Mapuches accused of being unpatriotic by Chilean nationalists and racists

Bristol, 30 September 1998

The "official" history of Chile must be revised

These days, there is a respect for cultural diversity which is seen as part of the wealth and heritage of mankind, in the same way that there is a recognition of human rights and respect for the environment, whose violation or abuse is no longer considered the internal business of a particular country, but rather as the concern of every human being. The emergence of this set of values demonstrates a change of attitude in the World towards native peoples, something which the United Nations has acknowledged through the implementation of a series of initiatives at various levels within its worldwide organisation.

With respect to Chile, I believe it is time that the Chilean State gave constitutional recognition to the existence of the Mapuche nation, its rights and its proper history. Currently, official Chilean history, which uses a blend of facile stereotypes to depict our Mapuche people, something which is both condescending and decidedly racist, does not foster the understanding and the spirit of mutual tolerance which should exist between the Mapuches and the Huincas, as the non-Mapuche Chileans are known. History, as it is taught today, confused and contradictory as it is, leads inevitably to the ideological conditioning of the student from his very earliest years and immunises him against or makes him complacent in the face of anything to do with the culture of indigenous peoples, and what is worse, it hinders his understanding of the reasons which lie behind the demands of our people. If we add to this the media, which is in the hands of non-Mapuche Chileans, many of whom are not equipped with the professional ethics proper to responsible and objective journalism, far from promoting a balanced and scientific debate between the parties concerned, it blindly reinforces the official version.

Manipulation of the historical facts

It is regretable that many Chileans still believe that with the Declaration of Independence of Chile from Spain in 1810, the Mapuche nation automatically came to form part of what is known today as the Republic of Chile. In my opinion, this version of the history of Chile, deliberately maintained in order to preserve the status quo - somewhat tarnished - and in the name of national unity, far from fulfilling its unifying role, actually feeds the feelings of resentment of many Chileans, who raise their voices in anger every time the Mapuches demand justice, as is happening today with our brothers of the Mapuche-Pewenche of the upper River Bio Bio and those who are trying to reclaim their lands in Lumaco, Arauco, Traiguen or in other Mapuche regions in conflict.

The nationalists and racists make their attacks in the newspapers, El Mercurio (18/9/89) and La Tercera (20/9/98); the principal daily newspapers in Chile have always given them broad and enthusiastic support. They accuse us of being unpatriotic for not having taken part - according to them - in the war against the Spanish and later in the war against Bolivia and Peru and they remind us that Chile is but one single country. These opinions are the result of the aforementioned brainwashing, the myth and the ignorance that the official history of Chile seeks to perpetuate. The authors of the articles in the two newspapers cited are evidently unaware that the Mapuche nation was independent before and during the war between the Huincas (The War of the Pacific which took place between Chile, Bolivia and Peru between 1879-1883). They are also unaware that Spain had signed a series of peace treaties recognising the territory and the independence of the Mapuche nation, and that the level of cooperation and mutual respect (between the Spanish and the Mapuches) had developed to the point that prior to Chilean independence the Mapuches maintained a diplomatic representation in Santiago.

However, it must be recognised, as the story of our resistence shows, that the conservation of the Mapuche nation was not a free gift from Spain, but the result of a struggle which cost the lives of thousands of our ancestors, men and women who fought shoulder to shoulder in defence of territorial integrity and the liberty of our people; the Spanish did not feel obliged to respect our frontier out of goodwill, they simply had no other option.

That is to say it was not Spain, but rather the Chilean State, employing illegal and colonialist measures, which took over the lands of the Mapuche by force of arms and in the process decimated our population. This war of subjugation, known as "The Pacification of Araucania" was illegal because it was a violation of treaties and agreements which Chile had signed with our people. The war against the Mapuche people ended in 1883, seventy years after the Chilean Declaration of Independence and therefore came after The War of the Pacific; it must not be forgotten that the troops which had been triumphant in the north against Peru and Bolivia were immediately transferred south to so-called Araucania in order to carry out the expansionist ambitions of the Chilean State. So it is that those who today accuse us of being unpatriotic are ignorant of our history; and let it be known that the responsibility for their ignorance is not ours, but the fault of the Chilean State and its educational system which does not teach the historical facts and their inevitable present-day consequences.

