Larissa Lomnitz, “Anthropology and Development in Latin America,” Human Organization 38, no. 3 (Fall 1979), 313-317.
A Latin American anthropologist disenchanted by the co-optation of anthropological practice for development and state formation makes a clarion call for multilineal, local-culture-driven, development models.
Notes
- 313 – “Latin American anthropologists have contributed to development by first, creating national ideologies (going back to the precolonial cultural roots in search of elements for a unified national identity); second, conducting field studies in community development; and third, conducting academic research, often of a critical nature, on the potential results of applying particular models of development to Latin America. To clarify the roles of Latin American anthropologists, I will describe the work anthropologists do, and the position they occupy in Latin American society. Then I will reflect on what their significance has been (or perhaps ought to be) in the context of national and regional development.”
- “In Latin America the first ethnographers were priests and Spanish soldiers whose intention was to convert the Indians (Palerm 1974).”
- “During the late 19th century, ethnographers produced numerous studies on the physical and social characteristics of the Indians, particularly in countries with large indigenous populations, such as Mexico and Peru. However, it was not until after the 1910-20 Revolution that Mexico took the lead in assigning an explicitly role to anthropology as an instrument of development.”
- 314 – “Anthropologists had to contend with many difficulties. In Mexico as elsewhere in Latin America, Indians had been stereotyped as lazy, inept drunkards, unable and unwilling to better themselves, and thus, an obstacle to modernization. The Indian cultural heritage had also been dismissed as picturesque and denigration. Now there developed a new emphasis on pre-Hispanic achievements in creating great civilizations and powerful nation-states. The anthropologists’ attitude of respect for indigenous cultures permeated the Mexican educational system which they had actively helped to create.”
- “President Cardenas said in 1940: ‘Our Indian policy is not concerned with keeping the Indians as Indians, or with indianizing Mexico, but rather with mexicanizing the Indians.’ Anthropologists participated actively in designing and carrying out an ‘integrationist policy . . ..’”
- “Anthropologists in government departments, principally in both the Ministries of Education and Agriculture, have been influential in shaping official cultural policies (Comas 1964).
- “Let us now consider a second aspect of Latin American anthropology in relation to development. I refer to the fieldwork and literature which is specifically practical in nature, in which the anthropologist often acts as interpreter, employed by state agencies, or as a broker between them and a local population. Here the objective is to achieve limited, short-term results in a local community.”
- “Anthropology, claims Villa Rojas (1971), became ‘the study of conditions which tended to accelerate or inhibit social change, in order to establish significant principles or generalization which might be used intelligently to direct the process of desirable change.’”
- 314-15 – “The Latin American applied projects have been similar to those in other parts of the world. Usually anthropologists worked wit hstate organizations entrusted with promoting the modernization of peasant communities. The purpose was to use the anthropologists’ insights into native customs, social structure, and values to smooth the transition into the national culture, making it less painful to the indigenous populations and (equally importantly) to the state.”
- 315 – “Uneasiness and disappointment with applied anthropology began to be noticed during the 1960s. Previously, anthropologists, almost without exception, had been civil servants who were directly committed to official state policies. Now there arose an academic community based on new full-time teaching posts at universities.”
- “But the most vocal opposition did not originate from concern for the ethnic identity of the millions of citizens whose first language was Nahuatl, Maya, Zapotec, Mixtec or Mazahua. Rather, it arose from a growing disenchantment with the benefits of development itself.”
- “Anthropologists themselves became critical of their involvement in modernization. The disenchantment spread to the political arena. Politicians and agency officials began complaining that social scientists were ineffectual, tended to shy away from making specific recommendations, and merely criticized the existing state of affairs without offering constructive solutions.”
- 315-16 – “The critique of Latin American anthropology became radicalized, with an important group of anthropologists sustaining the position that it is more urgent to change the economic structure of society than to create nationhood or to assist in development efforts. Unlike their predecessors, these critics emphasized the negative aspects of development and criticized the official policies, pointing out, for example, that cultural integration of meant making national underlings of the Indians, the better to exploit them.”
- 316 – “Everywhere in Latin America anthropologists have been directly or indirectly members of the central state apparatus — whether they drew a salary as specialists in sociocultural affairs or whether they taught at a national university.”
- “The evolution of human societies is not unilineal, but the dominant models of development prescribe a single goal for all humanity: industrialization. Perhaps it is time to take stock of our ideas, including the concept of multilinear evolution, and devise solutions which are more culture specific.”
- “It now seems doubtful that we in Latin America shall ever attain the levels of industrial and technological development found in Europe, the United States or Japan. Why insist on pursuing objectives which may be unrealistic, as well as unsatisfactory in terms of our own cultures?”
- Solutions which are less simplistic and destructive presuppose a basic respect for the capability of human societies to formulate valid designs for their own survival. There are many alternative roads toward development — if ‘development’ is understood as a more harmonious, peaceful, and productive pattern of life in a community. By utilizing local resources, local forms of production, and local social organizations, we may tap the specific contribution of each society to the pool of human experience.”
- “Previous models of development have been based largely on the goal of incorporating traditional populations into an industrial, consumer society and/or strengthening the central power of the state appartus [sic]. It is time, I believe, for anthropologists to shift the emphasis of development towards autonomy, self-sufficiency, and creativity at the community level.”
