By Roger Hamilton

Cárdenas accepts a handful of potatoes. He eats and talks, and the people gather closer to listen.

Cárdenas after a meeting in a rural village in Bolivia

To an outsider, the conversation is unintelligible, because it is conducted in the Aymara language. But it is likely about points raised in the morning meeting, or about Cárdenas’ experiences as former vice president of Bolivia (1993-97), or the activities of the Indigenous Peoples Fund, which he headed until recently. The people treat him with easy familiarity. After all, Cárdenas is one of them, born and raised in a rural Aymara village. Some take notes, a natural thing to do when in the presence of a former university professor who has an unusual ability to present complex ideas with passion, concreteness, and often with humor.

Later he spoke with IDBAmérica editor Roger Hamilton.

IDBAmerica: How do Bolivia’s indigenous people view their culture and their identity?

In the past 20 years we have seen a definite reaffirmation of indigenous culture. In rural areas, respect for our culture has always been strong, but now this respect is spreading to urban areas. We are beginning to create a new vision for the country, a Bolivia of Spanish heritage, indigenous heritage, and that of other cultures.

On the other hand, it is true that many indigenous people regard their language and culture as actually a kind of stigma. The reason is their asymmetrical relationship to the rest of society. For example, the willingness of some people to replace their language with Spanish is the result of a false perception.

IDBAmerica: What is the status of indigenous people in present-day Bolivia?

In our country, indigenous people still live extremely out of balance with the rest of society. They are excluded not just from political life, but also from the benefits of development and society as a whole. This situation of exclusion we call internal colonialism. While it began as external colonialism under Spain, after the founding of the republic, it became internal.
The challenge facing our democracy today is to overcome the conditions of internal colonialism.

IDBAmerica: Indigenous people and their cultures have survived in the face of what you describe as internal colonialism. How about influences from without, the forces of globalization?

We are seeing an enormously unequal invasion, in which the international communications media are setting cultural and social norms. But we cannot ignore it; we must incorporate these outside influences into our own identity.

There are some things we can and must do. Indigenous peoples themselves must have access to communications media. Radio and television cannot continue to exclude the indigenous world as they have until now.

At the same time, we must reject this unicultural vision, that the only model for being human today is that set forth by the great international corporations. We must understand that human diversity is a form of wealth, not of poverty.

IDBAmerica: National governments often view ethnic and cultural diversity as a threat. What is your view?

We have to be very careful, because diversity sometimes can take violent and perverse forms. People point to the interethnic conflicts in Yugoslavia and say, “See, there you have diversity.” But there are also positive examples of diversity. In Bolivia, with its laws requiring participation of the people, its educational reform and advances in social democratization, we are building the right pathway. Other countries are doing the same.

Admittedly, this is a difficult task. It would be far easier to submit to the process of homogenization. But I insist that the nonindigenous world is not the exclusive model for modernity, and there is no reason to relegate indigenous culture to the status of mere tradition.

I would say there are two kinds of modernity, one indigenous, the other nonindi-genous. The indigenous one is perfectly able to express modernity without turning its back on tradition, rejecting its roots. Even today’s most developed societies have roots. Sometimes we Bolivians wish to reject our roots, and graft our society onto the roots of others. This is wrong.

IDBAmerica: What impact did your term as vice president have on Bolivia’s indigenous peoples?

Apart from the legislative measures that we put into effect, we showed that an indigenous person can hold an important office and be successful. Remember there have been indigenous people who became parliamentarians and ministers, but who had disastrous terms. So it was very important for us to have a successful term. So now, when the people who were a little skeptical, who doubted our abilities, meet us on the street, they admit that they were wrong.

We have shown that we can produce successful high officials. Now we need successful indigenous businessmen, distinguished and capable indigenous intellectuals, and indigenous professionals of the highest quality who have studied in national and international universities—both men and women.

We need all of this because in the non-indigenous world, when one speaks of indigenous peoples, the image is still that of a person who is uneducated, dirty, isolated, invisible. People still say to me, “you are a university professor, you have been vice president, so you are not indigenous.” It is part of the stereotype an asymmetrical society has been instilling in indigenous and non-indigenous people alike.

IDBAmerica: You speak of using elements of the indigenous culture to create a modern society. What are some examples?

Let’s look first at the practical level, and then the theoretical level.

One is the concept of authority as a privilege, as a social service. In indigenous communities, a leader is a member of the group and subordinate to it. He cannot accumulate riches; on the contrary, he makes outlays from his own pockets to carry out his duties. This concept of authority would be a good model for the the political world of today. Also, an indigenous leader must constantly consult with his constituents. He can never make a decision that is not shared by the popular will.

In the area of economics, accumulation is not the primary objective in the indigenous world. It is fine to be rich, but wealth must be shared, and methods of redistribution are very important. The tradition of redistribution can be seen in the festivals, in rites and ceremonies. There are also indigenous businessmen who share with their communities, not just enrich themselves.

Another element is the indigenous concept of property held in common. I am not an enemy of private property, nor an admirer of community property. But both of these practices must be combined, because to be human is to be both an individual and part of a community. We have to strike a balance between the individual and the collective.

Still another element is the relative status of men and women. In our view, a human is whole only as a part of a pair. Man is one half, the woman is the other. I love this as a vision, but in reality, the woman occupies a second place in our culture. The tradition is good, but we must do a better job of putting it in practice.

IDBAmerica: And examples on the theoretical level?

I believe that peoples are like trees. The trunk, branches and flowers of a tree cannot grow on the roots of another tree. In Bolivia we have tried to graft our way of life on foreign roots. Today, we are trying to know our roots, which are indigenous, but also Spanish. Our roots, our traditions, are neither good or bad in themselves. Every culture has elements that favor development, and also elements that must be changed.