of what certainly occurs to any nation lacking industrial ortechnical qualification‟ as he observed to criticize the emphasis on the classic educationof the belles lettres. Booker Washington criticized the belief that the black problem would be solvedby the absorption of the blacks by the whites, pointing out an impassable obstacle: theone drop rule. In the text of an exemplar irony: „It is a known fact that if a person has1% of African blood in their vessels, they stop being a white person. The 99% of
  • 167. Caucasian blood don´t weigh compared to the 1% of African blood. So, it will be reallya hard task for the whites to absorb the blacks‟. At this epoch, the remnant hopes on the future of Serra Leon and Liberia wentaway and Booker and Washington contested the project of Back to Africa, thatfascinated black intellectual leaders in USA: „I remember that, not a few time ago, whenabout five hundred people departed from the port of Savannah toward Liberia, thenovelties crossed the country as a ray: the blacks decided to return to their own homeand this is the solution for the racial problem of the South. But these people with shortvision forgot that in the morning, before breakfast, only in the South another fivehundred blacks were born‟. The rector of Tuskegee, similarly to all his companions, believed in theexistence of races. But, foremost, he believed in the existence of an American nationthat would be the common home of whites and blacks. In the year of the Universal Exposition with initiative of Booker Washington itwas created in Boston the National League of Black Business, an organization destinedto the promotion of commercial and financial interests of businessmen and black liberalprofessionals. One year later, in a gesture without precedents, the president TheodoreRoosevelt invited the black leader to visit the White House. When at the end of thedecade of 1960 Richard Nixon pronounced his speech on the black capitalism andannounced policies of preferences to black businessmen he gave another tribute to theman who tried to conciliate the idea of a single nation with the reality of racialsegregation. Du Bois interpreted the past and imagined the future in a very different way.Until 1909 the persisted under the shade of the venerated rector of Tuskegee althoughhe was a detached voice. But in 12th February of that year, the centenary of birth ofAbraham Lincoln, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People(NAACP) started to transfer the leadership to the hands of Du Bois. In the followingyears, he wrote without stopping, assigning columns in many journals and directing thepublication of NAACP whose circulation overcame one hundred thousand issues in thebeginning of the decade of 1920. During two decades, Du Bois personified NAACP but in the beginning of theyears 1930 he entered in conflict with the new secretary-executive of the organization,Walter White and with the assistant secretary Roy Wilkins who diverged from the mostradical conceptions of the historical leader. Then, he left the direction of the journal andvisited the Imperial Japan and the Nazi German and got positively impressed by theproud of race that he found in both of the countries, but criticizing the persecution of theGerman Jews. During the World War, he cooperated with the Communist Party of USAand when Joseph Stalin died he wrote an article with open eulogies to the Sovietdictator.
  • 168. Africa represented the object of fascination of the whole life of Du Bois. In 1961he moved to Ghana in invitation to the president Kwame Nkrumah with the finality oforganizing the African Encyclopedic, an official book. In 1963, USA refused to renewhis passport and he received Ghanaian citizenship. He died in Accra in 27 th August 1963at 95 year-old. In the next day, Martin Luther King pronounced the speech „I have adream‟ that would have been interpreted as an abominable heresy by the founder of theAmerican black movement.Africa as a metaphor: Du Bois It was not Du Bois, but the missionary Alexander Crummell the father of thepan-Africanism. Cummell was born in New York in 1819 and 35 years later, he movedto Liberia where he lived for two decades. As many others, he saw Liberia as anadvanced place of the Christian civilization and of the English language in Africa. Spitehis personal experience with the tense meeting between American-Liberians andnatives, the never abandoned his fundamental belief in Africa as the fatherland of theblack race. A collection of his texts published in 1862 is entitled The Future of Africa.The Ghanaian philosopher Kwame Appiah observes correctly that the intentions ofCrummell to be speaking in the name of a continent was originated not from his Africanexperience but from a racial image learnt in USA and United Kingdom. Appiah alsoregisters that the concept of racial unity of Africa would shock the Liberian natives butit became in the XX century as a common property of great part of mankind. If there is a true African trace, this one is diversity. Before the badly nameddivision of Africa by the imperial powers, the continent was the home for thousands ofdistinct political entities that were reunited by the colonizers in about fifty Estates. Butthe Pan-Africanism, a fruit of the racial concepts of the XIX century, interprets Africaas a unity and a geographic metaphor for the black race. In Liberia, the walk of Crummell crossed with Edward Wilmot Blyden, born inSaint Thomas in the Virgin Islands at that time under Danish domain from free blackparents, who arrived in the new country in 1850. Blyden served as ambassador inEuropean countries and as minister of two governors of Liberia. In 1887, when hepublished Christianity, Islam and the Negro Race, he entered in the gallery of the fathersof the Pan-Africanism. In his book, he defended that Islam had a unifying potentialbigger than the Christian to the black Africa. Classifying the Christian religion as animport from Europe, he converted into the pioneer of a never completed project ofAfricanizing the doctrine of the Pan-Africanism. Between word and action, the figure of Henry Sylvester-Williams wasinterposed. The lawyer and writer, born in the British colony of Trinidad in 1869, knewUSA at the moment when the sour reality of the Jim Crow laws substituted the hopes of
  • 169. the Reconstruction. In 1896 he migrated to England and in the following year the cratedthe Pan-African Association that promoted the First Pan-African Conference in Londonin July 1900. Du Bois was among the thirty representatives who participated in theevent, where he coordinated the committee for redaction of the appeal „To the nations ofthe world‟. The text asked to the powers that they respected the rights of the Africandescendants and the sovereignty of the black Estates, as Liberia, Haiti and Abyssinia(nowadays Ethiopia) were named. After the original conference, the Pan-African movement was leaded by Du Boiswho organized the Pan-African Congress in Paris in 1919. Carried out parallel to theConference of Peace that negotiated the treatises of ending the First World War, themeeting reunited sixty representatives and only a few were African. New congresseswere carried out in London and Brussels in 1921; London and Lisbon in 1923 and NewYork in 1927. In this last one, among the 208 representatives, there was only a handfulof Africans, coming from Liberia, Serra Leon, Nigeria and Gold Coast. The colonialadministrations of France and United Kingdom had imposed restrictions of travelling inorder to empty the participation of Africans but, in fact, Pan-Africanism still continuedas a movement conducted essentially by English speaking intellectuals of USA,Caribbean and United Kingdom. It is not possible to understand the Pan-Africanism without understanding theplace of race in the vision of world of Du Bois. To the American leader, race was lessthan a biological concept and more a historic notion. He admitted that the grossdifferences of color, hairs and bones few explained about the paper developed by thehuman groups in history, but he invoked subtle forces that divided the human beingsinto races, not always defined by science, but clearly defined to the eyes of historiansand sociologists. He completed: „if this is true, so the history of the world is not ahistory of individuals, but the history of nations; not the one of nations, but of races –and whoever ignores or tries to smudge the idea of race in the human history ignoresand smudges the central concept of all the history. So, what is a race? It is a vast familyof human beings of blood and languages in common, always with history, tradition andimpulses in common that does efforts in common to the realization of determined idealsof life‟. Here it goes the best resume of the racialist thinking. Du Bois didn´t believe innotions of racial superiority or inferiority so he was not a racist. He believed that eachrace would carry a singular message, a particular ideal and that the plentiful realizationof the abilities of mankind needed the broadcasting of the messages of all races. TheGerman of Hitler impressed him favorably because it was concerned in giving themessage of a race, but he didn´t admit its destructive impulses against the Jews, anotherrace. The idea of miscegenation made no sense in the logic of his historic conceptionbecause it tended to smudge the racial limits, distorting its messages. The preservationof the races, a title of one of his essays, was a historic imperative of first order.
  • 170. Distinct races could live together in a same nation? Yes, answered Du Bois, withthe condition that among them it would establish a substantial business respecting laws,languages and religions. The racial and national identities could be conciliated, but therace was a fountain of a more vital and deeper communion: „we are Americans not onlyfor birth and citizenship, but due to our political ideals, language and religion. OurAmericanism goes no further. From this point, we are blacks, member of a vast historicrace that has been sleeping since the aurora of the creation, but that starts to awake inthe dark forests of its African homeland‟. Africa, in Du Bois, is not a geological reality, but the homeland of a race that hasa message to mankind. In this crucial sense, Africa would be a culture, a way ofunderstanding the world, a spiritual league of a vast community, the symbol of adestination. In The Black, of 1915, the conductor of the light of the Pan-Africanism goteven more distance from the notions of the scientific racism, denying the existence ofpure races and describing the variety of African physical types to conclude that theblack race should be seen as a historic actor. At the same time, he formulated the thesisthat the ruin of Africa, provoked by the slave traffic and the colonial division, dissolvedthe African kingdoms, breaking the development of modern black Estates. Theconsequences of the African ruin – the fragmentation of the race throughout the worldand colonial subordination of Africa – would only be overcome by the unity of theblacks of the Globe. The Black was written in a period of growth of the movement of syndicates inUSA and soon after the formation of the African National Congress in South Africa.Also, China had just founded the Republic, an event that Du Bois interpreted as thebeginning of the affirmation of the Asiatic race. These events are reflected in a part ofthe concluding chapter of the book that draws a horizon of political alliances. In thatpart, he emphasized that „while the black workers are slaves, the white workers willnever be free‟ and he claimed for a „unity of working classes in all places, a new unityof the colored races, new unity of men‟. However, the movement of changing would beconducted by the black race: „Slowly, not only it grows a particularly strongbrotherhood of black blood in the world but it also gains the expression the commoncause of the dark races against the insupportable intentions and insults of the Europeans.The majority of the people of this world is colored. The belief in mankind means abelief in the colored men. The world of the future will be probably what the coloredmen do. For this colored world to get established shall the earth be again wet by bloodof the combats, in a shout of human beasts, or will the ration and the good wishesprevail? The better and greater hope that the last ones prevail are on the character of theblack race because it represents at the same time the strongest and the most lovelyhuman races‟. As Appiah observed, in his approach to the theme of race, Du Bois wanted totrust in something more elevated than the rude continuity of the human genes. Hisconcept of race could not be separated from Biology, but only in History, which means,in first place, of a shared past. But if even Du Bois had African and Dutch ancestors,
  • 171. how could he define his racial category? The answer he gave was simple and arbitrary:the skin color. Because he was dark, he elected a tradition represented by the Africanancestors in detriment of the Dutch. Black race and Africa constituted the twoinseparable terms of an historic equation. The last phrase of the book is an evocation in Latin borrowed from a Greekproverb of the IV century before the Christian age: „Semper novi quid ex Africa (all thenovelties come from Africa). To Du Bois, Africa occupies the place of a mythical home.He was American and shared not only the popular American culture but also the highintellectual culture of his country. But due to his ideology he could not feel at home inUSA. Africa, note the Africas of the multiple experiences of the Africans, but animagined Africa, was the home of Du Bois. The Pan-Africanism of Du Bois was, deeply, a development of his Pan-Blackism. The black race in his conception was a diaspora race. But he didn´t defend areturn to Africa, but the opposite, as he actively searched for means to promote thematerial, social and intellectual progress of the blacks in the societies of the Americas.Africa developed two papers in his racialist vision: at the present it was a fountain of atradition, something as a historic memory that linked the blacks from all over the world;in the future, it should be a pole of political and cultural power capable of inspiring theblacks of the homeland and in the diaspora. Slowly, Du Bois got firmly convinced that the racial segregation of USA wasnot totally bad, as this indicated a way. In an article of 1935 he sustained the thesis thatthe black Americans constituted, at least partially, a nation inside the nation, due to theorganization of the black church, the black school and the black retail commerce. It wasimperative to follow this way, attracting the best, most vigorous and most educatedblacks to, via a volunteer and crescent segregation, raise a great racial unity and conquerpolitical equality. Equality here did not mean equal rights for the citizens, but a nationalpact of equality among races.Africa as a destiny: Garvey The leadership of Du Bois had a counterbalance in the Jamaican Marcus MosiahGarvey Jr. who formulated a very different version of Pan-Africanism and became themost important enemy of the American. Garvey was born in 1887, almost two decadesafter Du Bois. Under the influence of his father, a mason of a vast culture, he was atireless reader. However, at least according to an autobiographical narrative written in1923, it was not in the books that the found the belief around he would organize his life:„to me, at home, in the first times, there were no differences between blacks and whites.One of the properties of my father, the place where I lived most of the time, our houseneighbored the one of a white man. He had three daughters and a boy. We were friends
