El problema de nuestro tiempo no está en saber cómo ha sido el Perú. Está, más bien, en saber cómo es el Perú. El pasado nos interesa en la medida en que puede servirnos para explicarnos el presente. Las generaciones constructivas sienten el pasado como una raíz, como una causa. Jamás lo sienten como un programa.
7 Ensayos de Interpretación de la Realidad Peruana, José Carlos Mariátegui, 1928
The issue of our time is not in knowing how Peru used to be. It is, rather, in knowing how Peru is. The past interests us to the extent it can explain the present. Constructive generations think of the past as an origin, as a cause. They never think of it as a programme.
7 Essays on Interpreting Peru's Reality, José Carlos Mariátegui, 1928 (own translation)
“La revolución que será para los pobres no sólo será la conquista del pan, sino también la conquista de la belleza, del arte, del pensamiento y de todas las complacencias del espíritu.”
Mariátegui's funeral was one of the largest processions of workers ever seen in the streets of Lima, Peru, but in the U.S. his death was hardly noticed. In 1930, Waldo Frank wrote in the leftist U.S. weekly the Nation that the April 16 death of Jose Carlos Mariátegui had plunged “the intelligentsia of all of Hispano-America into sorrow; and nothing could be more eloquent of the cultural separation between the two halves of the new world than the fact that to most of us these words convey no meaning.” His funeral turned into one of the largest processions of workers ever seen in the streets of Lima, Peru, but in the United States his death was hardly noticed. Unfortunately, 87 years later Mariátegui is still largely unknown in the English-speaking world, even as his status as the founder of Latin American Marxism remains as relevant as ever for understanding political changes sweeping across the region. Mariátegui was born in the small southern Peruvian town of Moquegua on June 14,
REVOLUTION, SOCIALISM, AND NATIONAL TRADITION — An analysis of Mariátegui. Part 2.
In the article "NATIONALISM AND VANGUARDISM IN POLITICAL IDEOLOGY" (1925), Mariátegui deepens the debate between Creole conservatism and indigenous vanguardism in Peruvian political ideology.
Creole conservatism associates Peruvian nationality solely with Spanish and Latin influences, limiting Peru's history to four centuries.
During the colonial period, Peruvian history was often linked to the arrival of Pizarro and the foundation of Lima, ignoring the rich indigenous heritage, such as the Inca Empire.
Creole national consciousness was strongly tied to the Spanish heritage, excluding indigenous elements from Peruvian history and tradition, as further elaborated two years later in "THE NATIONAL TRADITION" (1927).
In contrast, the indigenous vanguard seeks a Peruvian reconstruction based on indigenous heritage, breaking away from the temporally limited view of Creole conservatism and its association with conquest and colonialism.
Revolutionary indigenist thinkers do not view the Inca past as a mere return to history, but as a foundation for Peruvian reconstruction.
They embrace a realistic and modern conception of history, considering all events and historical elements that have shaped Peruvian reality over more than four centuries, without excluding indigenous elements, as often happens in the colonialist view of history.
Mariátegui also highlights the relationship between nationalism and socialism in politically or economically colonized countries like Peru.
He argues that socialism is not inherently anti-national, except within empires. In former colonies, socialism takes on a nationalist stance, opposing Western imperialism and capitalism.
For the author, the assertion of Peruvian nationality is of utmost importance, especially for those historically oppressed and dispossessed.
The Peruvian reconstruction based on indigenous heritage is seen as a way to restore the independence and dignity of those who were conquered and subjugated by the Spanish four centuries ago.
The writings of José Carlos Mariátegui resonate deeply in the history and culture of various colonized countries, finding resonance in the struggles of the working class.
His reflections on national tradition, revolution, and socialism invite us to rethink how we perceive our own history, events, movements, and prominent figures, challenging both conservative and liberal narratives that seek to restrict and distort the richness of our cultural heritage.