The official version of Chilean history argues that the Mapuches were integrated into the Chilean State as a result of the Declaration of Independence in 1810. This was nonsense then and is nonsense now: it is absurd to believe that the independent and sovereign nation of the Mapuches formed part of an emergent state simply on the basis of the declaration of intent which immediately followed Chilean independence. It seems to me to be equally irrational to give any legal credibility to a unilateral declaration made in Santiago by the founder members of the Republic; a curious declaration that gave "citizenship" to the Mapuches without either their request or their consent. Before accepting it one should reflect on the internal inconsistency of the official history: on the one hand we hear of a strong-willed people who successfully defended their sovereignty and liberty against the Spanish for more than two and a half centuries; whereas, on the other, we have a people who surrender in the face of a declaration and submit themselves meekly to rules imposed from Santiago. To insist on notions that have no basis in logic is to fly in the face of the facts.

The Kingdom of Araucania and Patagonia

If we were to accept the official version of history which states that our people were integrated into the Republic with the Declaration of Independence in 1810, we would have to ask ourselves how was it that fifty years later there was founded the monarchy of Araucania and Patagonia? It was at this time that the most distinguished chiefs from both sides on the Andes, with the assistance of the French lawyer Orelie Antoine, founded a hereditary and constitutional monarchy, which, whether we like it or not, has a historical significance which cannot be easily dismissed. But...why a monarchy? To me it seems completely normal that our ancestors should seek allies and defend their threatened national sovereignty by diplomatic as well as military means. It seems equally legitimate to me that, given the circumstances of an imminent invasion and an unfavourable military balance, our authorities should explore strategies aimed at obtaining the international support and recognition necessary to ensure the territorial integrity for which they had fought for so long. Such a necessity was confirmed by an increase in military provocation, the supply of new armaments to the Chilean and Argentinean armies and the persistent calls for a prompt invasion which were emanating from politicians in both countries.

That the Mapuche authorities should organise themselves along Western lines and choose as their spokesman a European seems to me to be quite an appropriate political gambit for the time. Mistakenly or not, it appeared at the time that the best chance of obtaining international support and recognition was for the Mapuches to have a monarch and that they should choose Orelie to be their king. And what does the official history tell us of this episode? It says that Orelie Antoine was a madman. I ask myself , why? Some say simply because he was not a Mapuche or because he spoke in favour of the rights of the "indians". I think that the lesser of these reasons was perhaps the fact that he was foreign, for, after all, almost all of Chile's founding fathers were foreigners, starting with the Irishman, Bernardo O' Higgins. My modest conclusion is that it is most likely that he was labelled mad because he tried to defend the Mapuche nation and to promote its international recognition.

For those who doubt the claims of the Mapuche the foundation of an Araucanian and Patagonian monarchy is a reliable demonstration that in 1860 we exercised full control over our territory and enjoyed total self determination. In my opinion such a historical legacy is a further tool which we should use, if necessary, in our legal fight to defend our ancestral lands.

The claim of the Mapuche to his land is amply demonstrated and the historical Events Calendar which led to its plunder are etched upon the hearts and minds of each and every Mapuche. It will be the responsibility of the Chilean State to find a formula which will allow an honourable and conciliatory resolution of the problem, a solution which will govern relations with the Mapuche in the coming millenium. The Chilean government must honour the treaties and commitments contracted by the State with the Mapuche prior to the dawn of the Republic, just as it must observe the principles of international law ratified by Chile. The government must act justly and develop a policy which will produce the necessary moral and material compensation for the disastrous effects on the everyday life of our people directly occasioned by the illegal annexation of our land. We pray that we will not have to follow in the footsteps of other indigenous peoples, in particular those of the United States, that only following long legal battles have succeeded in any substantial recognition of their rights.