  • 172. of parties and jokes. We were innocent fools who never dreamt or felt a racial problem.When I was 14, my small friend and I separated. Her fathers imagined that it was timeto draw the line of the color. They sent her to a sister in Edinburgh, Scotland, and toldher that she never tried to write or make contact with me because I was a nigger. Aftermy first lesson of racial distinction, I didn´t think on playing with white girls anymore.‟ Garvey had a brief passage by syndicalism before working as journalist andeditor. In London in the years before the great European war, he wrote to African Timesand Orient Review, a publication directed by the Egyptian Duse Mohammed Ali, anAfrican nationalist and broadcaster of Islam. Five years after returning to Jamaica inAugust 1914, when the war broke out, he founded the Universal Negro ImprovementAssociation (Unia) that was defined as a movement against blacks who didn´t want tobe blacks. The declared finality of the organization was to gather all the black peoplesof the world in a great entity to establish a country and a government totally black-owned. In this autobiographic article, Garvey complained of the Jamaican mixed whodidn´t want a black leader and of the American black leaders who were not interested inthe poor. He also offers his version about the faction fights of the sections of Unia inUSA and he vaunted of his act of ending the First International Convention of theBlacks in 1920 in New York in a Madison Square Garden filled up by 25 thousandpersons. But mainly he tried to present the accusations he received due to the Black StarLine business as fruit of ivy of rival leaders. In fact, in his travels around USA, Garvey had grown an organization of massesbased on Harlem and with hundreds of paying affiliates and that competed in influencewith NAACP. Editing the journal The Black World and working tirelessly, theJamaican converted into an internationally known figure. Black Star Line was acompany of navigation instituted by Unia in 1919 with the ambitious project oftransporting passengers and charges in a global black economy. The few and old shipsof the company navigated during two years, principally in routes between USA andCaribbean in the middle of administrative disorganization, scandals of corruption andsabotages carried out by the FBI of Edgard Hoover. It was FBI that kicked seriously Black Star Line, conducted a vicious processagainst Garvey starting from an accusation of use of the postal service to sendmisleading propaganda. By means of coercion and buying testimonies the accusersobtained in 1923 a condemnation of the leader of Unia to five years in jail. The appealswere rejected and he carried out half of the sentence until he was freed and deported toJamaica by an act of the president Calvin Coolidge. In the years of glory of the creation of a navigation company, Unia started otherprojects even more ambitious but with less expressive results. The Corporation of BlackIndustries was a trial to establish a great chain of industries in USA, Caribbean andAfrica to product all the goods and services demanded by the world market of Africansand their descendants. In 1920 the organization decided to start a program for the
  • 173. development of Liberia and of Haiti, destined to free them from their debts and implantindustries, universities and railways. The initiative didn´t prosper due to the oppositionof USA and the European powers that had their own interests in both countries. Race had an essentially biological meaning to Garvey. If Du Bois translated it inhistoric terms and emphasized the racial unity of blacks and mulattos of the diaspora,the Jamaican didn´t hide his repulse to miscegenation. He considered his rivals in USAand in Caribbean as colored blacks, which means, mixed, and extract from this factconsequences of a large importance. The International Convention of the Blacksadopted a Declaration of Independence, a universal canticle and red black and greenflag, acclaiming Garvey as the provisory president of Africa. In the vision of the leaderof Unia, Africa was not a metaphoric homeland but a real one to where it was animperative to return. The true blacks would understand this spite the false coloredleaders such as Du Bois who insisted on the idea of a racial conciliation in the countriesof the diaspora. In the perspective of Garvey, the blacks should have a country of their own. Thiscountry would be a decolonized Africa and without internal frontiers to where all theblacks of the world would go back. The black separatism to which Du Bois, concernedwith the equality of rights, flirted indecisively, constituted and untouchable principle toGarvey: „we feel that there are absolutely no reason to exist any differences between thewhite and the black races if each one stops from invading one another and bothstabilize. We believe in the purity of both races. We don´t believe in that the black manshould be encouraged to think his greater objective in life is to marry a white woman. Itis a depraved and dangerous doctrine of social equality to claim as such colored leadersdo, for the acquaintanceship of blacks and whites, which would destroy the racial purityof both‟. The return to Africa, Garvey imagined, was a goal to which he could get thecooperation of the white leaders either clarified or openly racist. After all, he thought,the white men who struggled to construct their countries and civilizations are notdisposed to give them to the blacks or any other race. It didn´t make sense to wait thatone day the blacks would occupy the positions of majors, governors or president of thewhite countries. But the act of the return would give to each one of the races a separatedexistence eliminating the racial rivalries in each country. The discordance between Du Bois and Garvey left the stage of acrimony to themutual hate. In an article of two parts published between 1920 and 1921, the Americanmixed words of recognition of the leadership, honesty and idealism of the Jamaicanwith criticisms (obviously correct) about his authoritative personality, his insuperablemegalomania and his heterodox methods of business. In that text, to suggest that Garveylived in the clouds he reproduced a text of a speech where the Jamaican showed aparallel of his mission of redeeming Africa and the Napoleonic trial of taking the world.Less than two years later, Garvey referred to Du Bois as a mixed hence a monstrosity.At the same time the met in Atlanta Edward Young Clarked, one of the chiefs of the
  • 174. restored Ku Klux Klan. That was too much and in 1924 while Garvey appealed againsthis condemnation, Du Bois wrote an article entitled „A Lunatic or a Traitor‟ thatdescribed the Jamaican as the most dangerous enemy of black race in USA and theworld. In Du Bois´ Pan-Africanism the nations could be conciliated to the racialprinciple and the blacks should search for a pact of equality to the whites inside USA. InGarvey it was the contrary: the supreme principle of race collided with the one ofnation. His Africa was not a metaphor but a concrete destination. The salvation of theblacks (and the whites) was found in the geopolitical separation. This perspectiveopened a real area of cooperation between Unia and the heralds of the white supremacyin USA, something that in Du Bois´ eyes broke any limits of the tolerable. In the articleof 1924, the leader of NAACP denunciated the pamphlets and letters broadcasted byGarvey that called on politicians, educators and philanthropists to join the efforts ofUnia in favor of the geographic separation of races. A text reproduced in the material ofpropaganda was „one of the worst articles recently written by a Southern whitedefending the deportation of the black Americans to Liberia‟. In his conclusion, Du Bois denunciated the intimidations conducted by Garveyand his followers against judicial authorities involved in the process against him as wellas pretended scandals of corruption and even a murder linked to the fights of thefactions of Unia. Du Bois himself would have suffered physical threatening andthreatening of judicial processes. The final sentences are: „any man who from now andever, eulogizes or defends Marcus Garvey labels himself as unworthy to receive thesupport of the decent Americans. Regarding Garvey, this explicit allied of Ku KluxKlan must be arrested or deported to his country‟. The prison and the hatred of Du Bois and other black American leaders corrodedthe political bases of Garvey in USA. In Jamaica in 1929 he created the People´sPolitical Party, a party dedicated to the social reform and the rights of workers. Sixyears later he moved to London where he conducted campaigns to support Ethiopia inwar against Italian forces. The Jamaican admired the Christian Ethiopian Empire thatfigured in his eyes as the future of Africa and conceded a support (not free fromcriticisms) to his Emperor, Haile Selassie. The royal Ethiopian family was Christianized in the IV century by two Greek-Syrian explorers and Christianism became the official religion of the kingdom. In theXIII century, under the Salomonida dynasty, the Ethiopian Empire was consolidated,being the guardian of Christianity in Africa. In the European imperial expansion overAfrica, Ethiopia ceded to the Italians the colony of Eritrea but conserved itsindependence. In 1930 the regent Tafari Makonnen assumed the throne with the title ofHaile Selassie I. His Empire would last until the Revolution of 1974 and the abolition ofthe Salomonida dynasty. The adventures of Selassie linked his figure through a special cord to theJamaican history and culture. In 1936, militarily beat by the Italians in the Second War
  • 175. of Abyssinia, the Emperor claimed to the League of Nations that only imposedineffective sanctions against the invader. In the five years of exile in Great Britain heconverted into an international antifascist icon. Before this, however, he had become thefountain of inspiration of the Rastafari Movement. This name comes from the union ofthe term ras, an honorific Ethiopian title that means chief or duke with Tafari, the nameof baptism of Haile Selassie. Garvey didn´t develop a direct paper in the appearance of the RastafariMovement, which in fact emanated from popular preaches influenced by the ideas ofBack to Africa and of a black supremacy. The most important of them, Leonard Howell,„the first rasta‟ started to announce in 1933 that Selassie was the incarnation of theMessiah returning to Earth. Among the broadcasters of the new religion, many wereactivists of Garvey, which conferred to the Rastafari Movement a strong political color. To the Rastas, both Jesus Christ and Selassie were incarnations of God (Jah).The Occidental civilization represented only an oppressive structure, the use ofCannabis (ganja) worked as an instrument for the group meditation and the study of theBible. Garvey was never a rasta and criticized Howell for the identification of theEthiopian emperor to Messiah, but the rastas lifted him up to the condition of theprophet of the Return to Africa and incorporated him to their black separatism. Aspeech of Garvey in 1927 in which he had done a metaphoric reference to thecoronation of a black king in Africa was taken by the rastas as a prophecy of theenthronement of Selassie. In the rasta mythology, ships of the Black Star Line wouldtransport them back to Africa. Selassie didn´t disdain of the rasta cult and received and paid homage Jamaicanreligious leaders in Ethiopia in 1961 and carried out a famous visit to Jamaica in 1966.More than one hundred thousand rastas waited him around the airport of Kingston,smoking cannabis in a party climate. Rita Marley, wife of Bob Marley, converted to thereligion after meeting the emperor. The Rastafari Movement gained worldwidevisibility after his visit and reggae, already incorporated to the religion, reachedworldwide commercial success. Three years before in a speech to the General Assemblyof UN, Selassie condemned racism and declared that the skin color has no moreimportance than the color of the eyes, cutting the tree of the black supremacy among therastas. In his last years of life, Garvey carried out other strange alliances. In 1937 hisfollowers in USA cooperated with the Mississippi senator Theodore G. Bilbo, adetached herald of white supremacy, in a project of deportation of American blacks to aGreat Liberia that would be formed by the union of Liberia with the British and Frenchcolonies of Western Africa. In 1940 two strokes killed Garvey who was buried inLondon. After almost a quarter of a century later his mortal rests were removed andtransferred to a sanctuary in the Park of the National Heroes in Kingston. In contrary tohis enemy Du Bois who didn´t prescribe the return but lived his last days in Ghana, theprophet of Back to Africa never put his feet in African soil.
  • 176. Pan-Africanism reaches Africa After the interval of almost two decades, marked by the Great Depression andthe World War, it was carried out in Manchester, England, in 1945 the V Pan-AfricanCongress. Du Bois was present as ever but at 77 year-old he developed a paper basicallysymbolic and got the homage of being the honorific president of the meeting. In thepolitical direction the figures of George Padmore from Trinidad and Kwame Nkrumahfrom Ghana were luminous. They were leaders of left who had studied in USA and triedto conciliate Marxism with pan-Africanism. Contrary to the other four previous congresses, the theme of Africandecolonization started to get under light and young African leaders dominated thedebates. The principal resolution denunciated the imperialism and called on fights:„today, there is only one way to effective action – the organization of the masses‟. Fromthe above one hundred representatives, one fourth came from Africa, especially frompolitical parties organized in the British colonies. Among them were Jomo Kenyattawho would be the first president of Kenya; Hastings Kamuzu Banda, who would be thefirst president of Malawi and the Nigerians Benjamin Nnamdi Azikiwe, Jaja Wachukuand Obafemi Awolowo who would occupy, respectively, the positions of president,minister of Exterior and leader of the parliament opposition soon after theindependence. Many of the men who reunited in Manchester met after the initial greatwave of decolonization to constitute OAU – Organization of African Unity. The Pan-Africanism of the post-war started to be molded in the years 1930during the Italian occupation of Ethiopia. In London, it was created an InternationalOffice for Assistance to Africa that centralized the campaign for restoration of theEthiopian independence. The president of the organization was Padmore, a communistwho worked in USSR to Comintern (International Communist) from 1929 to 1934 butruptured with Moscow and got closer to the Trotskyite opposition. He had at his side hisfriend since childhood, also from Trinidad, Cyrill L. R. James, in the epoch when LeonTrotski carried out efforts to construct a Fourth International. The two Trinidadians were around 35 year-old and had not made contact withthe Ghanaian Nkrumah who were 10 years younger and was studying at the LincolnUniversity in Pennsylvania. The meeting happened during the war by means of Jameswho was the director of one from the innumerable Trotskyite dissidences. The grouphad also Kenyatta as a guest of Padmore. He had studied economics in Moscow andmoved with him to London and worked in the campaign of support to Ethiopia. For thefour guys, Du Bois represented merely a historic reference, but not a political orideological leader.
  • 177. Parallel to the articulation of the English-speaking pan-Africanists, it wasdeveloping the political and literary movement of Negritude, born at the same periodamong Caribbean and Africans of the French colonies. Under the influence of thewriters of the Reborn of Harlem, hugging the concept of African Diaspora nation, theheralds of the movement reverenced the figure of the Haitian L´Ouverture andprescribed the restoration of an ancestor African personality. The label Negritude was an invention of the young fellow Aimé Césaire fromMartinique in his poem Cahier d´un retour au pays natal (notes of a return to thehomeland), published in a student´s journal of Paris with the collaboration of the poetsLeon Damas from French Guyana and Leopold Sedar Senghor, future first president ofSenegal. In the bases of that label there is the idea of a deep cultural link that unites theAfricans and their descendants from all over the world and racialist logic attached to thestereotypes constructed by the scientific racism: „They accepted the irresponsiblethinking of Europe and objected that if the Europeans are rational, then the Africanshave rhythm and emotion. One group of myths substituted the other, since they turnedinto a fetish the concept of race and gave it a historic paper that reinforced theEurocentrism. The leaders of the principal anti-colonial fights in Africa formed theirconceptions of world in the English-speaking or French-speaking modes of the pan-Africanism. A partial exception was the Congolese Patrice Lumumba, younger and whohadn´t studied in the Exterior except for a very brief period and hadn´t participated ofthe articulations of the years of the world war. But he also adhered to the Pan-Africanistbelief and went to the Conference of African Peoples carried out in Accra in 1958. Afterthe doctrine was finally Africanized it became the legitimacy of the independent Estatesof Africa. Nkrumah, the host f the Ghanaian conference, became the uncontestable ensignof the post-colonial Pan-Africanism, a condition that derived, at least in part, from thecircumstance that Ghana had been the first British colony of Africa to becomeindependent. In his autobiography, there is a part where he refers to a speechpronounced five years before in Liberia: „I assigned that Providence had preserved theblacks during their years of probation in the exile, in USA and West Indies; that it wasthe same Providence that had taken care of Moses and of the Israelites in Egyptcenturies before. Africa to the Africans! – I exclaimed. A free and independent Estate inAfrica. We want to govern ourselves in this country without external interferences. Outside Africa, the children refer to Africa as a country, not as a continentconstituted by at least half a hundred of distinct political entities. Nkrumah did thesame. The blacks formed a race and a nation: a race-nation submitted to exile and thatclaimed for its promised land. It is clear that this mode of describing the world hadabsolutely no correspondence to the experience of the smashing majority of the Africansin Africa. But it reflected the long walk – in USA, Caribbean and Europe – byintellectuals such as Crummell, Du Bois, Garvey, Padmore and Nkrumah.