(Part 1)
REVOLUTION, SOCIALISM, AND NATIONAL TRADITION — An analysis of Mariátegui. Part 1.
The interconnection between tradition, socialism, and revolution represents a creative and renewing force in history. Its primary instrument and historical agent is the working class.
This relationship is therefore antagonistic to the reactionary movement that aims to freeze tradition, distorting its raison d'être and restricting "official" history and culture to the narrative and elements of the dominant class.
Those who identify as communists, socialists and thid world laborists need to remain vigilant. The historical narrative of the elites relegates popular elements to oblivion or condemnation.
The reactionary historical narrative imprisons cultural and historical elements, petrifying them and providing a distorted view of them.
In "HETERODOXY OF TRADITION" (1927), Mariátegui argues that tradition should not be erroneously associated with traditionalists. Traditionalists seek a static and inert tradition, while tradition, in its essence, is dynamic and constantly evolving.
According to the author, tradition is nurtured by those who renew and challenge it to enrich it, rather than keeping it stagnant. Those who desire a static tradition often distort it with their particular interpretation of history, seeing it as a mere extension of the past.
Mariátegui questions whether revolutionaries completely reject tradition and asserts that true revolutionaries do not act as if history "began with them." They recognize that they represent historical forces and use existing history as a basis for their actions, much like Marx used the study of bourgeois economics as the foundation for his anti-capitalist doctrine.
It is crucial to distinguish between tradition and traditionalism. Traditionalism is a conservative attitude that sees tradition as a set of inert relics and symbols. Tradition, on the other hand, is diverse and contradictory, resisting being reduced to a single concept.
To complement, different social groups interpret tradition divergently due to their political and economic interests. As noted by Marx and Engels, the dominant ideas in a given era are shaped by the ruling class that controls the means of production.
Walter Benjamin also contributes to this discussion by addressing the narrative dispute over history, in which "official" history is often defined by the ruling class.
Mariátegui argues that those less adept at recreating tradition, such as reactionary elements of the elite, often invoke it in a fictional manner.
Therefore, the true struggle does not occur between revolutionaries and tradition, but between revolutionaries and traditionalism. Revolutionaries seek to prevent society from becoming static, as a society without creativity loses its purpose and shows signs of aging and decay.
(Part 2).
"Virá um tempo em que a assombrosa mulher que escreveu na prisão as maravilhosas cartas a Luisa Kautsky - a despeito dos presunçosos catedráticos que hoje monopolizam a representação oficial da cultura - despertará a mesma devoção e encontrará o mesmo reconhecimento que uma Teresa d'Ávila. Espírito mais filosófico e moderno - ao mesmo tempo ativo e contemplativo - do que toda a corja pedante que a ignora, ela colocou no poema trágico de sua existência o heroísmo, a beleza, a agonia e o gozo que não são ensinados por nenhuma escola de sabedoria." Mariátegui Pintura de Rosa, em 1928. MARIÁTEGUI, J. C. Defesa do marxismo. Polêmica revolucionária e outros escritos.1° ed. São Paulo: Boitempo, 2011, p. 47 #materialismo #dialetica #materialismodialetico #rosaluxemburgo #mariategui https://www.instagram.com/p/CE12XUshdA7/?igshid=1bccrnc456t0k
Un día como hoy en Perú conmemoramos el natalicio, los 125 de José Carlos Mariátegui, nuestro intelectual, teórico y pensador.
No hay aquí en el Perú literatura mas critica e integral que la del maestro. Ningún periodista, mucho menos políticos hasta la fecha lo ha superado ni en categoría, ni en posición. Dicho sea de paso y no menos importante, marcó la dirección del movimiento socialista en el país y en latinoamérica.
Marxism, where it has shown itself to be revolutionary—that is, where it has shown itself to be Marxist—has never obeyed a passive and rigid determinism.
José Carlos Mariátegui, “In Defense of Marxism,” in Vanden and Becker, Anthology, 208.
