TUPAMAKES is one of the original leaders of the Tupamaros National Liberation Movement (MLN) of Uruguay, and was imprisoned for many years by that country's military dictatorship. Huidobro spoke to International Viewpoint about the perspectives for the Latin American left today. The interview was conducted in Montevideo in September 1991 by Ernesto Herrera and Braulio Chavez.
T Wo important
ments have recently taken place. On the one hand there have been meetings of the Latin American left in Sao Paulo and Mexico City where Stalinist, Maoist, Trotskyist, Castroist, Guevarist forces, and so on, have participated in the same conference.
These meetings, which would have been inconceivable two years ago, represent a step forward. But on the other hand, we are witnessing a degeneration of a good part of the left, which has rejected many of its former conceptions in the name of "modernization". Marxism has been called into question as a scientific method. What do you think of these two developments?
I think on principle that any discussion is positive. It's a good thing that people coming from different currents can sit down together and discuss; if somebody has confidence in their ideas, the debate is
But as far as the other aspect is concerned, the word "renewal" is in fashion, in a very superficial and frivolous sense. But Marxism, class struggle and all the ideas that flow from them are so stubborn that they cannot be easily dispensed with. As far as the heterodoxy of the left is concerned, I think that the collapse of socialism — or what was called the socialist camp — confirms Marxism, even if some think the opposite. And I would stick with the slogan that socialism will be worldwide or will not happen at all. That has been confirmed in a most striking manner. It has been confirmed in spite of the theoretical boasting that socialism could 20 confimed by the dramatic situation that be built in one country. It has been clearly
Cuba and Nicaragua are experiencing, as well as that of the Salvadoran comrades. This is undeniable. All these developments support Marx even if others think that they refute him.
The question of the class struggle is one that has been posed even more sharply in my country, as it has been throughout Latin America; but it has taken a new form. For example, yesterday, a right wing journalist said in relation to the question of the arrival in Italy of Albanians that these refugees should be sent to the United States and Europe so that they can understand the problem of poverty in the Third
He also said that in the struggle between the East and the West, the people in the East were under the illusion that the West was a paradise and that they are now realizing what this paradise really is! But they don't realize that in this paradise there are people who don't even have a place to die. And this same journalist wondered when the Soviet and Hungarian emigrant
In Uruguay, social violence is becoming more significant than political violence. When we carried out the armed struggle, we launched an operation in the La Teja quarter (a slum of Montevideo) and we stayed there all night. But we counted on a favorable political situation. Today, violence does not have a political content, it has a social content. And even the so-called left that talks today about renovation, of importing technology, and
I recently read a sociological analysis by a former anarchist concerning the economically active population (EAP) in class analysis, this researcher does not include children who that more than 10% of those who have had to leave the country are unemployed. • Are there different categories within the left?
Yes, there are some on the left who cannot adapt to the real world, a world in which, in my country, capitalism is the utopia that has failed more than all the other utopias. We are at the point where we have to stretch all analytical categories to the extreme. I'm surprised when I see the United Nations Commission for Latin America (UNCLA) use the term "poverty"; this term is insufficient. They later used the term "extreme poverty" which is also insufficient. I think they now talk about "indigence". Soon they'll be talking about the "walking dead". And all this is treated in a cold, matter-of-fact way!
are new classes, sectors, or groups who have emerged and whose presence must now be taken into account. I recently spoke with a teacher who works in a cantegril (a slum in Uruguay); he told me that he had obtained three pairs of shoes for three children who were walking around barefoot in the middle of the winter. The next day, the father, a worker was forced to sell the shoes in order to buy
A teacher in an isolated provincial town told me: "In order to provide breakfasts for the children we have to organize festivals and sell alcohol! Plus, we subsidize the pay of the cleaning ladies at the school out of our own pocket." What can we do? The bourgeoisie no longer send their children to public school because they have private schools. They say to the teachers and principals: "If you want to feed the children" [which is the only way to get them to come to school] "sell alcoholic beverages. And if you don't want to sup plement the salaries of the cleaning ladies, the schools won't be cleaned." But the cleaning ladies tell the 1. See International Viewpoint no. 212, September 16, 1991. 2. The public educational system in Uruguay was one of the most developed in Latin America, before the dictatorship. The rate of literacy was more than 95%. 3. In an interview in the Uruguayan newspaper Brecha, the Sandinista commander Victor Tirado Lopez said: "I think that the cycle of anti-imperialist revolutions, in the sense of a total response, military and eco nomic, to imperialism, is in the process of coming to an end. It is necessary to search for other options" (Brecha, March 30, 1991).
----- pull-quotes on this page -----
URUGUAY We must stay subversive!