  • 178. The British Gold Coast was renamed as Ghana at the time of independence, inthe first minute of 6th March 1957. In the initial words of the famous speech ofmidnight, Nkrumah didn´t refer to Ghana, but to Africa: „we´ll see that we created ourown African personality‟. The flooding of African independences was in 1960. In 23 thSepetember Nkrumah went to the General Assembly of UN and spoke againstcolonialism, neocolonialism and balkanization of Africa. Once more, Africa worked asthe name of a single entity submitted to external oppression: „Africa does not seek forrevenge. We don´t ask for the death of our oppressors, we don´t pronounce votes of badluck to our slave lords…‟ „Our slave lords‟ were never the chiefs of African blackkingdoms, but only of the traffickers and non-African slave owners. Through the lensesof Pan-Africanism, the complex history of the traffic was simplified in a narrative ofracial oppression. In the same speech, Nkrumah denunciated vigorously the coup of Estate of theColonel Mobutu Sese Seko in the Belgian colony of Congo in a moment when theprime-minister Lumumba still resisted inside the country. CIA gave a hidden support tothe coup and one version affirms that Mobutu had become an informant of the Belgiansecret service before independence, when he served as personal assessor of Lumumba.But the crisis started before the coup of Estate as a conflict between the presidentJoseph Kasa-Vubu and the prime-minister and the support of USA to the swindler chiefwas a reaction to the approximation of Lumumba to Moscow. Even so, the president ofGhana described the Congolese drama simply as an interference of the great powers inthe issues of Africa. Pan-Africanism, then, started to develop a function of hiding thepolitical responsibilities of the African leaders, attributing to external agents theproblems that inflicted the nations of the continent.A speech out of place The goal of geopolitical unity of Africa seemed to be a viable hypothesis duringthe vague beginning of the independences. In 1958 Nkrumah joined Ahmed SekouToure, leader of Guinea who ruptured with France to form the Ghana-Guinea Union.The new entity appeared above the division between the English-speaking and theFrench-speaking Africa with the ambition of constructing the nucleus of a future Pan-African union. Soon later, it was carried out in Accra the Pan-African conference andNkrumah called on the formation of the United Estates of Africa. In 1961 Mali adheredto the block Ghana-Guinea that was re-named as the Union of the African Estates. The Ghanaian dream had a short life and Pan-Africanism took a different way,expressed by the Organization of African Unity. Nkrumah developed a paper ofprotagonist in the convocation of the conference of the 32 African independent Estatesthat reunited in Adis Abeba in Ethiopia in March 1963 but the deliberations of themeeting frustrated the expectations. OAU would be an organization of regional safety,
  • 179. not the United Estates of Africa. Ghana would continue to occupy a symbolic place inthe history of the post-colonial Africa, but would never have the same leadership of thefirst years. Hosted by the mythic Selassie and as the headquarters of the capital of anEmpire never conquered of Ethiopia, the foundation conference of OAU was a strangemeeting. At the side of the representatives of the Sub-Sahara Africa, the Black Africaleaders seated close to the countries of the North of Africa that had nothing to do withthe tradition of the Pan-Africanism. The Arab peoples of the African North didn´t fallinto the concept of racial unity of the Pan-Africanist doctrine. Furthermore, theycouldn´t be described as victims of the black slave traffic, as they were a pole of importof slaves. These were unresolved contradictions that acted as a corrosive substance overa doctrine each time less and less stable. The Letter of OAU approved in Adis Abeba mentioned a broader unitytranscendent to national and ethnic differences but never used the words race, black,Diaspora. The document condemned colonialism and neocolonialism but had noreferences to the slave traffic or slavery. In the 3rd article, which exposed the principlesof the organization, the first item proclaimed the sovereign equality of the AfricanEstates; the second, of the compromising of non-interference in internal issues of thepartners; the third, of the respect of sovereignty and territorial integrity of each Estateand the right of independent existence. This way, they buried the idea of a big andsingle African Federal Estate. OAU lasted almost four decades before being substituted by the African Union(AU) in the Conference of Lome in Togo in 2000. The constitutive act of AU starts bythe declaration that the last organization appeared „inspired by the noble ideals thatguided the founders of our Continental Organization and generations of Pan-Africanists‟, but it is even more explicit about the theme of territorial integrity of theEstates. In the 4th article, a list of principles stresses a second item that promises the„respect to the existent frontiers at the moment of the independencies‟ – which means,the frontiers derived from the European imperial expansion. The official Pan-Africanism of OAU was manifested especially in the area of thecultural politics. In 1969 in a cultural festival in Algiers, the Algerian president HouariBoumedienne presented a Pan-African Cultural Manifest. According to the document,being an African is made of a variety of origins but expresses a common inheritance anda unity of destiny. Colonialism had distorted the African culture and nourished culturalelite alienated and away from the people. It meant to restore and preserve an Africanculture in the service of the masses. Boumedienne governed his country as a dictatorwith almost absolute powers. The language of the Manifest didn´t contain the traditionalsigns of Pan-Africanism because it came from an Arab leader, but in his leading therewere many obvious threatening to the free expression of the cultural producers. The Manifest of 1969 wasn´t constituted in an official document. But in 1976UA approved a Cultural Letter to Africa that explicitly was inspired in the text of
  • 180. Boumedienne. The Letter reproduced the notion that the history and culture were anAfrican identity and also it attacked the elite frequently alienated from the true Africanculture. Although in the same way of the predecessor the text was incapable ofsuggesting a true notion of African culture, it let clear that culture was a question ofEstate. Among the objectives, there was the development of all dynamic values of thecultural African inheritance and the rejection of any element that is an obstacle toprogress. In spite of the repeated mentions to the African cultural community, thedocument of 1976 accepted the principle of the respect of the national identities. In thecontext, this meant that each regime would take care of surveying culture and thecultural products in their own territories. A compromise of respect to freedom ofexpression had to wait the Letter for the Cultural Reborn of Africa, approved by AUthree decades later, in Khartoum, Sudan. However, even this document of politicalreform gives honor to the Cultural Pan-African Manifest and ritually it repeats theconcept that history is the fountain for an essential unity of Africa. This concept is the basis of the Pan-African doctrine and has no sense away themold of the racialist thinking. If history of Africa is the history of a race then it becomespossible to construct the idea of African unity that circles not only the peoples of Africabut also the ones of the Diaspora. But the renunciation to the notion of race, forced bythe presence of the Arab countries in AU an in its successor, implodes all the logic ofthe doctrine, built since the times of Crummell since there is nothing to be named as anAfrican history. With the appearance of AU, Pan-Africanism converted into a doctrine of Estate,losing its aspect of independent movement. In the beginning of the years 1970, unhappywith this order of things, activists of USA and Caribbean vindicated the organization ofa new Pan-African congress. The fights against regimes of white minority wereintensified in South Africa and in Rhodesia (nowadays Zimbabwe) and the Portuguesecolonies of Angola and Mozambique lived the height of their liberation wars. TheTanzania of Julius Nyerere prompted to sponsor the event that was carried out in Dar-es-Salaam in June 1974, thirty years after the historical V Congress. Nyerere was a singular Pan-Africanist that imbibed from the gradualist socialismduring his university years in Great Britain and believed in a fusion between the Africantraditional communitarian and the modern socialism. Together with Kenneth Kaundafrom Zambia he figured in the front line of support to the African National Congressand to the guerillas of Mozambique and Rhodesia. From his point of view, the VI Pan-African Congress would serve to the diplomatic efforts of isolating the Portuguesecolonialism and the regimes of white minority and also it would reinforce his ownposition in the concert of the African Estates. The American and Caribbean activists were in accordance to the goal ofsupporting the anti-colonial and antiapartheid wars but they didn´t expect an eventcontrolled by chiefs of Estate in the style of the reunions of OAU. The congress
  • 181. received representatives of the dictator of Guyana, Linden Forbes Burnham, aligned toCuba and USSR and of the corrupt and mentally unstable Eric Gairy of Granada. Incompensation, many Caribbean activists were not allowed to participate, whichprovoked a boycott of solidarity of Cyril James at his 73 year-old. From Brazil, Abdiasdo Nascimento participated, as he was in a volunteer exile in USA. Among theparticipants of the meeting in Dar-es-Salaam, the only remnant of the Congress of 1945was the Ghanaian Joe Emmanuel Appiah, father of the philosopher Kwame Appiah. Hisfriend and future rival Nkrumah, the principal African face of Pan-Africanism, died twoyears before. At the time of the congress of Dar-es-Salaam, Nyerere, the Baba wa Taifa(Father of the Nation), leader of independence and first Tanzanian president, completedhis tenth year in power where he would persist for more 11 years. Tanzania knew aregime of only one party during its first three decades of existence. In Ghana, Nkrumahgoverned as a dictator, manipulating fraudulent elections until 1960 when heproclaimed as perpetual president, instituted a one-party regime and arrested theobjectors. Joe Appiah was arrested twice before the military coup that removed thedictator from the power. As Nkrumah, the main leaders of the V Pan-African Congress implanteddictators of single parties. Kenyatta presided Kenya until his death in 1978 when thechief of Estate was transferred to his ally Daniel Arap Moi. In Malawi, Hastings Bandawas declared perpetual president soon after the independence. He mounted a policeEstate, robbed without stopping the public treasure and meticulously created a systemdevoted to the cult of his personality. Banda and Kenyatta aligned their countries to the Western powers but their Pan-Africanist colleagues preferred to cooperate with Moscow and preached theimplantation of the so-called African Socialism. The system in slightly differentversions from the ones of Nyerere and Kaunda was an ideological project with blurredborders that interpreted socialism according to the supposed African canticle ofcommunal distribution of richness. Nkrumah at his side rejected the adjective Africancriticizing the notion of an African Golden Age pre-colonial and stressed, provoking,that „before colonization, diffused in Africa only after the XIX century, the Africanswere inclined to sell, in general for no more than thirty pieces of silver, the companionsof tribe and even members of the same extended family and clan‟. However, above thedivergences, everybody saw in the term socialism a justification for the imposition ofsingle party systems. And since each one needed to confer legitimacy of their personalpower, the African socialisms received diverse national labels: the „consciousness‟ ofGhana, the Ujamaa of Tanzania, the humanism of Zambia. Foremost, there is the Negritude of Senghor. The introduction of an anthology ofblack and Malagasy poetry organized by the future president of Senegal and publishedin 1948 is a text of Jean-Paul Sartre entitled „Black Orpheus‟. In that text, thephilosopher defined the movement as an anti-racism racism that would work as an
  • 182. instrument for the abolition of racial differences. In the intellectual plan, the essentialistconcept of negritude derives in direct line from the notion of race and connects to theromantic thinking: it is not casual that Senghor mentioned something as the blackemotion. In the political plan, the ideology of Negritude served not only to legitimatethe semi-authoritative Senegalese regime but also, far away from Africa, the brutalHaitian dictatorship of François Duvalier, the Papa Doc, that used the witches ofvoodoo and the poor of the rural areas in his campaign against the mulatto elite. In the post-colonial Africa, the Estates experienced a destructive politicalparadox. At one side, in the plan of speech, the regimes affirmed tirelessly a supra-national Pan-Africanist compromise, expressed in the constellation of myths about theAfrican history unity and a cultural essence supposedly shared by the peoples of thecontinent. At another side, in practical plan, the political elites were articulated frominfra-national loyalties whose references were based on ethnicity and on clans. A resultof this oscillation between universalism and particularism is the notorious weakness ofthe Estate-nation that lacks a stronger legitimacy, which is frequently compensated byrecurring to violence. The African governments made from the Pan-Africanism an efficient officialnarrative. Through it, they built a mode of telling the history that is an adaptation of theprocedures of the colonizers. In the words of the Mozambican Mia Couto: they placed apositive sign on a beforehand negative sign. It is persistent the idea the pre-colonialAfrica was a timeless universe without conflicts nor wars nor disputes, a paradise madeof only harmonies. This idealized image of the pre-colonial times converts colonialisminto the fountain of every evil, past and future, which has an obvious political function:the single responsible people of our problems must be searched outside. Never inside.The few from inside who are evil is because they are agents from outside. But, since the appearance of AU, Pan-Africanism suffered an irreparablefracture. In Africa, its nature of unifying utopia dissolved into the acid of the denial ofthe myth of race, of the general adhesion to existent sovereignty and frontiers and thepolitical conveniences of the governors. In Diaspora, however, it conserved its oldstuffs, packed nowadays in the new forms of affirmative action of racial preferences.AFRICAN MIX At a morning of the end of 1963 or beginning of 1964, a train that was directedto Salisbury (nowadays Harare) stopped in the hill of the highland of South Rhodesia(nowadays Zimbabwe), waiting for the other train that carried out the inverse way topass back and had also stopped. At the window of the restaurant wagon, the youngBritish man, concentrated in his breakfast of egg, bacon, toasts and orange jelly lookedat the wagon of fourth class of the other train where a crowd of black men, women,
  • 183. children who ate slices of bread also looked back. The European who made a first andmarkedly contact with Africa of the racial segregation was the anthropologist Peter Fry,graduated some months before in Cambridge. He was traveling to assume a job in theBritish university of South Rhodesia and embarked in his train in Beira, coast city of thePortuguese colony of Mozambique. Established in 1890 by the Portuguese in the central Mozambican coast inmangroves and flooded areas of the left margin of the estuary of Pungue River, Beirawas born as a passing point, bond of different worlds. The port linked the Africancolony to Europe and Asia. The railway, implanted soon after, connected Mozambiqueto South Rhodesia, a territory without maritime exits. Eight years before the passage ofFry by the train station, Mia Couto was born in at that time small port center, son ofwhite colonizers. He described the Beira of his childhood as a city governed by the tidesthat filled up the swamps, with their colonial houses surrounded by verandas, offeringweak defenses against the surrounding continent. A place of unviable separation: Africawas there, impossible to get away or to postpone, mulattizing our souls. Mozambique reached independence in 1975 after a long anticolonial war. Itexperienced the favor to Soviets regime of the Front for the Liberation of Mozambique(Frelimo) and a civil war of 15 years, ended in 1992 by a pact between the governmentand the Mozambican National Resistance (Renamo), which had lost the support ofUSA, South Africa and Rhodesia. In the municipal elections of 2008 in Beira theFrelimo candidate, Lourenço Bulha, suffered a campaign of discredit in which his rivalsappealed to people to not vote in a mixed. In a public meeting in the city, the governorof the province of Sofala, Alberto Vaquina, argued that the fact of being a mixed shouldnot be an obstacle to his election. Vaquina mentioned his own marriage to a whitewoman to remind that he has mixed kids. Some time ago, people told me I shouldreduce the number of whites who came to visit me, he concluded ironically. Mia Couto, as other university students of Mozambique, sons of Portuguesecolonizers, took part clandestinely in groups of support to Frelimo during the anti-colonial war. More than three decades after, celebrating the victory of Barack Obama inthe American presidential elections, he wrote an article entitled „And if Obama wasAfrican?‟ In the article, published while the racial controversy of Beira was bubbling,there is the following extract: „let´s be sincere: Obama is black in USA. In Africa he ismulatto. If Obama were African, he would see his race thrown against his own face. It isnot true that the skin color was important to the peoples who want to see competenceand serious work in their leaders. But the predating elites would make a campaignagainst somebody that would be designated as a non-authentic African. The same blackbrother that today is saluted as a new American president would be maligned at home asbeing the representative of the others, of the other race…‟ At the pre-colonial times, the Africans were not blacks, but only members of aclan, a community, a kingdom. Race was imported from Europe and America as adefining concept and Pan-Africanism developed a decisive paper in its rooting in the
  • 184. African politics. Today, it works as an instrument of dispute and exercise of power inthe post-colonial Estates. Mozambique experience deep identity changes in just a few decades. At thetimes of the anti-colonial war, the Mozambican identity predominated in an absolutemanner: Mozambicans were all the ones who engaged in the fight for independence orsympathized with it. In the years 1980, the civil war lightened the fire of the ethnicrivalries and of the resentments of the rural men against the urban inhabitants. TheMozambicans then started to think themselves as Macuas, Macondes, Shonas, blacks,mulattos and whites. After, with the appearance of democracy, the identities becamepart of the political game based on an implicit hierarchy of African purity orauthenticity that is governed by the tonalities of skin color. The theme of race is less strong in Mozambique than in Angola, the other greatPortuguese ex-colony in Africa. At the time of independence in 1975, around 350thousand white colonizers lived in Angola and as the French of Algeria they neverimagined that one day they would abandon the African colony. The Popular Movementof Liberation of Angola (MPLA), one of the three political chains that conducted theliberation war, had its social supports stuck among the mulattos of Luanda thatdominated the Portuguese language and the European concept of nation. His principalleader, Agostinho Neto who was the president of the country had studied in Lisbon andCoimbra. MPLA formed the first independent Angolan government but the NationalUnion for the Total Independence of Angola (Unita), the rival group of basis essentiallyrural and ethnic, deflagrated an intermittent civil war what would only end in 2002. Implanted in the South in the region of Ovimbundu that constitute almost twofifths of the population of the country, the Unita of Jonas Savimbi wrapped in the flagof nativism and conducted xenophobic campaigns against the mulattos of Luanda. In thepresidential campaign of 1993, organized in a short peaceful interval, Savimbi ran withthe slogan „Angola for the Angolans‟ that had an obvious racial sense. The historicalleader of Unita died nine years later in battle field, few weeks before the stop-fire thatopened the doors for pacification. However in 2000 a parliament dominated by MPLAapproved the inscription of a racial label in the Card of Identity of the Angolans. Bylaw, since then, all the citizens are classified in the categories of white, black or mixed. A nominal racial classification existed in the Portuguese Angola but wascancelled by the colonial authorities in the decade of 1960. Its reinvention by the regimeof MPLA was contrary to the direction of the party but represented an instrument tocounterbalance the racial preaching of Unita. After pacification, the traditional positionsinverted: wile a reformed Unita took a hesitant position against the racialist law, theregional directors of MPLA tried campaigns against the supposed privileges of whitesand mulattos. The Angolan sociologist Paulo de Carvalho suggested a diagnosis for the racialclassification in the Identity Cards: „with this, it is pretended to bring to the minoritiesthe consciousness that they are in fact minorities and that they must stand at their own
  • 185. square.‟ Maybe it is more proper to say that it is not exactly the identification ofminorities, but of its creation as an official reality, obeying to the logic of politicalfragmentation of the society. In the capital, Luanda, based on the Identity Cards it hasbeen slowly built an informal politics of racial quotes in hiring employees to theprincipal Angolan and foreign companies. In the secondary cities, the medium layers ofMPLA press the government in the direction of establishing compulsory quotes in thelabor market. The new Angolan racism advances underground without declaring its name. In2006 the participation of Miss Universe of Stiviandra Oliveira, Miss Angola, seemed tobe cancelled by the commission of her country under the argument that the beautifulyoung lady was too clear for the taste of the black majority. Evidently, the commissiondenied that the prohibition had racial motives. Anyway, the place was transferred toIsmenia Junior, Miss Cabinda and second place in the contest of Angola, with a darkerskin.Black Economic Empowerment The census of South Africa did not change substantially with the end of theapartheid regime in 1994. They continued to use the racial classification elaborated bythe British colonial administration and consolidated by the Afrikaners. However, theycreated new racial labels adapted to the reality of the post-apartheid. The census of 2001divided the population into whites (9.6%) and blacks (90.4%), subdividing the blacksinto the categories of Indians (2.5%), colored (8.9%) and Africans (79%). This last label seems strange since all the population, independently of the skincolor, is obviously African. But it makes sense under the perspective of the Pan-Africanism that is based on the notion of equivalence between Africanity and blackrace. The category of blacks means only non-whites, serving to mark a polarity betweenthe smashing majority and the minority that conducted the country during apartheid.The subcategory Africans has a strictly racial connotation, evoking purity and nativism. After the inauguration of the first government of the African National Congress(ANC) it was drawn an ambitious program of affirmative action not in favor of aminority as prescribed by the model, but of a majority of blacks. Initially, theyestablished goals of racial equilibrium at the universities, applied to each departmentand including the staff of lecturers, students and employees. Later, the process, namedas transformation, changed focus, concentrating its first efforts in the labor market andin the business sphere. Under the title of Black Economic Empowerment (BEE), it wascompleted in 2007 a vast legislation destined to construct a black economic elite.