Can the Mapuches go on taking insults?

What should our response be to the anniversary celebrations of Chilean independence and the Day of the Army's Glories (18-19 Sept). As a Mapuche, like many of my brothers and sisters I am proud of our identity, our culture and our ancestors, and it is repugnant to me that Mapuche children should be obliged to march in celebration of the glory of the Chilean army just as they are obliged to swear allegience to a flag that represents the subjugation of our people and the death of thousands of our forbears. It is equally humiliating that in our territory they should erect statues to the bloodthirsty killers of our people. By this I do not mean to say that Chileans should not commemorate their heroes, just as we do our own, for everyone has the right to do this; what annoys me is that they should involve us, the Mapuches, in their commemorations, and demand that we celebrate together with them our defeat and the genocide committed during the Pacification of Araucania; thus they continually remind us of our condition as a subjugate people.

The pompous and arrogant insistence on emphasizing the episodes which led to the defeat of the indigenous peoples, and the imposition of patriotic values alien to those of the Mapuche nation, is frankly devoid of all logic and common sense. The attempt to demonstrate that Chile is one country through commemorations and patriotic ceremonies in which there is no distinction between the victors and the vanquished implies an ignorance of cultural diversity and a denial of our existence. It would appear that the only thing which is achieved by such ceremonies is to stir up resentment by paying homage to those Chileans who gave their lives for their cause, which is not our cause. Although for the moment our resentment is contained, the way in which these patriotic displays are oriented causes ill-feeling amongst the Mapuche; an ill-feeling which is exacerbated by the fact that we continually see the use of the military to repress our people. For example, we saw how, at the end of December last year and at the beginning of this year the present government invoked the Internal State Security Law in five Mapuche towns and thereby gave carte blanche for the creation of a reign of terror and intimidation throughout the Mapuche communities in the region - a situation which was denounced to the UN Commission for Human Rights by two groups of Mapuche organizations in March of this year.

The Mapuche cannot be expected to go on taking this institutionalised arrogance lying down; forcing us to participate in alien and offensive celebrations, as if we do not count, is at the moment only occasioning isolated protests, but in the long term there could be a massive demonstration against the established order for having used us in ceremonies against our will and our history, an outrage against the dignity of the Mapuche. A little respect and sensitivity towards peoples beaten in battle would do no harm to anyone. Indeed, this would be healthy for civic consciousness and would fortify the spirit of the Republic of which we too form a part. However, all the while the situation goes unchanged, it does not surprise me that on the 19th of last September, in a symbolic act, members of the Santiago based Mapuche organisation, Meli Wixan Mapu, lowered the Chilean flag as a protest against the Day of the Army's Glories. Neither does it surprise me that they declared that, "in the case of any contrived armed conflict", they would not allow themselves to be used "as cannon fodder". If there is no social and political will to promote respect towards the indigenous peoples then there can be no mutual respect and any future outbreak of more serious protests of this nature can neither be predicted nor condemned.

Centuries of armed aggression from Spain and from the Republics of Argentina and Chile did not succeed in breaking the fighting spirit of our glorious Mapuche people and today's insults and arrogance will not undermine our morale - for the national identity of people of the calibre of the Mapuche cannot be erased, since it emanates from the very land which gave us our name; it is founded upon historical traditions, upon epic struggles in the defence of the most noble ideals in which even our enemies stood in awe of our bravery and skill. So it is that our pride in ourselves is both genuine and deserved; it rises above the puerile and superficial chauvinism of some Chileans. Furthermore we have faith in the future for we all know that, sooner or later, truth, reason and justice will prevail.

By R. Marhikewun

Note: This article was originally submitted to the newspapers, El Mercurio and La Tercera, who refused to publish it. Instead I have asked Mapulink to distribute it.