January 20, 1992• #220 International Viewpoint teachers that without this work they won't
The "renewers" and the "europeanist" left who forget how the capitalist system works are blind to this situation. They talk about a capitalism that does not exist.
These same teachers gave me a UNCLA report, as well as one by an organization linked to the Christian Democracy dated 1986, concerning children who grew up in the slums. According to these documents, Uruguay has not yet reached the level of poverty of certain other countries, in spite of the high level of malnutrition, and the development of biologically inferior people who are smaller, have physiological and motor disorders as well as learning problems and so on.
One has the impression that we are going back 500 years in time to the period of the Conquest and colonization. Soon they'll be asking whether these people are in fact human beings and if they have souls. If they are no longer considered human beings, then they are sub-humans who can be left to die. For me, all this is tied to social classes, to the class struggle, to social categories that are as old as they are new. All of a sudden there is a sort of return to the time of Marx, of industrial expansion, but also of extreme poverty. But there are also things that Marx could not see. I've been re-reading Imperialism, the highest stage of Capitalism by Lenin, and suddenly I had the idea that a book should be written about post-Gulf capitalrotten capitalism that has decided to let three quarters of humanity die. It doesn't even exploit these three quarters. They are superfluous. • You speak of post-Gulf capitalism. This is an interesting term. After the electoral defeat of the Sandinista National Liberation Front (FSLN), Commander Victor Tirado Lopez drew a balance sheet of ten years of the Nicaraguan Revolution, suggesting that the era of anti-Imperialist revolutions as we knew it is over. Is it really possible to overcome the situation of misconfronting Imperialism?
Absolutely not. The only thing that Tirado said that seems to me correct is that we can no longer talk of imperialism in the way we have in the past. I think that Stalinism transformed the international class struggle into a struggle between states. We did not know that in the United States there are also social classes. We thought that imperialism was one homogeneous whole. This was what Stalinism taught the Uruguayan left. I have never heard the Uruguayan Communist Party (UP) speak of the North
The Vietnamese revolution showed that this was not so and that there were internal contradictions; many North Americans participated in the victory of the Vietnamese revolution. This stereotype also covered Europe. In Europe there were supposedly no contradictions. All the countries were considered imperialist and a French bourgeois politician like Chirac was the same as a French worker. This outlook was the heritage of Stalin-
Today we Latin Americans must have enough scientific and Marxist intelligence to see that we have powerful allies in Europe. We need to develop our work in such a way that we can link up closely with comrades in the United States or Europe. I recently travelled to Germany where I asked, somewhat facetiously, in order to criticize the way that we had thought about solidarity with these countries, "when will we create the first solicommittee with the German revolution?" because until now there have only been solidarity committees with
The capitalists have two possibilities. They can opt for a bloodbath, in the knowledge that their model and their utopia only concerns a minority. If capitalism were to keep its promises in India, in Latin America and so on, it must change model. But, during the Gulf War, we had the proof that it will not be thus: it was the first world war against a Third World
The other alternative is that posed in a utopian manner by the Pope, when he said "If this is capitalism, I want no part of it". But if this position is carried to its logical
URUGUAY extreme, one arrives at socialism. To avoid all these deaths, it is necessary to devote all the military expenditure to the development of humanity, the rich coun tries must help the poor countries, it is necessary to plan the world economy from an ecological point of view. If all this is carried through to its ultimate consequences, one will arrive at the world socialist revolution. • Some on the left, like the "renewers", say that the different strategies for resolving the crisis have been defeated. Some groups on the Latin American left which have waged armed struggle - like for example the M-19 in Colombia* - say that after the Sandinista defeat it is impossible to consider a perspective of power without a prior democratization of capitalism, of the state, and without a development of the productive forces. Because if not, what do you do when you are in power? One of the questions posed by certain groups on the left is that of the reinforcement of the institutional participation of the left.
Today, the left in Uruguay has an institutional presence that it has never enjoyed before, and is on the verge of expanding it still more at the next elections. The big problem is knowing whether the analysis that we have made until now — according to which capitalism has decided on a policy of genocide — was correct. We must be subversive: that is the balance sheet the left must draw. In this case, the solutions 4. The M-19 gave up the armed struggle in 1989. It subsequently participated in the govemment, in the ministry of health, among others. See IV 185, 186, and
21
International Viewpoint #220 • January 20, 1992
URUGUAY proposed by some comrades are completely utopian. I do not criticize them enough, but because they are not viable. Reformism has no perspective in countries like those of Latin America or the Third World, in the world which capitalism is building. • But what alternative can we pro-
When I say that we must be subversive it is in the face of public disorder. But we must also subvert our own categories. I think that it is necessary to make two kinds of analysis. If we are faced with two worlds that are increasingly from each other, even if there remain of communication, we must make a class analysis of the north — world "A", where there are undoubtedly class contradictions - and another for
"B". World "A" exploits and oppresses world "B" and it has even already decided to make it disappear. But, in world "A", there exist class contradictions which are going to sharpen. We must elaborate a project account these two situations: of new political alliances, new analyses of the social subject of the revolution, of the development of the productive forces, and so on.