  • 186. The Constitution of 1996 in its fundamental provisions consecrated the values ofnon-racialism. However, it established the concepts of fair discrimination and unfairdiscrimination. The 9th article is part of the Bill of Rights and prohibits the unfair racialdiscrimination but leaves open the way for a fair discrimination. It is this juridicalcolumn evoked by the governors to conduct BEE. The data, however, evidence that thenotion of justice in the South African case only wraps a policy of favoring a new blackeconomic elite whose interests are the same of the political interests of ANC. BEE has sections devoted to the employment of blacks in the private labormarket and in public administration. However, its inspiration is found in the blackcapitalism of Richard Nixon and its main goal is to promote a generalized changing inthe action control of the companies. Essentially, companies of white owners wereencouraged to sell preference actions to non-white businessmen. In thesis, it was avolunteer process and the new partners would pay the market values for the actions. Inpractice, the great national companies that don‟t engage in the program are excludedfrom public contests and due to the effectively compulsory aspect of the ownershipchanges the new partners acquire the actions for a fraction of its value. The government defined the goal of transferring one quarter of the money of thegreat companies to the property of non-whites until 2014. In parallel, it fixed theobjective that blacks occupied at least 40% of the executive jobs in the total of thecompanies. The action transference began before the passage of the whole of legalcodes that regulated it, by initiatives of the self companies. In 2003, when the programstarted, it reached 5.7 billion dollars and jumped to 8.6 billions in 2006, in about 250transactions. Under the influx of BEE, black elite of businessmen started to appearassociated to the great companies. Below them it also appeared a rising non-whitemedium class. The buppies (black up and coming professionals), a pejorative expressionthat got diffusive in the country were only 322 tousand, less than 1% of the black SouthAfrican population in 2006 according to estimations of the sociologist LawrenceSchlemmer. In the same year, 57% of the South Africans lived below the national lineof poverty and more than one quarter experienced open unemployed. The emergence of new non-white faces in high executive jobs of the businessworld and in the most elevated area of public functionalism carried out at the same timewith the maintenance of the social abysm that marks South Africa. From 1995 to 2000,the medium income of the African families suffered a reduction of 19% and the nationalinequality of income got higher. After that, throughout a long cycle of strongdevelopment pulled up the high prices of minerals in the world market, the mediumincome raised but the indexes of inequality continued to enhance and the fraction of thepeople below the poverty line didn´t change. The apartheid regime sculpted something as a capitalism of Estate. The greatSouth African companies were surrounded by protections against concurrence and as acounterbalance they ensured a stable and preference labor market to the Afrikaners. Theblack capitalism in South Africa retains a crucial trace of the apartheid model: the
  • 187. network that connects the economical elite to the political elite. ANC beforehandcontrolled by syndicates and directors of social movements, nowadays hosts powerfulinvestors moving in the hierarchy of BEE. The trajectory of Tokyo Sexwale, from theresistance to apartheid to the world of business, serves as a metaphor of the blackcapitalism. Sexwale was born in Soweto and entered to the Movement of BlackConsciousness at the end of the decade of 1960, still in his adolescence. Few years later,he changed the organization of Steve Biko to the armed forces of ANC and in 1975 heexiled in USSR to receive military training. In 1976, back to South Africa, he wasarrested and sentenced to 18 years in the prison of maximal security of Robben Island,where Nelson Mandela met his penalty. With the end of apartheid, he was elected asprime minister of the province of Gauteng that includes Johannesburg and its capital,Pretoria. Mandela was the president until 1999. Two years before the end of his mandate,Sexwale was present on a list of only three figures quoted to succeed the historicalleader. When the summit of ANC pended towards the direction of the vice-presidentThabo Mbeki, he and the third candidate, Cyril Ramaphosa, ex-president of theConstitutional Assembly, went to the business universe. Sexwale founded a corporationwith activities in the sectors of mining, finances, health and realty. His companies gotconcessions for exploring diamonds and petroleum in many African countries and inRussia. In South Africa, his conglomerate of exploitation of diamonds is only smallerthan De Beers and JFPI. Besides, he has positions in the directory or the council ofother industrial and mining groups. Sexwale, Ramaphosa and many other members of the leadership of ANC madesystematic use of BEE to climb with extraordinary rapidity the degree of the ladders ofthe business world. In September 2006 Sexwale traveled to London, together with fourwhite businessmen to speak in an event organized by South African expatriated lawyers.According to his testimony in the airport of Heathrow, he was selected for racial reasonsfor a safety inspection, something that had never happened before. After, in theconference, he defended BEE, arguing that the program was not destined to simplycreate the Tokyo Sexwales of the world, but, foremost, to create jobs and qualify theblacks. The opinion of Sexwale has not many followers outside the partially superposedcircles of the economic and political elites. Zwelinzima Vavi, the general-secretary ofthe Congress of the South African syndicates that was aligned to ANC declared that theBlack Economic Empowerment is part of a political orientation each time more distantform the interests of the poor and the working classes. The Archbishop Desmond Tutu,a mythical figure of the fights against apartheid, provoked the ire of the president Mbekibecause he classified the program as something that benefits only small elite. When he was invested as the President in 10th May 1994, Mandela pronouncedan uncommonly brief speech, but plentiful of political meanings. He knew that the eyes
  • 188. of the world were focusing his country so he defined the end of apartheid as a conquestof all mankind, as a common victory for justice, peace and human dignity. Heconfirmed the principles of democracy and of the non-racialism. Famously, he definedSouth Africa as the rainbow nation. The vision of Mandela was not completely lost butsuffers a continuous questioning from directing elite that tries to compensate by meansof the racial letter its failure in reducing poverty and creating a less unequal country. The tension between the two conceptions of the nation is manifested in heavydisputes in the area of sports politics. The commemorations of the South Africantriumph in the World Cup of Rugby in 2007 were blurred by a controversy about theracial composition of the selection of the country, which had only two dark players andthey were only colored. Parliamentarians of ANC criticized the lack of initiatives oftransformation of the selected group, which caused the dismissal of the coach JakeWhite. Butana Komphela, president of the Parliament Sports Committee, pronouncedbefore the games for urgent policies to integrate more „Africans‟ to the team and evensuggested to cancel the passports of the players if his proposal was not adopted. Theminister of Sports also lamented the small participation of „Africans‟ but was not inaccordance with extreme ideas and after the triumph the promised not to impose racialquotes to the selection. Komphela continued his campaign at the vespers of the Olympic games of 2008.One of his declarations accused the South African Olympic Committee on being full ofwhites and Indians who didn´t understand the transformation and lacked vision. He alsostarted a sour confrontation to Moss Mashishi, the president of the Committee. Mashishiclassified the accusation as racist and received manifestations of solidarity from almostall the sportsmen of the country. Komphela, however, had got the support of thedeputies of ANC who form a broad majority in the parliament. Blackness became a commercial value in the rainbow nation. But who exactly isblack? In 2000, the Chinese Association of South Africa, which represents about 200thousand citizens, presented to the Supreme Court of Pretoria a claim for that the SouthAfricans of Chinese origin started to be officially classified as black. The argument wasthat the members of the community were classified as colored and were discriminatedduring the apartheid regime, but continued to suffer discrimination in the processes ofpromotion in the companies and in business contracts with the Black EconomicEmpowerment because now they were considered white. After eight years of judicialbattle, the tribune accepted the arguments and decided that the Chinese ethnics are blackfor all the legal effects.
  • 189. Seals of authenticity Mia Couto wrote: „if Obama were African, he would not even be eligible ingreat part of the countries because the elites in the power invented restrictive laws thatclosed the doors of the presidency to sons of foreigners and descendants fromimmigrants. The Zambian nationalist Kenneth Kaunda is being questioned in his owncountry because he is son of Malawians. Conveniently, they „discovered‟ that the manwho conducted Zambia to independence and governed the country for more than 25years was, in fact, son of Malawians and during all this time he had governed illegally.Arrested due to false coup intentions, our Kenneth Kaunda (who gives name to one ofthe noblest avenues of Maputo) will be interdicted of carrying out politics hence theregime will be free from an objector.‟ In the truth, David, father of the first Zambian president, was not born in Malawi(that was simply inexistent) but in the British colony of Nyasaland in a period whenZambia also didn´t exist, except under the form of two British territories that would bereunited in the North Rhodesia, where Kenneth Kaunda was born. Kaunda governed as an autocrat, but voluntarily he organized multi-partyelections in 1991. Beaten, he gave the power to the oppositionist syndicate leaderFrederick Chiluba. Under Chiluba, the constitution was emended, prohibiting sons offoreign citizens to dispute presidency. The amendment had a precise destiny: to impedethat Kaunda disputed the elections of 1996. The ex-president declared that he wouldretire from the politic life but three years later the tribunal of Ndola, the second mostcity of Zambia, declared him as stateless. In the end, Kalunda recurred to the SupremeCourt and rejoined his citizenship. The Zambian case expresses the identity complex dilemmas that torment thepost-colonial Estates of Africa. Since the independences, the political game in theAfrican countries is a prey of the trap formed by three distinct levels of authenticity: thePan-Africanism, the national and the ethnics. Each one of these levels has its utility indiverse circumstances but the proportional value of them changed along time. The Pan-African seal of authenticity served to conduct the fights ofindependence against the colonial powers. It expressed the polarity between us andthem as an opposition between Africa and Europe. The myth of an original Africanpurity and the racial narrative of the saga of the slave traffic worked as fountains of asolidarity among the different anti-colonial movements. In each one of the Africanterritories, the foreigner was the European colonizer who represented the oppression ofa far away metropolis. The unity of the leaderships and political drafts involved in thefights for independence was organized around the common opposition to the Europeans. After the independences, Africanness served to other finalities, especially theone of giving legitimacy to authoritative governments, most of the time extremely
  • 190. corrupted and that could justify their failures invoking the colonial inheritance and theslave traffic. The reference to the European went off from any effective fight forsovereignty but continued to present relevant political papers. However, theconsolidation of the new Estates needed the mobilization for a seal of authenticity lessgeneric: the national identity. The African nations derived from decolonization had no roots in a properly saidAfrican tradition. Although all nations are deeply in fact only imagined communities, itwas not easy to create national histories of countries such as Nigeria, Kenya, Congo,Zambia, Tanzania, Malawi and many others that were in fact resulted from thegeopolitics of the European powers. But since OAU proclaimed the impalpability of thefrontiers inherited from the colonial era, it was indispensable to create national identitiesthat worked as support for the apparatus of Estate and to the armed forces of the newindependent countries. Because of this, the governors of the initial step emphasizedloyalty to nation and denounced the tribalism and the hold to the traditional authoritiesas anachronisms that retarded the march of progress. The nationalist cycle entered into a declination whose best metaphor is thedestiny of the Zambian Kaunda. In the last decades, the African countries experienced are-invention of the ethnical identities and of the tribalism that are promoted by thepolitical elites. The seal of ethnic authenticity is evoked based on supposed pre-colonialtraditions, but an accurate examination of these narratives evidences that the ethnicitiesand the tribes are, most of the time, references established exactly by the colonialadministrations. The ethnic letter works in a political game marked by nativism. During thecolonial era, the administrations traced a distinctive line between the natives on one sideand the vassal races on the other, to whom it was conceded some limited privileges. Thevassal races, interpreted as more evolved migrants who got established before theEuropeans, included groups such as the Indians and the colored of South Africa, theArabs of Zanzibar and the Tutsis of Rwanda and Burundi. The actual nativism re-takesthose distinctions to articulate an opposition between the natives and the foreigners. Butnow, the first would be the legitimate Africans with rights derived from their ancestryfrom which the seconds would lack. The nativism is not restricted to movements that search to define broader rightsfor the African majority in detriment of the old vassal races. It is manifested also underthe form of vindication of privileges to the majority ethnic groups in each region. In thismodality, which is the most diffused, the foreigners as the members of regional ethnicminorities, even if they in reality were established since many times ago in the placeswhere they live. The operation of the distinctions is done by means of the census, whichretake and consolidate ethnic classifications created by the colonial administrations.Kenya illustrates this tendency to turn official ethnicity in the political life. The demographic and political nucleus of Kenya is correspondent to the centraltablelands of the white earths that are fertile volcanic soils inhabited mainly by the
  • 191. ethnicities Kikuyu, Masai, Luo, Kalenjin and Kamba. The North and the East are semi-arid domains exploited by cattle breeders. In the thin coastal border, the MuslimSwahilis are predominant. The British colonization was concentrated in the denselypeopled white lands, at the Rift valley, dividing into great farms of diverse agricultureand creation of cattle and vast plantations of coffee, tea and sisal. In general, theAfricans were expulsed from the lands they cultivated and transferred to tribal reserveswith statute of ethnic territories. In this process of occupying the territory, rigidadministrative divisions appeared between populations of Bantu languages that had along history of exchanges. The Rebellion Mau Mau, first step towards independence, exploded in 1952 as afruit of the modernization of the commercial agriculture. The colonizers expanded hisplantations over areas cultivated by Kikuyus and Luos, transforming them into landlessproletarians. The rebels went back against the colonial government but also against theethnical chiefs invented by the British. The Kikuyus, the biggest ethnicity of about onefifth of the population, formed the basis of the movement of four years and suffered theconsequences of the British repression that left 10 thousand deaths and arrested intoconcentrating fields 80 thousand suspects. The syndicate leader Jomo Kenyatta wasarrested and condemned under the accusation of directing the rebellion, although inreality he didn´t take part in the Mau Mau Society. In the conclusion of the judgment,the British judge didn´t avoid the following racist words: „you extracted the mostcomplete advantage of power and influence that you have over your people and over theprimitive instincts that you know lay underneath their character…‟ Under the British, the Kenyan census consecrated a dense system of ethnicalclassification of the natives that served to determine the pertinence of each one to thedifferent tribal reserves. After independence ethnicity infiltrated in the political game,converting into fountains of endless blackmails of the tribal elites searching for jobs inthe administration and public sinecures. In the government of the Kikuyu Kenyatta whois inscribed in the nationalist circle, the ethnic letter developed secondary papers, butemerged with violence in 1969 when the Luo Tom Mboya was murdered, probablesuccessor of the president, and Luo crowds promoted riots in Nairobi. The KalenjinDaniel Arap Moi, allied and successor of Kenyatta, tighten the screws of the dictatorregime and started to use ethnical divisions in his own support. The ethnic crises went bigger with the reforms promoted after the end of theCold War. In the first multiparty elections in 1992 Arap Moi was triumphant exploringthe fear of political domain of Kikuyus. In the areas inhabited with the majority ofKalejins in the Rift Valley, the dictator incendiated ethnic fires throwing the nativesagainst the foreigners, especially the Kikuyus. Seven years later, when his regimeflunked, the census abolished the ethnic classifications and it was promised that nodistinctions would be made among the Kenyan citizens. Since this time, the initiative iscontested by multiculturalist international organizations. Among them, it is detached theMinority Rights Group that makes campaigns for the reborn of the ethnicclassifications. Financed among other by (obviously) Ford Foundation, the British NGO
