File spoon-archives/postcolonial.archive/postcolonial_2003/postcolonial.0301, message 62


Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 21:12:13 -0800 (PST)
From: Omar Guessous <o_guessous-AT-yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: debating "the Commonwealth"


I wonder though ... Were a self-determination
referendum to be held in Puerto Rico, would full
independence be chosen by the majority?
>From my reading, it appears that unfortunately *not* -
for lack of a historically-informed and critical
sociopolitical consciousness, as well as awarenes that
although the short-term would be rough, the long-term
would pay off not only in political/moral terms, but
in concrete material terms as well ... Given that an
overbearing materialism often guides one's political
stances (understandably-so), the short-term losses -
real & imagined/romanticized - seem to take precedence
in guiding locals' stance on this. 
Internalized imperialism/colonialism at play? If my
reading is correct, what implications does this have?
(i.e., when the so-called colonized (according to our
eyes) prefer the colonial/"commonwealth" condition -
the neverending ethical riddle ...)
Or do folks have a different reading on this? I'm
curious.
 Omar

p.s.: Interesting debate! 

--- JOBoriken-AT-aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 1/13/2003 9:38:55 PM Eastern
> Standard Time, 
> Josna.Rege-AT-dartmouth.edu writes:
> 
> > We don't need to restrict ourselves to the British
> Commonwealth (no longer 
> > called the British Commonwealth, but simply "the
> Commonwealth"): it's the 
> > function and value of the relationship over time
> that interests me. 
> > 
> 
> The case of Puerto Rico is the one i know best of
> all the American colonial 
> territories (the Mariana islands now have Free
> Association status; Guam had 
> been rejected for 'Commonwealth' status; Samoa &
> Palau i have no clue about; 
> the Virgin Islands have some creative political
> status as well).  
> 
> From 1898 to 1900, Puerto Rico was under martial
> law.  From 1900 to 1952, 
> Puerto Rico had its own legislature but appointed
> American military 
> governors.  In 1948, the first Puerto Rican elected
> govenor served.  In 1952, 
> the "Commonwealth" was created, complete with a new
> constitution.  Prior to 
> this date, the international community deplored the
> status and condition of 
> the island and revolutionary action swept the island
> and the American 
> mainland as well (as it did again in Congress in
> 1954). One nation stood out 
> in the United Nations in questioning the validity of
> the use of the term 
> 'Commonwealth' and it was India, as it questioned
> whether Puerto Rico had 
> really undergone a change in status or a superficial
> change in terminology.
> 
> Fifty years later, Congress has admitted that Puerto
> Rico has never gone 
> through the process of self-determination.  The UN
> continues to call for the 
> island's self determination and independence.
> 
> The Commonwealth was merely a clever mechanism to
> deflect international 
> criticism, placate and quiet unrest on the island,
> and legitimize its 
> colonial system there.  Nowadays, most people scoff
> at the notion of the 
> Commonwealth because it has proved completely
> powerless - it has showcases an 
> enormous imbalance of power between the US and
> Puerto Rico (PR cannot sign 
> treaties, take part in international trade/commerce,
> cannot regulate 
> immigration nor currency, shipping routes, cannot
> vote for US President but 
> are subject to the draft, and have no representation
> in the United Nations).  
> Its constitution is superceded by the Federal
> American Constitution and 
> federal agencies act at will on the island (i.e.,
> although the PR 
> Constitution prohibits electronic wiretaps, the FBI
> was permitted without 
> consequence to utilize this method in their
> surveillance of progressive and 
> left wing groups through the 60s-90s).  
> 
> More recently, Puerto Rico has been clamoring for a
> change in their status - 
> a change they are powerless to make.  Congress has
> claimed 'plenary powers' 
> over the territory under their Territorial Clause -
> which means they can do 
> what they wish with their territories.  The case of
> Vieques is a case in 
> point, where the populace must resort to civil
> disobedience to be heard.  
> Also, attempts to join regional economic
> organizations by Puerto Rico have 
> met stiff rebuke and blockage from federal
> authorities.
> 
> The Commonwealth is nothing, in this case, but a
> disguise designed to allow 
> continued colonial influence and control.  I think
> the British form is merely 
> an allusion to allegiance to the crown, but i am not
> sure...
> 
> JO
> 


===="There are insistent questions that we all have to ask and that make it clear to us that it is not possible to study simply for the sake of studying. As if we could study in a way that really had nothing to do with that distant, strange world out there."
- Paulo Freire, in 'Pedagogy of Freedom'

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com


     --- from list postcolonial-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005