Look at Cuba, which, after 30 years of revolution and faced with energy dependence on the socialist camp - nobody knows if this latter will continue to supply petrol to the country — has decided to use bicycles for transport. It is necessary to make a great self-criticism in this area. Once, when one discussed with the comrades of the Cuban department of Latin American Studies, they said that socialism was the development of the productive forces and now they are abandoning the car for the bicycle and the tractor for oxen. But from where can we draw the conclusion that, for a country like Cuba, the development of the productive forces passes by the car and the tractor and not oxen and the bicycle? Nobody is capable of telling us that.
The problem is that left militants are still defining their parameters in relation to the Western world. When we think what socialism would be like in our country, we think immediately of what socialism would be like in Holland. In the same way that the Soviet Union envisaged its development in relation to the United States, and the German Democratic Republic (GDR) in relation of that of West Germany. And we have seen where that led! Many Uruguayan leftists, so-called renewers, dream today of having three million cars in Uruguay; this would indicate for them that we are developed, that we are a great country, even if we are going towards catastrophe.
By that, I do not set myself the objective of a return to nature, to austerity or poverty (this is the danger that hides behind the word "austerity"). This world has also today lives in the direst poverty. As one of my friends who lives in these conditions puts it: "Look, you can eat all the chickens which are left in the garbage except those which have turned green". I wonder how many economists of the Uruguayan left, who work in universities, know this piece of information which is vital for thousands of people? Because it is necessary to go in the municipal garbage dumps and see the groups of kids who fight each other like seagulls for the remains of food. And this is part of post-Gulf capitalism.
Obviously, when we speak of capitalism we do not speak of European capitalism. But only a small part of humanity lives in Europe, and what of the other capitalism, which is just as much capitalist? It is a capitalism sui generis that they are ashamed to take into account in their surveys, but which certainly exists.
In Colombia, the two drug cartels handle $9 billion a year: that is equivalent to the gross national product of Uruguay and they are also the only Latin American multinationals! And it is this that they call the marginalized, informal economy! It is a part of the post-Gulf capitalist system, because of its social and political implica-
What will be the future of our "frontier economy""? Some days ago I took some maté with some bagayeros [people who live off the trade in contraband commodities at Uruguay's frontiers with Argentina or Brazil]: they understand very well the Mercosur project, because they are going to disappear as a social sector, and because they are not counted in any statistic whereas they are a part of the Uruguayan economy. Without these frontier smugglers, Uruguay would be something else, very many people would leave or would die of hunger. Our country has concentrated its population in the capital and in the frontier zones - because there is • Let's get back to the problem of the institutions and of democracy. It is true that the Latin American left occupies institutional spaces which it did not possess before. The word "democracy" is fashionable — even imperialism tries to appropriate it in its discourse. But these two questions pose serious problems for the In the case of Uruguay, some say that we can only resolve things through the institutions, through participation in the government, as citizens and not as a social class. What risks are posed by the institutional participation of the Broad
Front (FA) and the Movement of Pop-
Participation (MPP)? should the Latin American approach the problem of democra-
I am surprised to see a comrade of the Fourth International ask me such a question, because the defence of democracy has been one of the great standards of that organization!
I think that we must demand democracy and not leave it to be taken up by the bourgeoisie. The bourgeoisie is intelligent, it drapes itself in all the clothes it can find. When I said that we must be subversive, I tried to criticize the so-called renewers, because they are not sufficiently renewers, they are made of plastic, they are superficial. It is necessary to carry democracy through to its ultimate consequences; popular power, direct power, the organization of the people in the neighbourhoods. We will be renewers, but until the end; we need to question this bourgeois democracy in all its meanings and under
In Europe, the people do not participate, do not vote; if they do so, it is with their feet. During the last congress of the Broad Front, the great majority of militants voted with their feet. Thus, these militants said something important to us: "You are not credible, you are not useful to me, I have no interest in coming to discuss with the rank and file committees". There is the truth. I think then that we should demand democracy and carry it through to its ultimate consequences. • And on the institutions?
It is precisely this sector of the left, the so-called renewers, that believe we should 5. The Mercosur is an attempt to create a free trade zone in the countries of the Souther Cone, on the lines of the process currently underway between the United States, Canada and Mexico. See IV 205. 6. The reformist majority of the Broad Front consists of the Communist Party, the Socialist Party and their allies. The Christian Democrat Party (PDC) which participated at the end of the dictatorship, left it in 1988. The left is grouped in the Movement of Popular Participation (MPP) comprising the MILN, the Popular Party for the Victory of the People (PPVP), the Socialist Workers Party (PST — Uruguayan section of the Fourth Intemational) and independent sectors of the revolutionary left.