  • 192. formulated a complete ethnic picture of the country, visibly inspired in the scientificethnography of the colonizers. Kenya is not only very poor but also extremely unequal. The agrarian reform ofKenyatta converted him into one of the biggest land owner of the country withoutchanging the destiny of the immense majority of the landless rural workers. With ArapMoi, prosper medium classes continued to rise in small numbers and have benefitsunimaginable to the common Kenyans. A report of UN of 2004 registered that morethan two fifths of the national income were concentrated in the 10% of riches while the10% more poor got less than one cent of the richness. In the government of coalitionconstituted in 2002 after the end of the dictatorship, economy ruptured a long torpor butthe growth benefited foremost the medium class and the social inequality enhanced. The coalition was dissolved two years before the elections of December 2007,deflagrating the fight between the president Mwai Kibaki, a Kikuyu and his ex-ministerRaila Odinga, a Luo. Visiting the homeland of his father, the at that time senator Obamapronounced a speech in the University of Nairobi in which he claimed people to vote inproposals, not in ethnicities and made an alert: „It is needed to end with the tribalpolicies based on ethnicity. They are sustained over the bankrupt ideas that the goal ofpolitics or business is to deviate as much as possible of the cake to a clan, a tribe or agroup, instead of the public interest‟. But at that time, the old allies were alreadyinvoking their ancestries and ethnical identities, reactivating sleepy political speechessince the times of Arap Moi. Odinga used statistics prepared by the multiculturalist NGOs to kick on the oldkey of the economic predominance of Kikuyus, accusing Kibaki to benefit his ownethnicity by means of an unfair tax system. The president, at his side, evidenced theweakness of the criticisms of the tributes charged from the different regions and calledon the Kibuyus to defend from Luos. Barrack Muluka, columnist of the journalStandard of Nairobi, worked as a marked broadcaster of the thesis that the governmentpromoted tributary privileges. However, he identified the name of the game that was incourse: „it is ethnicity, stupid!‟ Nowadays, the ethnic poisoning of politics does not throw away false statisticartifacts. By geographic and historic reasons, the inhabitants of the Kenyan centraltablelands have an income greater than the rest of the population. The Kikuyus form themost numerous ethnic group in this richest region, which gives change for all kinds ofstatistical manipulation. Essentially, the argument of the economical predominance ofthe Kikuyus hides the inequalities of income among the social classes of the countrythat are also manifested in the abysm between the poor and the rich Kikuyus. But itgives to the Kenyan politic elite the opportunity of keeping in power and conserving asystem of social exclusion whose roots remind to the colonial era. The president won the elections using evident frauds. In the two followingmonths, ethnic militias controlled by the rival political chiefs murdered almost twothousand Kenyans and violence left 300 thousand internal refugees. The crisis was
  • 193. stopped by a pact: Kibaki persisted on the presidency and Odinga occupied the positionof prime-minister of a new government of coalition.We had to teach how to hate The Government College Umuhaia was among the most prestigious institutionsof education of the colonial Nigeria. Its mission was to educate the future Nigerian eliteand its model was the British public schools. After crossing its doors the teenagers leftoutside their multiple mother tongues and used only English. In the immediate post-war,the student Chinua Achebe who would become a very famous African writer, dared touse the Igbo language to ask a friend that he passed him the bowl of soup. The act gavehim his first school punishment in the Government College, but didn´t impede him tobecome an excellent student and an avid reader of the Western classic masterpieces ofliterature. Achebe grew as an Igbo, a British vassal and a Christian in a country inventedby the colonial power. At the end of the XIX century, the European powers draw in the maps thecolonial political geography of Africa. Some frontiers were drawn based on parallelsand meridians but in general it was given preference to the natural accidents, especiallydivisors of waters. This way, it was ensured the integral control of the mouth of therivers and of the hydric networks that served as axis of transport toward inland. Nigeriaappeared according this mold: the British got possession from the coast line thatcomprehends the large delta of the Niger River and used the watershed of Niger-Benue,configured as a Y, to implant the colonial administration on the domains of forests andsavannahs from inland. The British delimitated Nigeria as constituted by an extensive collection ofpeoples. They were about 250 linguistic groups, apart from communities of Saros(emigrated from Serra Leon) and Amaros (ex-slaves from Brazil). However, theNigerian political history gravitates around the three major ethnic groups: the Hausa-Fulani of the semiarid uplands of North (30% of the population), the Yoruba of the rightmargin of Niger River (21% of the population) and the Igbo of the left margin of Nigerand the inland portion of the delta of the Niger, in the Southeast (18%). The pre-colonial period saw the powerful Empire of Oyo to rise in the Yorubacoastal region that developed terrible techniques of war with horses and gave slaveseither for the Sub-Sahara and the transatlantic traffic. The fragmented Igbo communitiesfrom inland, which had never constituted a central Estate, were frequent preys of themilitary offensives of Oyo. Olaudah Equiano, the black abolitionist of London, wasamong the innumerable Igbo slaves harvested in the hunting net of the transatlantictraffic.
  • 194. At the moment of extension of the British power over all Nigeria, the FulaniMuslims completed a jihad of four centuries, imposing themselves over the Hausa andconverting them into Islamism. With the impact of protestant and Catholic missionaries,the Igbo converted as Christians soon in the first decade of colonization. The Yorubawere split between Islam and Christianity. Beside the two greatest foreign religions, thetraditional cults continued to be practiced. The logic of the system of indirect government applied by the British required aformation of native elite capable to supply the demands of the colonial administration.The British schools multiplied in the South, but not in the North due to thepredominance of the traditional Koran schools. In 1912, about 35 thousand studentscarried out the British primary school in the Southern Nigeria, against less than onethousand in the Northern portion of the Hausa-Fulani, where more than half of thepopulation lived. Soon the British formally unified his Nigerian territories, an act thatwould be named in the independent Nigeria as the „mistake of 1914‟.The discrepancies tended to augment with time in all school levels. As a consequence, itwas created elite of Igbo and Yoruba employees. The Christian native employeeseducated according British values, occupied administrative jobs in all the colony,including the North where they were obligated but the traditional Muslim chiefs to livein segregated communities. The ethnic frontiers diluted in geography, but deposited inconsciences. The first Nigerian University was inaugurated by the British in 1948. Theinstitution that would become the University of Ibadan received in its pioneer schoolclass the student Achebe approved with the highest notes. None of his colleagues wasHausa or Fulani. Ten years later at the vespers of independence, students originated inthe North represented only 9% of the student body of the University of Ibadan.Predictably, Yoruba and Igbo dominated the liberal professions, the qualified jobs andthe military offices. It was never developed a genuine Nigerian nationalism. Instead, the policy in thecolonial Nigeria oscillated between the poles of the Pan-African universalism and theethnic particularism. Pan-Africanism influenced Igbo intellectuals such as BenjaminAzikiwe and Jaja Wachuku and Ioruba ones such as Obafemi Awolowo but had noimpact in the North. The political organizations of the post-war period representedethnic and regional interests. Azikiwe and Wachuku leaded the National Council ofNigerian Citizenz, an Igbo party. Awolowo and Samuel Akintola founded as acounterbalance the Group of Action, a Yoruba party. In the Hausa-Fulani region, withthe accordance of the emirs, it appeared the North Peoples Congress, directed by themilitary chief Ahmadu Bello. NPC was based on a defensive platform of protection ofthe traditional Muslim institutions and of the regional integrity of the territory. Independence was not derived from a fighting of the Nigerian against thecolonial administration but from pacts and conflicts that involved the great parties andalso organizations that spoke in the name of the minority ethnic groups in their
  • 195. respective regions. The British mediated the long process, promulgating threeconstitutions from 1946 to 1954. Those colonial constitutions amplified the politicalparticipation of the Nigerians and sketched models of equilibrium among the principlesof federal unity and autonomy of the regions. But to attend to the demands of the North,it was needed to postpone the independence to 1960 and to promote a newconstitutional revision. The process resulted in a Federal Constitution and threeRegional Constitutions, for the North, the West and the East. In the first general elections of the new Estate, NPC conquered 142 seats in aChamber of 312 seats and formed a coalition of government with NCNC. The NorthernMuslim elite knew that for geographic reasons they would develop a predominantpolitical paper but also due to historic reasons the administrative apparatus tended to befilled with Yoruba and Igbo. So, to protect their interests, they imposed since thebeginning mechanisms of ethnic reserves in the public jobs. The ethnic divisionsworsened after the British left the country. A leader of the North admitted later the pricepaid in order to get support from the Muslim population for the policies of ethnicpreferences: „We had to teach the people to hate the Southerners, to see them as personswho expropriated their rights‟. The preferences were diffused soon to the employmentin the private companies established in the North of the country. The ethnic poisoning of the Nigerian politics culminated in the coups of Estateand successive riots that crossed the year o 1966, reaching an apex with a bloodypogrom against Igbo militaries and tradesmen inhabiting the Hausa-Fulani region. Themassive getaway of Igbo to the South deflagrated a separatist movement. In May 1967,Emeka Ojukwo, the military commander of the Eastern region declared theindependence of Biafra, inhabited essentially by Igbo and named with the name of thebay that extended to South since de delta of Niger. The separatist republic included thearea of the delta where soon before vast reservoirs of petroleum were discovered andreceived the recognition of a handful of nations and the support of Catholicphilanthropic organizations, but faced a war lost before it even started. Achebe involved himself of body and soul in the cause of Biafra, serving asambassador of the separatist republic and traveling to many countries searching forsupports that didn´t turn concrete. In the years of the civil war, he ruptured with the poetand friend of long time John Pepper Clark-Bekederemo, from a secondary ethnicity ofthe Nigerian West that were aligned to the Yoruba. Almost at the same time, hiscontemporary Wole Soyinka, the most detached Yoruba writer was arrested andconfined in a solitary jail to having met authorities of Biafra in a trial to open peacenegotiations. Biafra existed for less than three years. A military federal government, based onan alliance between the Hausa-Fulani and the Yoruba and having open support fromUnited Kingdom and USSR, imposed an asphyxiant blockage to the Igbo republic. Themilitary operations ruptured the defenses of Biafra and reduced its territory to a smallland inside. As fruit of the war and a horrendous crisis of starvation, more than one
  • 196. million Igbo died. The final kick was done by the troops of the Youruba OlusegunObasanjo who would become the principal figure of the subsequent military regime.The civil war ended in the beginning of 1970 with the exile of Ojukwo and thereincorporation of the region. An incomplete national reconciliation and an incomplete reconstruction of theIgbo region were carried out. In 1979 a new Constitution, inspired in the FederalConstitution of USA, extinguished the British parliamentary model and opened the wayto multiple party elections. The constitutional text amplified the powers of the centralgovernment and redrew the federation, substituting three or four regions of theconstitutions of 1960 and 1963 by 19 states. It was a trial to reduce the ethnic factor,diluting the powers of the regional elites. However, the parties continued to operatebased on old ethnic lines and the patterns of the votes evidenced the fragilities of thereinvented federation. Democracy lasted only five years, giving place to a cycle marked by coups ofEstate and military regimes each more time aggressive and corrupt. This cycle endedwith the end of the Northern dictator Sani Abacha in 1998 and the election of the ex-dictator Obasanjo in the following year. The general left the place he occupied in thecouncil of curators of Ford Foundation to assume the presidency of the country andsummoned an official commission to write one more constitution. The not confusablemark of multiculturalism is impressed in the new constitutional text. The constitution of 1999 amplified the number of states to 36, continuing theefforts initiated two decades before. But the password that singularizes it is found in theexpression „federal character‟, repeated nothing less than 15 times. The 14 th articleclarifies that the composition of the government of the federation and of all the agenciesand the conduction of the business must be handled in order to reflect the federalstructure of Nigeria and the necessity of promoting the national unity and the nationalloyalty. For an absolute clarity of the aim of this provision, the sentence continuesaffirming that it must be not allowed the predominance of persons of a few states or afew ethnic groups or of other kind of government in any of the agencies. The same principle is applied to the state governments and local instances, to thebody of officials of the Armed Forces and to the public companies. In the constitutionaltext, it is established a Commission of the Federal Character that in its competencesmust be not subjected to direction or control of no other authority or person. Thepowerful commission is constituted by a president and a representative of each state, allselected the President of the Republic and confirmed by the Senate. Their attributionsare to present to the Parliament an equality formula to distribution of the jobs in alllevels and surveillance of the system of nominating, promotions and contracts based onthe ethnic criteria. Thomas Sowell observes that the principle of ethnic equilibrium orders theaccess to the matters of interest and preoccupation of the more fortunate members of thevarious ethnic groups, which means, precisely the persons who went away from the
  • 197. traditional modes of life and entered in the modern sectors of society and economy. TheCommission of the Federal Character is the focusing point of a permanent disputeamong the ethnic elites to capture influent positions. Its functions have nothing to dowith the practical life and the most important interests of the immense majority of theNigerians who serve simply as demographic pretext for the vindications of the elites. In Nigeria of the federal character the merit was virtually abolished as adistinctive criteria giving place to what Achebe named as a cult to mediocrity.According to him, in his country it would be difficult to identify at least an importantjob that is occupied by the most competent person they have. In the circles that can aimposts of prestige and well paid jobs, everything depends on the ethnicity of each one, forthe good and for the bad. But a particular trace of the Nigerian system of affirmative action is that itbenefits, essentially, the ethnic majorities of each region. As the principle of ethnicequilibrium is submitted to the interpretation of the state authorities that haveadministrative and political autonomy, the quotes and numeric goals are allocated sucha way to give privileges to the dominant group. The mechanisms of favoring generatetireless claims from all sides that annihilate ones to the others when they reach theCommission of the Federal Character. Census is everywhere a theme full of political senses. But the Nigerian ethnicnativism left this norm to its most radical consequences. The first post-colonial censusin the middle of 1962 was cancelled due to accusations of fraud in many areas. In thefollowing years, the census takers counted a total population of 55.6 million people,something clearly exaggerated, since it would have needed an annual growth of 5.8% inthe decade since the last colonial census. To practical effects, to count Nigerians is toregister the demographic weigh of each ethnicity, with all the stimulations to fraud itimplies. There has never had a census without contests in the half century of existence ofNigeria as an independent Estate. The census of 1973 that followed the war of Biafra waalso annulled. A new census was carried out only in 1991 and the next one, in 2006.Contests followed the divulgation of the results of both, coming from the ethnic groupsof the South. In the last one, by pressures of the Muslim leaders, they cancelledquestions about ethnicity and religion. By means of this maneuver, the Hausa-Fulanielite, probably benefited from previous census, was able to avoid a feared reduction ofits privileges. The mistake of 1914 (if it really should be considered a mistake in fact) definedthe frontiers of a political entity named Nigeria and imposed a common nationality toHausa, Fulani, Yoruba, Igbo and more 250 ethnicities. However, throughout thecolonial and post-colonial periods, instead of a Nigerian nationalism, it took form anofficial and bureaucratic creation of ethnic identities. The political chiefs of the ethnicgroups of the country as well as innumerable intellectuals invoke the areole of ancestorcultures to preserve loyalties to their ethnicity. The truth is that the actual ethnic
  • 198. identities don‟t come from a pre-colonial past, but as products of a succession ofpolitical acts of the British and after, of the Nigerian governors. Achebe wrote: „suddenly one can take science of an identity from which theyhave suffered for a long time without knowing it. For example, the Igbo people: in myregion, historically, they never saw themselves as Igbo. They saw themselves as personsfrom this or that other tribe. In reality, in some places, Igbo was an offensive term.However, after the experience of the war of Biafra during a period of two years thisbecame a very powerful conscience. However, this had been real all the time. All ofthem spoke the same language called Igbo, even though they didn´t use this identity atall. „This had been real all the time‟. This affirmative makes sense for an Igbonationalist but it is nothing more than an arbitrary calling. In history, the Igbo onlybecame Igbo when this ethnic identity converted into a sign of difference and adistinctive native sign. Similarly, although the Yoruba people had pertained to acentralized Empire and the Hausa-Fulani shared the Muslim faith, ethnicity onlybecame a crucial identity factor when its elites started to dispute the control of acolonial social apparatus. Nativist illusions: Achebe seems to imagine that the tragedy of Biafrarepresented foremost a necessary experience of self-knowledge. But the ethnicalidentities are not something „real all the time‟. They are, in fact, tools in a power gameoutside the interests of the immense majority of the population. Here it is the motive ofits power and permanence.THE THREE SONS OF GAHANGA In an oral tradition of Rwanda, Gahanga figures as the father of the threeancestors of all Rwandese: Gatwa of Tua, Gahutu of Hutus and Gatutsi of Tutsis. Todetermine which of the three sons would deserve his inheritance, Gahanga gave a basketof milk to each one in one night. In the following morning, Gahanga went back andverified the manner his sons behaved in the original night. Gatwa was disqualified andbanished because in his shaky sleep he hit the bottle and lost the milk. Gahutu wasdisinherited and doomed to work to Gatutsi because he was thirsty and drank all themilk. Gatutsi stood awake and vigilant and conserved the milk, being designated as thesuccessor of Gahanga and received as inheritance all the cattle of the country andbecame free from needing to work with the hands. Myths of origin are historic narratives that by means of the selection of eventsand the attribution of relevance to situations and characters turn the past intelligible andplentiful of meanings, encouraging social cohesion. The myth of origin of Rwanda is a
