Bolivia or Kollasuyu?

02.27.2006

Technorati tags:

Apparently one of Evo's confidants, Román Loayza (executive sectretary of the CSUTCB & MAS senator) made controversial statements regarding the upcoming constituent assembly. These include suggestions that the country's name be changed from "Bolivia" to something else, like "Tawantinsuyo" or "Kollasuyo" — along w/ changes to the flag & other national symbols. Now. The national symbols are a product of nearly two centuries of history. So it's obvious that many people have deep, emotional attachments to them.

Of course, I recognize that Loayza's goal was to point out that indigenous history & tradition should be more greatly incorporated into the country's national symbology. But I just don't think this has a happy ending.

If the symbols & mythology of "Bolivia" are removed, then we're left w/ an implicit understanding that the country is not a tangible entity, that the national project as previously understood is no longer defensible. If so, then on what principle are lowland regions of Santa Cruz, Beni, or Tarija expected to remain in a single polity w/ Andean regions? After all, the Inca empire (Bolivia was part of the Kollasuyo part of that empire) or the Aymaran polity (the Tawantinsuyo reference) never extended into the eastern lowland regions. The name is meant to specifically exclude such regions from membership in the new polity.

Is Loayza saying he's accepting de facto secession from the lowland regions? Keeping in mind that the bulk of Bolivia's economic growth & potential growth rests in just those very regions. Many in the lowlands might welcome secession. But is that what Loayza wants?

Not to mention that the policy of appealing to Aymara-Quechua heritage as the preferential heritage of what is, in reality, a multicultural society is unfair. And not just to Spanish-speakers. But to the speakers of 34 other indigenous languages in the country. Like it or not, Bolivia is not an "indigenous" country, let alone an "Aymara" or "Quechua", or even an "Andean" nation. It's more complicated than that, as all multicultural societies are.

If MAS wants to give Santa Cruz (and other lowland regions) an excuse to raise the flag of secession in earnest, announcing the end of "Bolivia" & the move towards an Andean-centric polity is as good a first step as any.

At least let's hope the country doesn't get renamed "the Bolivarian Republic of Bolivia" (à la Venezuela). And not just for its redundancy.

----
UPDATE: In light of Eduardo Avila's comment (below), it's fair to point out that Loayza's standing in "MAS" (broadly speaking) is debatable. He's no longer a senator, but he was. And while MAS is a broader organization than a real "party", there've been enough similar statements made at various times by various members/representatives/spokespeople (including Evo himself) at various times to leave one wondering. And perhaps this lack of "party discipline" will hinder Evo's government as time drags on. Either way, Loayza's statement was certainly inflammatory & will likely do a great deal to unite the anti-Evo opposition (something that hasn't yet happened).

Posted by Miguel at 05:15 PM

Comments

I definitely wouldn't say that Loayza is a confidant of Morales or of the MAS leadership. He wasn't involved in the picking of the cabinent, nor was he included in any of the high-level meetings that determined the platform that MAS campaigned on. For the most part, MAS is a collection of social movements under one umbrella, which at any time may cause a stir internally. He is an important ally because he controls the CSUTCB.

Loayza is also not a senator (titular or suplente) for MAS in this recently elected Congress. I'm positive that he doesn't represent the official view of MAS. It's a shame that he says things like that and his earlier foot-in-the-mouth statements. For the most part, I would say that the majority of Bolivians do not want to change the name, nor the flag.

Posted by: eduardo at February 27, 2006 06:06 PM

One must take into account who put this argument forward before assessing the statement. As Eduardo notes, Loayza has fell out of the MAS structure, not least because of his statement about the possibility of MAS taking power by force. Ever since, MAS has distanced as much as possible from this guy, but without breaking up --he controls the CSUTCB, after all. So, yeah, this guy does not represent the official view of MAS, but then again, so far there is nothing resembling an official MAS view.
In the end, I believe that if the CA were to change the name of the country, it would serve the purpose of distracting the people from more important changes (read: Evo becoming the supremo), in true Macchiavellian fashion.
Now, it must say, this statement does not really surprise me. It's funny, but in a post I made in my blog, around two weeks ago, I noted that MAS kept insisting in an all-powerful Constituent Assembly, so they could change the name of the country, if they saw it fit. I ventured the names of Bolivarian, Tawantinsuyan and Originary Republic of Bolivia as the frontrunners, should that happen. It seems my prediction hit the bullseye.

Posted by: Alvaro Ruiz-Navajas (Off Topic) at February 28, 2006 04:51 AM