The rights of Street traders
THE problem of itinerant traders marked the Second Congress of the
Broad Front (FA) -- which brings together the whole of the Uruguayan left - held in August 1991, In the presence of 1,700 delegates.
URUGUAY framework of capitalism, could get an overwhelming majority? If such was the case what, in your opinion, should be done?
In this case, it would be necessary for
Montevideo, the Uruguayan capital - where nearly half of Uruguay s 3 milllon inhabitants live - has been governed by the Front since the 1990 elections, The mayor of the city, Tabare Vazquez, has seen hle popularky among the people confirmed. At the same time, the right on the municipal council has launched a campaign against the measures that it has just taken concerning Itinerant traders.
While the decree Issued by Vazquez limite the number of sellers per block of houses - a useless and unjust measure because Il cannot deal with the growing marginalization of the population driven Into thie trade - It also Institutionalizes the right of the unemployed to work In the street. At the beginning of 1991, according to the official figures, 15.8% of Uruguayan familles lived In a state of "critical poverty", whereas 22,3% lacked basic amenities (housing, running water, health, education and so on).
The FA congress also discused the bourgeolsie's central project for the Southern Cone, the Mercosur. Since 1985, the new "democratie" regimes of the region have begun to sign protocols of Integration. The get involved ements with co-sign one t concerning cas, Argentibe in a better peration and of free trade, he signatoted products olished up to e majority of ° protection: ress all cus of Paraguay previously razil, will not very unequal uay and Uruadvantage of and to introages, threatgovernment is using the whole of the revolutionary left of Uruguay to come together to see what it should do. That would be a very delicate situation and we could not stand by with our arms folded. But I think that this reformist current will try to reach an agreement. That will depend also on the relation of forces at the congress. • What is your balance sheet of the participation of the MPP in Parlia-
In general, I think that it is positive, above all if one takes account of the unfavourable situation today. We have been able to discuss with our parliamentarians. In the municipality of Montevideo [controlled by the Broad Front] we have had a lot of discussion, even if many things remain to be clarified. There are some people in the municipality who think that the 1994 elections are already in the bag.
But it is more complicated. For example, the municipality has mainly confronted the bourgeoisie on the question of the itinerant traders and on centralism whether the municipalities have the right to resolve their own problems. The bourgeois parliamentarians speak of the itinerant traders as something which dirties the city, as if these people had no right to any private property. It is a capitalism which is not rational; it refuses the right of private property to the itinerant traders. If somebody had told me, some years ago, that the principal problem of the municipality would be that of the itinerant traders I would have said they were mad. But today it is this affair that bothers the municipality and above all the most reactionary sectors of the bourgeoisie. On this subject, we want our parliamentarians to be intransigent, that is to support to the end the just ening thousands or un rectindancy the treaty to accelerate the privatization of enterprises and services (1.2 million workers are employed in the public sector) During the congrese, the FA also divided on thie debate, With the exception of the revolutionary left, grouped In the Movement of Popular Participation
(MP), the majority of the FA split on the question, some sectors advocating de facto acceptance of the project under the pretext of "reallsm".
(Information complled from La Unidad and Southern Cone Report). * become a simple current of opinion, that everything is concentrated in the political is Parliament, which supermarket enclosed behind four walls. And they say it clearly. When we explain that it is necessary to consult the rank-and-file, they treat us as demagogues. They want to be political mandarins, while the rank-and-file finds out what has happened but does not participate. They ask the rank-and-file to stay home and do nothing.
So far as the institutions are concerned, I think that we are obliged — and this is a positive thing — to fight also on this terrain, without losing sight of the fact that we cannot restrict ourselves to its narrow framework. This fight should go hand in • hand with the extra-institutional struggle and is subordinate to it. I insist, we cannot cease to be subversives. • On the forthcoming congress of the Broad Front (see box) do you think that this current of so-called renewers, which speaks of reforming the state, of increasing produc tivity, and of remaining within the demands of the itinerant traders. • Do we need a new internationalism?
One of the first conclusions to be drawn is that it is necessary to work on the basis of a new internationalism. We cannot remain enclosed within frontiers. We need an internationalism which coordinates the efforts of those who work in world "B" and those who work in world "A". As to its content, it is necessary to analyze all the international organizations which have been created, their gains and their errors.
We need an international which is inclusive, for everyone, and not ideological, as the Fourth International is to a certain extent. Obviously, there need to be practical agreements, a definition of principles and, starting from there, those who agree will be integrated. But I am sure that it is incestional do it; we live in a world of 23 internationals. *