  • 199. particular case because it developed the function to legitimate the supremacy of theTutsis and instead of inspiring solidarities, it inflamed ethnic passions. The clan was thebasic social unity of the pre-colonial Rwanda. Almost all clans included Tua, Hutu andTutsi members – an evidence that these social groups never constituted tribes and evenless ethnicities. There are many oral traditions about the origins of the Rwandese clansbut these narratives were buried by the myth of origin that legitimated the Tutsisupremacy. Eight million years ago, it started the last great tectonic episode in Africa,resulting in three long fractures in the Eastern side of the continent. One of theseepisodes practically separated the Arabic peninsula giving origin to the Red Sea and theGulf of Aden. The other two produced great longitudinal valleys, named as rift valleys.The Eastern rift is extended from the Gulf of Aden to the East of the Victoria Lake. TheWestern rift is extended from the Low Zambezi to the West of the Victoria Lake andincludes the lakes Malawi, Tanganyika and Kivu. Molded by majestic mountains, KivuRiver nourishes the Ruzizi River and separates Rwanda from the Democratic Republicof Congo (formerly Zaire). Rwanda, the country of one thousand hills, is a mountain country of the regionof the Great Lakes with fertile volcanic soils, astonishing beautiful landscape and arelief that conserved it relatively isolated. In the Conference of Berlin of 1884-1885when the European powers deflagrated the run to Africa, Rwanda was conceded toGermany. The first European to step on Rwandese lands was perhaps a German militaryexplorer: count Gustav Adolf von Götzen in 1894. But there was already a centralEstate in the East of Kivu Lake – the kingdom of Banyarwanda since at least the XVcentury. The kingdom of the Banyarwandas was organized around a mwami, sacred kingwhose authority was based on an aristocracy of cattle owners, the Tutsis thatsubordinated the masses of rural men, the Hutus and a minority of maids, the Tuas.Foreigners were forbidden to enter in the domains of the Banyarwandas. All the societywas linked by clan loops and personal dependence that gave some cohesion and isolatedthe region from the networks of slave hunting. Tutsis, Hutus and Tuas occupied theplace of castes in a traditional society where the prestige and richness was the propertyof cattle. A possible parallel is to the system of castes of India. Similarities effectively exist but hide the essential. Among Banyarwandas thethree classes were directly linked to patrimony: Tutsis had cattle, Hutus had cultivationlands, Tuas had nothing. More: the Zebu cows represented the true richness, weresacred and untouchable. The Tutsi aristocracy drank the milk and the blood of the cows.The monarch, descendant from the mythical Kigwe who had come down under to foundthe real clan, had the biggest cattle and the great festivals culminated with a parade ofhis cows. All Banyarwandas spoke the same language. There was social mobility someway in their society of classes. It is registered that in times of disasters and epidemics,
  • 200. Tutsis who lost their cattle became Hutus. Inversely, Hutus ascended the social ladderand became Tutsis when they had the opportunity to get cattle. The myth of originsupported a rule of inequality, but never put into question the common origin of all theBanyarwandas. The Tutsi aristocracy was linked by a network of clan relationships and theykept with the Hutus relations of direct subordination. The rural Hutu gave part of hisharvest to his lord Tutsi and got protection and the Ubuhake, the cession of a cow to hisuse. The social stability was achieved by these networks of dependence and by thehierarchic structure of the classes and was reflected in the prolonged peace inside of thekingdom. When finally the Europeans reached Rwanda, they found and area with elevateddemographic densities with spots in the heights of 1.5 and 1.8 thousand meters, wherethe mild temperatures hinder the tsetse fly, transmitter of the cow disease of the sleepdisease at the same time they favor the cultivation of the fields. Nowadays, as reflect ofits singular social history, Rwanda is the most populated country of Africa, with anaverage density of 390 inhabitants per square kilometer. Von Götzen was able to firm treatises with the chiefs of Tanganyika, Rwandaand Urundi so that the Germans started to indirectly influence the local issues.However, this European power didn´t reveal any further interest in the region and facedwith insufficient troops the tribal wars in different areas of what it would become theGerman Eastern Coast. In 1911 the Germans helped the Tutsis to stop a Hutu rebellionbut in the First War Belgian forces advanced from Congo over the German colony andwith the help of a British offensive from Uganda, they defeated the Germans and theirBanyarwanda allies. After the Great War, by decision of the League of Nations, the German EasternAfrica was divided between Belgians and British. The territory of Rwanda-Urundi gotunder Belgian administration in the quality of government class B. The system ofmandates of the League of Nations was destined to remove sovereignty of the defeatedpowers over their colonies, put them into government of the Allied Powers. The class Amandates in old Ottoman domains previewed a future concession of independence. Thiswas not previewed in the class B mandates such as the German colonies in Africa, butthe mandatory power contracted the obligation of ensuring freedom of consciousnessand religion to the peoples under their administration. After the Second World War, by decision of the Conference of Yalta, Rwanda-Urundi and almost all the other mandates became territories under the administration ofUN. This meant that the administration power – Belgium in this case – acted in thename of UN and compromised to prepare the territory to independence. In the end,under one or other label, Rwanda was subordinated to Belgium from 1916 to 1962.
  • 201. From a myth of origin to another The Belgians administered their mandate with iron hands but as the Germansthey made an alliance with the Tutsis and conserved the structuring traces of theprevious social order. Rwanda should generate profits by the culture of coffee, anexpanding product in the international market. The rural Hutus were then submitted to anew modality of compulsory work in lands they should reserve to the coffee cultivation.The violence routinely employed by the foremen provoked tensions and rebellionsbesides deflagrating a migratory flux of great proportions towards the Britishprotectorate of Uganda. Under the colonial power, the Tutsi class converted into subordinated elite. Alow Tutsi officiality formed the spine of the armed forces of the mandate; the publicjobs not occupied by Europeans were given to Tutsi employees and they gainedprivileged access to superior school. The Belgian Catholic Church devoted tenaciouslyto evangelize the colonial elite. Mwami Yuhi Musinga collaborated with the Germanssince 1896 and aligned to the Belgians but never accepted to convert to Catholicism.Because of this, the administration took him off his position, sending him to exile andsubstituting him by his son Mutara Rudahigwa. The new Mwami converted to Christianity in 1931 adopting a first Christianname and governing as Charles Rudahiga Mutara III. In his trail, a significant parcel ofthe Tutsis adhered to Christianity. Even before the conversion of the king in 1926 thecolonial administration started to distribute ethnical identity cards legally segregatingthe three native Rwandese castes. The property of ten or more cows, purely patrimonialcriteria, defined a person as a Tutsi. In 1933 the ethnic documents became an exigencyof the census. But, at this time, the myth of origin of Rwanda experienced a crucialtransformation. The Physical Anthropology was the arrowhead of the transformation. Under thesign of classical racist theories, the Belgian anthropologists discovered noticeableanatomic differences between Tutsis and Hutus. After detailed measurements, theyconcluded that the firsts were significantly taller than the seconds: the mediumdifference was around 10 cm. The king Mutara III with his 2.06m seemed to be anexample very appropriate of the group. Besides being taller, the Tutsis would be leaner,beautiful, with harmony of facial traces and their aquiline noses would distinguish themfrom the Hutus and approach them to the whites. In reality, Tutsis and Hutus areindistinguishable. But there was no difficulty in finding differences of height when theycompared Tutsis aristocrats and Hutus rural men, considering that only the firsts atemilk and derived products regularly. This finding was amplified and novelized by theracist imagination and inspired the formulation of the Hamitic hypothesis on thediffusion of the Tutsis.
  • 202. In the XVIII century when the first scientific theories on the human racesappeared, it was a convention to divide the African continent in an European Africa (theland of the Nile River) inhabited by groups close to the Europeans an in a „true‟ Africa,separated from the first one by the Sahara desert and by an impassable racial barrier.This idea didn‟t resist to the evidences that the desert was throughout all history a placeof intense and endless exchanges. In the end of the following century, the conventionalknowledge was changing and it was imagined that evolved peoples from the North ofAfrica had established in some areas of the „true‟ Africa where they acted as factors ofprogress. An exhaustive ethnographic description of these evolved peoples – the Hamites-was offered by the British physician and anthropologist Charles Gabriel Seligman whotraveled in Sudan from 1909 to 1912 and from 1921 to 1922 and consolidated his workson the theme in Races of Africa published in 1930. Seligman described them as„pastoral Europeans‟, more intelligent and better warriors than the black cultivatorsfrom the South of Sahara, over whom they imposed from many migratory waves. Inspired by this narrative, the Belgian sages in Rwanda decided that Tutsis couldonly be one of the fruits of the Hamite migrations. In the principal version of the thesis,the Tutsis would be originated in some point of the Horn of Africa, probably Ethiopia.In an alternative version, they would have come from the Nile valley. However, theEthiopian origin was most seductive to the Europeans because it meant that the Tutsishad Christian ancestors. The Rwandese historiography adopted the Hamitic hypothesis withoutabandoning the traditional myth of the Banyarwandas in the ancestral night. Thenarrative of the sage colonizers seemed to the eyes of this historiography as a scientificconfirmation of the insuperable difference between the Tutsis and the other Rwandese.It also offered opportunities for an audacious action of considering Rwanda as anEuropean region in essence. This action was conducted by the Tutsi Alexis Kagame, akey figure in the Rwandese cultural politics. Born in 1912 in an aristocratic Rwandese family, Kagame was baptized in 1928when the Mwami Yuhi Musinga resisted to conversion. He entered to a seminar as wasordered as a priest in 1941. Still in the seminar he had contact with Charles Mutara IIIand started a varied intellectual career of poet, journalist, philosopher and historian.Soon after his ordination he wrote a book in many volumes on the myth of the creationand the history of the world in the oral traditional Rwandese narratives that highlightsmultiple parallels between the Tutsi tradition and the Christian conceptions. But his seminal book, Le Code des Institutions Politiques du Rwanda, publishedin 1952, is an investigation of the political institutions of the pre-colonial Rwandawhere he develops the idea that the Banyarwanda kingdom had a support on asophisticated code of customary laws that limited the powers of the king such as thepre-revolutionary France. Those laws that limited the powers of the king conferred a
  • 203. modern aspect to the Rwandese society and illuminated the ways for a gradual politicalevolution free from traumas or violent ruptures. The Belgians didn´t appreciate the scholar exposition in where it was hidden thesuggestion that the Tutsis could govern Rwanda without external interference and sentKagame to Vatican to continue his studies. The grater of the Rwandese intellectualsbecame a famous theologian, became a member of the black priests, publishedimportant philosophical books and back to Rwanda he was protected from the atrocitiesmade by the Hutus against the Tutsis in the new Hutu regime established in 1959. In theend of his life he figured as one of the most influencing voices of the movement ofAfricanizing of Catholicism that started in the II Vatican Council. Kagame planted on the Rwandese soil the imported tree of the Hamitic origin ofthe Tutsis. The acceptance of this narrative provoked a distortion in the myth of originof Rwanda that acquired the typical colors of the scientific racism. In the pre-colonialmyth the Banyarwandas was separated by the events of the ancestral night, but had acommon origin. In the myth created by the sage colonizers the Tutsis were separatedfrom the other Rwandese by something deeper and essential that is race. The idea that the Tutsis come from the Northern Africa persisted during mostpart of the XX century and was accepted even by consecrated historians such as theBritish Africanist Basil Davidson who reproduced it in his The Lost Cities of Africa, of1959. In this acclaimed book, he cites the merit of the anthropologist Jacques Maquetwhose description of the dominant class of Rwanda is „they don´t do manual works andhave idle time to cultivate the speech, the eloquence, the poetry, the refined manners,the subtle art of irony and to drink honey diluted in water with their friends‟. As aconclusion, Davidson questions if the adequate parallel would be with the position ofthe knights and poets of medieval France. Scientific concepts present an impressive force of inertia. Less than four decadesago, the physical anthropologist Jean Hiernaux, one of the greatest academic authoritieson Africa, produced tables of differences of height between Tutsis and Hutus and basedon archeological and blood studies he draw an alternative to the unbelievable Hamitichistory. Hiernaux proposed that the Tutsis were originated from prolonged migrationsoriginated in Kenya and Tanzania. Hence, although he took an explicit distance fromthe racist vision formulated by the Belgians, he insisted on intepretating the twoprincipal castes of Rwanda under the lights of an ethnic contrast. The recent studies evidenced a few differences between Tutsis and Hutus butthey tend to deny the idea that the Tutsis arrived to Rwanda in the XV century,imposing themselves as elite of conquest over the local rural men. In the field of thedifferences, genetic trials suggest that the prevalence of sickle cell anemia among theHutus is similar to the neighboring regions but among the Tutsis is significantly smaller. This somehow supports the idea of a correlation between the Tutsi and oldmigratory fluxes from malaria-free regions. At the same time, it was shown that 75% of
  • 204. the Tutsi conserve a high ability on digesting lactose, a genetic aspect of populationsthat drank milk for centuries. The tolerance to lactose is present in only 30% of theHutus, a proportion much smaller than the one of the Tutsis but still higher than of someneighboring peoples. A possible explanation of this was the relatively broadmiscegenation and the social mobility between Tutsis and Hutus, something inaccordance to the social patterns of the pre-colonial Rwanda. Anyway, modern genetics seem to clearly avoid both the Hamitic hypothesis andthe thesis of migrations of Hiernaux since Tutsis and Hutus are much closer betweenthem than of populations from the Horn of Africa, valley of Nile, Kenya or Tanzania. Inparallel, the historic investigation never found evidences of a sudden flux of rural menin the XV century as sustained by the Belgian narrative of the conquest of the Tutsis.Evidences suggest that the creation of cattle was disseminated in a longer period in theregion of the Banyarwandas, maybe under the influence of small and continued fluxesof migrants –which means, in a time of diffusion of innovations, not of militaryexpansion of a warrior group. The historic criticism on the colonial narrative was only started with thepublication in 1962 of a book of the Belgian historian and anthropologist Jan Vansinaon the Banyarwandas. Vansina showed that the conceptions, norms, habits and rituals ofthe kingdom controlled by the Tutsis were in great part absorbed by the previous HutuEstates, some of them even survived with autonomy until the organization of theBelgian administration. In his book, it appears a picture of the complex network ofcultural influences carried out between Tutsis and Hutus. Furthermore, later, with thesupport of an even greater documentation of verbal fountains he evidenced that thewords Tutsi and Hutu only got generalized to reflect a social polarity in the final periodof the kingdom of the Banyarwandas: „Hutu and Tutsi are old words with exchangingmeanings. First in Rwanda and after in Burundi Hutu is opposed to Tutsi. Each one ofthe words excludes the other: if one is a Tutsi, they can´t be a Hutu. But be careful: thisevolution appears only after 1800. We discovered traces of this. We know about peoplewho never referred themselves as Hutus and used a name of a place to identify theirorigin. So, gradually, the word Hutu got disseminated in the great rural population todescribe their common social condition‟. But the intervention of Vansina is posterior to the consolidation of the myth oforigin created by the Belgians and adopted as an official truth of history and in thecolonial schools of Rwanda. This substituting myth, pressed in the school books, drawthe frontiers of the nation imagined by generations of Rwandese, Tutsis and Hutus. Itserved to perfection to confer legitimacy of the radical experiment of indirectgovernment conducted by the European power that reserved to the Tutsis the place ofderived colonial elite. However, it was a double-edged sword. According to their logic,Tutsis represented a superior race but also figured as foreigners and invaders. Thiswould have truly tragic consequences.
  • 205. Hutus in power In the post-war, a series of factors destroyed the stability of Rwanda. Under theinflux of the new democratic ideas in fashion in the world, the Belgians introducedpolitical reforms that gave rights to the Hutus. The reforms were not well accepted bythe Tutsis who articulated a Rwandese nationalism of classes. At the same time, thegrowth of population and cattle activated conflicts on the control of the scarce fields thatsuffered quick processes of erosion. In 1949, Mutara III banished the Ubuhake and fiveyears later the promoted a redistribution of lands and cattle, reducing the poverty of theHutu rural men. These initiatives were supported by the Belgians but provokedresentments among the Tutsis. The Belgian public opinion started to influence in the colonial policy and therivalry between Walloons and Flemings infiltrated in the conceptions about the future ofRwanda. The Walloons, French speaking, controlled the Belgian politics and were seenby the Fleming majority, Dutch speaking, as a dominant class. Nowadays, the Walloonsconstitute less than one third of the Belgian population while the Flemings form morethan 60% of the total. Notwithstanding, the industrial economy of Wallonia declinedwhile the Northern region of Flanders got stronger. The Flemings interpreted theRwandese scenario from their personal experience and favored the Hutus as a majoritysubordinated to a Tutsi aristocracy. The year of changing was 1959. In July, as he returned from meetings with themetropolitan government, Mutara III was vaccinated by a Belgian doctor in Bujumbura,capital of the neighbor Burundi and died soon when he was 48 year-old. The event wasread by the Tutsi aristocracy as a murder. His brother Jean-Baptiste Ndahindurwaassumed the throne as Kigeri V. In September, the Tutsi elite founded the NationalRwandese Union, a party that vindicated independence. In November, the Huturevolution started and the new Mwami ran away to Uganda. The insurrection got the form of a bloody rural riot against the Tutsi lords andwas described by the Hutu intellectuals as a French revolution in Africa. The rural menput fire in the properties of the lords and took the cattle. Dozens of thousands of Tutsiswere killed. From a total of about 300 thousand Tutsis, the elite of the country of 2.8million inhabitants, something between 100 and 150 thousand ran away to neighboringcountries. In Uganda a Tutsi army was formed during this Diaspora and they recruitedsoldiers in the fields of refugees scattered in Burundi, Tanzania, Uganda and the East ofZaire. In 1960 UN intervened and a referendum was carried out when the Rwandesevoted for Republic and ended monarchy. Months later, Grégoire Kayibanda, a moderatenationalist and founder of the Party of the Hutu Emancipation Movement (Parmehutu)formed the government that conducted the country to independence. After theretirement of the Belgians in the elections of 1963, Parmehutu won all the seats in the
  • 206. Parliament. It started a new era in the history of Rwanda, marked with a radical andofficial rupture to its past. The Hutu regime declared that the anterior history of thecountry since the consolidation of the Tutsi power in the kingdom of the Banyarwandasconstituted a long age of shadows. This rupture, however, didn´t exclude continuities:the myth of origin created by the Belgians was not abandoned, but reinterpreted. Thealliance with the Catholic Church was kept and they continued to produce ethnicalidentity cards that served to new finalities. The old system of classes with its hierarchy, institutions and rules served as asolid rock, spite being deeply unjust, to the kingdom of the Banyarwandas and to thecolonial Rwanda. The introduction by the Belgians of new rules, a little bit moredemocratic in the post-war provoked fractures in the columns of the society. Afterindependence, with the universal vote, these columns collapsed. The principle ofpolitical equality could never live with the paradigm of the division of the Rwandeseinto opposite castes whose fundaments are inequality. The seeds of the genocide werewatered by such insurmountable contradiction. Kayibanda was among the nine leaders who assigned the Hutu Manifest of 24thMarch 1957 in which they drew the program of Parmehutu to an independent Rwanda.Part of this document said: „we vigorously oppose, at least at this moment, to thesuppression of official and private identity documents of the mentions Muhutu, Mututsiand Mutwa because such suppression could impede statistics to lift up the reality of thefacts‟. Muhutu, Mututsi and Mutwa indicated the singular: one Hutu, one Tutsi, oneTwa. The Hutu leaders prepared for the universal vote and didn´t want anything thatcould shade the existence of a Hutu majority. Tutsi and Hutu only became ethnic designations along the XIX century in theapogee of a pre-colonial Tutsi power. Before that, these words had variable meaningsand sometimes just situational meanings. The Belgians introduced the ethnicclassification in law, consolidating a fixed identity system. The Hutu regime receivedfrom the colonizers a system of nominal identification of the ethnicity of each one of theRwandese. The identity cards existed since three decades ago, since it was not difficultto define who was a Tutsi and who was a Hutu. Under Kayibanda the Tutsis were totally excluded from the military officialityand ethnical quotes were introduced in the universities and high schools. The ethnicalquotes became a national law and extended to public jobs in 1973 with the coup ofEstate that brought the Major Juvenal Habyarimana to power. The law limited to 9% ofthe total amount that could be filled up by Tutsi candidates. In thesis, according to thedata from the census, this was the proportion of Tutsis in the Rwandese population. Theofficial argument emphasized the idea of compensation: it was needed to ensure to theHutus the ways of social ascendance that had been denied for such a long time. The social disparity of Rwanda never stopped to get deeper. In 1963 Tutsi forcesattacked the Northern frontier starting from Burundi, the neighboring country of Tutsigovernment. Two years later, a new attack was contained and in reaction the Hutu
  • 207. Armed Forces slaughtered with kicks of machetes more than 20 thousand Tutsis. Thechronic conflict formed a background to the crescent doctrinaire radicalization of theRwandese government that described the Tutsis as a foreign people and a threatening tothe survivor of the Hutu nation. At this epoch, it started to get disseminated the use ofthe word „cockroaches‟ to refer to the Tutsis. The history of Burundi got split from the Rwandese one in 1959 with the Huturevolution. After that, the brother countries evolved politically in a mirrored way. InBurundi, the Tutsis retained the power and repressed with violence the recurrent Huturebellions while they collaborated with the military efforts of the exiled RwandeseTutsis. In 1972 it started in Burundi a new rebellion, smashed by the massacre ofsomething between 100 and 200 thousand Hutus, which provoked a massive getaway ofrefugees to Rwanda. The influx of something next to one million Hutus worsened theRwandese social crisis that got catastrophic aspects. It was in this environment in thefollowing year that the Minister of Defense Habyarimana leaded a military coup andknocked Kayibanda down. Habyarimana was Hutu such as Kayibanda but has nothing of moderate. Afterthe coup the arrested and murdered by poisoning the closer circle of the deposedpresident, his old friend. Kayibanda and his wife were arrested and three years later diedfrom starvation in the prison. At the same time, Habyarimana formed the NationalRevolutionary Movement for Development, single party of his dictatorship in where allthe Rwandese were automatically inscribed.The gears of the genocide In the two decades of the regime of Habyarimana, the industry of invention ofmemories completed the production of communities of fear and hate. This process wasnot limited to Rwanda but got regional dimensions including Burundi, Uganda and Eastof Zaire. In Uganda in 1981 the warrior Yoweri Museveni deflagrated a war against thedictator Milton Obote recruiting a significant part of his soldiers in the fields ofRwandese refugees. When five years later Museveni took the power it had constituted inUgandese lands a Tutsi army, commanded by experienced officials. This army, theRwandan Patriotic Front started the civil war of Rwanda in 1990, in an offensive by theNorthern frontier that was only stopped due to the help of Zairian troops and twocompanies of French paratroopers to the government of Habyarimana. The Frenchpolicy form Africa in the post-colonial period was organized around the strategy ofpreserving a sphere of French influence in the continent. In the picture of this strategy,the government of Fraçois Miterrand decided to give support to a Hutu Rwanda French-speaking against the Rwandan Front allied of the English-speaking Museveni inUganda.
  • 208. Intrahamwe (Together We´ll Attack), a civil Hutu militia, trained by theRwandese army, appeared as a consequence of this invasion. Habyarimana, his sponsor,feared the fifth-column constituted by the Tutsis who stood in Rwanda and intended toface it by arming his faithful supporters. Additionally, Intrahamwe was destined to scarethe many Hutus who hated the clan dictatorship of Habyarimana with his unmeasuredviolence and corruption. This militia later converted in the instrument of the greatestgenocide of the second half of the XX century. The Rwandan Patriotic Front didn´t took Kigali, the Rwandese capital, in theoffensive of 1990 but it occupied the Northeast of the country. The threateningproximity of the Tutsi army and the living memory of the massacre of Hutus in Burundiinstilled fright not only in the circle of Habyarimana but also in most part of the Hutusof Rwanda. The ideology of the genocide flowered in this environment, developing oldthemes in an extreme and eschatological narrative. In this, once more, the intellectualsdeveloped decisive papers. The genocide ideology in its last form was not born among the Rwandese Hutus,but among the exiled Hutus of Burundi. Remi Gahutu founded of the Party for theLiberation of the Hutu People (Palipehutu), a radical Burundian party organized afterthe massacre of 1972. He formulated this ideology based on recurrent issues. The Tutsiswas originated from the Hamite race, morally depraved, perverse and untrustable. Itshistoric hegemony derived not only from the use of violence but also from craftiness:Hutus were betrayed by malefic offenses such as cows and beautiful women. The wordHutu is a malicious Tutsi invention to erase the unity of the Bantus, fragmenting theminto tribes. Gahutu fixed a crucial theme of the anti-Tutsi speech: the evil paper developedby the Tutsi women in the society of the Banyarwandas. Later, this theme would bedeveloped. The sensuality of the Tutsi women was the original perdition of the Hutus.The Tutsi women no matter their jobs are in support to the Tutsi ethnicity and act asspies among the Hutus. The Hutu wives must tireless survey their husbands avoidingthem to be involved by the diabolic Tutsi hexes. A group of academics of the University of Rwanda in Butare, members of thesame clan Akazu of Habyairmana, formed the nucleus of the ideological anti-Tutsiproduction in the years before the genocide: Ferdinand Nahimana, PhD in History bythe University of Paris VII with a thesis on the origins of the Rwandese Estate; LeonMugesira also historian; Casimir Bizumungo, doctor with PhD in USA, ministry ofExterior and after ministry of Health; Hassan Ngeze, journalist and editor of Kangura,from Kigali. After the genocide, the new rector of Butare, Emmanuel Bugingo,recognized the digital impressions of the University in the tragedy: „all the butchery inRwanda was carefully planned by intellectuals and these ones studied at thisUniversity‟. An extremist eugenism crosses the speeches produced by the group. Kangurapublished in 1990 the Ten Hutu Commandments that denounced the inter-ethnical
  • 209. unions, responsible for the contamination of the Hutu purity and determined theisolation of the evil Tutsis. In 1992 in a Hutu assembly, Mugesi went step further andevaluated that the fatal mistake done by the revolution of 1959 was to not havingexterminated the Tutsis. Nahimana concluded that the only solution to the historicalproblem was to transfer back all Tutsis to their homeland in the Nile Valley, dead oralive. Isolated slaughters of Tutsis appeared in those years. In 1994 at the vespers of thegenocide, La Medaille, another extremist journal, called on for the extinction of theTutsi race. The anti-Tutsi speech followed a similar trajectory to the anti-Judaic Nazispeech, evolving from the idea of deportation to extermination. The Ten Hutu Commandments represent the condensation of anti-Tutsi racism.One of its items mixes and recreates the two myths of the origin of Rwanda as follows:„you know the trick they used when they arrived in Rwanda: they pretended they hadcome from the sky, but in fact they came from the North of Africa‟. Another myth saysthat there is a conspiracy to install by means of Hutu genocide a vast Tutsi Empire in allthe region of the Great Lakes. Facing the imminent danger, the documents point as anexit the rediscovery of the true Bantu identity of the Hutus: „Nation is artificial; onlyrace is natural‟. The entrance of electronic media in the play of hate provoked a crucial changingin the scenario. The anti-Tutsi propaganda hit the whole country when the Free Radioand Television of the One Thousand Hills (RTLM) started to operate in July 1993.Under the ideological direction of Nahimana and Bizimungu and having the journalistNzege as partner, RTML offered innumerable historic lessons of the betrayals done bythe Tutsis and the oppression on the Hutus. Since 6 th April 1994 during the genocide thecompany called on the audience to fulfill the empty graves with more and more Tutsis.This had a creepy meaning but in the same manner the genocide of Jews was not adirect consequence of the Mein Kampf, the genocide of Tutsis was not written explicitlyin the long anti-Tutsi ideology elaborated after the massacre of Burundi. The distinctionbetween before and after the beginning of the genocide got the statute of juridicaldecision of Nahimana in the International Tribunal for Rwanda. In November 2007 hewas absolved from the principal accusation of provoking genocide by the Chamber ofAppeals that cancelled the decision of first instance. The judge didn´t consider theemissions of RTLM, previous to the genocide, as call-on to the massacre. Nahimanawas condemned to thirty years in jail to his indirect responsibility by the genocidespeeches of the company broadcasted after 6th April. The transition from intention to gesture demanded a new trauma, which was theassault against Habyarimana. Since the offensive of Rwandan Front in 1990 the dictatoroscillated between the radicalization of his supremacist followers and a strategy ofnational reconciliation. When the enemy forces threatened Kigali the announced theintention of canceling the ethnical identity cards but never put the idea into practice. In1992 during the negotiations conducted with the Rwandan Patriotic Front undersurveillance of UN he cancelled the system of single party, constituted a transitorygovernment and called the Tutsis to participate in the general elections. In August of the
  • 210. following year, the government and RPF assigned in Tanzania the Treatises of Arushathat should end the civil war. The meeting lighted furious reactions among the Hutuextremists who lost the confidence in Habyarimana and organized violent persecutionsagainst Tutsis. The Rwandese government was dissolving. In 6th April 1994 when the dictator came back from an international travelfollowed by the Burundian chief of Estate Cyprien Ntaryamira, a moderate Hutu wholeaded the transition in the neighboring country, his helicopter was hit by two missiles,exploded in the air and fell down in the garden of the presidency palace in Kigali. Thetwo presidents and 10 more people died. Hours later, the Hutu extremists and RPFchanged accusations, each one accusing the other for the terrorist attack that was neverclarified. At the same time, from the calls of RTML, the genocide started. The final solution wanted since many years by some people and conductedthroughout 100 days was a consequence of the collapse of the Hutu Estate. The fire thatconsumed the presidential helicopter consumed also the political alternatives to the civilwar. Facing the decisive battle with RPF the Hutu supremacists started the operation ofextermination. If they won, improbable hypothesis, the Hutu homeland would be freeforever from the presence of Tutsis. If they lost, they imagined that they would beslaughtered anyway. The genocide was an operation organized by the apparatus of theEstate, as the military and administrative organs supported the logistic of theextermination. The militias of Interahamwe started the massacre with the help of the ArmedForces. They were already hundreds of thousands recruited in the cities and villages.The genocide was a massive action carried out by significant parcel of Hutu population.Many killed to revenge of long conflicts or simply to solve banal problems ofneighbors. Many killed just to not be killed by the militia or by the soldiers: theextremists wanted to involve all Hutu Nation in the genocide operation, sealingcommon guilt and destiny. The preferred weapon was the machete but they used sickles,knives, arrows and guns. The ethnical identity cards had a decisive function during the genocide. Thelabel Tutsi in those documents almost meant a sentence to death. Soldiers and militiahad orders to take the identity cards of the murdered people and send them to theirsuperiors. Testimonies registered that soldiers delivered everyday those documents inthe house of the Capitan Idelphonse Nizeyimana, one of the coordinators of theoperation. But the slaughters were not restricted to Tutsis as they hit Hutus and Twaswho were openly against the regime. It was inferred a total of killed person superior to700 thousands, among them 500 thousands were Tutsis, about 75% of the whole Tutsipopulation of Rwanda. Evil symbolisms followed the genocide. In the area of Butare, the signal for thebeginning of the slaughters was the order of the Lieutenant Pierre Bizimana, undercommands of Nizeyimana, to shoot the Queen Rosalie Gicanda, widow of Mutara III at80 year-old, who stood in Rwanda due to health problems. In an endless influx, corpses
  • 211. were thrown in the Kagera River that limits the frontier between Rwanda and Tanzaniaand nourishes the Victoria Lake, one of the fountains of Nile River. This way, theimaginary design of Nahimana of transferring the Tutsis back to their lands dead oralive was carried out. The international community has an indirect, but very clear paper in theRwandese genocide. The amount of 2.5 thousand soldiers of the peace forces of UN inRwanda received orders to not interfere, since their mandate was to monitor thesituation. In 21st April, ten Belgian soldiers were killed and the amount was reduced to250 soldiers, losing any effective capacity of interference. Nine days after, the Councilof Security refused to define the events as genocide, which as consequence postponedthe arrival of forces of interposition. The lack of action continued ashamedly until the end. In 22 nd July, reluctantly,UN classified the murders as genocide, but sent only French troops to the Southeast ofRwanda with the mission of establishing a safe place for the refugees that was noteffectively put in reality. In 17 th July finally the forces of RPF took Kigali, deposed thegovernment and the slaughters ended without any interference from the internationalcommunity.The evil names Paul Kagame was 3 year-old in 1960 when his Tutsi family exiled in Ugandarunning away from the Hutu revolution. He grew in a refugee camp, joined the rebelarmy of Museveni, from whom he became a loyal ally, founded RPF and receivedmilitary training in USA. This man entered victorious in Kigaly and stopped the Tutsigenocide. The provisory government he implanted and which he was the true leader hadas president a Hutu, Pasteur Bizimungu who had participated from the regime ofHabyarimana but ruptured with the dictator in 1990. The new regime prohibited MRND and, foremost, cancelled the ethinicalpolitics. The labels of ethnicity of all documents were cancelled and laws prohibitingunder severe sanctions were approved to prohibit any ethnical identification in thepolitical debates. These prohibitions were formally written in the Constitution approvedby the referendum of 2003. In its 54th article, the constitutional text determines that„political organizations are prohibited on being based on race, ethnical group, tribe,clan, religion, sex or any other division that could generate discrimination‟. Rwandashould re-start its history again, tracing a future over a stone clean from the evil namesthat made so much blood to flow. History has a particular sensible place in the project of re-creation of Rwanda.The provisory government cancelled the disciplines of History in all the school systemuntil the production of new books without ethnical supremacies. The discipline returned
  • 212. only in 2008 after being concluded a long work of curricular reforming that wasconducted by a group of consultants from the Centers of Human Right of the Universityof California in Berkeley. The finality proclaimed with the new curricular orientation isto develop the critical thinking of the students over concurrent visions of history andethnicity. The slogan of the program of history could not be more explicit: „education toreconciliation‟. Reconciliation constitutes obviously a vital goal but there is still the riskthat under this pretext, Rwanda gets again an instrumental historiography, subordinatedto the political oscillations and to the conveniences of the authorities. The recent past can be revealed as more untouchable than the distant times. TheTutsi genocide of 1994 is a division mark of memory of huge proportions. It is recordedin the Constitution and assigns the year zero of the Rwandese history. But the Tutsisboth in Burundi and in Rwanda ritually keep denying the Burundian Hutu genocide of1972. In the same line, it is strongly denied that massacres against Hutus had occurredduring the Tutsi genocide and two years after it. However there are strong evidences ofthis thing called, perhaps with a certain excess, as the second genocide of Rwanda. A trail of civil blood followed the final offensive of RPF in 1994 according totestimonies taken by independent organizations of human rights. There is not a trustableestimative of the total of dead people in these massacres that weren´t a systematicgenocide but can not be hidden as the new Rwandese government wants, under the fogof the war. Soon after the victory of RPF, two million Hutus ran away from Rwanda fearingretaliation. The majority of them formed endless columns of exhausted figures, thirstyand starving in the forests of the East of Zaire. Many died from cholera and diarrheabefore the implantation of refugee fields. In those camps, the direct responsible form theTutsi genocide mixed to the masses of homeless and started to get organized as an armyin the exile. From 1996 to 1997 the Rwandese Armed Forces crossed the frontiers,invaded the camps and conducted operations of searching and destroying enemies.Dozens of thousands of Hutus, many of them involved in the Tutsi genocide, werekilled in the hands of the soldiers of Rwanda. Obviously, the regime of Kagame classifies as enemies of Rwanda all the oneswho lift up the voice to denounce the genocide of 1972 in Burundi or ask theinvestigation of the crimes carried out by the Tutsi Army. Among them there is PaulRusesabagina, the administrator of the Hotel One Thousand Hills of Kigali, pictured inthe movie Hotel Rwanda that put his life in risk to protect more than 1.2 thousandRwandese, Tutsis and Hutus during the genocide. Rusesabagina exiled in Belgium in1996 as he became persona non grata in Rwanda because he classified Kagame as a warcriminal, asking him to clarify all the massacres. In the dogma of re-invented Rwanda,genocide is a term reserved to the massacres carried out by Hutus in 1959 and 1994.Behind this there is the message that in Rwanda the democratic principle is not appliedas the system of government of majority would be equal to the reinstallation of a Hutupower and this would mean a new genocide.
  • 213. The reinvention of Rwanda is an adventure full of ambiguities. The governmentof Pasteur Bizimungu ended suddenly in 2000 with the forced desistance of thepresident who had entered into conflicts with Kagame. The historical Tutsi leader thatoccupied the vice-presidency became chief of Estate and three years later was electedpresident for large majority facing only a consented opposition. The Rwandese politicalsystem should be considered as a mild dictatorship that respects some basic humanrights and reasonably tolerates the freedom of expression with the exclusion of thetaboo themes of ethnicity and war crimes of RPF. The trauma of the genocide is the distinctive trace of the new Rwanda. TheConstitution reserves a minimum of one third of the seats of the parliament to women asit is believed that a strong feminine presence in politics is an insurance against theethnical radicalism. Since 1996, about 1.5 million of Hutu refugees returned from thecamps of Zaire and Tanzania to Rwanda. The International Penal Tribunal installed inArusha was tasked to sue the high authorities accused of the Tutsi genocide but theprocesses against other people stood as a task to the Rwandese tribunals. In 2006, tenthousand of people had been judged but other dozens of thousands waited for judgmentin the prisons of the country. The abolition of death penalty in the following year reduced the tensionsbetween the Rwandese government and the international community. To accelerate thejudgments Rwanda implanted the Gacaca Courts that are traditional communitariantribunals and have as goal to reconstruct a coherent narrative of the facts, make justiceand promote reconciliation. Under the surveillance of the Supreme Court, thesetribunals give back to the formal justice system the authors of more strong crimes andsentence the authors of crimes of second or third category to prison or to work in thelands of victims of the genocide. The ethnical policy has no place anymore inside Rwanda, but seems to joy thepolicy of the regime of Kagame to the region of Kivu in the East of Zaire. In thisfrontier border in 1996 the Hutu refugee militias reorganized and attacked the Tutsisthat had established in the region after the Hutu revolution of 1959. The intervention ofthe Rwandese Army destroyed the Hutu militias and deflagrated the civil war in Zairethat would get concluded in a first time with the end of the dictatorship of Mobutu SeseSeko and the proclamation of the Democratic Republic of Congo. Soon after in 1998,the new Congolese president, Laurent-Désire Kabila, went back against Rwanda andUganda that had supported him in the civil war and tried to impose a forced repatriationof the Tutsis of Kivu. So, almost from nothing, by a proclamation of the Rwandesegovernment, the ethnicity of the Banyamulenges was created. In the official version constructed hastily by Rwanda, the North Kivu and SouthKivu pertained in the past to the kingdom of the Banyarwandas. With the Europeancolonization, the Banyarwandas of Kivu stood separated from the Rwandese andconstituted a singular ethnicity inside the Belgian Congo. The narrative is totally falseexcept by a detail: due to the conflicts with the Banyarwanda dynasty, a small group of
  • 214. Tutsi cattle raisers established in the locality of Mulenge, in South Kivu in the end ofthe XIX century. This Banyamulenge community includes nowadays only about 30thousand people but the Rwandese government extended the ethnical label to the morethan 250 thousand Tutsis of Kivu originated from the Diaspora of 1959. In the ironicwords of René Lemarchand, „there are no similar ethnogenesis so sudden and so quickin the continent‟. The creation of the Banyamulenges has two functions. From one side, namingthem as an ethnicity established long time ago in the modern Democratic Republic ofCongo makes difficult the intention of the Congolese government in transferring themback to Rwanda. From another side, naming them as a population that was part of thekingdom of the Banyarwandas evidences the spectrum of a territorial vindication ofRwanda in the neighboring country. In the end, the ethnographic artifact in the Westernsurroundings of Kivu Lake is other evidence that giving names to ethnicities constitutesa political gesture and even an act of war.PART IV - ORIENTTHE RESTORATION OF THE CASTES „Our community is as underdeveloped as the old pariahs‟, explained MansinghBurja, a rioter who, together with other hundreds of rioters, under the strong sun of theIndian summer, blocked the roadway to Taj Mahal in Agra. „We need the samebenefits‟, he concluded, showing a curious logic, but incontestable in his own terms. Burja is a Gujjar, an ethnical group that inhabits predominantly the North ofIndia. The Indian Gujjars pertain to Kshatriya Varna, the military layer and governor inthe traditional social system. The blockage of the roadway lasted one month when therewere several acts of vandalism and fights against police, leaving forty people dead. Inthe end, they got what they wanted: the lowering of his group in the official system ofcastes in order to obtain reserved quotes in the public jobs and universities. A pact withthe government of Rajasthan State ensured to the Gujjars 5% of the places in the publicfunctionalism. The Gujjar protest was tactically organized to coincide with the proximity of thestate elections. As the government of Rajasthan receded and conceded the demandedprivileges, it invested in the constitution of a political clientele. But this was not an
  • 215. isolated episode. The politicians of India since the independence play with theopportunity of exchanges privileges of a group to electoral loyalties. The major programof affirmative action of the world is structured on the system of castes and is also afountain of sour disputes among groups and to endless political violence. The social order of Hinduism came from pre-historic migrations of the Indo-Arian peoples to the Ganges Valley and other parts of the Indian subcontinent from1700 to 1300 BC. Its double fundament is the systems of class (Varna) and of caste(Jati) that coexist and have many points in common but without being confused. Varnais a Sanskrit word that means „to close‟ and indicate social groups perfectly delimitated.The four Varnas are: the Brahmans (clergymen), the Chatrias (warriors), the Vaisas(businessmen) and the Sudras (rural men, servants and workmen). According to a thesis,originally there were only the three first Varnas corresponding to the traditional socialfunctions of the Indo-Europeans and reflected in a mythology with three parts: gods thatreign the cosmic order, warrior gods and gods that conserve the Universe in activity.The Varna of the hand workers would have appeared as a result from the meeting of theIndo-European conquerors and the native peoples of India. Spite the appearances there is no correspondence of the Varnas to the socialclasses typical of the Occident. Brahmans and Chatrias can be poor although theypertain to the superior categories. The prosperous medium class of the big Indian citiesis not constituted in general by Brahmans nor Chatrias, but by Vaisas. Also there is norelationship between pertinence to a determined Varna and the political orientation ofthe person. Mahatma Gandhi, leader of the fights for independence, was a Vaisa.Jawaharlal Nehru, the first chief of government of India, of the same Party of Congress,was born in a family of Brahmans. Many left political leaders were Brahmans. The functional hierarchy of the Varnas antecedes the creation of castes. In thebeginning, two centuries before the Christian era, the attribution to a place to eachperson in a flexible system of castes derived from an evaluation of their intellectual andspiritual aspects and of their professional abilities. Nobody was doomed to pertain to thecaste of their father or to be all the life in determined caste. With time, the castesconverted in something similar to the corporations of letter and got hereditary features.The dissolution of the corporations of letter did not suppress the castes but transformedthem into fraternities linked by blood, by a series of manners and rules including dietand by obligations of protection of their members. Caste and Jati are not true synonyms although they had become interchangeablewords. The word „caste‟ is of Portuguese origin and is directly related to the notion ofrace. The word Jati means community and also species with the strict sense it has inBiology. The Jatis are related to several jobs but they can also indicate a religious sector a linguistic group. They appear inside the Varnas as endogamous groups: accordingtradition, marriages are carried out inside the castes. The Jatis have a territorial basisand are governed by councils that also take care of internal issues. Among the Hindus ofIndia there are thousands of castes and sub-castes. Hundreds of them coexist in each
  • 216. region and there is not a precise correspondence between the castes of different regions.As a rule, the surname of people evidences pertinence to a caste. Gandhi pertained tothe Bania caste and his surname means greengrocer. The castes exist in the Terrain life but is true fundament is found in the cosmiclife. They are a central element in the building of Hinduism and are articulated aroundthe notion of purity. It is not regarding to the purity of a person in their biological cycleof life, but something more complex that is expressed in the belief of karma. The bodyperishes but the soul remains and is transmitted through generations. Each one isresponsible not only for the own present life but for all the past existences of the cosmiccycle. The acts of each individual not only echo over themselves and their surroundingenvironment, but also over their innumerable chains placed in the past and in the future.The rupture of the rules of religion scatters the impurity behind and forwardcontaminating the world. Octavio Paz makes two crucial observations on the Indian caste. The first is thatit is not a conglomerate of persons, but a circle of families. The individuals are linked totheir family caste since birth to death and can only leave it through a gesture ofrenunciation to society and to the concrete world, which consists in a conversion to thereligious life. There are hundreds of thousands of hermits in India dedicated to reflexionand contemplation who live exclusively from begging. The second is that the cast lackshistoricity: its function is to oppose an unchangeable reality against the history and thechanges of the world. As the castes work as a denial of individualism, the system ofsocial organization of the Hindus is an element of resistant to modernization. Also, as itrequires a special loyalty to the local community, it represents a factor of disturbancesin the principle of the national cohesion. All the Hindu castes are inserted in one of the four Varnas. However, outside thesphere of the castes, there are the pariahs, groups considered ritually impure due to theiroccupations. The workers of shambles, the butchers and workers with leather arepariahs because they handle parts of dead animals. Pariahs are also the ones who handlehuman feces, cleaning restrooms and sewers. Such groups were named as theuntouchable and should be physically avoided by the Hindus of castes. They had noright to use the water of the fountains and wells that served to the others and even theshadow of an untouchable could project over a Hindu of caste. When they arrived to avillage, the untouchable must announce their presence playing alert tambourines. There is a complex debate on the pertinence to Hinduism of those excludedgroups. Many pariahs in India and Pakistan converted to Islam, Christianity orBuddhism to overcome the social stigma. However, most of them stood loyal toreligion. Arya